i've tended to stay away from this forum because i didn't like the way that the moderator blocked some of my posts, but we'll see if this one gets past the censor...
my advice is that you be vary skeptical of people who assert that there are discernible "sonic" differences between power cords, yet they can't give any explanation as to why that is the case. it's, like, all subjective, so the comments are subject to exogenous influences that have nothing to do with electronics.
you are dealing with expectations: a person who is willing to go out and get a power cord is someone who is seeking a better audio experience; so they are starting out *hoping* that the power cord will make their system sound better. this is aided by visually appealing packaging: expensive-looking packaging, impressive-looking cord thicknesses/end connectors and aesthetically appealing cord sheathing.
you are dealing with personal biases: a person who has already spend a few hundred (if not thousand) dollars on a power cord has a need to feel that he hasn't wasted his money. so, of course such a person will tell you that the power cord made an "immense" difference in his system, even if he can't tell you why.
one of the things that hurts the credibility of high end audio is all the bs and pseudo-science that is promoted to justify $30,000 speaker cables (that you can buy at radio shack for $0.40/foot) and various other "tweaks", which purported make your system sound better. add to this the role of "audiophile" reviewers who often has conflicts of interest in the products that they review (which are not disclosed to the readers).
until i hear one of these reviewers conduct their reviews in blind testing, where they have to comment on the "sonic" qualities of the system without knowing which cords are being used (or even if the cords have been switched from one test to the next), i will not give much credence to the assertions (offered without explanation) of how various cords improve the "sonic" quality of a given component or system. |
09-04-11: Zaikesman
Paperw8: How do you explain the audiophile, such as myself and no doubt just about anyone who has actually tried a variety of power cords and hears differences among them (or any other component for that matter -- power cords are no different from anything else in this regard), who has had the experience of buying something that yes, they hoped would succeed and fulfill their expectations, and yes, paid good money for it, and no, their auditioning wasn't performed double-blind (of course), and yet, wound up NOT preferring the most expensive, or the newest, or the prettiest, or the best-reviewed item? This does happen not-infrequently in the real world...
you're effectively asking me to tell you what is going on in your head, and i can't do that. suffice it to say, and as noted earlier in this thread, this topic is a *highly* controversial one. in general, i have difficulty with stuff which seems to operate by magic. when i read comments about the presumed sonic benefits of power cords, and "tweaks" in general, my reaction is to think that these people should remember to wear their tin foil hats with the shiny side facing outward. in my mind, this stuff is no different than with other controversial topics like the loch ness monster, area 51 ufo theories, and the abominable snowman. |
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
(poking my nose back in for a moment...)
Paperw8, you do harm to your argument with such illustrations that stretch credibility. I sense you are quite passionate about your position, but you hurt yourself when you suggest...
-That a person be wary of an individual who describes a phenomenon but can't explain it. Doesn't all observation lead to exploration, discovery? Shall we be suspect of all who hear a phenomenon regularly? Perhaps we should be suspect of those who don't?
-Re: Personal Biases - The existence of bias is not a reason for dismissal of a phenomenon. It may influence one's perception, but certainly is not definitive proof against it.
i write as a person who really wishes that there were better, more credible, information available about audio equipment. but the amount of bs that is so frequently proliferated about in the public, hurts the credibility of the industry in general. i appreciate the existence of scientific methods of empirical observation. but that's not what is going on here. here, the problems are that you often have suggestion and anticipation *before* observation. that kind of stuff can color your observations. that doesn't "prove" that the obsrevations are incorrect; but it does make them highly suspect. if you read my comments more closely, you will note that i stated that AT MINIMUM, such "evaluations" need to be done in blind testing, where the listener does not know which components are being used, or even whether components have been changed at all from one test to the next. i guarantee you that you would be a lot less sure about the purported "sonic improvements" that you claim to hear if you didn't know what you were listening to from one test to the next.
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
I have had the pleasure of having several audiophiles, some industry professionals, in my room who started with a negative bias against cables, especially power cables. It has been pure joy to demonstrate simply the efficacy of switching power cords. To a man (and one man's wife as well!) they have been impressed, i.e. they have heard the difference - and heard it immediately. You assume a positive bias, but simple comparisons in a good audio system has been able to overcome negative bias in people.
I enjoy their shocked expressions and struggle to find explanations. :)
i don't know what your test methods were, but if you went into it with the intention of "proving" that power cables did make a difference, i suspect that you tended to set up the test to bias toward the result that you were seeking to get. in general, this kind of testing is highly unreliable: i'll listen to one component, and then while repeating the test, and even when playing the same piece of music, i have to try to remember exactly how it sounded a few minutes earlier. it is an, at best, unreliable means of testing, and one in which the bias is to think that the most recent hearing is the best one. so if, in your testing, you used the "upgraded" power cord last, then i would suspect that you biased the results. that is why you have to do repeated blind testing in random sequence (including tests where you don't make any changes).
09-06-11: Douglas_schroeder
-You mention Pseudo-science and "...stuff which seems to operate by magic." Surely you are aware of the many persons in the cable industry who have engineering/electronics education? Surely you know about research white papers, discussions on websites of work with dielectric, conductor size/geometry and gauge? I'm not speaking of networked cables here as they are a special case, but of straight wire cable manufacturers. It is misinformed of you to state that there is no attempt at science/research behind cable manufacturing. Now, you may wish to disdain it, that's your choice. But to pretend it doesn't exist is inaccurate. If you wish to read some reviews with an eye toward the design element of cables I suggest you find my cable reviews on Dagogo.com.
i don't doubt that the makers of audio gear are knowledgeable about electronics. but i also know that these are people who are out to make a buck by selling their wares to people who largely *don't* know a lot about electronics. let me give you an example - siltech makes high end cables, i mean, these guys make speaker cables that cost over $30,000. when i read what they had to say about their products, there were comments about how they designed their cables to over come the effects of signal distortion that can occur as a signal travels through cable. what the guy was invoking was a transmission line model of a cable. technically, that is correct, a cable can indeed be modelled as equivalent to a series of capacitors and inductors in a transmission line model. the problem is that the transmission line model is typically only relevant at microwave frequencies; to invoke such a model for signals in the range of audio frequencies is ridiculous. so basically, these guys are trying to convince you to spend thousands of dollars on cable that you can get at radio shack for $0.40/foot. that said, the siltech cables (connectors, sheaths and all) look a lot more impressive than the stuff at radio shack. |
09-06-11: Rwwear
I think anyone interested should read this:
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm#house
remember: shiny side out! |
09-07-11: Zaikesman
Paperw8: I can't help but notice that you basically punted on my question. You said you couldn't know what was going in another audionphile's head, so to speak. Well of course, but I didn't ask you that: I asked what explanation you could offer for audiophile *behavior* that contravenes your assumptions about the supposedly confounding effects of presumed psychological factors. Mine was a valid question, which can't be satisfactorily sidestepped in your paradigm by refusing to consider the evidence.
what you offered were *your* opinions and *your* perceptions; both of which are the product of what is going on in your head. i will tell you that observing differences in system performances based on cable selection is not a universal phenomenon. in fact, i watched one commentary about thiel speakers in which the person raved about the speakers but said that she couldn't really tell the difference when the merchant switched cables in the system. you may also want to look at some of the articles cited in posts b rwwear... |
09-07-11: Mrtennis
i think most would agree that many statements made on the discussion forums cannot be proven, because they are opinions, not facts or knowledge.
to a certain extent, it's like trying to prove/disprove the existence of santa claus or the easter bunny. but let's think about this logically: you just spent big money on, say, a power amplifier. you would like to think that the maker put great thought into the design of *every* detail in the amplifier. but then, by a mere change of power cord you discover that they didn't spend time thinking through the detail of supplying a sufficient power cord to enable to amplifier to achieve its peak performance. in other words, you've been gypped! if the maker of that power amplifier did not even show enough care to select the right power cord, what does that suggest about the rest of the system? do you see where this is heading? |
09-07-11: Tbg
Rwwear, no one owes you proof. I doubt seriously if many audiophiles avoid trying different power cords because several people, imbued with the "laws of EE," claim they could make no difference.
let me give you a hypothetical: a person goes to an audio store, spends $50,000 to buy a power amplifier and later concludes: "i'll gladly spend another $2,500 to get a power cord that will make my amplifier sound even better!" i would think that most people hearing that hypothetical would conclude that the buyer was a fool, one who maybe had a bit too much money on his hands. you would think if the buyer discovered the undeniable sonic benefits of this alternative cable, that he would go back to the maker of the amplifier and angrily demand to know why they sold a $50,000 amplifier with a sub-standard power cord. to bring the discussion to the present discussion; if you really are so convinced of the putative benefits of power cords, then you and the rest of the "believers" in this stuff, should be calling the makers of high end audio equipment to account for shipping sub-standard products at super-standard prices. of course, if you go to the makers with these kinds of allegations, you're going to have to substantiate them, but i am not expecting you, or anyone in the "audiophile reviewer" community to initiate such a line of inquiry. the fact that there has been no such inquiry points to reasons to be suspicious of the claims of "dramatic" sonic benefits based on cable/cord selection. let's face it, cable is probably the most lucrative product line in the "audio tweaks" product category. and the thing is, when people are spending tens of thousands of dollars (or more) on audio systems, its easy to drop a few hundred (or thousand) bucks more on "tweaks" because comparatively speaking, it looks like a relatively small amount of money. |
09-07-11: Tbg
Paperw8, why do you care? It is not your money nor your listening. It sounds like you are offended for others, why would that be?
i engage in these discussions for the following reasons: 1)intellectual interest: i sometimes learn stuff from debating others' points of view (that hasn't been the case so much in this discussion, but i do pick up information); 2)personal interest: i actually do want to see better, more reliable, information on audio equipment choices. i actually have gripes about the quality of information in general, not just about cable matters. but my thinking is that by challenging the information out there that it will hopefully result in better information; 3)general consumer interest: there is a lot of bs out there about audio products that is being passed off as information. as i mentioned, audio equipment is often sold by people who know a lot about electronics to people who know little about electronics. that's fertile ground for being taken advantage of. i really think that people are getting snookered out of a lot of money on the basis of questionable claims, and i feel that someone should challenge the bs. |
09-08-11: Zaikesman
What I must wonder is, how you would explain it if you came to my house, listened to my system with different power cord substitutions, and heard the correlated sonic effects that I hear? Because I don't see how you could fail to if you have ears on your head.
i've got a better test for you: contact the maker of your audio component and tell them if they have "ears on their heads" that they will see the "undeniable" sonic benefits that result from using your selected power cable with their component. tell them, based on this "undeniable" evidence that they should replace the "substandard" power cable that they are currently using with the "undeniably" better one that you have discovered. the fact that audio equipment makers are not shipping product using these "upmarket" power cords tell me that the people who actually make audio equipment aren't buying into these assertions. |
09-08-11: Drubin
the fact that audio equipment makers are not shipping product using these "upmarket" power cords tell me that the people who actually make audio equipment aren't buying into these assertions.
All you'd have to do is visit a high-end audio show for a few minutes to see that your assertion is patently untrue. They don't ship their products with upmarket cords because of what it will do the price of the products, but many many of them chose to use those cords when they demonstrate their products.
surely you don't believe what you wrote: "because of what it (upmarket power cords) will do (sic) the price of the products"?!? i mean, if you're a "value" purchaser, you probably aren't buying high end audio. when a company claims that their "reference" products incorporate "price not object" design choices, do you *really* believe that they would cut corners on the power cords because of what it would to the price of the "cost no object" product? |
09-09-11: Drubin
I stand by what I wrote, paperw8, but do acknowledge that it's a bit more complicated. Manufacturers know these days that their products need to come with detachable power cords because audiophiles are accustomed to having that choice. If they bundle a specific cord with the amp because they think it sounds best with their product, some customers will insist on using a different cord and will balk at having to pay extra for the bundled cord. This isn't about "value buyers." If you were building a $6,000 amp but it would have to sell for $8,000 with your power cord of choice, would you do it? I think it would be a poor business decision.
a person spending $6,000 on an amplifier will probably not want to spend $2,000 on an "upmarket" power cord; but a person spending $20,000 probably would be willing to do so, and a person spending $100,000 (or more) would probably not think twice about it. that was my point in an earlier posting: the target market for "tweaks" is people who are spending big money on their systems such that the additional cost of the "tweaks" does not seem large in comparison to the overall cash outlay. but feel free to sand by your comments. but as i previously stated, if you shell out large sums of money to buy "reference"/"cost no object" equipment, don't you think that you have a right to expect to get for your money a product that actually was "cost no object"? but if you insist on the right to pay extra for upmarket "tweaks", you can take comfort in the fact that there is a segment of the audio industry that is happy to accommodate you.
09-09-11: Drubin
Oh, and what if the customer needs a longer length?
get a power strip that has it's own cord. voila! you have an extension. |
09-09-11: Tbg
Another reason many manufacturers don't include power cords is that they don't want to irritate many power cord manufacturers while pleasing only one.
i'm not so sure about this explanation. for example, krell apparently decided that there was money to be made in the "upmarket" power cord biz because they introduced the "vector hc power cable". krell says of the vector hc power cord that it is "engineered to the same rigorous standards as krell electronics". yes audiophiles, if, after spending $40,000 or $50,000 on monoblock amplifiers, you still feel that you haven't spent enough money, krell will now accommodate your wishes by offering you the opportunity to spend another $4,000 on a pair of "upmarket" power cords. |
09-09-11: Mrtennis
I have discussed the subject of designing an amp with a fixed power cord or an iec. several have said that an iec degrades the sound, and a well designed permanently attached will provide (a) superior sign(al).
theoretically this is true; the connection is a potential source for the introduction of noise into the signal path. the same reasoning would suggest that you would achieve superior sound if a phono preamplifier had hardwired load resistors instead of switchable ones. but the questions you have to ask are what is the amplitude of the noise and what is the frequency range of the noise. i mean, unless you have your audio system in an emi shielded room with extra precautions to shield each component and each cable from cross-emi, then your audio system operates in an environment where are all kinds of ambient sources of interference noise that could theoretically degrade the signals traveling through your audio system. but the real question is: can you *really* hear them? if you believe that you can, then you may want to take appropriate actions. |
