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.
prof, you sure talk a lot about blind testing and test protocols and how thorough testing protocols will minimize errors and so forth but have you conducted cables tests yourself or even know anyone who meets your criteria for testing - whatever they actually are - who has? Surely you must realize the word *thorough* means different things to different people. And minimizing errors. Those are what we call loosely goosey terms. Pseudo skeptics chant, if you do this, if you do that, if you ...... Heaven forbid they ever test anything themselves. This is all just hand waving. And who exactly is the lucky guy who is elected to determine what the test protocols are? You? AES? Some famous pseudo skeptic? Lol
Unless someone is on board the cable directionality train, the break in train and the re-settle in train I don’t care what they say. Not to mention the boatload of other variables many audiophiles are blissfully unaware or dismiss. That’s why I insist negative results mean nothing.
So, unless I see some new information or something other than hand waving I consider the skeptics’ argument completely stalled out and ineffective.
Lizzie, I’m not the one all hot and bothered. I enjoy chit chatting with prof. Enjoy the ride. Don’t get all wrapped around the axle. If you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen.
My responses to you were polite and honest. And after my first substantial response I finished saying "Anyway, I won’t pursue that any further, and thanks again for your input!"
So I was done.
But you chose to respond with a snide bit characterizing me as not trusting myself and not knowing which way was up or down. THAT was a baiting type of response, not mine.
So I politely explained how your characterization was inaccurate. And then again you’ve gone back to simply disparaging my character, without showing where I was unreasonable.
I’m not the one making baiting posts here. If you want to join in a thread clearly about debating the merits of cables, but are inclined to critique the person when you can’t point out a problem in their reasoning, then I’m not the one degrading the content of these threads.
At least my replies are there for more fair-minded folks to evaluate.
Why do some people with low end systems, who cannot easily distinguish various instruments or voices, but with shallow pockets, ever get involved so deeply in this type thread, which actually is a high end audio thread? Doesn’t make sense. It can only lead to disaster. 🤠
Then you got the guys who love to write, they post a thousand word essay every time.
Some thousand word essays are easier to read than others. I for one find Prof’s lengthy but intelligent and very well written posts to be a pleasure to read.
I am fond of prof’s oft longish posts mainly because they tend to enunciate the skeptic/pseudo skeptic’s philosophy/mission statement very well. In order for a real debate to take place there must be a line drawn very clearly in the sand so everyone knows where the two sides stand. Thus, folks like prof and by extension Al, a fervent skeptical pontificator himself of no small measure, must be free to express and/or support skeptical philosophy. Otherwise, it would be just your humble scribe flapping his gums.
.... as opposed to GK who mostly just muddles up everything and anything. I guess that is what supposed theoretical physicists selling useless tweaks to bored audiophiles do.
mapman, no disrespect but have you really been pretending to be an engineer ever since you joined Audiogon? I like the way you jump right into a discussion after being away/asleep for a few weeks with a simple +1. That takes a lot of engineering skill. 😛
Prof is also always very polite and respectful even in situations that might not command that. Almarg too. I wish I coukd be as patient and respectful of all as those two.
Anyhow in reponse to the OP yes cables matter. No sound using components without them. Also they do not always sound the same. That's it in a nutshell.
Roachie Great poetry man! For you cables DO matter and I share your passion for the music. I'm sure we would have fun celebrating Montiverdi and alot of the Dorian Catalog over a good port. We would just let cables slide...
Some people just don’t have systems where it’s worth it. Some do. Putting high priced cables on low end systems don’t work. Your systems have to be resolving for it to matter. Some people don’t have the hearing or the proper reference point.
I too enjoy Prof's posts. His discourse is cerebral and pointedly, unabashedly down the fence, if people take the time to read understand what has been written. I do not see any insults in the posts that require such vehement, even venomous responses.
Everyone has a right to express his/her opinions, but this is not the forum for nastiness. I have had my share for expressing my opinion, and I'd probably expect more from certain quarters.
The skeptics capable of enunciating and verbalizing the skeptic’s philosophy seem to have a handful of supporters, but just an observation - those supporters don’t seem to have a position of their own, or if they do they keep it to themselves. I doubt they understand the argument. We call these supporters nodders. When they’re not nodding off they’re nodding. And what do they have in common, by their own words? They have trouble hearing. Hmmmmmm... it appears we should probably add a new word our list of talker, walker and sitter. Nodder.
...and walk off the cliff with all the believers. Tell me it won't hurt when I hit the bottom and I might look at it further. Until then I'll keep the $$$ in my own pocket and enjoy what I have currently ;)
Oh, geez! Glupson joined the thread with his usual aplomb and savior faire. That’s not particularly good news for the pseudo skeptics and undecideds in terms of debate skills. We already have at least two master debaters here and he’s no master debater.
I see calvinj is still running with the old "ears or gear" response to cable skeptics. Which is of course just another form of put down - if you don’t hear these amazing cable differences either your ears are crap or your gear is crap...hey, don’t shoot the messenger ;-).
There are many reasons this is a dubious defense. First, this "ears or gear" put down has been used whenever audiophiles are defending claims of audible differences to skeptics - differences between solid state amps, various tweaks, you name it. And yet:
1. Many blind/double blind tests have been run using claimed "golden eared audiophiles," including audio reviewers, and with high end systems of all manner, and the claims of "easily audible differences" often did not survive these tests.
2. If we were talking about truly minute differences easily buried in the noise floor, THEN it would start to make some sense that one needs a super high resolution system to be able to discern these differences. But ultra-minute differences ARE NOT THE TYPE of audible differences often ascribed to cables by audiophiles (much less manufacturers). Rather, we are often told cables make BIG, OBVIOUS, YOU HAVE TO BE DEAF NOT TO NOTICE differences. And those differences typically involve "extended/smoother highs, fuller mids, lower/tighter bass, punchier or looser sound, expanded soundstaging, more precise imaging...and on and on. All sorts of "unmistakable" sonic differences.
The type of new signal conveyed to a loudspeaker by these cables describes all the types of differences that should be and are audible via any number of modest, well designed speakers. For instance, I have a very old pair of cheap two way box speakers from Thiel, before they went all high-end and first order crossovers. It would surely bring some laughs as put up against the "super resolving" modern speakers others are using. And yet these speakers are fully capable of showing me differences from large to subtle. A soundstage expands from one recording to the next? I’ll hear it. Smoother highs on one recording, slightly tighter bass from another? It will be there. New master of a recording; easily heard. And the most subtle notching of the frequency response via an EQ is easily audible. But somehow all the grossly large differences a fancy cable would transmit, just wouldn’t be audible???(And though I have had many "highly resolving" loudspeakers, including my current Thiel 3.7/2.7s and MBL 121s which use the mids/tweeter often seen as world class in resolution....any of my more modest monitors - Spendor, Waveform, Hales etc - also show me all manner of subtle sonic differences).
It reminds me of listening to my brother’s album masters. He often invites me over to evaluate several different masters for his album. Yet, struggling musician that he is, he just uses and old JVC amp, plain-jane cables, and some really old modest PSB speakers. And yet...miracle of miracles!...we can easily discern all the subtle differences between masters - a slight brightness here, a bit of grain there, reverb and space slightly truncated here, depth expanding there, a bit tighter and punchier, or a bit more lush, etc. Most of the same sonic attributes audiophiles often talk about when comparing cables, seem discernible on modest sound systems.
So again, to be clear on what I’m saying: I am not of course saying that some speaker systems are not capable of more resolution than others. Rather, I’m saying that the TYPE of audible differences often attributed to changing cables are of a nature that should not require super high resolution systems, as those type of sonic differences can be heard in relatively modest speaker systems.
3. We hear from audiophiles with a wide variety of systems claiming audio cable differences, AC cable differences, power conditioner differences. It is not remotely contained to audiophiles with Ultra High Resolving Systems. And yet when people with more modest systems claim audible differences, it seems those claims are just accepted: "Well of course you heard differences...cable difference are easy to hear!"
Which leads me to provisionally conclude:
4. This common "ears or gear" response is just an excuse to yet again find a put down of anyone skeptical, with little evidence but self-serving anecdotes (well I can hear it on MY system!).
(And btw, while the above shows I don’t go along with calvinj’s "ears/gear" stance, if he would like to compare gear and listening experience, and general experience in the world of reproduced sound...we can do that ;-))
1. Many blind/double blind tests have been run using claimed "golden eared audiophiles," including audio reviewers, and with high end systems of all manner, and the claims of "easily audible differences" often did not survive these tests.
>>>>Yeah, sure. Prove it. It sounds suspiciously like one of them pseudo skeptic old wives tales. No offense.
I’ll even help you out. Just say, I can’t remember where I saw them but I’m pretty sure I saw them somewhere in some high end publication.
Rather than those who ascribe to the idea that cables make an appreciable difference to be announced in capital letters being the believers, I say they are the sceptics, who do not believe that cables do not make the appreciable difference as claimed they do.
Now if this is the case, prove that they do. I place the shoe on the other foot. Go for it.
Any potential difference in sound due to different cables may easily end up being negligible with a small change in loudness. Discussing anything about the sound perception without including the constant of how loud it is, is pointless. Maybe, instead of changing the cable, change the volume. Unfortunately, it is a cheap tweak.
Well gosh, if a group wants a discussion among folks who only want to discuss differences in cables they think they hear, with others of the same mind set, by all means do so and have fun. Just call it something other than "DO CABLES MAKE A DIFFERENCE...." which seems to invite dissenting opinions. And the reason the burden of proof is not onthe sceptics is because of 150 years of Electrical Theory and Engineering not to mention the huge majority of actual unbiased blinded testing. If that stuff means nothing to you, well there really isn't a discussion to be had. And if one CAN offer repeatable, verifiable evidence of the Highly Unlikely in signal transmission, well, as I tell my friends who are fervent believers in ESP or ghosts, or UFO's or homeopathy, great, bring it on I would truly love to have a solid paradigm stood on it's head. I WANT to believe in magic, really I do. That seems to be the last of what I have to offer this thread, thanks for the many well intentioned thoughtful and funny posters of all mind sets. Shame about the other types. Good night and joy be with you all.
Well gosh, if a group wants a discussion among folks who only want to discuss differences in cables they think they hear, with others of the same mind set, by all means do so and have fun. Just call it something other than "DO CABLES MAKE A DIFFERENCE...." which seems to invite dissenting opinions.
Exactly!
This is what I pointed out before. Why in the world start a thread asking IF cables make a difference....and then complain when people actually give their views, pro *and* con?
Previous threads have been similar, asking this question but when anyone provides the other view, the skeptical side, you get versions of "Why are you here bothering us? Can’t you just leave us alone!!?"It’s like "Do cables make a difference? Note: The only people welcome to comment are those who think they make a difference." Then...why ASK?
And it’s not like those of us with questions about cable claims are chasing cable-lovers all around the place. This sub-forum is filled with people happily discussing their cables. Personally I generally only enter these "debates" when that is the actual subject of a thread. And still EVEN in threads in which the opposing view seems to be asked for, if you give it you come in for personal and disparaging remarks here.
Also I find comments from, say, elizabeth quite strange about skeptics "raising hell." How would someone "raise hell" just voicing their own skeptical view of cables? That seems to imply a rather emotional/dogmatic commitment on the part of a cable lover if encountering someone else’s lack of belief just ruins their day.
In the case of calvinj starting this thread, I think it’s become apparent that he never really was interested in any in-depth conversation, or challenging of his own view, so much as just posting the OP as a put-down of anyone skeptical. Yes, yes we know calvinj, we’ll all get our ears looked at and upgrade our crap equipment....as you’ve told us many times how deficient we are.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
