Cable Costs Relative to System

In my opinion, most of the cables on the market can be duplicated using as good or better quality components for appr. 20% of the retail price. IF your handy at DIY and doing some careful research and shopping, you can typically make BETTER cords and cables than what most of reviewers are raving about for that month or two. Of course, it helps to have a little electronics knowledge and various tools and supplies at one's disposal in order to keep costs down. As such, i find buying "fancy cables" ( including power cords ) to be a vast waste of money in most cases. Besides that, i've found cables to be so extremely system and component dependent that spending BIG money on specific cables without first trying them in your system is quite foolish indeed. What might be "the latest & greatest" might actually make YOUR system perform noticeably poorer. This is NOT to say that i think that spending that kind of money on them is wrong for others to do, i just don't think that it is necessary in my specific situation. Besides that, it helps when you get all your supplies "wholesale". Sean

I think that's what they said about the Shelby Cobra : )

I agree with you wholeheartedly even though i joked about what you said. Just like anything else, something that is well designed to start with needs less "finessing" than something that was "lacking" when it left the factory. Buy better gear and go and go from there. Sean
>

My experience is that a specific cable MIGHT work like magic between a DAC and preamp but fail miserably between the preamp and power amp. Since most people don't experiment with what cables they have and where they work best in the system, much of this goes unnoticed or is passed over even by many folks that consider themselves to be "audiophiles". The same goes for people that use all of the same type of cable throughout the entire system. From this post you can obviously tell that i DO believe that it is appropriate to "mix and match" different cables and cables from different manufacturers to achieve the best sonics possible. I know this point of view breaks a lot of people's rules, but it is what i have found to work best. Having said that, i look back to the article on Salvatore's site about speaker cable. He highly praised both Goertz and Coincident as being some of the best available. As most of you know, those two cable brands are quite "reasonable" compared to many others on the market. While i've "praised" Goertz both here and at AA, i've never tried the Coincident. Between his "ranting" and the others here that have spoken highly of it, i think that i will give some of them a try. The only thing that i find "goofy" about the Coincident's is that they "claim" to need TONS of time to "break in". Even though i do own two different "cable burners", i still have a hard time with claims like that. Sean
>

Homedesign: It is too bad that you didn't apply as much logic or research as you did passion to your post.

Not all components are load stable, nor do all cables present the same feedpoint impedance, even when terminated with identical electrical characteristics from identical components. As such, cable changes can and are component / system dependent. On top of that, some of these differences can both be audible and measurable.

If you doubt this, try talking to Frank Van Alstine* about this subject. Frank is both a designer / manufacturer and one of the most out-spoken individuals in audio when it comes to cables and "snake oil". Ask him if components from various manufacturers all respond identically to cable changes. I'm talking about cable changes that result in variations in the feedpoint & load impedances that they see. Since i already know his answer and the truth about the subject at hand, i'll be waiting for your enlightened response once you delve further into the subject and re-educate yourself. Sean
>

PS... Since you seem to be a fan of his, try emailing Siegfried Linkwitz and see what he has to say about the subject. If he's ever done any REAL testing on the subject with a variety of components from various manufacturers, he'll share the same thoughts on the subject that Mr Van Alstine and i do. That is, cables should NOT affect system performance but most circuits aren't designed / built well enough to achieve this goal. Therefore, their performance is altered to one degree or another when cables are changed.

* I know that Frank knows all about this, as he took the time to educate Julian Hirsch about the subject.

Muralman: There is NO way for anyone to know exactly what is on the disc or what it the "most correct" interpretation of what one can hear. That is, unless they were involved in the recording / mastering process of each and every recording that they listen to. That is why "personal preference" is mentioned around here so much.

Besides, it is quite possible that what one thinks sounds "transparent" could actually be shown to be "less accurate" if one took the time to actually take measurements within the system itself and compare various cables and how the system responds to them electrically. While most folks would never think about doing such things, it can be pretty interesting to say the least. The results are not always what one might be led to think they would be.

As far as your comment regarding what an "expert" has to say, the person that i referrenced is not in the "cable game" and is "anti-fancy cabling". Your comment also goes to show that you will believe and act upon your beliefs regardless of what is presented to you. That implies that you have your "personal preferences" and that is all that you are concerned with. That's fine, so long as you don't try to empirically state that your personal preferences are the only point of reference for accuracy or how things should be done when building a system.

If you think that i present information in that manner, think again. I'm simply throwing out my comments based on past experience and the knowledge that i've acquired over the years. If someone else would like to compare contrasting notes, i'm all for it. On top of that, i've always encouraged people to buy what they like, regardless of what someone else has to say. There are plenty of products out there that i don't like, but if it works for you in your system, who am i to tell you that you shouldn't be happy with what you have ? I might not like it and might have had bad experiences with it, but then again, i don't have to listen to it either : ) Sean
>

We've done some blind testing using digital cables and the winner was always the same cable in several different systems. This specific cable makes use of resistive terminations as described in this article at Borbely Audio.

While Borbely talks about a low grade cable with these terminations working better than a high grade cable without these terminations, the cable i'm talking about was designed to work well in every aspect and then the terminations added. That is, it uses a specially shaped solid core silver center conductor to minimize skin effect, high grade Teflon dielectric and then a braided silver shield. I have this cable in both BNC and RCA form and they both work very well.

The manufacturer also made this in a copper version at a later date, which was still some 10+ years ago. When i called them up to get some info on the silver cables, they couldn't even recall ever making such a cable or any of the specifics about it. I know that this was a standard item though as i've got at least three of them here and my Brother is running one too. From what i've seen, none of their digital cables after this series makes use of materials or designs that are anywhere near as good as what i've described here. The profit margin was probably only 500% rather than their goal of 1000%, hence the decision to revert back to less expensive materials and production techniques.

Please take note that Borbely makes mention of impedance matching being an "old trick" to RF people. As most of the regulars here know, i've discussed impedance matching of cabling and components for many years now. I've specifically mentioned the fact that one obtains the best performance possible when the output impedance of the source component matches the nominal impedance of the cabling used and the input impedance of the load. I've also stated that i only know of one specific manufacturer that has designed their entire product line to do this, so it is not very common within the field of audio design. As such, the benefits of such a design could only be fully achieved if using that one brand of components in every position of one's system.

Outside of interconnects, selecting a loudspeaker cable that displays the proper nominal impedance is also very important. Test results demonstrated the superior bandwidth and linearity of such a design was presented by Audioholics a short while ago. It was no coincidence that this cable, which i've recommended for several years now, beat every other cable tested by a wide margin. The fact that the folks conducting these tests at Audioholics are basically "cable naysayers", and their test results DID show a measurable difference in electrical performance between different makes, models and geometries, demonstrates that there is a method to the madness when designing and purchasing cabling for a specific application.

As i've said before, spec's can tell one quite a bit about the sonics and measurable levels of performance. That is, if the spec's were properly obtained and they are properly interpreted. If such weren't the case, we wouldn't be able to move forward in terms of electronic technology and would still be in the dark ages. Cabling is no different. You don't have to spend a lot of money on cabling in order to obtain excellent performance. You just have to buy competently designed active components, and therein lies the major problem. Sean
>

Good points Duane. I've always been a proponent of very fast, wide bandwidth electronics. I'm sure that this has influenced my cable choices too.

If i had bandwidth limited electronics that introduced audible degradation via time and phase related problems, i probably would have went with lesser cabling. The cabling wouldn't make much of an audible difference because the purity of the signal was already degraded by the electronics.

In that respect, i guess that i can understand why so many people don't hear some of the major differences in cabling that others do. That is, their gear / installation has compromised the signal so much so that the cables are no longer the weakest link. This could be why "very subtle differences" are all that they are ever able to detect. Sean
>

PS... Anyone remember what the highest linearity / widest bandwidth speaker cable was that Audioholics ( the "cables are cables" people ) tested? If you took notes, you'll remember that this wasn't a "real expensive" speaker cable either.

Just thought i'd check and see what's up after "dropping out" of the scene for several years. Coming up on 9 years since this thread was started and not much has changed. Mostly still a matter of personal preference based on system synergy from what i'm seeing here. Since the owner of the system is the only one that has to be happy with what he spends or hears ( perceived or reality ), i guess that's all that matters. Sean
<