Quote:
Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Have you measured this? Surely I don't ask whether you made aural tests. How many times did you try to replace the stock cable with something optimal from the engineering point of view and evaluate the result?.
|
It is certainly true that I have not performed any tests myself, but the burden of proof is on the recable-believers to justify people spending money to improve their systems. If you are also an EE, can you enlighten us on
how a recable improves headphones? I hear people talking about certain cables being "warm" or having various other sound signatures. By what mechanism would cables introduce a unique sound signature to the signal being transmitted, being drawn out pieces of metal?
Furthermore, other parts of the cable business seem mighty shady to me. For example: this company
Luminous Audio Technology offers a "cable burn-in service." Again, cables are pieces of metal. Unless the company aims to oxidize the cable by running high current through it (and I certainly hope that's not their aim
), there is no physical reason why this would be a beneficial thing to do. They are charging customers for a service which has no physical basis, vouching for audible improvement. I call that taking advantage of consumers.
Also: the well-known Jena Labs sells cables at (what I consider to be) astronomical prices
here. I'd like to know what the profit margins are on those cables. Are they really using materials and skilled labor that justify the cost of hundreds or even thousands of dollars for a few feet of cable? These companies often use vague terms to skirt around the fact that, again, there is no physical basis for their claims. For example, at Lawton Audio they sell recables costing hundreds of dollars for the HD800
here saying that "The Adrenaline really increases the HD800's FUN-factor."
Oh really. Maybe it's fun to look at or feel, but the sound produced won't be any more "FUN."
Finally, if companies manufactured headphones whose cables are the limiting factor in their performance, why wouldn't they change and produce them with adequate cabling so that their customers wouldn't have to recable. You said that you improved the sound of your cans with $2/meter cable. Why didn't Denons product engineers use such a cable then? Surely the $2/meter would be worth it. And especially with the Sennheiser example I provided above, I can't imagine Sennheiser selling their most premium headphones with cables that limit their performance. These companies (for the most part
) know their stuff. They have salaried employees working to design the best headphones possible within the budget constraints of the company.
Anyways, if you can provide links to a study quantitatively, not qualitatively, demonstrating the superiority of aftermarket cables I would be very interested to see them. In fact, I wouldn't mind in the least if you can prove me wrong and show that recables will provide better audio (especially on such premium phones as the HD800); I welcome the truth as I just don't want to see people spending money where they don't need to be under false pretenses (I'm sure all of our wallets appreciate this sentiment). I don't think that it's fair for companies to sell products boasting audible improvement when none can be shown. Other companies sell demonstrably better headphones and amps with demonstrably higher performance, pointing to lower THD or other better results on other forms of measurement. Companies selling cables need similar proof--that's really just good, fair business practices.
Finally, all of us are free to spend our hard-earned cash in the manner in which we please, and if you like recabling your headphones for whatever reason then be my guest. I just want the matter settled so that people aren't spending money blindly.
P.S.
By the way, if anyone associated with the companies I mentioned is reading this, please don't take offence at my remarks and feel free to refute me.
