Those are wonderful posts guys, but I'm not sure the argument is as impeccable in practice as on the page. I have to wonder if those positions are based more on theory or experience. In my own experience, although maybe some of this extrinsic/intrinsic business does apply (and I would agree that a good bit of it does apply when it comes to speaker cables in particular), I have pretty much found that any power cord's sonic signature migrates between components with the cord to a significant extent. Whether all of those marriages are happy, within a given system context, is of course a different question. (In my own system, I have actually settled on one preferred model of power cord for all applications, but I didn't always operate this way.)
If your take is based on experience, then my own feeling would be that what you're actually responding to is mostly a simple matter of how well (or not) any particular cord's sound complements any particular component's sound (and vice versa) -- rather than believing that, as Al puts it, "it is incorrect to attribute tonal characteristics to a power cord, because those tonal effects will vary from system to system". To me, this represents an extreme conclusion that, while it may be arrived at logically (if imperfectly), simply doesn't correspond to what I've observed.
I think that like anything else, this just boils down to questions of synergy and preference. (A listener's impression of a power cord might change with seating position!) But like yours, that's just my opinion... |
Hi Byron, I thought I was done here but as you surmised that was before I saw your questions, which derserve to be answered. Unfortunately I have been otherwise occupied and will continue to be for a while. Please give me a chance to read and digest what has been posted since and I will return when I am able to respond further. |
Hi Al, thank you for your thoughtful response. It does seem to answer my question about whether your position that power cords can't have an intrinsic 'sound' is taken primarily from theory or listening.
I am not qualified to submit to you the existence of other possible technical factors beyond the ones you listed, and indeed there may be none (though I did wonder why you omitted capacitance -- I'm sure you have a reason and will explain it). But I tend to be skeptical about any assertion that the things we know to measure for are necessarily the only qualities we would ever want or need to measure, relevent to correlating with subjective sonic impressions, if only we knew what and how. (Not that you have specifically asserted such.)
I would however venture to guess that questions of what I will loosely lump under the umbrella term of resonance, not only of the mechanical kind, may play a part. And I do believe that, despite the sorts of well-recognized factors you describe and nobody would dispute, it's highly likely that no one actually possesses the knowledge or wherewithal to sit down with a blank sheet of paper to design a power cord and know in advance just what it will sound like. (I think there's a bit of a crapshoot-factor here -- some call it 'black art' -- that demands reiterative, trial-and-error experience involving subjective listening in the design process in order to accumulate a useful knowledge base -- at least for honest designers who aren't just 'badge engineering' their products and slapping a fancy jacket on them to go along with the high price tag). But of course for those who share your take that power cords can't 'have sounds' in the first place, that assumption, even if true, would not present a conceptual hurdle.
There's nothing particularly difficult, from the standpoint of either practicality or the ability to draw valid conclusions, about an audiophile getting his or her hands on a few different power cords, trying them on various components, and seeing whether or not any consistencies in sonic signature tend to migrate with the cords to a perceptible degree. You could do it as easily as I. If you did, I'd wager that you just might reconsider whether you've satisfactorily explained everything there may be to think about from the theoretical perspective.
Fortunately however, the whole question is largely trivial and moot in my view. Whether or not power cords, or any cables for that matter, possess their own intrinsic 'sounds', or whether such qualities, to the extend we believe and can observe that they exist at all, are purely extrinsic in nature, at the end of the day we all still need some kind of wires to hook up and plug in our gear with. And unless you're going to design and make your own, or are hell-bent on just going to Home Despot and buying off the reel without subjectively evaluating anything else, so as to conform with preexisting beliefs (however apparently logical) -- or maybe just in order to save money (quite logical if someone has never heard a difference) -- then there's really nothing else to do but identify a few likely candidates, quite probably based on theoretical considerations among others, and then listen to music through them. Except of course if debating about it online is the higher priority... ;^)
Cheers, that's all I got, I'm out! |
Hi Byron, I'm sorry, but this otherwise very nice discussion is just too far off into the weeds for me to want to compound it further by delving into the boring specifics of my own experiences with power cords. You sound like you've done just as much experimentation as I have, so if you reached somewhat different conclusions, that's good enough for me. Regardless of whether or not the 'sound' associated with a cable is extrinsic, intrinsic, or, as I think most of us would probably accept, a mixture of both (a description that in my book would apply to all audio components), it seems to me that as long as one can hear the differences, no theoretical conclusions regarding this factor would be likely to ultimately affect one's choices. The debate probably arises (once again) because we are talking about cables in general, and power cords in particular, which still tend to be regarded by many as though they are somehow extraneous to the signal path. About this: I will challenge you on one thing though, and that is this comment...
A listener's impression of a power cord might change with seating position!
On the face of it, this statement strikes me as a contradiction of the position you are advancing. If a listenerÂ’s impression of a power cord changes from one listening position to another, then the power cord in question FAILS TO exhibit consistent audible characteristics. And if a power cord fails to exhibit consistent audible characteristics across MINOR changes like listening position, then how can we expect the very same power cord to exhibit consistent audible characteristics across MAJOR changes, like two different audio systems? I would take exception with two of your premises there. First, I don't consider a change in seating position to be at all minor. To me that can certainly be more significant than almost any change in wires (or of almost any component of similar type and quality, for that matter). As for the second, I'll ask you your own question in modified form: If your impression of the sound of a speaker were to change with listening position (and of course it would), would you then conclude that the speaker "fails to exhibit consistent audible characteristics" and expect it not to necessarily display any similarities in another setting? |
I still do keep hope alive of someday getting off this thread, but (very simplistically): If you're sitting in one spot, you might react positively to a cord substitution that subjectively tightens the bass response. If you're sitting in another position, even with the same system, you might instead react more positively to a cord substitution that subjectively mellows the treble, or whatever. (The same would also apply to a change in speaker placement, choice of music, etc.) Remember, this is always in relation to the use of some other power cord; it's not possible to compare against no cord at all.* The same goes for listening position -- there is no neutral reference, only preference for a given set of circumstances, and when circumstance changes so may preference.
*[By contrast, it is often possible to evaluate interconnects against the neutral reference of their absence from the chain, rather than purely against one another. It's called bypass-testing, and it's more objective than conventional, subjective substitution testing, but few seem to do it, or even know about it. One easy way to do this, which I use, is by placing two competing interconnects under test into a remote-controllable preamp's A and B tape loops. Then from the listening seat it's a simple matter to, with no switchover delay, select and deselect first loop A a few times, then do the same with loop B, by which method the addition of each interconnect into the chain is compared against the direct feed (the 'bypass', or that interconnect's absence from the chain -- you are NOT switching directly from loop A to loop B; you're switching each loop in and out of the chain in turn, always listening next to the direct feed as your baseline reference). Whichever of the two interconnects alters the sound the least (or least objectionably) as compared with the direct feed wins the round (and can advance to a subsequent round if more than two interconnects are being tested). If you've never done something like this before, you might be surprised at actually 'hearing' your interconnects in isolation for the first time.]
And since I'm posting, I'll risk adding that I don't subscribe to the notion, advanced above, that changing out a whole suite of 'em in unison is the best way to evaluate power cords. The choice shouldn't be between exchanging two different cords between two components, which is obviously confounding, or else going to that other extreme. As with any test, it's always best to hold the variables down to a single controlled one if possible. In this case that means substituting one cord on one component while the others are held constant. In the case of changing out all the cords together, to me that's unecessarily introducing too many variables at once; you may certainly get a feel for the 'sound' of that new model of cord vs. whatever suite of cords was replaced, but not for how that cord synergizes with each individual component, which means you may overshoot the mark and miss the optimum configuration. Of course one may work one's way toward progressively replacing them all with the new cord, after having thoroughly evaluated that model by serially substituting it throughout the existing system (as ultimately happened with me), but I expect that for most audiophiles, like for myself, acquiring multiple duplicate cords before having even comprehensively evaluated a single example represents a putting of the cart before the horse and is unrealistic. (I also don't buy the notion, however helpful and comforting it may be, that one must hear any changes obviously and immediately or else they are rendered definitionally insignificant.) |
Hi Byron, agreed that this can and should go no farther. However, just for the record (and perhaps a better understanding if I failed to make myself clear, which is probable), I never said that a power cord's sound changes with listening position. (As it clearly does with a speaker -- although of course a speaker can only make a sound at all when fed a signal that by necessity involves power cords, and more to my point, a power cord can only be heard through the lens of a speaker in a room at a listening position.) What I did say was that a listener's impression of a power cord's sound can change with their position. The word "impression" to me invokes subjective reaction, evaluation and judgement, both qualitatively and at the basic pro or con level. |
Liguy, you got me at "I think..."
A little bedtime story: Once upon a time, when I was shopping for my last preamp, the model I narrowed-in on for several reasons, and ultimately got and kept, was the Levinson 380S (now discontinued). But it wasn't until I'd bought and installed it that I learned the IEC power cord receptacle was located on the middle of the underside, facing down and oriented sideways, and the stock cord used a special right-angle plug, different even from most other right-angle plugs, that was oriented sideways and didn't protrude much, so that it could fit in the limited space available underneath and exit out the back instead of the side.
Stymied from using my aftermarket cords, I called the dealer where I bought it to ask what he thought. Then I asked a handful of other ML dealers the same question. They all told me the same thing you're saying: "The power supply in that preamp is so well designed, it doesn't need or benefit from an aftermarket cord. Don't worry about it." (In fact the whole reason ML located the receptacle in that inconvenient spot had to do with keeping potential mains interference away from the audio signal path.)
Being the terminally curious and unbelieving type however, this explanation sounded suspiciously pat to me. Really? You're telling me that the one preamp which won't easily accept an upgrade cord also just happens to be the one preamp that won't benefit from the use of same? Because all my other components do.
I wasn't having it. So I removed the preamp, readjusted my rack shelves so there was double the amount of headroom above it, and reinstalled the thing UPSIDE-DOWN. Of course it looked like hell, what with the feet sticking up in the air like it had keeled over dead, and even more so with a limited-flexibility power cord arching up twice as high out its exposed belly, but at least now I could plug in my aftermarket cords to my heart's content (even if reading the alphanumeric display became a bit of a challenge).
And you can guess the rest: Surprise surprise, but substituting a better power cord made about the same degree of improvement as it usually does with any other component, no matter how well-designed. And mind you, this was with a preamp -- no big current demands, and the stock cord was a decent one of 'sufficient' guage. (Ultimately, after living this way for months trying various cords, I did get some compliant footers to place under the preamp's own feet to help raise it up more, and a right-angle IEC adapter, so now it rides somewhat tall in the saddle but determinedly right-side up.)
One other thing: Last I read anything about it, Halcro, whose proprietary UPFC (Universal Power Factor Corrected) power supply is supposed to be the core technology of their ultra-low distortion amps, and who are probably one of the most engineering-driven companies in the business, had taken the unusual step of supplying an entry-level aftermarket power cord from Shunyata as standard equipment instead of a typical stock cord -- but with the proviso that even this cord, which retailed for around $150 I believe, was still to be considered as just a 'starter' cord, that should be further upgraded for maximum performance. Try telling Halcro this means their signature power supply isn't properly designed. |
Hi Al, if there was any sonic difference between having the preamp right-side-up and upside-down, I was never aware of it. (As best I remember, I tried listening for such when I first turned it over, but not with the expectation of hearing much if anything different.) I did, however, eventually change the power cord again, from the model I had chosen over the stock cord at the time I reinstalled it right-side-up, to another model I use today throughout my system, and those comparisons were carried out in normal orientation using the adapter. (I should note that some other aspects of my system had also changed during that time span, and still more since.)
As a postscript, I also remember talking again to the ML dealer and mentioning my findings. I thought I was enlightening him, based on what he'd told me, but his reaction was that he wasn't surprised, that of course if you upgrade the power cord on any component you're likely to hear some improvement in a revealing system no matter how good that component's power supply, but getting into that just wasn't practical for his ML preamp customers. (I'd also note that the No.38x series was designed prior to the time when aftermarket power cords came on the scene, and I do believe that ML's later preamp offerings dropped the obscure receptacle placement.)
PPS - Hi Richard, almost as soon as I'd posted I wished I hadn't taken the bait, so thanks! |
Dear Mr. Liguy: I would like to think a lot of things about myself (and a few of them may even be true!), but in the situation I had something of particular relevance to tell you, I'd go ahead and spell it out... |
Hi Liguy, never was any offense taken. I simply felt you should be more forthcoming rather than cryptic, and now you have been, so thank you. Yes, we'll agree to disagree -- I just find it impossible to believe that hundreds of high-end component manufacturers are all somehow derelict in the designs of their power supplies when, in your estimation, they could just as easily make them completely immune to whatever influences power cords have upon them.
Personally, I feel it's more likely the other was around: It's the ubiquitous generic stock power cords which were discovered to be suboptimally designed (as we might expect for something that's not even designed or made by the component manufacturers themselves and is treated as a giveaway 'freebie' and an afterthought). |
Hi Liguy: It sounds like you've done due listening diligence in revealing systems, so if you've never heard a difference, no one can argue with that. Just count yourself lucky I guess, even if I don't quite see how power supplies for missle-guidance systems (of which I would wonder whether they need have their output modulated over as wide a frequency and dynamic spectrum as is present in music?) ought necessarily to correlate with listening impressions in high-end audio systems.
I heard an immediate difference the very first time I tried an aftermarket power cord with an amp around 12 years ago, and even though my gear is considerably better now than it was then, I continue to hear improvements, if not as drastic. (To me, power cords are more sonically consequential than interconnects, at least on a par with speaker cables. In fact, I recently ordered two more of my preferred power cord from my dealer, at a combined cost of about $1k. While hardly the most expensive model going, it still freaks me out a bit to think that I 'have' to spend even this much on power cords. But I'm just not as satisfied with the sound of my system if I don't, and since my investment in the gear they power is many times that amount, it seems justified if the ultimate goal is maximum enjoyment of recorded music.)
A couple things of note I find interesting:
It's easy to understand why an aftermarket cord might sound better than a stock cord, regardless of power supply considerations. What I've never had explained to me, and indeed suspect no one may be able to adequately explain or predict, is the fact that even among various aftermarket cords, all with better shielding and of heavier gauge than stock cords, there remain meaningful differences in sonic character. I don't think differences in resistance are significant enough to be the answer, but although I do feel that complex impedance must surely be a big part of it, I somehow doubt that is the entire story either.
Another thing is the fact that, even if we take the position that power supplies in components aren't as impervious as they perhaps could be, a thorough power conditioning regimen ought to help alleviate this factor. Yet even there, I have no trouble hearing meaningful differences when substituting power cords feeding the power conditioners themselves (in my system, of both the active waveform/voltage-correction and passive balanced/isolation-transformer types), as well as between the power conditioners and the components they feed.
But of course neither of those considerations can be cause for question if you don't hear differences among aftermarket power cords in the first place. So I also find it interesting that on this thread, the two posters who are career EEs both think and find this topic to be more spurious than legit. A small sample size, but it makes me wonder which group, audiophiles who aren't EEs or EEs who are also audiophiles, may bring the more prejudicial biases to their listening impressions.
PS - So what does Nelson Pass have to say about power cords? |
Hi Corazon, I think audiophiles have already voted with their feet (and wallets) on this one -- we want the flexibility to play with different aftermarket cords on our own. It's like asking why most speakers don't come standard with 'matching' audiophile-approved speaker cables. Just give us an IEC inlet and a Belden cord we can stash in the closet, and don't charge us more for something we prefer to choose for ourselves. |
Just for grins last night, I substituted a couple of older aftermarket cords on my CD transport which I'd never compared on that particular component before (and hadn't compared period in quite some time, predating my system's current configuration). The results surprised me by actually conforming to Byron's and Al's 'extrinsic-dominant' point of view, in that the sonic differences I expected, based on past experiences using these two cords on various amps (where their sonic characteristics had largely transferred with the cords), didn't at all translate in this application, for either cord. In fact my impressions, as well as preference, were just about exactly inverted from my expectations. |
Doug: I can't help but notice you've name-dropped Wireworld cords a couple of times. One of the cords that I tried and got rid of the quickest was their Silver Electra III+ (or some such). Didn't dig it on anything, despite its maybe having been the most expensive cord to pass through here. OTOH, a local Agonner of my acquaintance once bought one of my preferred cords based on my liking it, but didn't feel the same and wound up selling it to me! So I think IMO & YMMV are clearly the watchwords here... |
Rwwear: And your point is? |
Snicker snicker yourself Rwwear -- yours is hands-down the most comical assertion posted here: "If you have compared dozens upon dozens of cables I submit your judgement will become convoluted" If you have compared no cables, I submit your judgement will be worth about the server space taken up by your, er, 'contributions' to this thread. Who is more of a "fanatic" -- someone who reaches their conclusions through repeated critical listening, or someone who has predetermined a conclusion without listening? |
|
I'm not getting suckered into a flame-war, and obviously won't respond to someone who has resorted to calling names. Anyone can click on the "This Thread" button under my or any other member's posts here and determine for themselves who contributed what to the discussion. My regards to those many who participated with diligence and in earnest. |
Me: 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...
Paperw8: 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. 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. FYI, I am a scientifically-oriented skeptic and don't believe in any of those sorts of 'supernatural phenomena' that you equate with aftermarket power cords. I also don't believe in 'magic' or 'black box' audio tweaks with no apparent or plausible basis or explanation for their operation. But I think you make a fundamental mistake in conflating stuff like 'magic' pucks, pebbles, clocks etc. with upgraded power cords, and that it would be disingenuous to imply that the vastly greater number of audiophiles (and reviewers and manufacturers) who employ aftermarket cords are in the same camp as the much smaller number who use the typically faddish and ephemeral 'magic' tweaks. Contrary to your statement, power cords are actually not at all controversial -- not within the audiophile community, nor outside of it (since most nonaudiophiles not only have no experience with them, they don't even know such a thing exists). The much wider and more enduring acceptance among audiophiles of the efficacy of power cords vs. 'magic' tweaks should really tell you something, becuase unlike your caricature, the majority of audiophiles are in fact reasonably intelligent, scientifically aware rationalists, who aren't alien abductees or conspiracy theorists and don't wear tin hats. It's true. |
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... |
Dave: That's a very interesting question you asked. I am quite frankly surprised by the answers.
(It would be too politically incorrect for me to explicitly say why -- although in another sense I guess I shouldn't be surprised at all, since I myself was once asked if I would be interested in reviewing for one of the publications mentioned above, by its editor. I wasn't, but also declined because I didn't feel that I was qualified: not as an audiophile, nor technically, nor as a writer.) |
Paperw8: As you apparently insist on missing my point I suppose there's not much I can do about it, but my original hypothetical to you wasn't about my opinions or perceptions, or even about me in particular. Go back and reread it: I asked how, in your psychological paradigm, you can account for the fact that audiophile behavior doesn't always, or even very often in my experience, conform to your purported stereotype (of being inextricably swayed by factors other than subjective sonic performance).
I'm left to pose the same Socratism that I did earlier in the thread: Namely, which approach -- yours (power cords can't 'work' for a [selective] variety of reasons *other* than actually auditioning some in revealing systems and coming up empty, therefore one can disregard that imperative), or mine (essentially the opposite, i.e., since I can reliably hear them 'work', then a totally explicated formulation for *precisely* why and how they work is distinctly secondary) -- is the more predetermined and possibly prejudicial?
I don't quibble with your subjugate points about value-for-money or questionable advertising practices. (I do however find unconvincing your critique regarding the hypothetical of high-end amplifier manufacturers and power cords.) And I can't even say that I don't sympathize with your position to some degree, since I myself likewise decline to audition the sorts of tweaks that strike *me* as being unrealistically 'magical' or baseless. There's only so much time and resources in life, and each of us has to choose for ourselves what to pursue and what not to.
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. But the happy user of some 'black box' tweak would say the same thing to me, so absent actually doing this test, on (and on!) we go... |
Allow me to dispense with diplomacy, Paperw8, long enough to note that you came on this thread proclaiming that: "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." But when challenged to respond to evidence of actual audiophile behavior not fitting these assertions, you retreated to: "you're effectively asking me to tell you what is going on in your head, and i can't do that." Does this contradiction just represent carelessness on your part, or does it show disingenuousness? Because your posts are rapidly becoming more purely argumentative as you go on here. I'm forced to conclude that I was mistaken to take you at face value in this debate: I think you're basically trolling. Little wonder that Agon has withheld some of your forum input in the past. |
