[Trogdor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor JaZZ, I agee with you most of the time but on this one, I just don't agree with you. I have NEVER witnessed a system that went from mediocre to great sounding due to ICs. Until I do, I just don't believe you!

I should qualify this in that Golden Reference ICs are not going to make a mediocre setup better. That's it. In fact if you truely believe in cables making things more revealing, it will hurt more than help.

I've always thought good ICs made by Moon, Zu, etc. are worth a look (heck I'm using Blue Dragon xLR's right now). However, I just don't believe those 2k ICs are really going to give you anything more than the 2-3 hundred bucks you can spend on high quality cable and some nice Neutrik connectors.

Again, I will reiterate my point (opinion), the point of diminishing returns on ICs hits the hardest compared to the rest of the chain (minus perhaps power chords not power conditioning however).

 

[Inkmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dane I feel that cable microphonics is often overlooked, perhaps the most important property of a headphone cable IMO. For example, the cable on my A900 is incredibly microphonic - it's actually impressive. My CD3000, which has a similar looking but more flexible cable, has much, much less cable microphonics. Some of the aftermarket cables apper to be quite inflexible, so microphonics could be a problem.

I have the AD900. Talk about microphonics? What's it called when you're folding a sweater clean outta the dryer while listening to your favorite cans and get a static shock on your earlobe? Audio Technica is all about bringin' more electricity to your ear than other inferior headphones that just stop at sound!

 

[ssingh0]

you want electrons to flow smooth. Imagine a wire is a freeway, if the freeway is made out of concrete, or clay, or mud, its going to effect how cars handle, if there's bumps and potholes, how smoothly they flow, ... same for electrons.

The flow of electrons is affected by MANY interfering factors. The fact that you expect the same exact electrical information/electrons to travel the two ends of a wire without a rigorous manufacturing process... what do you think fiber optics became big for?

 

[threedd97]

I'd like a fiber optic cable from my headphone into my source.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor I should qualify this in that Golden Reference ICs are not going to make a mediocre setup better.

We should differentiate between «better» in the sense of more pleasing and more accurate. Yes, cables can make the sound more pleasing and rounded in creating a better synergy, not so much more accurate. In a mediocre system you wouldn't want too revealing cables, so it will not become a high-end system anyway, but more listenable and enjoyable -- maybe even more so than a higher-end system with a comparably dry and analytical sound due to bad synergy between expensive components. Fine-tuning by means of cables helps a lot and is indispensable also and especially with high-end gear.

Quote:

In fact if you truely believe in cables making things more revealing, it will hurt more than help.

Yes, I do, but revealing is not the same as unforgiving, fortunately. However, I don't believe that there's any neutral cable, so it's more about synergy than accuracy.

Quote:

I've always thought good ICs made by Moon, Zu, etc. are worth a look (heck I'm using Blue Dragon xLR's right now). However, I just don't believe those 2k ICs are really going to give you anything more than the 2-3 hundred bucks you can spend on high quality cable and some nice Neutrik connectors.

I've experimented a lot, but my own HD-650 cable creations aren't quite as good as Silver Dragon and Zu Mobius. With ICs I was more successful, and meanwhile I almost exclusively use my own magnet-wire designs. Not that it saves any money, as I've made so many of them... but it's fun.
.

 

[jbloudg20]

The way I view cables, is they should be as transparent as possible. Ideally we would want a direct connection from the source to the amp to the can... no cable is a good cable. Since this is not possible, I just look for the cleanest signal transfer I can get from point A to point B.

 

[AdamWill]

Quote:

Originally Posted by threedd97 I'd like a fiber optic cable from my headphone into my source.

Um. So you want a DAC built into your headphones that beats an external one? Could be tricky.

 

[AdamWill]

Quote:

Originally Posted by halcyon - alter the electronic capabilities of the cable in the audible frequency range (this is debatable for cables that are not broken on purpose)

Just wanted to expand on halcyon's point here, because it's quite important. I think everyone (even "sceptics") agrees it's actually quite easy to make a cable that changes the sound of a pair of headphones: you just build it in such a way that it's intentionally broken. You can build a cable, intentionally, in such a way that it will roll off certain areas of the frequency spectrum, and this will of course change how the headphone sounds. So this gives sceptics an "out" even when everyone agrees that a headphone sounds better with Expensive Aftermarket Cable - it's not that Expensive Aftermarket Cable is doing a better job of transmitting the sound than Cheap OEM Cable, but that Expensive Aftermarket Cable is basically doing equalisation on the signal in a way that complements the phone's characteristics. To take a theoretical example, if you built a cable that rolled off high mids, attached it to a pair of Grados and gave it to someone who doesn't like Grados because they're bright, they may well consider the cable to be 'better' than the stock one, because it's "broken on purpose". This just serves to make the whole "sceptics vs. believers" thing even more complicated and unresolvable, but oh well. The main belief of cable sceptics is that you do not need a complicated and expensive cable to provide a very _accurate_ signal, and none of the expensive aftermarket cables provide a more accurate signal than a well designed very cheap cable.

 

[Supsup]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssingh0 what do you think fiber optics became big for?

Sending information along longer distances than 10 feet, that's for sure.

 

[Trogdor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ We should differentiate between «better» in the sense of more pleasing and more accurate. Yes, cables can make the sound more pleasing and rounded in creating a better synergy, not so much more accurate. In a mediocre system you wouldn't want too revealing cables, so it will not become a high-end system anyway, but more listenable and enjoyable -- maybe even more so than a higher-end system with a comparably dry and analytical sound due to bad synergy between expensive components. Fine-tuning by means of cables helps a lot and is indispensable also and especially with high-end gear.

I've personally never experienced this where ICs had such a dramactic effect. Yes, maybe you can fine-tune, but that's it, FINE-TUNE.

I do have to sit down with someone's Senn 650 and compare the stock cable with the Zu since a lot of folks here feel very strongly about the differences.

With that said, hopefully I will be able to compare a homemade balanced cable with an aftermarket one to get an idea of the differences (or lack there of)!

 

[kramer5150]

All my Canare star quad recables have made my cans more bass heavy, extend sub-bass and "tighten" up the bass for a quicker kind of sound. Mids are warmer too. While treble remains unchanged. Soundstage and image seems to pull inward a little too.

Garrett

 

[Emon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor If I had a nickel for everytime someone brought up this logic in a discussion about practically any commerical product, man Orpheus here I come...

Yes, but the markup on cables is FAR more ridiculous. It's not just profit, it's downright fraud.

 

[Riku540]

A tip for non-believers:

If you can’t hear it, see it! Cables don’t only affect headphones. Try different cables on your television with your DVD player. For some people, it is easier to see a difference than hear. I personally am confident that I have a good ear, but I will always tell you that my eye is sharper.

 

[Emon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riku540 A tip for non-believers: If you can’t hear it, see it! Cables don’t only affect headphones. Try different cables on your television with your DVD player. For some people, it is easier to see a difference than hear. I personally am confident that I have a good ear, but I will always tell you that my eye is sharper.

That's because video signals operate in the MHz range where cables are much more significant. I'm talking only about low-frequency (audio) signals over short runs, as in a home setup. Not video and not 300 foot balanced line-level runs. Not transmission lines in the GHz range. Just short runs of audio.

 

[Elephas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inkmo Personally, I think my KSC35 and HD201 sound pretty much as good as my AD900. The 900 is just more fine tuned. And it has velour pads. Mmm.. velour. It's like, you don't really go all that far 'up' after the 35. You just move around back and forth till your comfortable. And get velour pads.... Of course, if someone will refute what I just said, I'd really like to hear what you're listening to. And I don't mean that in a 'c'mon, punk, make my day' way, but a 'I would really enjoy to hear something that sounds better than what I have - ,maybe I have been doing this wrong' sorta way.

I haven't heard the KSC35 or HD201. My AD2000 sounds much better than the Koss PortaPro, which I've heard. In fact, I think it is better than most headphones I've heard, including the DT880, HD650 and RS-1. I suggest trying the AD900 with better sources and amplification. I suspect the AD900 will improve much more than the KSC35 or HD201. Also, I don't experience any microphonic issues with the AD2000 cable.

As for headphone recables, my DT880 with Cardas recable seems to sound different from a stock DT880. I haven't had the chance to do an extensive comparison yet.

The HD600/650 with stock, Cardas, Zu Mobius etc. are the easiest way to listen for cable differences.