DO CABLES REALLY MATTER?
I think that the most important thing for cable naysayers to understand is: "Emergent science does not come out of the barrel of a textbook." It’s important to understand that even Einstein received death threats, from within the world of science, from lesser minds. Max Planck (the origin point for the quantum sciences) made a point of mentioning this problem, in his quote, "Science advances -funeral by funeral". What he meant...was that the non exploring dogmatic textbook waving and thumping types, when they die their grip is lessened and science can finally move on to where it should have been, if they had not been around... their inability to understand (and those who listen/gather to them) --being what held science and human advancement back. |
DO CABLES REALLY MATTER? Yes, it does. But the PROBLEM is that it matters NOT THAT MUCH in overall music listening experience. It provides WORST ROI for any upgrade in your overall hifi system. CABLES that cost over a few hundred bucks are NOT the first upgrade, but it should be the LAST UPGRADE if you can afford and have Sound Sommelier Level of Golden Ear, which is RARE. What provides EVEN WORSE ROI is investing in Digital Transport Cable such as USB or Optical. Again, after you upgrade everything else and analog cables, then you want to upgrade the digital cables, the VERY LAST. |
That’s a keen observation, prof. Obviously premium gas won’t help generally if the compression ratio is average but it will help if compression ratio is high, as in high performance. Kind of like cables, high end cables are for high end systems. Average cables or what we often refer to as crap cables are for pro audio. 😛 |
I'm new here but this is a question that has fascinated me forever. I'm very fond of a particular 12 gauge OFC with 87 strands that is readily available online and seems to suit most systems I put together. I've also been applying a "jacket" to the standard cables for years....Makes them look nice and is protective. I know some of you here with very deep pockets may have had experiences with some "cost-no-object" cables that might convince some of us (Vulcan mind-meld would be useful here)...…. Would be interested in hearing the story of anyone here who has had a "cable experience" such as this...…..?? |
Audio Cable Distortion is Not a Myth! AES E-LibraryHuh, no wonder it is about cables. As a price comparison... https://www.barnesandnoble.com/p/electronics-engineers-handbook-donald-christiansen/1000505242/26799... |
From the AES link: "However, because the loudspeaker load is typically nonlinear and causes harmonic currents to flow, finite impedance in an audio cable does indeed cause harmonic voltages to appear across the loudspeaker." ~~~~~~~~~~ The signal level cables also have finite impedance. They also cause variance in signal distortion, distortion due to the signal source and the receiving impedance both not being perfectly exact and finite under complex dynamic conditions. Which is the description of an audio signal. A signal so complex it is considered, for the most part, to be non repeating. There is only ONE cable type, both speaker and signal level types...that has a complex dynamic impedance that is varied by the signal load. Only one cable type that solves the issue where it lives. That particular cornerstone of transmission line design is also unique enough to be patentable - and is indeed patented. |
@prof : But what I haven’t actually seen from Teo is an actual cogent argument, that would show his points are directly pertinent to, or act as an actually justified critique, of anyone’s points. In other words: I've yet to see Teo do anything other than raise vague strawmen. The above post addresses your desires directly. As did the issuance of the liquid metal cables themselves provide direct extant solution..or, as they say... "Res ipsa loquitur". |
Ok teo, Your previous post about Einstein and death threats was completely irrelevant. (And you’ll find a similar post to the one you made in virtually every pseudo-science forum. "They called X scientist crazy too, you know! Critiques of X claim are just being dogmatic!" If you think any of it amounted to a relevant critique of anything I’ve written here, you just haven’t been reading at all carefully). You have been doing your best to cast aspersions on folks like myself for voicing some caution in the face of the claims made by the high end cable industry, retailers and audiophiles. Note, btw, the author of the very paper you cited also includes similar skepticism in his conclusion: AUTHOR OF PAPER: "The audio cable market certainly owes something to the appeal of audio jewellery but there is also, with little doubt, a significant element of sell-delusion on the part of consumers and probably also reviewers, retailers and manufacturers." Of course you don’t quote that part ;-) But at least in posting links to that paper, you are moving toward some specificity. But not quite yet. The above post addresses your desires directly. No it doesn’t. You are still posting stuff without making the direct connections - and hence actual argument - that I asked for. Remember what I’d asked:
First...you did not in fact show that what you previously wrote - in your "Eisntien" post - was a relevant critique of what I’ve written. But as you’ve ignored that, now you’ve just posted a link to a single paper. So, please explain how that paper undermines the position I’ve taken here, or shows I’ve been unreasonable or claimed untruths. Can you do this...WITHOUT cherry-picking something I wrote while ignoring the context I’ve given my position in this thread? That’s what I’m waiting for: for you to actually, specifically justify your critiques. Thanks. |
Excerpt from the Waldrep blog on demos of cables at audio shows, “I deliberately avoided naming the salesperson who demonstrated the “benefits” of expensive — very expensive — power cords and the name of his company out of respect for the hosts. His demo produced audible/measurable increases in the amplitude of identical music selections. A result that is impossible according to the laws of physics. Electrical engineers and those with even a casual knowledge of how electrical circuits and power supplies work know that a heavy twisted cable worth thousands of dollars cannot — and should not — increase the plus and minus voltages needed by the various circuits in the equipment in question.” >>>>I gave up reading immediately after the phrases, “a result that is impossible according to the laws of physics,” electrical engineers and those with casual knowledge...” not to mention, “I deliberately avoided naming the salesperson and the name of his company out of respect...” are indicative of some pseudo skeptic somewhere with an axe to grind. Darn the torpedoes, full speed ahead! |
When I do live sound stuff it’s all balanced...signal to the amps, subs, inputs from EQ and compressors, every microphone of course...all of it. The only unbalanced thing is, of course, my normal mental state, and whatever I’m using for background music using a short stereo cable...generally something streaming from an old iPhone that isn’t used as a phone (otherwise calls would come through the PA system...generally not good.) |
| Post removed |
ALL that one needs is highly stranded, oxygen free copper at #6 awg with decent insulation and you are off to the races. $1.50/foot. Get yourself some high compression 100% copper lugs and I would A/B that setup against $5K cables all day long. The above average listener would have a very hard time discerning the difference 50% of the time. |
“The above average listener would have a very hard time discerning the difference 50% of the time. “ What at about the other 50%?! And you seem to forget that everyone here is waaay above average listener....We hear things that even cats and dogs fail to hear. Ask anyone here with a cat or a dog at home. |
50% of the time is no better than guesswork. If we experienced listeners need just the right conditions, at the perfect time of the calendar moon, when all our faculties are working optimally to strain to distinguish better than 50% between a $1 and a $1000 cable in an unsighted test, wouldn't we be better off spending our money elsewhere? Like say loudspeakers, where the difference between a $300 and $3000 pair could be easily identified by almost anyone >90% of the time unsighted. Bear in mind also that a $1000 pair of speakers with a $1 cable will be far superior to a $100 speakers paired with a $1000 cable to everyone except cable manufacturers and dealers maybe. How about putting your money where it counts? In real sonic gains and not in dealer's pockets. A good dealer is an enthusiast, not a pickpocket and deserves our full support. But they are hard to find so if anyone mentions costly cables, then that's the time to leave. Thanks, but no thanks. |
I like the solid core concept for reasons I can’t remember, so for years speaker and ICs have all beed solid...now it’s AQ speaker wire (for many years Type 8 and recently Rocket biwire), and inexpensive Morrow ICs replacing all but the sp/dif digital signal cables (some used but very cool solid silver AQs from streamer and CD player to the DAC). I like Morrow cables as they seem to be relatively transparent, as they say. The do say that don’t they? |
cd318, It’s always struck me as telling that audiophiles/reviewers/cable manufacturers will describe these awesome so-obvious-you-are-deaf-if-you-can’t-hear-it changes made by a given cable. But when you ask people to identify the cable when they aren’t personally swapping the cables so they don’t know which is which, suddenly you get "but you need such a Highly Resolving System to pick up these differences...otherwise they are too subtle to hear....and how in the world do you expect me to pick out these subtle difference reliably under SUCH STRESSFUL conditions as a blind test???!!! Seems a sort of wanting things both ways: obvious differences that skeptics must be deaf not to discern; differences then become so subtle that the mere addition of blind controls make the differences impossible to reliably discern. *(That’s in regards to many typical replies to skeptics suggesting blind tests for cables, where such cable-loving audiophiles reject blind testing. That’s not to say that blind testing automatically invalidates all claims of cable differences. Although one can find numerous examples of blind tests that did not support cable differences, there are also some that suggest people heard differences). |
I think it’s all relative. In my situation putting about 5 to 7k in cabling is ok because it allows my system to open up in ways that I like as opposed to the cheaper generic cabling. For example the clarity cable gives me great lower midrange and extended highs and I like those qualities. High fidelity reveal gives a big sound with great bass and good detail. Kubala sosna gives a great transparent sound with a smooth openness but they are out my systems price range. I started this thread to not down any non believers. But some people don’t have resolving systems. Some people have not heard the best systems out there. I’ve heard the majority of the uber expensive brands and as a reference point I’ve come to the conclusion that cables matter! |
"I have come to the conclusion that (fill in your choice) matters!" cables, gravity, the speed of light, Planck's Constant, EMF, today's DJA, Trump's Trade Embargo, who won the last Powerball, Fermat's Last Theorem, the speed of sound in water, will the sun rise tomorrow, today's gasoline prices, the square root of 2, who lost the battle of Waterloo, Croatia advances to the WC Final, Infinity ... |
