I see the topic of discussion on this thread is dealing with balanced cables at the moment so forgive me if I take a slight detour from that. However the OP asked about cables in general, and requested to hear "voices of experience and sanity", so here are my two pennies.
It is my opinion that the community is greatly mistaken about cables. While I firmly believe that different cables sound differently from one another, I am equally convinced that audiophiles are wrong about what the cables are actually doing in a system. For example, in the amplifier/speaker relationship, if you really want to hear what your amplifier sounds like, your speaker cable should be exactly the same wire that is inside of your amp going to its binding posts. Right? All these high end cables we put as the interface between amp and speaker that give us tremendous air and expansive soundstage, etc., are all DOING SOMETHING to the signal to give us the ILLUSION of air and expansive soundstage. Anyone who believes that expensive cables are unlocking something magical from your amplifier is a fool. You can't get something from nothing. If you have some generic wire inside your amplifier and speaker, insert a $4,000 speaker cable between them and VOILA! Now you have successfully unlocked the amplifier's full potential. Or, my favorite, "found a cable that gets out of the way of the music". Give me a break.
So just to recap: Yes, I believe different cables sound differently from on another, but it's because they are manipulating the signal to give you the illusion of more this or that. They DO NOT unlock your amplifier's greatness. If you truly want to know what your amp sounds like, use the same wire inside your amp as speaker cable.
This is what makes most sense to me. |
@hifiman5,....... VERY interesting, I must say. Never thought of it from that perspective. |
@hifiman5, I think you need to read my post again.
Regarding your post, you say "the wire in the amp is one of many designed for a specific purpose" (or more realistically, price point). Also, when your binding post broke, you followed someone's advice and replaced the conductor. That's fine. Replace the conductor with whatever you want. Replace it with something that's $1,000 per inch. MY point was, in order to hear the most truthful representation of your new and improved amplifier, theoretically, you would need that same conductor going to your speaker. You repeat the word "faithfully" numerous times in your post, also mentioning the word "integrity". The only conductor that will do so, is the one in your amp. NOT some boutique cable costing thousands of dollars. Obviously no one will do this, I'm just trying to make a point.
When used properly, cables can balance out a system very well. If an amp is too warm or dark sounding for the owner, he/she may add a cable that livens up the highs or opens it up a bit, and vice versa. That's the beauty of cabling.
Thank you for ending your post with, what I consider to be, the most annoying, misunderstood line in audio. |
@hifiman5, one more thing regarding your post, specifically your use of the word "faithfully". You say you want to transmit the signal as faithfully as possible. Ok. Faithful to what?
Let’s say you purchase a cd. You take this cd home and you want to get the music from the cd to your ears as faithfully as possible.
Great, however your very first link in the chain is adding its own sonic signature to the signal. Every step of the way, something is coloring the sound somewhat:
1) cd player/trasport
2) digital cable
3) DAC
4) interconnects
5) preamp
6) interconnects
7) amplifier
So, now hifiman5 wants to reproduce the signal as faithfully as possible. I ask again, faithful to what? The cd? Pa-lease. You’re already so far away from what’s truthfully on that cd that you cannot be close to it at all. The only thing you can be faithful to at this point is get the sound as close to what’s leaving the amplifier. Now, you want to add some boutique speaker cables between your amp and speaker to be "faithful" to the cd? Gimme a break. The damage has been done. |
Something else just occurred to me. For the sake of argument, let’s use the number 100. It could be more, it could be less, but let’s just use 100.
Using the seven components I listed in my last post (transport, digital cable, dAC, interconnects, preamp, interconnects, amp), that means there could be as many as 700 different manufacturers of 7 different components in the chain. I don’t know how to do the math, but I’m assuming the possible combinations would reach into the billions.
Think about that.....
By the time the signal leaves the amplifier, it could, theoretically, have billions of different sonic signatures that differ from what’s on the cd. Now, hifiman5 wants to put a fancy speaker cable on the amp to be "faithful" to the cd?
This was my whole point from the get-go. I understand your point, hifiman5, but with all due respect, I think you failed to understand mine. "Faithful" goes out the window the moment the music sees the first link in the chain.
Not to mention the speaker interaction with the amp. You may have a speaker cable that's close to faithful of what's leaving the amp, but it may sound like crap going to speaker A, but on speaker B it sounds wonderful.
So, finding a cable that works well with amp and speaker is the real goal. |
To quote Stereophile magazine founder, Gordon Holt, from an interview in 2007: “Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me..” I've always been a firm believer in blind testing. We, as audiofools, listen first with our eyes, then with our wallets. After taking both factors into consideration, it is then that we use our ears just to "verify" what our eyes and wallets have told us about a product. Let's say an amplifier has a fancy faceplate, or a speaker cable looks like it came off a suspension bridge, and both of them cost 5 times as much as another amp or speaker cable. We go into the listening session with a preconceived opinion of what we will about to hear. Before we begin to listen we'll think the fancy, expensive stuff MUST sound better than the cheaper ones. This happens subconsciously and very quickly, but it's in the back of our minds. We may or may not realise it, but it's there. I believe that if you compared audio products blindfolded, many times, you would pick out the "uglier" and cheaper products over the more pretty, expensive ones. The audio industry would obviously NEVER back blind testing. (At least the companies who make the expensive, pretty ones). |
@cleeds, maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. I wouldn't be surprised if manufacturers used blind testing within their own company to test out their products amongst other companies. I meant that they wouldn't want US to do it.
|
Agree with hifiman5, disagree with psag. I believe cables ARE tone controls...without question.
Everyone's perception of what "sounds good" is different.
Let's say someone prefers a certain flavor of sound. Cable A might take them further away from that flavor, while cable B may bring their system closer to it. All components have their own flavor as well. They're like ingredients in a recipe. Certain ingredients work well together, some don't. Depends what you want it to taste like. Also, too much of one ingredient can ruin the meal...just like cables.
I have one friend who has two different model pairs of interconnects. The ones going to his preamp are five times as expensive as the ones going to his amp. Why? Because while the first pair has tremendous air but is slightly thinner in bass, the second pair brings that needed bass to the signal. (there's more to it than that but I'm just trying to make this long, borring post shorter, lol).
There is no right and wrong, just right and wrong TO THAT PERSON, IN THEIR SYSTEM.
|
