[Cymbal Monkey]

And as such audiophilla will always be considered stupid.

 

[vikingred]

wow, this is an intense debate.  when i jumped in and made my first purchase, here is the extra i spent for elite cables:
 
recabling on the K702s ( 6ft of blackdragon w/furutech plug) = $310
blackdragon interconnects 1.5ft w/ WRT 0144 connectors = $220
wireworld starlight usb cable (for DAC) = $90
total = $620
 
so nearly 1/3 of my expenditure was for high end cables, cuz the whole rig (Burson HA-160, K702s recabled, HRT MS II+ DAC, and all cables) = $1925
 
things that come to mind:
 
1. we can pretty much state for a fact the new cables aren't any WORSE than stock or cheap ones, and they may possibly yield SQ that is minutely/subtly better than stock/cheap ones.  no doubt millions of variables go into creating the final experience of sound quality.   at the very least, my purchase decision has opened my rig up to the possibility that if there is some chance for SQ improvement via resistance/conductivity differences, i may avail myself of it, BUT even if there isn't, i'm not any worse off SQ wise, and the cables and connectors look cool as hell.  Q: no one has scientifically proven that pro-cables improve sound, but has anyone scientifically prove they do not or can not?
 
2. i wonder if anti-cable people's sentiments have anything to do with their being unable to afford the nice cables?  or if there is any correlation to the person's attitudes about money.
 
3. if it is truly only a placebo affect, and that my 620$ was a complete waste of money on this rig, but i believe that it sounds better, then who's to say it wasn't worth it or that it wasn't real?
 
hahaha.  what a fun subject.

 

[BIG POPPA]

My opinion on this subject is to me this is a hobby. The scientific experiments to enjoy this hobby will cut into my time listening to music. If I was to do a DBT it would be on my rig.  Know it's strengths and weakness' . Made all my cables in my rig except for the Senn cable a buddy made for me. Are the scientific experiments going to help me enjoy my rig? At this point in my life, no. Almost 30 years ago when I first got into hi-fi the science part would have interested me.

 

[maverickronin]

@Uncle Erik
 
I would question how many of them are actually aware that they most likely owe their lives to DBT, through medicine, if nothing else.  IME a lot of people don't seem to think about where all the wondrous technology we enjoy actually comes from and essentially regard it as magic.  As something that is inherently indecipherable to anyone but a "professional".  They understand that it is created by "science" but they don't understand what science actually is.  They seem to have a comic book or movie image of science where someone of sufficient intelligence with enough time and money can lock themselves away inside a laboratory and emerge at a later date with some piece of technology that does whatever they wish.
 
They're not necessarily stupid, but intellectually lazy and scared.  They don't stop to think.  They don't want to stop to think.  They don't take the time to properly arrange and collate their various beliefs and experiences into a coherent worldview.  I assume because they are scared of finding out they are wrong about anything.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

1. we can pretty much state for a fact the new cables aren't any WORSE than stock or cheap ones, and they may possibly yield SQ that is minutely/subtly better than stock/cheap ones.  no doubt millions of variables go into creating the final experience of sound quality.   at the very least, my purchase decision has opened my rig up to the possibility that if there is some chance for SQ improvement via resistance/conductivity differences, i may avail myself of it, BUT even if there isn't, i'm not any worse off SQ wise, and the cables and connectors look cool as hell.  Q: no one has scientifically proven that pro-cables improve sound, but has anyone scientifically prove they do not or can not?
 
You have to examine this question on a case by case basis. Some cables can actually be really bad in an objectively measurable way. There are all sorts of tricks you can do to deliberately alter sound amd then there is fundamentally bad design. Sterephile tested some analog cables that used an optical coupler system ($1900)  these added huge amounts of distortion and noise and were apalling by any rational high fidelity criteria. The FR did not get flat until 100hz, adding audible harmonic distortion and ***reducing*** the dynamic range of the signal. The reviewer spoke about purity, transparency, natural and believable and so on. So either the reviewer is as deaf as a post or prefers really bad sound, (it was Michael Fremer a vinylist)  or was biased by what he knew about the cables or perhaps we cannot easily detect these enormous degradations in hifi kit in which case why bother anyway, who knows.
 
 
2. i wonder if anti-cable people's sentiments have anything to do with their being unable to afford the nice cables?  or if there is any correlation to the person's attitudes about money.
 
II bought some expensive cables, I tested them , listened to them, I sold them, (apart from the silver ones that nobody would buy from me) I can afford expensive cables, I choose to spend my money elsewhere.  If I seriously thought expensive cables could be a positive benefit I would buy them. The evidence however is insufficient to make that case.
 
3. if it is truly only a placebo affect, and that my 620$ was a complete waste of money on this rig, but i believe that it sounds better, then who's to say it wasn't worth it or that it wasn't real?
 
Your money, your choice. But wouldn't you like to know if it was just in your mind?

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

wow, this is an intense debate.  when i jumped in and made my first purchase, here is the extra i spent for elite cables:
 
recabling on the K702s ( 6ft of blackdragon w/furutech plug) = $310
blackdragon interconnects 1.5ft w/ WRT 0144 connectors = $220
wireworld starlight usb cable (for DAC) = $90
total = $620
 
so nearly 1/3 of my expenditure was for high end cables, cuz the whole rig (Burson HA-160, K702s recabled, HRT MS II+ DAC, and all cables) = $1925
 
things that come to mind:
 
1. we can pretty much state for a fact the new cables aren't any WORSE than stock or cheap ones, and they may possibly yield SQ that is minutely/subtly better than stock/cheap ones.  no doubt millions of variables go into creating the final experience of sound quality.   at the very least, my purchase decision has opened my rig up to the possibility that if there is some chance for SQ improvement via resistance/conductivity differences, i may avail myself of it, BUT even if there isn't, i'm not any worse off SQ wise, and the cables and connectors look cool as hell.  Q: no one has scientifically proven that pro-cables improve sound, but has anyone scientifically prove they do not or can not?
 
2. i wonder if anti-cable people's sentiments have anything to do with their being unable to afford the nice cables?  or if there is any correlation to the person's attitudes about money.
 
3. if it is truly only a placebo affect, and that my 620$ was a complete waste of money on this rig, but i believe that it sounds better, then who's to say it wasn't worth it or that it wasn't real?
 
hahaha.  what a fun subject.

That is exactly the only valid pro cable argument. But, it is self defeating.
 
It is like going to see a homeopath, and saying they cured you.  Maybe you feel better, but it was not due to the homeopath. 
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

vikingred, the "can you afford it" argument has been kicked around plenty of times. If I can pick up a $10,000 vinyl rig, let me assure you that buying a cable is not a problem. I probably have spend another $20k on various electronics and test gear, too.

I've been willing to explore all sorts of audio gear. Whatever major variation there is, I've tried it. Circuit topologies for amps are interesting, different types of transducers and I've got about eight different sources. Of course, I took an interest in cables, too. But I did not find a difference. I listened (and still do) to various cables and have also tested them. I found no difference. To be fair, I don't find much difference in digital sources, either. I wouldn't mind using a $29 DVD player with a quality amp and headphones/speakers.

I think you are sincere in your belief, but I am also sincere in not finding any difference whatsoever. You cannot place that difference on being "cheap" or "hating" cables. I've blindly bought all manner of gear - electrostats, AMTs, solid state, tubes, many things, and am offering my opinion on what I heard and measured. It's OK to buy cables for cosmetics and durability (I have), but there's no need to spend more for alleged sonic benefits. If you're not happy with the way something sounds, buy something you like. If you don't like your headphones' sound, get different headphones. Or maybe try them with a different amp - there are quantifiable and measurable differences between amps. Recabling headphones doesn't make any difference. I've tried it.

 

[kingtz]

Quote:

 
3. if it is truly only a placebo affect, and that my 620$ was a complete waste of money on this rig, but i believe that it sounds better, then who's to say it wasn't worth it or that it wasn't real?
 

Considering that the person is already conceding it's a placebo effect, then subsequently calling it "real" is merely self delusion. An ugly person can call himself handsome all he wants and feel really great about himself, but when he steps outside his house, he's still ugly.  (Obviously, I'm not calling you ugly. This was just an example of self delusion.)

 

[tvrboy]

Quote:

vikingred, the "can you afford it" argument has been kicked around plenty of times. If I can pick up a $10,000 vinyl rig, let me assure you that buying a cable is not a problem. I probably have spend another $20k on various electronics and test gear, too.

I've been willing to explore all sorts of audio gear. Whatever major variation there is, I've tried it. Circuit topologies for amps are interesting, different types of transducers and I've got about eight different sources. Of course, I took an interest in cables, too. But I did not find a difference. I listened (and still do) to various cables and have also tested them. I found no difference. To be fair, I don't find much difference in digital sources, either. I wouldn't mind using a $29 DVD player with a quality amp and headphones/speakers.

I think you are sincere in your belief, but I am also sincere in not finding any difference whatsoever. You cannot place that difference on being "cheap" or "hating" cables. I've blindly bought all manner of gear - electrostats, AMTs, solid state, tubes, many things, and am offering my opinion on what I heard and measured. It's OK to buy cables for cosmetics and durability (I have), but there's no need to spend more for alleged sonic benefits. If you're not happy with the way something sounds, buy something you like. If you don't like your headphones' sound, get different headphones. Or maybe try them with a different amp - there are quantifiable and measurable differences between amps. Recabling headphones doesn't make any difference. I've tried it.

UE, I think your arguments against cables are sound, but today at a meet I heard two cables and there was an easily audible difference between them. I actually have an anti-cable agenda so I'm really surprised and dissapointed now. I dunno what to think now ... but I will still stick with my anti-cable beliefs even though I heard a difference. The anti-cable arguments just make so much sense, I can't change my beliefs even though I heard the difference. I'd rather trust logic than myself.

 

[nycbone]

Thanks. I'm not often accused of being levelheaded.... at least not around the house.

 

 
Quote:

@nycbone
 
Your post here strikes me, a non-scientist but also a non-believer in the "magic" of cables, as the best and most levelheaded one in all of these discussions about cables.

 

[nycbone]

Can anyone explain why cables might  make a difference in frequency response?
 
Their job is to get electrons form one place to another, right?
 
Does the wire composition, gauge, length or any other parameter influence the flow of electrons between components?
 
If so, how?
 
I seem to recall that heavier gauge wire should be used for longer runs (e.g., for loudspeakers located a good distance from the amplifier).
 
And that 'electron lag' can result in certain types of circuits - e.g., series circuits with light bulbs where the bulbs are dim compared to bulbs in a parallel circuit.
 
I'm not sure that this would take place in a wire conductor.
 
If not, why should it matter (in terms of frequency response, not SQ) if an expensive, beefy cable is used or a single strand or wire?

 

[KnightK]

I know one thing that does matter which most cables address is proper shielding from outside EMI. That can really mess with the original signal being sent.

 

[Bullseye]

Wait, stop for one second and think back. Did you control perfectly the test? Could one system with one cable have sounded louder than the other? If you don't think so, did you actually measure the difference?
 
Were you expecting something out of them? Did anyone say how good A sounded compared to B because the latter sounded in another way?
 
Just think how many things could have made it sound really different, as I don't believe the test was really controlled and set (for what you say)
 
You don't need to distrust logic. It would be illogical, wouldn't it? 

 
Quote:

UE, I think your arguments against cables are sound, but today at a meet I heard two cables and there was an easily audible difference between them. I actually have an anti-cable agenda so I'm really surprised and dissapointed now. I dunno what to think now ... but I will still stick with my anti-cable beliefs even though I heard a difference. The anti-cable arguments just make so much sense, I can't change my beliefs even though I heard the difference. I'd rather trust logic than myself.

 

[tvrboy]

Quote:

Wait, stop for one second and think back. Did you control perfectly the test? Could one system with one cable have sounded louder than the other? If you don't think so, did you actually measure the difference?
 
Were you expecting something out of them? Did anyone say how good A sounded compared to B because the latter sounded in another way?
 
Just think how many things could have made it sound really different, as I don't believe the test was really controlled and set (for what you say)
 
You don't need to distrust logic. It would be illogical, wouldn't it? 

 

 

Believe me, I went in with an anti cable agenda. I really wanted NOT to hear a difference. I did hear a difference in clarity for sure. The system was the same for both cables. The volume wasn't exactly the same, but very close. By the way, the system was a Whiplash modified ipod with various Whiplash line out docks going to a RSA Protector going to a balanced HD650. I cranked the volume as far as it would go (the Protector shuts itself off when it starts to clip, so its easy to hit max). I heard the difference between two different Whiplash LODs.
 
But I am happy I won a $1500 Cary Xciter DAC today! Big thanks to Drew and Nicole from Moon Audio!

 

[mikeaj]

Classically, the resistance of a conducting wire is proportional to a constant rho (depends on the material the conductor is made of), proportional to the length of the wire, and inversely proportional to the cross-sectional area.  Higher-gauge wire is thinner, so it has less cross-sectional area and thus more resistance.  Likewise, longer wire has more resistance.  The above usually holds for materials intended for use as conductors.  Some other materials may have resistance that changes as a function of temperature, current flow, etc.  A wire made out of non-conducting material would have REALLY high resistance. 
 
Passive speaker impedance is pretty small, e.g. 4 ohms, so with improperly thin wires running a significant distance, the resistance of the wires is not negligible.  If the resistance of the wire is on the order of the speakers, then a significant portion of the power output from the amp will be lost to the wires rather than the speakers.  SQ is probably not effected, but volume is. Headphone impedance can be one or two orders of magnitude higher than speaker impedance, and wires for headphone systems are shorter, so these are not significant issues.
 
Light bulbs in parallel rather than series has to do with the fact that the voltage in the series configuration is being divided among each bulb.  If you have 12V and 3 bulbs, in parallel each bulb gets the full 12V while in series each gets 4V.  That's an unrelated issue. 
 
In practice, wires may be picking up ground hum or other EMI, and certain non-ideal, more difficult to describe effects like the skin effect, proximity effect, etc. may apply.  Actual wires may have some inductance or capacitance.  For example, if there's capacitance somehow, then you'd see a slight capacitance is in parallel with the headphones load resulting in a very slight lowpass effect.  High frequencies would be slightly attenuated compared to low frequencies, so you'd get your FR change.  In most home audio situations, all of these things probably are not an issue or have negligible effect.
 
 
However, it would be fairly easy to build a wonky cable intentionally to change the FR.  If the source or cables have significant impedance compared to the headphones, then in the very least the volume can be attenuated.  If the headphones have impedance that varies across frequency, then the FR would change too.  The argument being made is that the difference between reasonable non-wonky cables is close to zero from a signal transmission perspective.  The difference may also be close to zero for some wonky and most cheap cables too.
 
Quote:

Can anyone explain why cables might  make a difference in frequency response?
 
Their job is to get electrons form one place to another, right?
 
Does the wire composition, gauge, length or any other parameter influence the flow of electrons between components?
 
If so, how?
 
I seem to recall that heavier gauge wire should be used for longer runs (e.g., for loudspeakers located a good distance from the amplifier).
 
And that 'electron lag' can result in certain types of circuits - e.g., series circuits with light bulbs where the bulbs are dim compared to bulbs in a parallel circuit.
 
I'm not sure that this would take place in a wire conductor.
 
If not, why should it matter (in terms of frequency response, not SQ) if an expensive, beefy cable is used or a single strand or wire?