That is an interesting twist you used there Irv. I've always associated the cable non-believers with the flat earth scientist. Since they are the ones who limit their minds to the boundries of what present day science can explain. Cable believers are more like those who thought the earth to be round before science could catch up and prove it. Your association of people who do not believe the cable lie with those who believe in a flat earth runs contrary to how the term evolved. So-called flat-earthers are people who believe that the earth must be flat because they observe it to be, regardless of what the objective evidence reveals. In this regard, Jmcgrogan2, you are asserting that cables sound different because that is your perception, so by analogy you are indeed a flat-earther. What I see as more... unattractive, is that you folks are so proud of your anti-science, anti-knowledge, anti-logic stance, while you type away on a device that wouldn't exist if the understanding of circuit design was so lacking. Which do you think is a more challenging electrical design problem, the design of a cable for audio frequencies, or the microchips we are having this discussion courtesy of? |
03-08-13: Irvrobinson
These are the ones with clear shrink wrap and all copper conductor. I believe 1st generation ...
I use speaker cables like that, but I can't remember the brand offhand. Carolco? 10 gauge. Flat bass, great highs. Not congested. Awesome sound.
Irvrobinson (Threads | Answers | This Thread) That's fantastic and I'm very happy for you. At one point, I thought they were fantastic too! |
Nonoise, your post is nonsensical. (BTW, it's Romex, not Nomex.) Why is it that you true believers are allowed to insult the intelligence and the veracity of us cable atheists, yet when someone like me answers you with the same sort of demeaning comments, we're derided?
As for your what's fixed and what's variable baloney, what you are implying is that a cable can somehow transform and improve the signal it carries. I have news for you, all a passive conductor can do is insert loss and distortion.
If you can hear it, and the differences are so night and day, why can't they be measured? Let me guess, there's some unknown factor in electrical theory we haven't discovered yet, that allows a passive cable to act as a positive transformation device? |
These are the ones with clear shrink wrap and all copper conductor. I believe 1st generation ... I use speaker cables like that, but I can't remember the brand offhand. Carolco? 10 gauge. Flat bass, great highs. Not congested. Awesome sound. |
wow!now things are stirred up!popcorn eanybody!,Its not that I want to argue,cause I will not!,I enjoy to hear both sides of a debate as long as it does not turn nasty!,I will put thousands of dollars on a bet to any one who can not hear a difference between Taralabs zero gold,nordost odin, and cheap cables that the none believers can produce!,first I may check medical records on their hearing and hearing aides first!LOL!,my opinion,I would not spend as much money on cables that I have unless I heard a difference,after all,Its my money!happy listening! |
what is not considered here is the fallibility and unreliability of perception.
this means that one cannot know that there is a difference in the sound of cables, but that it is one's opinion that there is.
it has nothing to do with being open monded or closed minded.
our senses are imperfect and unreliable.
i won't presume to be aware of what someone else is hearing and will not contest his perceptions. i will reserve judgment tto listen and draw my own conclusions.
the important thing is not to be judgmental.
it does not matter in the abstract what someone says about matters of the sense, since no knowledge can be derived from them.
thus the discussion of cables being hyped, or components sounding different is academic.
live and let live. |
03-08-13: Irvrobinson
Let's ignore science for a moment, let's stick just to logic, something even you flat earthers can understand. That is an interesting twist you used there Irv. I've always associated the cable non-believers with the flat earth scientist. Since they are the ones who limit their minds to the boundries of what present day science can explain. Cable believers are more like those who thought the earth to be round before science could catch up and prove it. There will always be conservative folks, people who are bound to beliefs that have been tried and true from past learnings. There will also always be liberals, folks who believe that we should not limit our minds to what is currently known, that there are still worlds out there that remain unexplored. These two types differ in all facets of life, not just on audio forums. There really is no use arguing, since so few of us are weak-minded enough to be easily swayed in either direction. I just wanted to clarify who the true 'flat earthers' are here, and that would be those that beleive what their eyes tell them about the current limited knowledge of human hearing. I believe the human capacity to learn is an ongoing concept, not a finished work. Maybe it's because I suffer from health afflictions that modern science has not learned how to identify or correct yet. I do not feel alone, for thousands of years humans have suffered from real illness' that medical science could not explain or cure in their times. Science is limited by what the human mind can currently understand and explain. Science is ever-evolving, no matter how many flat earthers tell me what I can or cannot see, hear, taste, smell or feel. I have my own scientific measuring tools, one on either side of my head. :) |
Knghifi, mine are newer 2m that I usually only use for 2 subwoofers. The Linns will be connected to my sources for sure. I have an all tube system and liked the Nordosts, but their cost is not justified. Only their powercords make a difference. I even have the Blue Heaven Rev II bi wires, and they are good, but the sound was the same using Morrow Audio SP4 bi wires, and Kimber TC4 TC8 and TC12 single wires. Happy listening. |
One thing I've noted is the amount of hubris some here display when making a point. POVs are made with a modicum of bile. Discourse is peppered with denunciations. Positions are stated as fact allowing nothing but acquiescence as an answer.
Open minded?
When the maps in ones head don't correspond to the actual territory in the real world, things go awry. People get angry quickly. Knee jerk defensive reactions take the place of discourse. Smarmy snark becomes the norm.
Fiberglass traces, miles of Nomex, and internal wiring are all red herrings. They seem to the casual reader to be of import but they are specious arguments, at best. They don't fit into the argument but are used to deflect attention.
One thing traces, internal wiring and Nomex have in common is that they are all set.
Let that sink in for a minute.
The amp is already voiced the way it's been built. To change anything internally will change the sound. Ask any designer. Internal wiring, traces and layout all affect the sound.
The same goes for speakers. All designers fuss over internal wiring, crossover design, etc. Laymen and DIYers can use product of lesser value and be happy with the result but they are on a learning curve and not to be confused with the better efforts out there.
The wall receptacle is fixed as well. Nothing can be done to it unless you, say, run a dedicated line or go all battery: off the grid.
What is being discussed is what can be done between the wall and the amp and the speaker (there's the logic). What is (and should by now) be discussed is the differences we hear (which we can). Some differences more easily than others, hence the discussion.
Note: I said discussion. Naysayers and flat earthers need better arguments than "you can't hear it".
All the best,
Nonoise |
Irvrobinson, I'm not waiting for some sort of entertaining debate so don't put words in my mouth.
Like I said many times, I shop with my ears for audio components ... buy what sounds good. If the last .00001 cm of a PC improves the sound of my system, I will buy it. Simple! |
03-07-13: Knghifi
These forums are a great place to learn but one needs an OPEN mind. It's possible rok2id upgraded from his Yugo with a new perspective? A friend of mine sent me an email, saying I should peek back in here, and see what turmoil I've helped to wrought. I'm glad I did, because I didn't see Bander's reply before I left. It is seldom I am called intelligent and an ass in one reply. I enjoyed that. As for Knghifi, Waxwaves, and Audiolabyrinth, all of you are waiting for some sort of entertaining debate so you can sit around and pat each other on the back for hearing what no one else can, while accusing those more interested in science and fact of being close-minded - you guys are seriously deluding yourselves. As I said before, being open-minded does not mean being open to silliness. Let's ignore science for a moment, let's stick just to logic, something even you flat earthers can understand. I don't care what the cable is for, whether it's an interconnect, a speaker cable, or a power cable, the case for any one of these fails a basic test, which is why a cable that is only a single segment of a much longer signal path affects sound quality as much as you guys claim it does. In the case of an interconnect, once you get inside of almost any modern component the signal is going to trace on a circuit board. Even if it isn't trace, it's probably some cheap hook-up wire. Why are the trace and solder joints so much less important? Or speaker cables, where most speakers are wired, again, with simple hook-up wire. And if not the cabling inside of speakers, the wire on voice coils, which is often aluminum, or the trace on some crossover boards, not to mention all of the simple bare copper wire in massive air-core inductors? I fail to understand why speaker cables are so much more important than these wires, which are in the same signal path. There is no logic to this. Of course, the most massive failure of logic has to be in power cables and outlets, what with tens of feet of Romex in your house. And power cables aren't even in the signal path. So while you guys are figuratively sitting here, all smug in your pathetic delusions, telling yourselves in posts how the rest of us are just close-minded and half-deaf because we can't hear the differences you all claim are so critical to a great system, think about these questions. Why does a speaker cable make so much difference when there's just plain-old copper wire in that inductor? Or some nice trace on fiberglass in the way? |
I'm sure everybody has some old monster cables in the basement. I forgot the reason and also tried them/SC several years ago. My experience is very different than Polks, they had NO bass, highs but just a congested mid sound ... horrible!
These are the ones with clear shrink wrap and all copper conductor. I believe 1st generation ... |
Waxwaves, some folks just enjoy a good argument. There are people out there who simply enjoy taking a contrary view in life. I've found folks out there like that. No matter what you say, they will take the opposite stance. This one guy I'll never forget, he used to track me down and try to befriend me. Everything we talked about turned into an argument. His named was Richard, but he enjoyed being called "Dick", which he was, and revealed in the glow. I did my best to avoid him, but I also noticed he was like this with everyone else he met too, it wasn't just me. Then I realized that some folks just enjoy being agitators in life, it's how they have their *fun*. It's a crazy world we live in. |
I just sold a set of Nordost Heimdalls and a set of Blue Heaven IC's. They sounded great in my system, and I was going to upgrade to Tyr, Valhallas, or Odins. Instead, I am waiting on Linn IC's since I've always had good luck with them. I have to use Monster cables while waiting for the Linns to arrive. Guess what...my system still sounds fantastic. I would have kicked myself paying the kind of money to get the Nordosts, however their powercords and QB4 distribution box did make a difference for the better, so I guess it really matters what type of system one has. |
@ knghifi and waxwaves,I agree knghifi,hopefully rok2id did get a new perspective,,waxwaves,I could not have made a better post 3-7-13 myself!,you hit the nail on the head!very good explanation!you have my best respects!,As a matter of fact,one of us should start a new thread saying what jmcgrogan2 recommended!,I would be there everyday!,we may be able to teach cable hatters about cables!cheers! |
I'm not afraid Audiolab, there IS something seriously wrong with the cable haters. Are they hard of hearing or do they not have system enough to discerned cable differences? Are they buying into their own hype? Why has this become such an issue for some? I can't believe some of the stuff I've been reading and do not understand the inability to judge differences in interconnect and speaker cable.
Maybe the cable haters really don't belong on audio forums jmcgrogan2? That would be a better topic.
Folks, cabling plays a huge role in all live performances, in all sound recording, in all sound reproduction, and therfore in ALL of our sound systems. There is no question it has an effect on what we hear. |
These forums are a great place to learn but one needs an OPEN mind. It's possible rok2id upgraded from his Yugo with a new perspective? |
@ jmcgrogan2,LOL!,I miss the debates,but I do not want to be the one in it,just make a subtle comment here and there and watch the entertainment with popcorn for real, LOL!,I do not have the balls to say what you recommended I should say,man-o-man I would not want that wrath on my head!,LOL! |
Audiolabyrinth, this thread has run it's course, as all threads eventually do, but rest assured, there will be others, and Rok and his crew shall return.
If you miss the battle that much maybe you should start a thread that says anyone who can't hear differences in cables does not belong on audio forums. That should stir up the hornets nest again. ;) |
where is rok2id?,regardless of the difference in opinion,he kept this forum rolling along!Tell him to come back!,I miss the entertainment!,I respect his passion for what he believes!,I thought my last post would snag him to post something,If you see this post rok2id,I enjoyed your posting in this thread!cheers! |
Ok,lets get the entertainment back,cables are the most important part of a system! |
Ebm has a healthy attitude I think when it comes to these things...... |
|
where is the debate?,did we win! |
@ nonoise,I do not believe I have heard of this cable brand you have,correct me if I am wrong,the brand is called mapleshade?,this is new to me and I love learning of new products!,never heard of zu audio ither,I will try to research on computer when I get time latter today,that is better than putting you thru explaining the sound,how they are made,where,etc...,thankyou for answering my request.cheers! |
Audiolabyrinth,
I use 8' runs of Mapleshade Double Helix speaker cables, Mapleshade Ultrathin Analog interconnects and Zu Audio Mission power cables.
Nothing expensive but the best I can find in my price range.
All the best,
Nonoise |
@ nonoise,Hi,what do you use for cables? |
Wow!I like this thread,entertaining to say the least!,thou I can tell who are well seasoned audiophiles and been exposed to alot of equipment and cables,you know who you are,we have spoke or complimented each other on this thread,you gentlemen that have a vast knowledge of the hi-end audio I enjoy talking to!the rest is pure entertainment,like jmcgrogan2 said,going out for popcorn,In my case I have allready poped the popcorn to get ready to read this forum,LOL,so I will not miss A beat,now thats entertainment!happy listening! |
@ frogman and knghifi,I was currious to know the cables the both of you use,Thankyou gentlemen for answering my request,very outstanding cables you both have indeed! |
This is for Irvrobinson. Enjoy. |
Irvrobinson, in addition to being an intelligent/knowlegeable person, you are equal parts arrogant, rude and impolite. Your attitude toward, and response to Nonoise speaks volumes. You come off as a real ass. |
In those intervening six years or so you'll find lots here of the same mind as me who've already stated as much in other threads and are of a wider exposure and experience level and are given much more respect and difference in their thoughts and views.
After all, it's just a conversation, not a conversion to be had.
All the best,
Nonoise |
Nonoise, I will openly admit that I'm only discussing this with you because I'm avoiding a task that I really to need to accomplish, a very difficult and arduous task, and arguing with someone who believes he can hear the difference between terminations distracts and amuses me. It is so ridiculous, so implausible, that I can't respond with anything you would call civility. Open-mindedness does not mean being open to silliness.
I want to thank you, however, for convincing me that I need to stop avoiding what I know I need to do, get to work, and stop this useless posting.
Talk to you in another six years or so. |
Here we go off the civil path. Neither foolish nor difficult, but patient enough to tolerate another's view. Wish I could say the same.
How does that saying go? "I'll support any man searching for the truth but will fight anyone who claims to know it."
I just don't agree and am trying to understand your point of view. Bare in mind I'm not going to agree with you.
I've seen the same wire constructed with many different terminations (even bare) all measure the same and yet most here would agree that terminations impart their own sound. Some feel, like me, that bare wire is the best way to go. To me it stands to reason that within those same measurements lie more variance than some care to admit.
And as for gauge, why do my 18 gauge Mapleshade SCs sound better than other, thicker guage SCs? I'm talking Zu Mission, Music Metre, Supra SCs that are up there in thickness, well made, and yet can't keep up with what the Mapleshades have to offer.
Don't bother responding if you're inclined to be nasty.
All the best,
Nonoise |
On amplifiers, he does say that amplifiers of a similar design, matched in levels and run below clipping are indistinguishable from each other in listening tests. He never said that all amps - tube and solid state, set and push-pull, all sound the same. That's sort of true, but Aczel did assert that if tube and SS amps measure alike they will sound alike. I believe that too. With amps I wonder if things are a little more complicated than Aczel asserts, but, to be honest, I'd rather be on his side of the argument than one asserting differences between amplifiers. A lot of good amps these days don't have a single measurable artifact of noise or distortion above 80db below 1W of output. How any differences could be audible even in the quietest room on an awesome speaker system is difficult to imagine. Other than more power for higher clipping limits, or more stable performance into very complex loads, you begin to wonder about what could possibly improve? |
One set of cables are designed to "fit" the requirements of an amp and a pair of speakers.
Said cable will not work as well with other amps and speakers since they are of different design and needs.
No one cable is good enough for all applications?
Did we just come full circle? No, no, no! That isn't what I said. Either you're foolish or just being difficult, I'm going to assume the latter. In the case of the example I made for speakers, any 10 gauge stranded copper cable will work for any speaker, in any reasonable length (like, less than 100 feet). 12 gauge wire works just fine for many, many cases. I was just pointing out that you can screw up speaker cable by going to too small a gauge. I was not at all trying to say that every speaker needed a different set of cable parameters. Any properly designed RCA-terminated interconnect will work indistinguishably from another, no matter what the length. For lengths over, I dunno, fifteen feet, you might want to consider balanced cables (XLR-terminated) to take advantage of common mode rejection, but there won't be audible differences between cables. In the case of XLR cables, anything you pick up in a music store for mics or amps will do fine. We did not come full circle. Stop it! |
Okay.
One set of cables are designed to "fit" the requirements of an amp and a pair of speakers.
Said cable will not work as well with other amps and speakers since they are of different design and needs.
No one cable is good enough for all applications?
Did we just come full circle?
I have several sets of cables that sound different to anyone who would care to listen and all are well regarded, well made cables. So it seems that a cable that would fit the requirements of a given system can only be made one way and if anyone makes that particular cable, they should all sound the same.
That I understand but doesn't it stand to reason that there need be as many types of cable needed to satisfy the particular requirements of all the possible combinations of amps, speakers, length and gauge in order to get the best possible sound?
I don't mean to sound obtuse (though I've been accused of being stubborn) but I think we're all agreeing on this from different perspectives.
All the best,
Nonoise |
I think Aczel says that there are no differences in wires that cannot be explained in terms of resistance, capacitance and inductance. His back issues contain an article showing how cables with different electrical characteristics caused very large and measurable differences in the frequency response based on the cable's interaction with the amp/speaker circuit. I know he once wrote that coat hangers are identical to the most expensive cables, but that statement seems inconsistent with his own article.
On amplifiers, he does say that amplifiers of a similar design, matched in levels and run below clipping are indistinguishable from each other in listening tests. He never said that all amps - tube and solid state, set and push-pull, all sound the same. |
Are "properly designed" and "given application" escape clauses? No, not at all. I'm just stating this caveat because you *can* improperly design a cable and make it sound different. You can make speakers cables that have too small a gauge for a given speaker's impedance, or the required cable length. You can make interconnects that have improper impedance, bad shields, poor insulators, or some weird geometry that increases inductance or capacitance beyond some reasonable trade-off of values. For example, a speaker with a minimum impedance of less than 2 ohms that needs a twenty-five foot cable run is not going to be best served by 16 gauge cables - a 16 gauge cable in that scenario may indeed cause audible differences, and there won't be any mystery why. It'll be measurable. |
Are "properly designed" and "given application" escape clauses?
If so, then you've just described a cable made to order for a "specific" application.
Friend who are not into this hobby as much as I can hear the difference as well but don't consider it important enough to worry about it. That alone speaks volumes as I suspect that that is the underlying meme going on here.
All the best,
Nonoise |
Well said. I think I detected a little Aczelian influence.
Last night I reread his review of the Parasound A21 power amp. How refreshing to read a real review. I really miss his input. he was the last of a kind. The only thing between truth and the charlatans.
He quit his 'hip-boots' articles because he said the ENTIRE audio media industry was now corrupt, so there was no need to point of the voodoo priests, since they are all now selling snake oil. I enjoy some of Aczel's writing immensely. Some of his writing, like the Biggest Lies, or the Zais-Atkinson article, are perhaps the best examples of writing in the audio press. I think Azcel's focus on science and engineering is very admirable. On the other hand, I'm not an unqualified follower of his. I think he is prone to unsupported assertions on points where *there are* measurable differences, or where personal opinions are indeed involved, and I think he could stand to improve in those areas. Like, for example, his assertion that the Linkwitz Orion is the best speaker one can buy, period. I've heard the Orion, it's a good speaker, a very good speaker, but I've heard better, and I think for Aczel to assert it's better than anything else is no more excusable based on his opinion than someone here saying their Audioquest speaker cable sounds better than 10ga stranded copper. |
The implication being that no believers are technically astute. Clearly, not the case. How does one explain the many clearly "technically astute " individuals who are believers. It is true that there is a lot of hype; but that, in no way, suggests that it is ALL hype. To suggest otherwise is the worst example of lack of astuteness. It is ALL hype. If two cables are appropriately designed for a given application there isn't any audible difference between them. Any technically astute person knows that frequency response is unaffected to within a tenth of a db and there's no added distortion. One can design cables improperly, and those cables may sound different because they are ineptly done, but that's not the case you're making, is it. THe case you're making is that two cables that transmit exactly the same signal by any measurement we can make sound different. That's irrational. For example, how does an analog interconnect affect frequency response or distortion? Better yet, how does it affect sound-stage or how "clean" highs are? There aren't even theories for how this might occur. I suppose if you design in some sort of impedance mismatch, or perhaps specifically design a cable to have excessive capacitance this could happen, but that's inept design, and that's not what Rok2id or I am discussing. There is no academic argument about this. There's no debate at all, because there is no basis for the cables-sound-different argument other than someone says so. The very same principles that underlie the design of our equipment are the same principles that are used for the case that all properly designed cables sound the same. |
Not sure why didn't worked in my post ...
Audiolabyrinth, I use ASI Liveline ICs and SCs and HiDiamond PCs. |
Audiolabyrinth, in my main I use Audionote tonearm wire, Siltech and/ or Nordost IC's, and Siltech speaker cables. In a second system I use all Wireworld Eclipse, and the basement "workout" system has all Cardas in it. I have some other stuff laying around, some old MIT, TMC, Kimber. |
|
"Now, anybody that tells me that "Sassy" can't sing."
Now who could be clueless!!!
Cheers |
****I was looking for an Academic debate, but we could not get away from stereo systems, money and personal opinions.
But, as Nonoise alluded, it ain't that important. I am PASSOINATE about MUSIC. That's it. The gear is just a means to an end. I wish we didn't need it. ****
Rok, I agree completely; and you, perhaps inadvertently, made my point. The problem with attempts to discuss these things is that "academic" and "music" are as diametrically opposed as just about anything. In fact, "academic" is an adjective used by musicians to describe "music" that is dry, soul-less, boring... The two don't mix.
Acrimony? No way! Wire is not important enough to merit acrimony in my book. Now, anybody that tells me that "Sassy" can't sing.... That's cause for acrimony.
Peace. |
To All:
I just dropped by to give a shout out to Irvrobinson. Frogman then addressed a post to me, and I answered. Thats just common courtesy. But I am finished with the so called 'debate' on wire. I have found that after things like this are over, I just feel bad.
I think the people of this entire site are some of the nicest people you will find anywhere. Smart, educated , well read and seem to have done well in life. A good bunch.
I was looking for an Academic debate, but we could not get away from stereo systems, money and personal opinions.
But, as Nonoise alluded, it ain't that important. I am PASSOINATE about MUSIC. That's it. The gear is just a means to an end. I wish we didn't need it. I would love to walk into my house and say, "COMPUTER! Beethoven's 5th". Just like on Star Trek. :) Maybe I'll see that before I go.
If I have offended anyone, it was not intentional. Just love to spar.
Now, I am finished with wire!!
Cheers. |
OK, I'll play a little longer; ten minutes left in my Lifecycle workout (my Agon posting time).
****And how, pray tell, did you come to that conclusion? And what 'stuff' are you referring to?****
A couple of clues:
1.You, actually, have pretty good taste in music. So, not all is lost. There's hope. :-) Anybody who likes Sarah Vaughn the way that you do can't be all bad. That's the good news.
2. The bad news: You demonstrate a pattern of making provocative statements and misrepresenting or misinterpreting what others say (write). Then, when it is pointed out to you, you completely (conveniently) overlook it and move on to your next provocative comment. This has happened several times in this thread, including this most recent exchange. You are too transparent in this respect for there to be true passion about all this "stuff" (the subject at hand, if you have to ask).
BTW, Sarah Vaughn's "Brazilian Romance" is a gem. Pretty good sound, too. But, a little bight; nothing a vintage MIT cable couldn't fix ;-) |
A reasonable person is always open to possibilities. Nothing is black and white and there are no absolutes: lots of grey area out there.
Self appointed high priests of truth are dime a dozen, regardless of field. Sad to say they are here in audio as well. Yes, there are extravagant, over the top claims and snake oil a plenty but we seem to be dancing around the issue of what some people plainly lack: hearing acuity or the outright refusal to pay any more than necessary for what they feel is enough.
This kind of forum will never sort it out. So let's just agree to disagree without the acrimony.
Next thing we'll see are protestors with signs and placards outside of audio shows denouncing the evil and unclean amongst us who would dare proclaim that we can do better.
When that happens, I'll know for certain I am on the right side of the equation as they will reveal themselves to be truly on the fringe.
All the best,
Nonoise |
