a great take on big$ cables

'faith' is the 'biggest' difference in wire upgrades.

Try making that argument fly with my wife. Claims to hear significant differences between cables and cords. What a fool, huh?

I don't know whether there's any audiophile-type difference in cables, or not. With age and because of inevitable hearing loss, I am noticing I prefer brighter cables with added resolution, also...brighter speakers to emphasize the high frequencies.

According to the article there’s been $15,000 challenges that haven’t been taken by these experts. The dumbing-down of audio. Read one unnamed magazine’s recent attempt (not Stereo Review)at describing why they won’t do double blind testing a few months ago– it’s hilarious, and total and complete nonsense.

There's plenty of these experts here, stand by for the typical obfuscation regarding why you can’t and don't want to do blind testing. Even better are the power cord (or chord as some insist on calling them) claims. Some cords are apparently "soundstage champs" - Okey doke, sure. Let’s see a statistically repetitive go at that one.

A fool and his money are easily parted.

Pmotz.

i have a question for you,what are you talking about when you say " this goes against everything audiophiles strive for" isnt better sound what audiophiles strive for & how does an enginer's finding's done in blind listening test's go against anything ? its nothing more than information,use it if you like or dont its of no matter to me but i would love to know what goes against all that that is hifi.

what i find odd is you choose to fixate on useless information like stereo review & aes instead of the real information in the article which was the results of blind listening tests set up in such a way that there was no time lapse between the changing of wires not what some stupid mag had to say.

if you want to stress a point atleast come up with a response that has merit to it instead of refering to how many people buy exotic wires & cables,that's like saying that bose sells more speakers than anybody else so they cant be wrong.

when i read the page at no time did i take the the parts about stereo review or aes as a reference nor do i think they were intended as such, i think they were included to show just how fast these mag's & reviewers changed their tune, he even admited to his own company reversing its own findings on wire's & cables as to not hurt dealer sales.

to tell the truth i was hoping that someone would comment on the published results of the listening tests instead of focusing on trivial issues such as the honesty of audio mags or reviewer's,as far as i know this type of testing is the most precise way to present different cable's & wire's to test subject's without corupting the test's with visual's of wire's being changed or a prolonged break in the music.

mike.

mr russell doesn't say that all interconnects and speaker wire sound the same. he merely points out that there is very little difference between them. this is the point where i say "the audiophile is better off with tone controls on a preamp than exotic cables", and everyone comes out with both guns a-blazin. if there IS a cable company out there, who can change 'copper'and 'silver' into something other than 'copper'and 'silver', i would hope they would be using that knowledge for some greater purpose than practicing alchemy. 'faith' is the 'biggest' difference in wire upgrades.

Referencing anything Stereo Review printed regarding sound is not a plus IMO. In fact, putting that out there potentially removes credibility from the poster. I leaned first hand (not via heresay or in a magazine) that the reviewer at Stereo Review was either 1 - lying, 2 - had substantial hearing loss, or 3 - his setup was so convoluted that the sonic differences between Bose 601s and Wilson Sohias would be inaudible. Stereo Review was a joke, and a likely token for the various manufacturers, not a source for any real, credible information.

As an over-50 year old male, I'd have to say that, even though I notice my hearing deteriorates with time, I NEVER have any trouble telling that it's my equipment playing a Beethoven quartet and not the Emerson Q somehow getting into my listening room just to fool me. They know enough not to even try.

Bigjoe, you use to have to spend a lot of money to get that last 10% of performance but not anyone! http://www.realitycables.com And to improve things even more try some dakiom 203 series feedback stabilizer http://www.dakiom.com and QuickSilver contact enhancer http://www.xtremecables.com

At least 90% of that article is true. I have heard high $$$ cables that sounded terrible (but did make a difference). That being said, I have yet to hear a cable that made such a marked improvement as to warrant spending similar $$$ for the marginal improvement. Big fat cheap OFC (yes I do think I can hear the crud in non-OFC)does it for me.

Physiologically men do loose their hearing to a larger degree than women and at a relatively faster and more constant pace. Even those who take care not to expose themselves to damaging SPL's will gradually and irreparably loose some of their hearing in the upper frequencies. Those who depend on their auditory acuity to perform specific tasks on a regular basis (ex-A.J. van den Hul) will suffer this to a much smaller degree. Also, these are often people who started at a higher mark on the hearing scale continuum therefore reducing the effective functional degredation regardless of the quantitative loss.

Are we all going to be the Jack Lalaine of the auditory world? Probably not. We can expect to get a reasonably good reproduction of the music that makes us happy for some 30 to 50 years before having to tip the trebble knob and turn the volume up enough to cause complaints.

Happy listening!

All I can say is if you agree with everything said by Mr. Russell there is no reason for you to continue visiting Audiogon. This goes against everything audiophiles strive for. I can't definitively prove he's wrong, but there are an awful large number of deluded people if he is correct! I should add that the same folks (Stereo Review and the AES) who said there is no difference in wire also said years ago there is no difference in electronics. Interesting that Mr. Russell didn't address that, of course McIntosh wouldn't still be in business if everything sounded the same, would they? Recall they are a high end company, with some very expensive components (at least to the average Joe on the street) so his opinion of anything above zip cord is suspect. I also think he takes it a little too far with the Audioquest cables he thinks are an absolute waste of $58,000. I would agree with that only because I will never have that kind of money to throw around! What I found most interesting is the short section on age related hearing loss. A 35 year old male has typically lost 11dB at 8000 Hz! That's pretty bad. I wonder if that is true for most Audiogoner's? Might explain why some folks like bright speakers!

Sorry about the error in my last post the wire is 16awg not 6 and my runs are 8 Feet long.

Actually my BEST Speaker cables are DIY made from 6ag solid wires from Home Depot just wind them about 2 twists every inch or so. They cost almost nothing and sound better than any cable I have tried, mostly monster cables as well as the very low end kimber cables.

Remember, there is more profit (read markup) on big buck cables which are typically sold via dealer networks. More dollars does not mean better sound, IMO.

price != equal to quality WRT cables.