If you think cables, interconnects or other wiring make a difference, yes they do. This is a long article so I won't post it here but will a link describing how blind testing results in correct guessing that is no more accurate than random chance. Enjoy.
Nonsense. This isn’t a scientific forum. No one here owes you any "rigorous" explanation or any other kind of proof, although of course you’re free to conduct your own experiments and share the results. If the empirical evidence described by users here is insufficient for you, perhaps you are in the wrong place.
@cleeds
I think you misread me. I don’t require any explanation. Evidence described by user’s perceptions are perfectly adequate for me, with no further claims or explanations beyond that. If they like it, they like it. Period. But, if the manufacturer starts making technical claims, it is scorn worthy if they don’t back it up. If they’re not going to back it up, why make a technical claim in the first place? If it’s just how users perceive it, who cares how it works? Why bother with all the technical hocus pocus, or credentials of the person who designed it? If it works, it works!
I’m not curious enough about it to do any formal testing myself. I’ve listened, and since my listening skills aren’t good enough to be impressed, I’ll leave it to those who can perceive what the fuss is all about and are curious about how it actually works to do those kinds of experiments. This is my selfish side. I’m interested in things I can hear, things that matter to me. I hear a lot of problems with 2 speaker stereo. Even though it sounds quite good, it’s a hack job way of creating stereo sound. I’ve got much bigger fish to fry than cable improvements. The problem is, I have no reasonable idea how to fry them.
I would agree that there is a difference between the worst and the best. There are many physical properties to consider: Resistance; Capacitance; Inductance; Dielectric Absorption; RF rejection; connection integrity..
So yes, there are differences based on physical principles, and understood to physics. Are they important? Yes - but system dependent. If you seek transparency, then that's easy - decent connectors and quality cabling like Canare will set you up nicely, and be somewhat better than lamp cord.
But, for example, if you have an over-bright system, then a high resistance, high capacitance, high inductance, high DA cable may correct it to the point of listenability. Of course, you might do lots better with better components, but cables do make a difference. They are just the worst way to do it. IMO.
@steakster I can't believe you are calling out some of the biggest shysters in the industry as credible. I'm surprised you didn't include Ted Denney.
As for the rest, I do NOT, under ANY circumstances, believe that any of these companies do anything more with Quantum-whatever than misquote, bend and stretch truth, and use to deceive gullible audiophiles with meaningless word salad and pseudo-scientific nonsense. Some of the claims of these companies are so preposterous that it is astounding that ANYONE would believe them.
Many cable manufacturers are using the results, regarding the following mentioned science, as guidance in building cables for audio systems.
The only experimentation left for one to do, is try them in their own system/home and determine if they make a difference in their own listening experience.
Another rerun:
That the studies of QM and QED have been revolutionizing virtually every branch of Science, since the early 1900s, has been firmly established.
The evidence is all around us and ONLY the most obtuse, or: willfully ignorant, could possibly ignore it.
To deny the above exemplifies the Dunning-Kruger Effect*!
Were one needing a thesis submission, to a Psychology Undergraduate Office; the local Naysayer Church would make an excellent case study of the above*.
@steakster Remarkable...You think that small companies are manipulating quantum mechanics and electrodynamics in their little shops in the backyard, and scammers like Ted Denney, a high school dropout with no technical training is "Quantum Tunneling" his products, and I am the flat-earther.
Your ability to be taken in by the most ridiculous claims is the reason the scam audio jewelry industry exists.
@steakster Remarkable...You think that small companies are manipulating quantum mechanics and electrodynamics in their little shops in the backyard, and scammers like Ted Denney, a high school dropout with no technical training is "Quantum Tunneling" his products, and I am the flat-earther.
Your ability to be taken in by the most ridiculous claims is the reason the scam audio jewelry industry exists.
I don’t know the person mentioned above but this pseudo-science term "quantum-tunneling" cracks me up. His product(s) must belong to the category of "extreme snake oil".
Of course your ears can deceive you. Your mind can play tricks on
what you "want to hear" as opposed to what is really being played. This will largely depend on your age and hearing, but no question about your mind playing tricks on what you "want" to hear.
HOWEVER: he had a plethora of Scientists and Inventors (ie: Nikola Tesla, for a time) in the employ*, at Menlo Park.
*means: WORKING FOR A COMPANY, for the more obtuse reader.
Ted Denney owns a COMPANY, that manufactures some excellent and efficacious products. He's been offering an unconditional, money-back trial period, to purchasers, since the 1980s (don't like it = don't buy it), that makes one's listening experiment (as previously mentioned), fairly painless.
Thanks, roadcykler for reapproaching such a topic in this Forum...
Having retired yesterday at age 78 (not great with money, enough but not large ~~) I'm going to up the ante a little and address tweaks, upgrades and general betterment over a journey of 55+ years, attempting to stay focused and trim.
Growing up around tons of live music, more in a role of designated listener, I became hypercritical early on when non-musical sounds were introduced to my systems, such as surface noise and early gear distortions. My passion for great sound has NEVER waned and a restricted budget has forced lots of experimentation over the years.
Converting to digital in the mid-90's once it struck my emotions, the focus became better wire, isolation of the gear, both internally and externally. Tube buffers, and or, tube gear in tandem with digital playback were mandatory distortions for my flavor preferences.
I had befriended a fellow with a niche hi-end store in Lewiston, Maine, who was pushing the envelope with modifications of gear, wire experiments and extreme isolation of gear, including Marigo Lab products. This is dated yet no less of value today: The Audiophile Voice | MARIGO AUDIO LAB
I suspect the expectations can be wildly different for us in improving our systems. And, yes, there is often a "honeymoon period" of excitement that can fade over time, causing us to lose confidence in taking risks. In my case, yes, there were mistakes made. However, my great passion found a fix and the process of bettering my systems has never waned.
Here, I want to repeat that there was not a lot of money. A $2,300 active solid-state preamp in the mid-1980's was my largest investment. There is little I would not try in improving my sound. Tonality... sounds = real ...has always been primary, followed closely by all the audiophile stuff...full range full body impact in 2 channel audio.
Back to expectations. I have a friend who grew up with his dad's uber Infinity RS loudspeaker system. He cares, has a capable vinyl-based system, is happy with early Blue Jeans cables, well made and do the job. He simply is not interested in what he considers "minor improvements." I suspect there are many gradations of this type of preference. In my case, I never want to be "finished," always pressing forward as knowledge and budget allows.
Room tuning and the u-BACCH Plug-in crosstalk cancellation have been huge gains in the last couple of years in a tough cube of a studio. The benefits of professionally applied DSP vastly outweigh any negatives in my experience. My recommend to those with similar passion is to be bold, self-forgiving and experiment. As I told a longtime friend this morning who is struggling with a download issue, "...it IS worth the struggle...but never fun to HAVE to muck through it." ONWARDS!
My opinion, from my experience, everything in the signal path from the preamp connectors to the speaker wire make a significant difference. From my experience the 100% oxygen-free copper connectors give better overall bandwidth in sound. Most notably transparency, detail, bass clairiy punch, low end. I chose " The worlds best cables" because the reviews were good, and I could afford them. I used interex 10 gage OFC on speakers. Works for me. The Worlds best cables made a significant difference from $20 inter-connects. . Most likely, installing a $1000 or more in interconnects or speaker cables would not be worth it on a $3000 integrated or separate PA Pre amp. ( to each his own) I think in a high end system that brings out every detail, it would. Thats what the big bucks are for. I am sure there would be a difference, but I doubt $1000 worth in sound on a cheaper mid fi wont be worth it. The WBC cables made my system brighter, I had to turn down the mid and tweeter! If your system does not have adjustable mids and highs, you might end up with too bright of a result and not be happy with it. When I visited my local brick and mortar, the owner first asked if my speakers were bright in mids and highs. I am older and need that. He suggested a Hegel or Primaluna system because they are work well with crisp, bright speaker components. So changing cables on an already bright electronics and speakers might not work if the cables enhance that. If I was going to drop a bunch of cash on cables with a high end system, I suggest talking to a pro at a brick and mortar business that carries your system because they will be able to guide you right, and, probably let you try a few different ones. They can be a real benefit figuring things out. What you like in sound is whats important and they can help you get the best sound you can afford.
@kevn Yes, that’s a certainty. Very few (none maybe) beginning audiophiles are capable of discerning acoustical properties which coincide with music reproduction at a high level unless hearing a audio system that can accomplish that. Being a musician does not qualify either.
After hearing 1000s of systems at shows, audio salons and friends homes, I am able to compare them with live acoustical music and determine what I like. Audiophiles have differences in music preferences as well as their hearing attributes/character so different strokes for different folks. I also have a great advantage over beginners having recorded in studios, performed and engineered recordings (simple) in major orchestral venues and appraised/inspected most recording studios in So. Cal.
I’m still not an expert though. Time/amplitude-dynamics/tonality-overtones/etc. are immensely more complex in music than photography is (with it’s more easily measured parameters). I’ve taken about 100,000+ photos during my worklife and began with the lowly Argus C-3 rangefinder at 10 years old (beat my parents who just pointed and shot with maybe 2 photos out of a roll being okay-my exposures were fabulous, too bad audio is so much more complex).
@fleschler - and the greatest difficulty is attempting to gauge the difference of sound quality of a specific piece of equipment in a listening space that isn’t ours…. I’ve found it’s next to impossible to do that away from the specific familiarity of our own personal listening spaces - it’s the ultimate gift of complexity in this crazy hobby of ours 🤦🏻♀️😂
I’m still surprised that people cannot hear differences in cables. For me, nothing could be easier, and a few of my non-audiophile friends I’ve given cables to, hear it, and they can even identify what they hear cogently.
But then, my friends were either conductors, play acoustic instruments or it was their major/minor in college, so they KNOW when a cable is correctly reproducing triple-tonguing, or dotted quarter notes. And given I set up their system, and eliminated noise by arranging cables carefully (which means, NOT on top of each other, especially a power cord touching a signal interconnect (speaker cable or interconnect) and an excellent anti-vibration platform (I have Critical Mass Center Stage footers). I think too many systems lack the resolution to hear this, but I still think it is more the noise that people induce by stacking components or, as I’ve already said, cables touching each other.
A good cable should make it clear that one is hearing a Stradivarius, not a Guarneri or an Amati. It would be helpful for people to at least have a passing acquaintance with live music - and I don’t mean the amplified kind. And the number of people familiar with live music seems pretty dismal to me. So, it is not a surprise that there is so much dismissiveness among the people coming into the High End in the past 20 years over things like cable.
Speaking of being able to hear the difference between violins, apparently not all accomplished violin players can tell them apart even when they’re actually playing them, and even if they were pretty sure that they could. Maybe the welding goggles changed the tone.
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.
