Just to mention Roger Skoff was one of the dudes at XLO who produced the XLO cables, also a producer of the oft mentioned XLO Test CD, an icon of speaker placement methodology and other necessary tools.
DO CABLES REALLY MATTER?
Yes they do. I’m not here to advocate for any particular brand but I’ve heard a lot and they do matter. High Fidelity reveal cables, Kubala Sosna Elation and Clarity Cable Natural. I’m having a listening session where all of them is doing a great job. I’ve had cables that were cheaper in my system but a nicely priced cable that matches your system is a must. I’m not here to argue what I’m not hearing because I have a pretty good ear. I’m enjoying these three brands today and each is presenting the music differently but very nicely. Those who say cables don’t matter. Get your ears checked. I have a system that’s worth about 30 to 35k retail. Now all of these brands are above 1k and up but they really are performing! What are your thoughts.
Showing 50 responses by geoffkait
News flash! Blind tests cannot prove anything. They can provide evidence... maybe. But most of the time they can’t even do that. Almost even nobody does blind tests, maybe one or two folks, who knows. So how can anyone make any claims for blind tests? There are no standards for audio blind tests. Nobody agrees how they should be performed. Too many things can go wrong with any audio test to be able to say a test with negative results proves anything. |
For budget minded folks in these uncertain economic times there are many ways to improve the performance of what you already have. Check for directionality, send cables/power cords to cryo lab or freeze two days in home freezer, apply PWB Cream Electret (free on request from PWB - hel-loo!) to cables, clean and apply contact enhancer like the new Graphene stuff, suspend cables and cords to avoid seismic vibration and static electric fields. You are the creator! Create a Giant Killer! |
Zavfino cables “Drawing on more than 18 years of manufacturing experience, Zavfino has developed a remarkable new technique for twisting stranded wire tightly around a central solid-core conductor. An electrical phenomenon is commonly known as the “skin effect” occurs when electrons move through any solid core conductor. Higher frequencies travel along the outside (the skin) of the conductor faster than midrange and lower echelon frequencies. This results in smeared PRaT, muddled instrumental timbres, and an unnatural sound. Zavfino’s new H-Wound™ manufacturing technique negates the skin effect.” >>>>>That’s rarher odd. You know, since electrons don’t actually move through solid core conductors or any conductor. They are, for all practical purposes, stationary. Having said that, just going on the photos of the Graphene Gold Rush Tonearm cables, I want some. https://www.monoandstereo.com/2017/10/zavfino-1877phono-graphene-gold-rush.html |
glupson said, ”I also googled "gobbledygook", the word I had never encountered before.” >>>>>That in itself is cause for worry, perhaps even doubt. Could it be a cultural or language thing. No wonder glupson oft appears to be a clean slate. Maybe I’ve been unfair. Oh, yeah, I forgot, you’re Scandinavian. Factoid of the day: All Scandinavian countries are very high up the list of World’s happiest. |
chemman @geoffkait @cleeds I’m unclear as to why you can’t engage in a bit of discourse without getting personal. >>>>It is what it is. Glupson must get some satisfaction since he keeps responding to all of my posts. He even goes out of his way to interrupt or offer some advice or whatever. My guess? 🍑🍔🍔 That’s a joke in case you can’t tell. @geoffkait What in goodness sake has glupson done to anyone to merit that sort of talk. Get some rest gentleman. >>>>We already have a moderator. Thanks, anyway. @prof What I was attempting to get at, rather poorly it seems, is humans are notoriously unreliable test subjects. Because of human variability, it is extremely difficult to get adequate support to satisfy a hypothesis that ultimately results in a scientific "law," unlike something like Ohm’s Law which is pretty much a bedrock principle in electronics. We can point to failed medical studies and drug recalls. We can’t control human moods, blood pressure, sleep patterns, vascular anomalies, etc. All of that makes it less reliable than running the same test through a computer with Rightmark and testing for THD, frequency response, dynamic range etc.. Those are quantifiable numbers that speak to the transmission/reception of sound waves. "I liked this one better," can be added up along with it’s opposite number. You want to quantify that fine. That’s simply not good enough for me. Nor, is it very good science. On the other hand, some knowledge can be taken from it. >>>>That looks like it should go in the Whatever file, your apparent expertise in most of the scientific disciplines notwithstanding. 😛 |
glupson geoffkait, Two "what about this" questions that are off the thread topic, but that came to me after reading your list above. Don’t you sometimes, maybe secretly, wish that you do find someone who agrees with you? Do you ever wonder how that would feel? Having to fight all those windmills alone must be exhausting. >>>>I oft pine for a new class of posters, perhaps more curious and enthusiastic, and sometimes ask myself, why can’t there be more of me? |
chemman @geoffkait I disagree as it seems highly unlikely that someone would pay money for something they expect to provide an enhancement and not expect it to work. The "hope" that it will enhance is correlated with the pleasure in the brain. Moreover, confirmation bias is not ordinarily found in an experiment that focuses on empirical data. It is found in pseudo science that seeks to pass itself off as veracity. Much like your skilled listener experiment-- you can’t control variables properly. There is your logical fallacy. You can’t quantify listening skills, just as glupson described above. You can give hearing tests to determine the frequencies people can hear, but you certainly cannot attach a number to what they can hear when listening to subtle music which is comprised of always changing frequencies from multiple different instruments. Not quite sure where to file that one. Maybe under one of the following, a. Whoa! b. Whatever c. Please, not another glupson sympathizer! d. Examples of Strawman arguing e. Look who’s calling someone a pseudo scientist f. OMG, not another pseudo neuroscientist! g. OMG, not another pseudo physchologist! h. All of the above |
chemman @geoffkait But I will agree that not everyone, in the whole world, is susceptible to confirmation bias in regard to a purchase. >>>>That’s mighty decent of you. So, I take you still don’t see what’s wrong with your argument. then chemman wrote, There have to be a few people out there that would be unaffected. Not me mind you, if I bought a cable, for virtually any amount of money, that was supposed to improve the sonic capabilities and did not, I would be disappointed. Because I would have been super hopeful and probably could have even talked myself into the belief the sound was better. I will try it some day soon, probably, but not now. I am too busy enjoying the music. Enjoy it yourself. I imagine you have a nice set up! >>>>>Whatever. |
chenman Who is to say that confirmation bias is not at work either? Someone spends $500 on a cable because they believe it will enhance the sonic performance of their system is going to be psychologically pre-disposed to hearing it. There is no way around that. How much so is up for debate? >>>>The arguments regarding confirmation bias, placebo effect and other psychological phenomena are the “weapons of mass destruction” of died-in-the-wool pseudo skeptics. No one is saying psychological issues never occur, but they don’t always occur. They can be controlled through careful testing by skilled listeners, I.e., audiophiles. It might not be easy. I never promised you a rose garden. 🌹Therefore, that particular argument is a logical fallacy. 😢 By the way, you could make your argument a whole lot stronger and more believable by other undecideds and newbies if you used $5000 instead of $500. 😬 |
glupson, are you posting drunk again? I said the Ikea Poang Chair contained foam similar to Sonex. I just realized you probably have no idea what Sonex is or why I would find it objectionable. I suppose that’s the risk one takes when dealing with clean slates. Never mind..... I’m standing by for some more of your bright what about this? what about that? routines. |
All cables and power cords must be allowed time to settle in. Once the electrical-mechanical connection is disturbed you have to start all over. Even if the cables or cords are broken in. Therefore, any kind shootout or blind test is unreliable. It’s not that easy, MGee. Even if the cable or cord is moved without unplugging, that alone can affect the sound. That’s why the debate has gone on for what, 40 years? I don’t even have to bring up contact enhancers or cable elevators. Even when people think they hear differences in tests they sometimes change their mind later and think better if it for a number of reasons. Especially if the device is controversial. 😬 |
Speaking of stuffing in chairs am I the only one who cannot tolerate the IKEA Poang Chair? You know, the cheap audiophile alternative chair, the one that’s stuffed with that same kind of foam as Sonex acoustic foam. Sonex has got to be one of the worst sounding materials ever foisted on unsuspecting and gullible audiophiles. Leather chairs, regardless of stuffing, are another irritant. |
glupson Geoffkait: “A rich man has about as much chance of entering audio Nirvana as a camel has of passing through the eye of a needle." That must be a really big needle. Why is being rich/able-to-afford so frequently mentioned as a negative trait on this forum? >>>>>I don’t think it’s a negative trait per se. I think it’s negative only because expense of equipment or cables is irrelevant to most of the discussions about sound. Owning expensive equipment does not automatically mean the owner has found audio Nirvana or that his system even sounds good. Nor can he automatically win arguments based on the expense of his system. Even when he swears up and down his system sounds awesome. That’s what we call a logical fallacy. Asking someone to list his system is not really a way to find out what that system sounds like or to prove that system/cable X sounds better than system/cable Z. There are no shortcuts to Xanadu. 😛 |
calvinj Also the more your system is worth it allows you to put in and justify better cabl8ng and power cords. For some it’s nutty but our systems allow us to hear the difference. That’s all. It putting people down but if you can’t tell me what kit you are running your opinions are useless to me. >>>>>Back at ya, slick! Your opinions are worthless to me. A rich man has about as much chance of entering audio Nirvana as a camel has of passing through the eye of a needle. |
calvinj @geoffkait I’m not showing off by telling you what my gear is and how much I paid for it. No disrespect but not knowing what gear you running I’m a lot less inclined to value what you say. That’s just my opinion. I don’t know what basevlevel you are at. I was able to have Allnic, veloce, classe, high fidelity, Kubala sosna, Audio research, revel, Sonus faber, Vienna acoustics , clarity Cable, Clarus cables, atlas mavros, audioquest in my system at different times through the last 12 years so my context for what great sound is maybe different based on my ability to have long demos to well respected gear. Any way without knowing your gear I’m less inclined to pay attention. When I hadn’t heard better I did not know better. >>>>Whatever. |
calvinj @geoffkait what does your system consists of. I’ve seen all these comments but don’t know your system. >>>>What’s the difference? What good would it do you to know my system? It certainly wouldn’t change my comments. I’m not a big fan of showing off how expensive one’s system is to try to prove a point, like some people. I’ve heard my share of expensive systems that sound like crap. Did I answer your question? I’ll show you mine if you show me yours. 😳 Please don’t hit me over the head with your Kubala Sosnas. |
calvinj OP No it’s actually a blocked shot. Some of us have excellent hearing and can hear a difference. It’s makes a huge difference in some of our systems to our ears. We will do what we do while you stick to homemade monoprice or whatever. >>>>>If it looks like a troll, acts like a troll and walks like a troll....it’s a troll. |
It’s not that difficult to see from calvinj’s point of view there is no debate. He made that pretty clear in his somewhat baiting OP. That’s why the OP was all caps. I’m sure calvinj thanks all those who took the bait. 🤡 By the way, there is no difference between cable skeptics and say, skeptics of the Tice Clock, Mpingo discs, Silver Rainbow Foil, the Green Pen, Schuman Frequency Generator, tiny little bowl resonators or demagnetizing CDs. The only difference is how the skeptic will decide to formulate his philosophic and scientific attack. |
Reasons why blind Cable tests should not be taken seriously 1. Test system was not be verified as having no errors, i.e., Absolute Polarity, out of phase, poor speaker placement, etc. Many if not most systems mask subtle differences. This produces what is known as a “rush to judgement.” Who came up with the expression, Audiophile Myth, anyway? Uh, a Pseudo Skeptic. Hel-loo! 2. Too many things can go wrong with any test to be able to say this test proves such and such. If someone was determined to prove that differences between two cables DO EXIST he would ALWAYS DO THE TESTS LATE AT NIGHT OR EARLY MORNING. How many of these “impartial” tests are self fulfilling prophecies? You decide. 3. Speaking of subtle differences what’s wring with them? Many characteristics of sound ARE subtle. That’s what we advanced audiophiles are looking for, we want subtle but powerful. Like subtle improvements to the human voice. You have to know it when you hear it. Nobody is demanding “night and day differences.” If you are unable to hear subtle differences that would be your problem. Wake up and smell the roses! 🌹🌹🌹 4. Test participants cannot be verified to actually possess keen hearing skills. It should be noted almost all audiophiles consider themselves excellent listeners. Cough, cough 5. Cables under test cannot be verified as being competent broken in. Yes, I know what you’re thinking, well get an idea of the differences without going to all that trouble. 😀 6. Cables under test when disconnected break the delicate mechanical/electrical interface which takes at least several days to reestablish. 7. Directionality can be be ascertained for cables under test. Cables in the incorrect direction just don’t sound very good. When many if not most of the blind tests were performed directionality was not even a gleam in most audiophiles’ eye.👁 8. Results of a single test cannot be generalized, especially if results are negative or inconclusive. If a test is repeated by the same personnel in the same system that has merit. If the test can be repeated by different personnel in different systems that would have even more merit. 9. A single test is only one data point. It takes more than two points to make a curve. In order to draw a conclusion about cables or anything under test there must be a number of data points, the more the better, so one can draw a smooth curve through them. |