Asp307, why are you so hurt over the term filthy rich? It doesn’t carry the negative connotation to me as it does to you. It seems only some of those who have more money than what they know what to do with get offended. I would love to be filthy rich and wouldn’t care if someone used that descriptor.
I have described in detail why I don’t think expensive cables are not worth their price. Perhaps you should read my comments again. But I will list them again.
First, the raw materials needed for expensive cables are easily obtained, are cheap in the quantities needed, and are few, namely metal wire, connector, and dielectric. How expensive is copper or even silver wire that goes into an expensive 1 meter of IC or 8’ feet of speaker cable? I hope you don’t start getting into monocrystal wire debate. Cost of most dielectric is almost nothing.
Second, the engineering of expensive audio cables is not sophisticated compared to amplifiers, DACs, speakers, although cable manufacturers will claim a lot of unproven BS. In contrast for example, there are cables used in some components of high energy physics particle colliders (eg, CERN) that do require sophisticated engineering and manufacturing and are probably expensive for a reason.
Third, markup of expensive audio cable is probably the highest in the industry for no good reason. If you can provide a good reason, please let us know.
Fourth, there is no consistent evidence published or otherwise that expensive cables sound better than inexpensive ones, coat hangers excluded (Watts you’re precious.). I with other audiophiles have conducted blinded AB testing, and there has never been consistent preference for expensive cables ($5k+ speaker cables and ICs) over relatively inexpensive ones ($300-$2k). I do find differences in sound among cables, but price has never been the consistent factor.
Fifth, manufacturing of these expensive, highly marketed audio cables is cheap compared to most high end gear. They can be made in miles of quantity by machines. Actually, I think some of the more boutique, one man operations spend more time hand making his wire (hand polishing the wire, making and applying the dielectric by hand, etc).
If you are to claim value is in the eye of the beholder, then I got a $10,000 umbrella stand I can sell you.
So now my turn. What is your reasoning behind justifying the cost of $10k ICs and $50k speaker cables? Have you done blinded AB testing and found consistent evidence that expensive cables sound better than inexpensive cables? I would love to hear your response. |
I too have trouble understanding how a power cord can have the same list price as a Honda Civic. On the other hand, if someone wants to build them and someone wants to buy them, so be it... |
Me too jl35. But if there are fools who want to part with their money and scammers who prey on fools, so be it... |
The social and psychological content of this and several other threads going on now are fascinating. drac, your post below is one of your most thoughtful in this thread. The recent cultural disdain for folks who have accumulated wealth seems to have replaced what was once respect, then envy. Sure, some inherit their wealth but many others are some of the hardest working people I know and many started with nothing more than an idea, fearlessness and perseverance. Without the wealthy to drive our economy, who is going to provide jobs? The government certainly cannot do it all since they are funded by all of us. It would be interesting if the folks who complain about high-priced cables actually took a close look at what the government does with the money we pay them.....talk about waste and lack of value. To your question, What is your reasoning behind justifying the cost of $10k ICs and $50k speaker cables?
I would say, why do they have to be justified? While I am happy with my WE wire from ebay, I have no problem with others who believe a $10K pair of interconnects, or a dozen $150 fuses, are necessary for their audio enjoyment. I agree with jl35,
if someone wants to build them and someone wants to buy them, so be it...
|
Mitch2,
"To your question,
What is your reasoning behind justifying the cost of $10k ICs and $50k speaker cables?
I would say, why do they have to be justified? While I am happy with my WE wire from ebay, I have no problem with others who believe a $10K pair of interconnects, or a dozen $150 fuses, are necessary for their audio enjoyment."
Well, my question was directed to asp307, but I’m glad you joined our discussion. The reason why I posed the above question is because some have attacked me for suggesting some high end cables have become so absurdly expensive for no good reason. And there are people willing to buy these cables without really even thinking about what goes into making them. And the reasons they give for buying these cables is well...how should I put it...they already drank the kool-aid. I was hoping for more rational reason other than the subjective "it sounds good to me". A hamburger with grilled onions and cheddar cheese sounds good to me, but I’m not going to pay $200 for it no matter how good it is. I guess I have a disdain for getting ripped off.
"It would be interesting if the folks who complain about high-priced cables actually took a close look at what the government does with the money we pay them.....talk about waste and lack of value."
You don't think people are aware of this? I work at an institution that is supported in part by the government and see the waste first hand, besides all the government waste reported in the media. But this is entirely a different matter that doesn’t belong on Audiogon.
"Sure, some inherit their wealth but many others are some of the hardest working people I know and many started with nothing more than an idea, fearlessness and perseverance."
I agree. My criticism was never about these people. My original post had to do with unjustifiably expensive cables and the people who buy them.
"drac, your post below is one of your most thoughtful in this thread."
Well thanks. I’m not exactly sure which exact post you’re referring to because most of my posts are thoughtful when I’m responding to rational people. ;-)
|
Drac, if you love dogs, here this will get you riled up. It makes $100K cables look pedestrian! Who loves their dogs??!! You don’t really love them unless the have a exquisite dog collars from “I Love Dogs Diamonds” . 3 models to choose from starting at $498,000 and going up to $3,200,000....for a dog collar. What’s that? Can’t hear you Drac. Hahahahahahahahahaha. http://www.leibish.com/diamonds-for-dogs-article-400 I enjoy how you qualify *rational* people. They are simply those people that agree with your way of thinking. In my mind, *rational* people are those that understand that there are differences between people, and accept that others choices should be left up to them. *Irrational* people, are people like you Drac, that get frustrated when you find people that do not agree with everything that you feel to be *right*, and have a burning desire to try to make everything *right* in the world by trying to change those people. Expand you mind, expand your horizons, expand your world. Accept others for what they are, and enjoy your life. Stop trying to change others to fit your mold of what should be. As Frankie Goes To Hollywood would say: R-E-L-A-X. |
Hmm..Jmc, seems like you’re the one who can’t except the way some people are. RELAX man. Poor you, vying for my attention with all your posts. You want my attention. I’m giving you some. Happy? |
while I think we generally agree on cables Drac, I don't assume the purchasers of $10K cables are fools or the manufacturer scammers... |
if you have loads of money and the $10k cables sound best to you after auditioning many cables at different prices on your $100k speakers... |
jl35, I don't think all are but some I do. |
vs someone who buys $10k speakers and slaps on cheap cables without auditioning, simply assuming cables don't matter... |
|
Repeat after me, "It’s only a hobby. It’s only a hobby." In terms of price spread high end audio is not really a whole lot different from say model railroading, mountain climbing or stamp collecting or even baseball card collecting. There will always be ridiculously high priced products in any hobby. Not every mountain climber can afford to climb Everest and of those that can most undoubtedly don’t want to. The Mickey Mantle baseball card from his rookie year is how much?! I suspect the the whole answer to the high priced audiophile cable debate is whether the SQ of very expensive cables is superior to inexpensive cables, generally speaking. I far don’t see any real evidence to the contrary, only a lot of who shot John. I can't help pointing out that inexpensive cables, say Radio Shack, might actually sound better than much more expensive cables if they're broken in and the expensive ones aren't, they're cryo'd and the expensive ones aren't and/or they're inserted with the correct directionality in mind while the expensive ones aren't.
|
"vs someone who buys $10k speakers and slaps on cheap cables without auditioning, simply assuming cables don't matter..."
If you mean lamp cords or rolls of Monster Cable at Best Buy, I agree. |
for me Drac, the key is the auditioning, deciding by what sounds best to you, within the constraints of your budget... |
and yes, some truly have no budgetary constraints... |
It's not hard to get caught up in the hype especially when you are trying to get the most out of your system and want to fine tune it but I'm convinced that we want to believe that a ten thousand dollar cable should and will make a huge difference in spite of the fact that all logic says other wise (diminishing returns). Any audiophile with experience knows that cabling is system dependent regardless of it's cost. If you built an addition on to your house and the electrician told you that he could install electrical wire that would dramatically improve the performance of anything plugged into it but it would cost you a $100.00 a foot would you go for it?
|
If you built an addition on to your house and the electrician told you that he could install electrical wire that would dramatically improve the performance of anything plugged into it but it would cost you a $100.00 a foot would you go for it? JPS Labs in-wall power cable, only $24/foot I'm afraid but the answer is yes. And btw the electrician in question (now retired) worked on most of the studios in LA ps head-head A/B auditioning of in-wall power cable is beyond even me 😀 |
|
If an electrician told me that I would tell him to give me some of what he has been smoking. |
I would tell him to give me some of what he has been smoking.
Yeah, that approach was a lot more fun before they figured out how bad it is for our health. Made our inexpensive systems sound awesome. Here's to simpler times... |
It's not nearly as bad as alcohol or many other legal, more socially accepted things. I actually don't endulge but as with cables, there is a ton of misinformation out there. 😳 |
Regarding the $24/foot in-wall power cabling, I would certainly envision that it might make a difference in many applications, to a greater or lesser degree depending on many variables. Including the length that is required; whether the incoming AC voltage at the particular location happens to be greater than or less than the voltage the particular components were designed to sound best at; the magnitude and spectral characteristics of whatever noise may be riding on that AC; whether the power amp is biased in class A or AB or D (which affects the extent to which the current it draws fluctuates with the dynamics of the music); the susceptibility of the components in the system to ground loop issues, which can also be dependent on how they are interconnected; and countless other variables involving the design of the particular components in the system.
However I also see no reason to rule out the possibility that depending on all of those variables the results that would be provided in many cases by the $24/foot wiring might be worse than ordinary Romex would provide, rather than better. Certainly from a subjective standpoint, at least.
Regards,
-- Al
|
Lest I compound the impression of being rich as Croesus 💰💰💰💰 I should not that for my most recent build out I did not use the JPS again but instead opted for the Synergistic Research cryo treated Romex at <$10/foot (I forget the actual price)
Do I think the JPS sounded better than the SR? No idea -- but the JPS was a bear to work with and given my use of other SR products I opted for the cheaper and lighter cable
One consideration on in-wall is that it has zero resale value ... unless you can demolish your construction, so cost of ownership is that much higher
|
Almarg wrote,
"However I also see no reason to rule out the possibility that depending on all of those variables the results that would be provided in many cases by the $24/foot wiring might be worse than ordinary Romex would provide, rather than better. Certainly from a subjective standpoint, at least."
Hey, Al, correct me if I’m wrong but the whole point of thorough and conscientious testing is to eliminate all those persnickety variables you refer to, or at least as many as you can. Not all of the variables will be known, if that’s what you mean I agree! Hey, that would make an excellent topic, how many variables are there? The same way you would for tests of any cables, fuses, or any product.
The easiest (only) way to solve three simultaneous equations in four unknowns is get rid of one of the unknowns. - old audiophile expression
g. kait
m. dynamica
|
Hey, Al, correct me if I’m wrong but the whole point of thorough and conscientious testing is to eliminate all those persnickety variables you refer to, or at least as many as you can. Well, of course, Geoff. Not sure what your point is, though, with respect to my comment about expensive in-wall wiring vs. Romex. Obviously not many of us are going to do A/B comparisons of those alternatives. And I see little if any reason to expect the findings of those few people who may do such comparisons to be applicable to other systems and installations, considering all of the variables I cited. Regards, -- Al |
What troubles me more than any price that someone can sell something and the price for which someone is willing to pay for something, is the reality that there are two sets of rules in our current so-called, but in reality no longer, capitalist society. One set of rules is for those of us who may complain about prices from time to time, but by and large play by a set of rules that is fair. We call ’em as we see ’em and expect a fair deal and quality.
Then there’s the set of rules that I’ll bet none-to-very-few-of-us has access to. Who here can buy a credit default swap for 7 figures or higher and gain from someone else’s failure? Who here can sequester $Ms in off-shore tax-free havens? Who here is able to buy or sell equities on secondary markets with nanosecond transactions? I have to place a bid and then wait hours before it is denied or confirmed, all the while the market shifts and moves out of my purview.
Some are able to transact these things in an informed manner, or have agents who have access to such transaction capabilities, but they don’t care about the price of an audio cable or component and whether it is priced too high. And by the way I was raised, such second sets of rules accessible by some and not all is NOT free market capitalism and never will be.
So I don’t complain about the prices of audio gear; there are far more important fish to fry. |
There is no use for this thread. Nobody, who considers themselves member of the scam police, will heed those who say some expensive cables are worth it. Nor will the scam police ever embrace at least some expensive cables.
I have had expensive and awful cables and inexpensive and awful cables and rejected both.
|
almarg
6,473 posts
06-19-2016 3:39pm
Geoffkait: Hey, Al, correct me if I’m wrong but the whole point of thorough and conscientious testing is to eliminate all those persnickety variables you refer to, or at least as many as you can.
to which Al replied,
"Well, of course, Geoff. Not sure what your point is, though, with respect to my comment about expensive in-wall wiring vs. Romex. Obviously not many of us are going to do A/B comparisons of those alternatives. And I see little if any reason to expect the findings of those few people who may do such comparisons to be applicable to other systems and installations, considering all of the variables I cited."
My point is of course you can construct absurd cases where some generic wire might win in a shoot out with a superior wire due to some contrived assemblage of variables. But those case can be thrown out. They’re outliers. You cannot put the genie back n the bottle. Not with cables and wire, not with fuses. Simply saying we can’t easily perform an AB test doesn’t actually mean your argument is valid. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. One trusts wire directionality is one of your variables.
|
My point is of course you can construct absurd cases where some generic wire might win in a shoot out with a superior wire due to some contrived assemblage of variables. But those case can be thrown out. They’re outliers. You cannot put the genie back n the bottle. Not with cables and wire, not with fuses. Simply saying we can’t easily perform an AB test doesn’t actually mean
your argument is valid. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. One
trusts wire directionality is one of your variables.
Geoff, I wasn’t constructing any cases, absurd or otherwise. And I wasn’t addressing cables or fuses. My point in mentioning all of those variables was to convey the thought that the results provided by expensive in-wall wiring in comparison with Romex are (a)unlikely to have much if any predictability, and (b)are unlikely to have much if any consistency among different systems and installations. Regards, -- Al |
Al,
To point out the problems with poorly designed experiments, I gave an example above of how inferior interconnects can help with impedance matching between components; however, I can't think of a scenario where a combination of the variables you list would make well designed AC wires perform worse than romex (save for an extreme example of a reduced voltage drop leaving voltage above the component spec which, frankly, is hard for me to conceive). You always do a good job of pointing out the existence of each end of the bell curve but in this case I am not in agreement. Can you be specific with a scenario I am missing.
BTW, I use 10 gauge Furutech OCC in my walls because I like the way it looks on my oscilloscope. |
geoffkait3,597 posts06-18-2016 7:59amBringing up credentials, especially when they aren’t particularly relevant, such as chemistry in a physics debate or discussion, is what we refer to as Appeal to Authority, a particular form of logical fallacy. A recording engineer who might argue against cables making a difference in SQ cannot win the argument based ONLY on his credentials as a recording engineer. A chemistry major or even a EE cannot win any physics argument based on his credentials.
geoff,
Ya but how about bringing up that "I know a guy" who works at NASA and he agrees with me? Now that pretty much clears up this whole topic. Seriously though, I completely agree with your point that an "Appeal to Authority" is often a sophomoric tactic employed when the facts aren’t in support of a position; just as poorly designed experiments (DBT’s as an example) serve the same purpose.
That said, I raised my role as a materials scientist not to support a specific scientific claim (as I have made none). Rather, I did so in response to a post made by inna which indicated the OP needed a scientific background to make his claims. I pointed out my credentials to demonstrate my qualifications to engage in a discussion about science regarding the poorly contrived scientific claims of the OP. This is of course a proposition he has shown no desire to pursue for reasons I have mentioned. Namely, I don’t believe this thread is about cables.
|
WPC wrote,
"geoff,
Ya but how about bringing up that "I know a guy" who works at NASA and he agrees with me? Now that pretty much clears up this whole topic."
But I am the guy that worked at NASA. Hel-looo!
;-)
|
I was referring to Drac's reference to his friend at Nasa who has unequivocally determined cable's are scams. Are you to whom he was referring? |
Watts,
"Ya but how about bringing up that "I know a guy" who works at NASA and he agrees with me? Now that pretty much clears up this whole topic.
Seriously though, I completely agree with your point that an "Appeal to Authority" is often a sophomoric tactic employed when the facts aren’t in support of a position; just as poorly designed experiments (DBT’s as an example) serve the same purpose.
That said, I raised my role as a materials scientist not to support a specific scientific claim (as I have made none). Rather, I did so in response to a post made by inna which indicated the OP needed a scientific background to make his claims. I pointed out my credentials to demonstrate my qualifications to engage in a discussion about science regarding the poorly contrived scientific claims of the OP. This is of course a proposition he has shown no desire to pursue for reasons I have mentioned. Namely, I don’t believe this thread is about cables."
Taking the passive aggressive approach? All this verbiage, yet you have contributed nothing except for how great an psychoanalyst engineer you are working on F16s, Mercedes, etc. If you don’t believe this thread is about cables, then why participate. Go start your own audiophile psychobabble thread and have at it. Who here wants to hear your psychobabble over and over again?
That "NASA guy" has real credentials and can be trusted because I know him. I have no idea which community or online college you sprang from.
"BTW, I use 10 gauge Furutech OCC in my walls because I like the way it looks on my oscilloscope."
Hmm, next time I’ll bring my oscilloscope to my audio dealer and if I like the way a cable looks on my oscilloscope, I’ll buy it. Why even listen to it? Precious. |
"Drac’s reference to his friend at Nasa who has unequivocally determined cable’s are scams. Are you to whom he was referring?"
"I was referring to Drac’s reference to his friend at Nasa who has unequivocally determined cable’s are scams. Are you to whom he was referring?"
You're a bit slow, aren’t you Watts? 🙄
BTW, your ability to misinterpret my statements is pure gold. Are you really an engineer? |
"My point is of course you can construct absurd cases where some generic wire might win in a shoot out with a superior wire due to some contrived assemblage of variables. But those case can be thrown out. They’re outliers. You cannot put the genie back n the bottle. Not with cables and wire, not with fuses. Simply saying we can’t easily perform an AB test doesn’t actually mean your argument is valid. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. One trusts wire directionality is one of your variables.
Geoff, I wasn’t constructing any cases, absurd or otherwise. And I wasn’t addressing cables or fuses. My point in mentioning all of those variables was to convey the thought that the results provided by expensive in-wall wiring in comparison with Romex are (a)unlikely to have much if any predictability, and (b)are unlikely to have much if any consistency among different systems and installations.
Regards,
-- Al"
Geoff, you really like to troll don't you? Looking for fights where they don't exist. This is your MO. Every time I've seen you argue with Al, you've come up short handed.
|
Wattsperchannel 6-19-2016 5:34 pm EDT
I can’t think of a scenario where a combination of the variables you list would make well designed AC wires perform worse than romex (save for an extreme example of a reduced voltage drop leaving voltage above the component spec which, frankly, is hard for me to conceive).... Can you be specific with a scenario I am missing. One example would involve ground loops, which as I’m sure you realize can cause or contribute to high frequency noise as well as low frequency hum, and in digital applications can cause or contribute to jitter. See pages 31 to 35 of the following paper, by Bill Whitlock of Jensen Transformers: https://centralindianaaes.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/indy-aes-2012-seminar-w-notes-v1-0.pdfAs you’ll see, he explains that "what drives 99% of all ground loops" is imperfect cancellation at the safety ground conductor of the magnetic fields surrounding the hot and neutral conductors, resulting in voltages being induced in the safety ground conductor. As he indicates, Romex is particularly good in that regard, because of its uniform geometry. The $24/foot wire is described as having noise-rejecting geometry, which would seem to suggest that the hot and neutral are twisted or interwoven in some manner. Will that geometry be as good as Romex in terms of the uniformity across its length of the physical relationship between the two current conductors and the safety ground conductor? Who knows, but it certainly seems questionable. Also, I recall seeing numbers on the inductance of Romex, which were somewhat highish. And the twisted or interwoven geometry of the expensive wire would seem to suggest that it has significantly lower inductance. While that geometry can be expected to be advantageous to the high priced wire with respect to pickup of radiated RFI, might the higher inductance of Romex be advantageous with respect to filtering of high frequency noise that may be present on the incoming AC? Again, who knows? But as I’m sure you realize, higher inductance means progressively higher impedance at progressively higher frequencies, and therefore more opposition to the flow of high frequency noise currents. How this tradeoff may net out in any particular application could very conceivably depend on the particular spectral characteristics (frequency distribution) of the noise and RFI that may be present. And perhaps also on the unknown capacitances of the two kinds of wire. On the other hand, though, higher inductance means more opposition to abrupt changes in demand for current, such as may occur in power amplifiers to a greater or lesser degree depending on their bias class. How much significance the presumably higher inductance of Romex may have in that regard, if any, figures to be highly dependent on the bias class of the particular amp. As well as on the length of the wiring, since inductance is proportional to length. And of course different components will differ in their susceptibility to ground loop issues, in part due to how and through what impedance their internal circuit ground and chassis/AC safety ground are interconnected. And in part due to whether a given component is interconnected to other components via balanced or unbalanced connections, and if the connections are balanced whether the shield of the interconnect cable is connected to the circuit ground or chassis/AC safety ground in each of the interconnected components. And beyond all that is the possibility that results that are "better" from an objective standpoint may not be preferable subjectively. For example, relative to digital applications see this paper by Steve Nugent of Empirical Audio, in which he states: Another interesting thing about audibility of jitter is it’s ability to mask other sibilance in a system. Sometimes, when the jitter is reduced in a system, other component sibilance is now obvious and even more objectionable than the original jitter was. And with regard to analog applications I have seen it said by a number of writers that low level high frequency noise can from a subjective standpoint sometimes result in improved perception of hall ambience, and an increased perception of "air." The bottom line, as I said earlier: It’s all very unpredictable, and figures to be very system, location, and listener dependent. Regards, -- Al |
Dracule1 wrote,
"Geoff, you really like to troll don’t you? Looking for fights where they don’t exist. This is your MO. Every time I’ve seen you argue with Al, you’ve come up short handed."
Your mixed metaphors roll off me like a duck out of water.
|
Hmm, I can spend one million for a watch no bigger than a silver dollar.
How about $50M for a Gulfstream Jet? Are these worth it?? Maybe but quality always costs
Why all the fuss, If it offends you, that is your problem. You can say these are a rip off however that is to denigrate all the hardworking engineers and metallurgists who do the science to extract the most out of these cables.
|
Al,
I understand your points. I guess I was presuming if a person was going to take the step of using a wire with superior properties (capacitance, inductance et. al.) they would take the steps to engineer the system holistically.
Taking things one point at a time.
1) Ground Loops-- The key to avoiding ground loops is ensuring equal electrical potential at each receptacle ground. The concept that the emi rejection method of a premium spec wire (be it twisting or otherwise) would cause a variation in potential, I suppose is possible, but to me that would indicate the wire by definition was not premium spec. to begin with. Certainly there are wires with tighter geometric tolerances than romex that would quickly render this concern moot as far as the pursuit of improved overall performance is concerned. (As an aside I use a furutech star ground harness which runs directly from my 5 neutrals 3 feet behind my listening wall to a 1" solid copper 8' grounding rod. It does the trick.)
2) RFI/EMI Filtering-- Of course romex has higher inductance and of course inductance cleans up high frequencies but that would be a blunt (backwards) approach to addressing the problem. I would much prefer wire with both inductance and capacitance thereby maximizing current delivery and clean things up with a purpose built device. ( I use a 75 amp Torus ahead of my 20' 10 gauge Furutech lines. It cleans things up with precision as opposed to hoping my wire is long enough and poorly engineered enough to solve the problem.)
3) Bad is Good Rationalization-- Regarding Steve's stuff, the arguement that taking sound engineering steps to improve the performance of one aspect of a system is a bad idea because it might display the other areas of the system that need improvement has never made any sense to me as it relates to audio or system design generally. How does one ever make progress employing such a mindset?
4) Analog Signals and LCR Tuning-- Yes lots can be done to dial in bandwidth and noise on analog signals to taste. That is why I specifically referred to AC wires in my question.
5) System Predictability-- I would agree predictability is low if system inputs are somewhat randomly assembled, but I would argue results become far more linear (and in fact measurable) when proper science is used in the initial system specification. Again, this holds true in audio as well as system design generally.
|
Instead of going off subject, why don't we get back on track. Earlier I posted a list of why I think megaexpensive cables are not worth their price. I hear nothing but silence from those who oppose my views. It's irrelevant what people pay for watches, cars, Gulf Stream jets, etc. That wasn't the subject of my original post. If you feel justified paying for mega expensive cables because they sound good to you despite my contention there are cheaper alternatives, then you don't have to respond. You've made up your mind so happy listening. However, if someone can justify the issues I have with expensive cables (listed below), I would sincerely like to hear your views. No more personal attacks, smart ass remarks, and psychoanalysis from either side.
First, the raw materials needed for expensive cables are easily obtained, are cheap in the quantities needed, and are only few, namely metal wire, connector, and dielectric. How expensive is copper or even silver wire that goes into an expensive 1 meter of IC or 8’ feet of speaker cable? Cost of most dielectric and shielding is almost nothing.
Second, the engineering of expensive audio cables is not sophisticated compared to amplifiers, DACs, speakers, although cable manufacturers will claim otherwise. I'm not talking about cables used in some components of high energy physics particle colliders (eg, CERN) that my physicist friends have told me about. They do require sophisticated engineering and manufacturing and are probably expensive for a reason.
Third, markup of expensive audio cable is probably the highest in the industry for no good reason. If you can provide a good reason, please let us know.
Fourth, there is no consistent evidence published or otherwise that expensive cables sound better than inexpensive ones, coat hangers excluded. I with other audiophiles have conducted blinded AB testing, and there has never been consistent preference for expensive cables ($5k+ speaker cables and ICs) over relatively inexpensive ones ($300-$2k). I do find differences in sound among cables, but price has never been the consistent factor. If you contend blinded AB testing is flawed, then provide an alternative.
Fifth, manufacturing of these expensive, highly marketed audio cables is cheap compared to most high end gear. As far as I know, there is no cable geometry that a machine can't wind. And cables can be made tens of thousands of feet easily by machines. Actually, I think some of the more boutique, one man operations spend more time hand making his wire (hand polishing the wire, making and applying the dielectric by hand, etc).
I would love to hear your responses.
|
Just two things. Your negative or unsubstantial results actually don’t match what the majority of audiophiles experience with expensive cables, therefore your contention that expensive cables are not worth the price is unfounded. Two, your contention that blind tests reveal that all expensive cables are no better than cheap cables is either your own puffery and untrue or if you have been involved in a blind test, which BTW I actually doubt, that produced negative results I suggest it is simply an outlier and can be thrown out. Besides the tests you yourself (for some bizarre reason) linked earlier on this thread actually show the opposite - they show that there ARE significant differences among cables as heard by almost ALL listeners in the test. Hel-loo! Have you had your hearing checked recently?
cheers,
geoff kait
machina dynamica
|
Re your argument that for less money other alternative methods can provide more benefits with respect to sound quality than spending big bucks on super expensive cables, nobody said they couldn’t. However, if you wish to use room treatments as the alternative to expensive wires, a word of caution. Room treatments you know, like the tiny little bowl acoustic resonators, the Synergistic Research stuff, the Audio Magic stuff, Shakti Hallographs, SteinMusic Harmonizer, heck, even the ubiquitous Tube Traps ain't cheap, not by any means. I bet you think room treatment involves simply putting up a couple squares of SONEX.
|
Drac,
Regarding your comments 1,2, 3, and 5 you seem to lack an appreciation for how things work in a free market economy.
Operators capable of raising capital must set pricing on the products the capital is used to produce at a level that maximizes the net-present-value of all future cash flows generated by that capital (as determined using a discount rate equal to the operator's cost of capital) which in turn must maximize the rate-of-return on each dollar of the capital raised.
Those who employ capital must make such pricing decisions by assessing the price elasticity for the product in question and the incumbent capital required to meet the demand for any given price point. The cost to produce any particular product is only used to determine the floor for pricing to determine a go-no-go decision on the capital project.
Failure to employ rate-of-return maximizing corporate finance principals will quickly undermine the operator's ability to raise capital as such capital will alternatively flow to those who understand these concepts.
What you describe harkens back to a Soviet style centrally planned economy where the cost of manufacturing is used to determine pricing. Maybe this is one small part of the disconnect so many have with your approach to things.
Regarding your comment 4, I must confess I oscillate between whether I think you really believe the things you say about cables (and as such simply need enlightenment as a scientific matter) or you understand how ill founded your positions are but nonetheless use them within the nebulas nature of the subject to berate those who's success you deplore. All things considered, (i.e., your clear venom toward the affluent, juvenile treatment toward anyone who logically challenges you, and the weakness of your positions) I continue to lean toward the latter.
Take the corollary of your position into consideration. In my experience I have generally found the correlation coefficient between intelligence and economic success to be greater the zero. On its face, your position argues that the most successful of the successful have happened upon their economic position in spite of the fact that you claim a correlation coefficient of less than zero. A pretty illogical proposition in my opinion.
I strongly encourage you to spend some time with the brain trust you purport to maintain to understand how inductance and capacitance not only impact current availability but influence bandwidth in analog cables; why skin effect is so critical in speaker cables (why I prefer Nordost btw); etc.etc.etc. The mere existence of snake oil is not justification for dismissal of all sound scientific principals. That behavior wreaks of an agenda.
I nor anyone I have seen on this thread has argued the lack of existence of extremes in the distribution of outcomes for cables (Al articulated this most clearly). Some high priced cables are poor performers and low priced cables are exceptional. Further, some high priced cables company's are indeed selling snake oil and bling. This reality, however, by no means negates the fact that other high-end cables are engineered and manufactured to very high standards and perform accordingly.
As I pointed out (and you chose to mock rather than acknowledge) there are 70,000 people in the USA alone who's time is valued to such a degree that it makes no economic sense for them to sort through the low priced cables to achieve the performance they desire. Such an endeavor would actually be more expensive not less expensive than going to a cable company with sound engineering and paying for their services. I refuse to believe you are incapable of grasping this concept but choose to ignore it because it stands in the way of your purpose here.
It is your refusal to embrace alternative thought and the absolute nature of your claims--that people who buy expensive cables are fools, retarded, etc.--that is the problem so many have with you and this thread.
|
The point is, if I make something for $0.01 and, based on whatever marketing or voodoo or apparent added value I effectively attach to my product, I am able to sell it for $1.0M, then exactly what is the problem here?
In my world, good for me and good for the buyer who thinks he/she got a good deal. |
stevecham2,273 posts06-19-2016 3:47pmWhat troubles me more than any price that someone can sell something and the price for which someone is willing to pay for something, is the reality that there are two sets of rules in our current so-called, but in reality no longer, capitalist society. One set of rules is for those of us who may complain about prices from time to time, but by and large play by a set of rules that is fair. We call ’em as we see ’em and expect a fair deal and quality.
Then there’s the set of rules that I’ll bet none-to-very-few-of-us has access to. Who here can buy a credit default swap for 7 figures or higher and gain from someone else’s failure? Who here can sequester $Ms in off-shore tax-free havens? Who here is able to buy or sell equities on secondary markets with nanosecond transactions? I have to place a bid and then wait hours before it is denied or confirmed, all the while the market shifts and moves out of my purview. High prices, companies are ripping us off ... In order to support the high prices, there has to be demand. The problem is staring at you in the mirror. Your disposable income is not keeping up with the JONES so priced out of the market. Instead of complaining, try improving your financial situation if goods are important enough or just content with what you can afford. Don't want to get political but last 8 years has increased the gap between the rich and poor due to Quantitative Easing and No/Low interest rates. Creating a bubble in hard assets that includes audio. Many companies are doing well, Magico, VAC .... Magico introduces a new version every 3 years and can't keep up with demand. Same with access to financial incentives. Is your account balance large enough to enjoy the special benefits?
The point is, if I make something for $0.01 and, based on whatever marketing or voodoo or apparent added value I effectively attach to my product, I am able to sell it for $1.0M, then exactly what is the problem here?
In my world, good for me and good for the buyer who thinks he/she got a good deal.
It's basically rewarding results that will drive innovation, efficiency ... and eventually lower prices and a superior products for the end consumer. For example in US Open golf tournament, winner gets $1,800,000. 3 tied for 2nd that gets $745,270 each ... So players will work to improve their game to win the grand prize if that's their goal. What do you propose, pie gets evenly divided between all the players? Then why bother improving their game if there's no EXTRA incentive to win? A Bernie Sander's tournament????? |
stevecham
2,273 posts
06-20-2016 12:49pm
"The point is, if I make something for $0.01 and, based on whatever marketing or voodoo or apparent added value I effectively attach to my product, I am able to sell it for $1.0M, then exactly what is the problem here?
In my world, good for me and good for the buyer who thinks he/she got a good deal."
But the cost of materials is not the whole issue. Not by a long shot. One ought to consider sound quality, quality of connectors, quality of welds, actual cost as used or discounted item, will it hold it's value, and physical appearance. If this is your first purchase of very expensive cables then I can certainly understand your angst.
|
I would propose - the winner takes it all. |
Darn it, where's my green Sharpie? |
