Increased metal purity adds to the cost, as well as custom dielectrics. Beyond the basic and hand woven geometries, machine manufacturing can be quite expensive to set-up/run small batches for the very small high-end audio market. Take a look at the construction of Nordost cables for instance.
Are cables really worth their high price because of their geometry?
They’re some pricey cables that have claim to fame because of the high tech geometry used in their cables.
Many of these cables have patents on specific geometry patterns used in their cables and use this as a reason their cables sound so good. For that reason, many say the reason their cables cost so much is they’re so complex . The man hours to make a pr results in their high price. That maybe true for some cables, but I’ve seen very pricey cables using the same geometry reason that look like a thin piece of wire rapped in outer jacket no thicker than a pencil. So,Is all this geometry just another way to justify their cost or is it true science that we are paying in the end?
Many of these cables have patents on specific geometry patterns used in their cables and use this as a reason their cables sound so good. For that reason, many say the reason their cables cost so much is they’re so complex . The man hours to make a pr results in their high price. That maybe true for some cables, but I’ve seen very pricey cables using the same geometry reason that look like a thin piece of wire rapped in outer jacket no thicker than a pencil. So,Is all this geometry just another way to justify their cost or is it true science that we are paying in the end?
Showing 4 responses by kennyc
I surmise that most audio cable naysayers cannot reconcile the cable's individual component costs with the final price. Looking from this angle I can see how high cable prices can rub folks the wrong way. However, I don't consider the manufacturing costs/retail price, rather, I focus on price/performance. For instance: Option "A" use inexpensive cables Option "B" try out a say $200 cable hopefully for free (borrow, returnable). Then I can decide if there is an uptick in performance, am I willing to pay $200 for this uptick? I can still not purchase and be no worse than option "A". With option "B", at least I have choices and additional information (a data point) with zero $ invested and the possibility to elevate my system. I suspect that many naysayers are not even willing to try, being emotionally resentful of the often steep pricing and entrenching their resentment with some argument. I'm also of the belief that everything in the audio chain matters. Whether cables should be elevated to component level is subjective. For me, because I believe cables sound different from one another, I treat them as components. As I move up the audio food chain, I don't want my cables to be the weak bottleneck. I agree that a lot of audio cable manufacture's advertisement/marketing is filled with a lot of subjective marketing hype, but I don't it reaches the level as being BS since BS can mean deceitful/lying. When researching/shopping for components, I give the most weight to opinions of audiophiles who has purchased/used the component with no skin in the game (like a dealer peddling his product). If enough voices sing the same tune, I'm of the belief that I can obtain similar results if purchased - the caveat of course is it can be system dependent. I give little/no value to manufacturer's hype. Is a person who purchases a expensive audio cable being duped by marketing hype, placebo, or false imagination? I'd say generally no, at least for the very expensive cables. Seems most are educated professionals (with incomes enough to further splurge in this high-end hobby) who when you read their reviews/posts, are very serious about the performance of their systems and are deliberate/thoughtful on why they purchased the cable and how it performs. I don't believe that as the price of cables increase, their testimony validity decreases. If so, what's that based on? Audio BS Facebook group? Taking a magnifying glass to outliers and calling it the truth is misleading. You need to get an "impartial" sample size(s) to be able to make educated guesses/claims regarding the population as a whole. |
@b4icuIf If you want to find out about audio cable design from a rather scientific point of view, I suggest reading the Iconoclast “white papers - design briefs” where a seasoned cable designer/engineer shares his process/methodology of his designing Iconoclast cables using the resources/equipment of the large cable company Belden.https://www.iconoclastcable.com/story/ |
@b4icu Which part of the white papers do you disagree on? Did even read the white papers? Your saying “The cable’s character that matters is its resistance.” so only resistance matters, but this seasoned cable engineer says that “A standard approach to any problem in audio cabling begins with some fundamental measurable attributes of wire and cable: R (resistance), L (inductance) and C (capacitance).”. Where’s your proof that this engineer is wrong? And no, Belden is not “just” a raw cable manufacturer, they’re the company that manufacturers the Iconoclast cables. If you don’t know this, seems obvious that you didn’t even bother to look at the white papers. I’ve got no skin in the game but I’m open minded to look at the evidence. I mentioned Belden because this engineer has access to many expensive measuring, manufacturing, and other equipment that the typical audio cable manufacturer cannot afford. I looked at your arguments and the engineers and frankly given his specific expertise and experience in designing and manufacturing cables I’d say the professional’s word in the field has more weight. I mentioned you specifically because I assumed in your previous post you were asking for additional info/proof. But it seems your promoting your thread/ideas which implies you’re not open minded but rather opinionated. My intention was to help you. Apologies if I missed the mark. |