[Rishumon]

So, I was wondering whether or not there is a noticeable difference between lets say an Audiquest Sydney cable and an Evergreen one?
Also wanted to ask people who have the EF2A amp for any tube suggestions, the current stock ones produce a silent distant buzzing (?).
 

 

[V1001]

That is a big price difference and move up the line. I have like the forest or something like that. And their USB carbon wire. From reading reviews it seems pretty unanimous that in a decent system you always get better results as you move up the line. Going that further up I'd say yes you should get the better ones. 
 
What I've discovered with how these companies sell their products and market is that they have a bunch of marketing speak but really the improvements come from each wire going up has a larger AWG and conducts better. So each more expensive wire is just a tiny bit better AWG than the last but they charge a whole lot more money for them. And then at the end you get to the silver wire, silver is the best conductor, but only a little better than copper but they charge an insane amount for it. (trust me that's with decades of me taking apart wires and searching hard to find documents and specs on what the AWG is of wires that are sold, everyone of these companies do the same thing).
 
So anyway yes, you'll be getting a better conducting wire, with good shielding. And it dos sound better.
 
If it matters I didn't really like the forest much. It sounded better than cheap wires though and was ok. Bass wasn't that great because the wire is just to small an AWG. Other reviews complained the same thing about bass. 
 
So what I did was I just went out and got a hard adapter 3.5 mm to RCA. Then got another adapter and just used some Rg6 coax wire as my RCA's. It actually works really really well. Awesome bass and great sound. That will get you way farther than most expensive wires. But not beat the best or anything. That was just temporary though. I eventually got a DAC and built my own with solid core 15 AWG, which is ridiculously stiff and way thicker than most anything out there. No brass ends, pure copper ends. Best wire I ever heard. And now recently I made one with 10 AWG wire for my interconnect, best wire I've ever heard in my life hands down. 
 
Anyway you get my point. I'd say get the better one with the thicker AWG wire inside or do what I did with the Rg6 coax.

 

[V1001]

Ok I just looked it up on my amazon history. I did have the evergreen, I thought it was called the forest but I was wrong. Yep it's an "ok" wire. But lacked bass and I wasn't really happy with it overall. It sounded only decent and worked fine. I still have it sitting in a box in the closet. 

 

[cmacsocial]

I own the EL-8 and connect to a Burson Soloist SL MKII. Feel it could use more bass. Your system is only as strong as your weak link, they say, and right now my weak link is the RCA-to-3.5mm cable running from my AK100II to the Burson amp.
 
Is there someone who can make a cable? Or am I better off spending the big bucks on Audioquest Sydney or others? Am new to this, so appreciate your help.

 

[cmacsocial]

Ended up buying the Blue Jeans Cable MSA-1...folks on this forum rave about it. Have a hard time believing it's worth it to spend more than this ($30).

 

[Pwndius Pilatus]

  Ended up buying the Blue Jeans Cable MSA-1...folks on this forum rave about it. Have a hard time believing it's worth it to spend more than this ($30).

How is the cable? Interested in buying one for my Cocktail Audio x10 because SPDIF sounds too "digital".

 

[FieldEffect]

I just use Hosa cables for most everything. They work fine, and I don't really believe expensive cables make any audible difference.

 

[atsq17]

I just use Hosa cables for most everything. They work fine, and I don't really believe expensive cables make any audible difference.

I used to want to believe this so bad but it's patently untrue. I have conducted experiments with non audiophiles who can all hear the same difference (especially when it's a night and day one) from cable change alone.

It's like not believing in hot and cold or something. If you have half decent equipment, different cables makes a clear difference. With really good equipment it is even clearer.

 

[gregorio]

[1] I used to want to believe this so bad but it's patently untrue.
[2] I have conducted experiments with non audiophiles who can all hear the same difference (especially when it's a night and day one) from cable change alone.
[3] It's like not believing in hot and cold or something. If you have half decent equipment, different cables makes a clear difference. With really good equipment it is even clearer.

1. Actually it IS patently true. However:
2. Unless experiments are controlled, it's sometimes easy to perceive a really obvious difference where in fact there isn't any. And,
3. Actually it's the other way around. If you have dodgy equipment, then cables *might* make a difference. If for example the equipment has dodgy connectors or internal isolation. But with really good equipment, there is no audible difference between cables (assuming they're of the correct type/gauge and are not broken). This is why none of the top commercial studios use expensive audiophile cables, they have big budgets and REALLY good equipment. The difficulty in the audiophile world is that some equipment marketed as "really good", "high-end", "audiophile grade" or whatever, is actually no better than far cheaper equipment (although it looks better) and sometimes is even quite dodgy!

G

 

[atsq17]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I've actually put my money where my mouth is and bought many different cables to test and while some were hype, others were excellent. I had no reason to be biased because I was prepared to sell any and all that did not demonstrate to me a clear improvement (and I have done so). Many of the cables i kept were not the most hyped or most expensive but the ones that consistently improved the sound to my tastes.

Also regarding your assumption that the results of our experimentation was hearing things that weren't there. It's odd that without information sharing, many of us could hear the same clear differences and came to the same conclusions. Also our experiments were sufficiently controlled. We varied one item at a time. Listened to the same part of the same song and got a wide range of people with varying tastes and degrees of knowledge in audio related matters and there were still many cases where every person who tried heard the same thing.

You can attribute the differences to flaws or whatever but the bottom line is, the differences can be heard by anyone impartial. Therefore there is indeed value in some of the expensive cables.

 

[gregorio]

[1] We'll have to agree to disagree.
[2] I had no reason to be biased because ...
[3] Also regarding your assumption that the results of our experimentation was hearing things that weren't there.
[3a] It's odd that without information sharing, many of us could hear the same clear differences and came to the same conclusions.
[4] You can attribute the differences to flaws or whatever but the bottom line is, the differences can be heard by anyone impartial.
[6] Therefore there is indeed value in some of the expensive cables.

1. Of course. Although that means one of us is agreeing with the actual facts and one isn't.

2. You had every reason to be biased, because you're a human being and all human beings have biases, whether we're consciously aware of them or not. For example, if we didn't have perception biases then we wouldn't be able to differentiate music from semi-random noise in the first place.

3. What is "there" (in a cable) is an electrical signal and we can easily measure electrical (analogue audio) signals, which is what digital audio recording does. So, it's relatively easy to compare what is actually "there" between cables and avoid the difficulty of eliminating biases in listening tests (and hearing things that weren't there).
3a. No, it's not "odd", it's actually quite common.

4. First of all, we have to ascertain if there is actually a difference (as per point #3) big enough to be audible. Because if there isn't, then obviously, by definition it cannot be heard by anyone, regardless of whether we believe our listening experiment was "sufficiently controlled" and regardless of the participants' partiality/impartiality!

5. Unless there is a measurable difference large enough to be audible, there is indeed NO value in any of the expensive cables. Providing of course that we're talking about "value" in terms of SQ/signal fidelity rather than some other non-audio metric, such as visual appearance for example. The fact there is no measurable difference large enough to be audible is why (again), none of the top recording studios use any of the expensive audiophile cables.

G

 

[atsq17]

I respect that you believe what you say but your bias towards your opinion is in my opinion misleading people who read this thread.

1. I agree with your point that one of us is factually inaccurate. Probably disagree on who it is.

2. I am biased towards having the best equipment I can afford and spending as little as possible to get it. Not biased towards any particular brand or product. Of course I read reviews but my tests disproved many popular opinions and proved some.

3. While your very basic understanding of what goes on with an audio electrical signal is roughly on the mark, you are barely scratching the surface with the actual science involved. I might as well say that a rocket burns stuff and goes into the air. Anything combustible will do as rocket fuel. I know my example is not really comparable but I'm comparing how rudimentary that statement is compared to what's actually going on. I've seen measurement tests of USB cables that show the audible differences between them. Each cable was compliant with usb 2.0 but was constructed from different materials and used different shielding techniques. If sticking ones head in the sand instead of finding out more and seeking actual experts is ones preference then so be it. However the science is there whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

3b/4. So you want to believe that it's not that the cables sound different in a perceivable way that many people can pick up the same differences without collaborating; we're just using our psychic ability to fool ourselves by inflicting biases on each other to cheat the test. Ok. If you choose to believe that so be it.

4. Yes it's perceivable and it was heard. You can measure everything you want and that's cool but I'll be listening to my music and you are welcome to your opinion that I'm just succumbing to my confirmation bias and placebo etc. Doesn't change the sweet sounds I hear aided by carefully tested and selected cables. Which change for the worse when I switch out to alternative cables.

5. Therefore yes, there are differences between different cables. Sometimes it's a flavor thing so an expensive cable is not always better. Different cables are made differently, use different materials and sound different (or sometimes similar/same). What's for sure is it doesn't all sound the same. I know you disagree and that's cool.

6. My advice to people new to this hobby is to use free trials and borrow cables to compare yourself. Don't believe either one of us. Try it for yourself. If you don't hear differences, don't spend the money. It helps if your equipment minus the cables are decent enough to begin with but work within your preferences and budgets.

7. If you, like me can tell the differences between cables, it helps to look for other like minded people to ask for opinions and experiences. Just bear on mind that every thread that asks for opinions on cables will see at least a few, if not many people coming on to "warn" you about how cables don't make a difference. Feel free to believe them or just private message the people who have actually tried them out and look like they have something useful to share.

 

[atsq17]

I came to this thread because I use an Audioquest big sur 3.5 to rca. It sounds pretty good compared to generic ones and some cheaper ones I've had but I'm looking to see if anyone with more experience than me has any suggestions. The answer to that seems to be no.

Anyone interested with original topic of this thread can message me directly if you are interested in my opinion on the big sur or if you have anything to suggest to me. This way you don't have to get involved with yet another audio science debate.

 

[gregorio]

I respect that you believe what you say but your bias towards your opinion is in my opinion misleading people who read this thread.
1. I agree with your point that one of us is factually inaccurate. Probably disagree on who it is.
2. I am biased towards having the best equipment I can afford and spending as little as possible to get it. Not biased towards any particular brand or product.
[2a] Of course I read reviews but my tests disproved many popular opinions and proved some.
3. While your very basic understanding of what goes on with an audio electrical signal is roughly on the mark, you are barely scratching the surface with the actual science involved. [3a] I know my example is not really comparable but I'm comparing how rudimentary that statement is compared to what's actually going on.
[3b] I've seen measurement tests of USB cables that show the audible differences between them. Each cable was compliant with usb 2.0 but was constructed from different materials and used different shielding techniques.

1. And I respect that you believe what you are saying .... but as it doesn't agree with the actual facts/science, it is misleading others.

2. Like you, I too am biased towards having the best equipment and listening environments I can afford, also without wasting money, and so too are all the commercial studios. The difference is the amounts we can afford (several millions in the case of commercial studios) and that the decisions made are not based on audiophile reviews, yours, mine or any other opinions but the objective measurable/testable facts. Which is why they do NOT use expensive audiophile cables.

3. What's the difference between someone with only a "very basic understanding" and someone with a good understanding explaining the rudimentary basics, and how have you determined that I'm the former? Also, what was only "roughly on the mark" in what I stated, what do you think was incorrect or missing? Sure, I didn't mention the wealth of "actual science" that underpins/proves the rudimentary basics I stated but how does not mentioning it disprove what I stated?
3a. An (analogue) audio cable is just transferring an electrical (analogue audio) signal, what else do you think is "actually going on"?
3b. Could you please post a link to the measurements that show audible differences? I've measured and seen countless others' measurements of cheap/standard USB 2.0 cables and never seen a difference that could be audible. In fact, I've run 30 or more simultaneous 24/96 channels of digital audio for countless hours on cheap USB 2.0 cables and measured bit perfect performance. As there obviously can't be anything better than bit perfect transfer, why would I buy expensive audiophile USB 2.0 cables for either exactly the same or worse performance?

[3c] If sticking ones head in the sand instead of finding out more and seeking actual experts is ones preference then so be it. However the science is there whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
3b/4. So you want to believe that it's not that the cables sound different in a perceivable way that many people can pick up the same differences without collaborating; we're just using our psychic ability to fool ourselves by inflicting biases on each other to cheat the test. Ok. If you choose to believe that so be it.
4. Yes it's perceivable and it was heard.
4a. You can measure everything you want and that's cool but I'll be listening to my music
4b. and you are welcome to your opinion that I'm just succumbing to my confirmation bias and placebo etc.
4c. Doesn't change the sweet sounds I hear aided by carefully tested and selected cables.

3c. Absolutely, the "science is there", we completely agree!! It's in text books and published in scientific journals and/or by industry engineering bodies (such as the ITC, AES, EBU and others). And obviously, the "actual experts" are the communities of sound/audio: scientists, engineers (who implement the science) and university lecturers (who teach the science). Which of these communities have you sought out and which of these publications do you study? As you say, if one doesn't find out or acknowledge the science and contradicts it, isn't "seeking the actual experts" and contradicts them when one is encountered (!), "then so be it", that's up to the individual but of course, their opinion does NOT agree with the actual facts and is MISLEADING if presented/advised to others!!

3b/4. No, what I "want to believe" are the actual facts/science, which of course does NOT involve psychic abilities and we do NOT have to "inflict biases on each other" because as human beings we already have a whole host of biases! If you choose to believe you can hear inaudible differences, again as in the previous point then "so be it"!

4. Sure, anything is perceivable, even the perception of obvious differences where in fact there aren't any at all but how can a difference be heard that is inaudible?
4a. Sorry but I don't understand the difference? If you're listening to digital audio recordings of music (or anything else) then you're listening to a single measurement of everything, because that's what digital audio is!
4b. What other rational explanation is there, other than some sort of perception bias, if the measured differences are inaudible?
4c. Exactly my point, the sound that one hears does NOT audibly change! What must therefore be changing (if one is perceiving a difference) are the biases that influence perception, which "careful testing" would have eliminated!

5. Therefore yes, there are differences between different cables. Sometimes it's a flavor thing so an expensive cable is not always better. Different cables are made differently, use different materials and sound different (or sometimes similar/same).
5b. What's for sure is it doesn't all sound the same.
6. My advice to people new to this hobby is to use free trials and borrow cables to compare yourself. Don't believe either one of us. Try it for yourself. If you don't hear differences, don't spend the money.
7. If you, like me can tell the differences between cables, it helps to look for other like minded people to ask for opinions and experiences.
7a. Just bear on mind that every thread that asks for opinions on cables will see at least a few, if not many people coming on to "warn" you about how cables don't make a difference.
7b. Feel free to believe them or just private message the people who have actually tried them out and look like they have something useful to share.

5. Agreed, there are many obvious differences between cables! Differences in appearance, cost, construction, marketing, impressions, reviews, opinions and even in the actual audio signal performance but the latter is inaudible (given the obvious conditions previously mentioned).
5a. Again, if the measured audio signal performance differences are below audibility, then by definition they MUST sound the same, though not necessarily be perceived the same.

6. Agreed but it's important to add: And if you DO hear differences, do a simple null test measurement to confirm there is actually an audible difference and not just a difference in your perception/brain.

7. Hang on, you just effectively stated the opposite (point 3c above)! Instead of "sticking one's head in the sand" one should be "seeking actual experts" (scientists, engineers, etc.) NOT just "like minded people"! And, If one is to acknowledge the science, then obviously one should NOT be asking for others' opinions or experience but for actual proven facts/scientific evidence! Let's say for example, we have someone who believes the Earth is flat but wants to know the actual facts/science: How would it help to "look for other like minded people to ask for opinions and experiences", members of the Flat Earth Society for instance? The only "help" that would provide is in reinforcing their false belief! What they should be doing is "seeking actual experts" (scientists, engineers, university lecturers in the subject, astronauts and others who know and acknowledge the science) and asking for the actual facts/science!
7a. I've not seen anyone "warn about how cables don't make a difference", only that different (functional, appropriate, similar length) cables don't make an audible difference to signal quality/integrity.
7b. Therefore: If someone has actually tried them out and posts that they can hear a difference, then one should publicly or privately ask for supporting objective evidence (measurements for example) and thereby determine if what they are sharing is useful or is actually just personal perception/biases that have nothing to do with the cables' signal performance.

G

 

[atsq17]

You are an intelligent person no doubt but without getting into a thesis battle with you, I'm just going to say that I believe that because of your flawed assumptions that our measuring equipment can measure all variations in sound over cables precisely and consistently with what we hear, you're wrong. You obviously believe what you believe and I believe what I observe because we both have internal locus of control.

Anyway, we are not going to agree on this so again i say to others, those with an open mind and are willing to observe for yourselves without fear of being tricked by your own ears feel free to pm me for an undisturbed sharing of experiences and knowledge.

If you're in the no measure no joy and cables are all snake oil camp, that's cool too. Enjoy the avoidable jitter and noise both which are measurable in cables but I have not the expertise or desire to debate. I'm here to discuss REAL (albeit subjective) experiences with equipment, not sweeping assumptions which I already know to be wrong.

Also to save me the trouble from replying again to the same disagreement, assume that everything you post subsequent to this, if it's just more of the same then pretend I have an auto responder bot that responds to every post: okay sure, I respect your right to an opinion but I disagree with it and think it's wrong. Cheers.