"My priority has been to use components in such a way as to convey the signal as it was recorded."
How? In order to do that, you would need a reference. Otherwise, how do you know if you are going in the right direction? |
"10-09-14: Sabai
Zd542,
Are you referring to the size of the cables or the sound?"
The size. |
Hi Onhwy61,
The ears are an integral part of this process, not our nose, eyes or fingertips. As I did earlier reference the obvious brain processing of information as you point out. I guess what I don't understand is why some people try to deny or diminished the stark reality of things sometimes. To appreciate music requires listening and in order to listen we need our ears.If you or I were unfortunately deaf would we be able to hear and enjoy the music we love? What would substitute for our non functioning hearing?
Thanks,
Charles, |
Gosh this is so cool, our brain interprets sound waves and you can tell what a system sounds like by seeing a list of components? Can we tell what a system sounds like looking at a picture? That would be cool. :-) |
The talk about cables being tone controls, series or not, begs the question, why do cables have to be tone controls? If a cable has a tone, then it is adding distortion to the signal. A perfect cable would have no tone. Why not try to move toward that to get the maximum detail and fidelity from the source?
Isn't that why the industry moved away from tone controls in the first place, in order to get rid of distortion? |
I agree that trust your ears can be misleading. We don't actually listen to music. Our ears (and to a far lesser extent, our bodies) pick up changes in air pressure which our brain then interprets as sound. The brain then processes certain sounds as music. Further processing in the brain categorizes the music into familiar archtypes and patterns. The key is that past experiences allows the brain to create internal models of "music" and the process of listening to music is comparing incoming sounds to these existing mental images of music. Effectively your brain is creating the music based upon external stimuli. As with nearly any human ability there's a variability within a population group and some people are better able to form mental models of music. Some people can instantly say whether it's Ben Webster or Coleman Hawkins, and others cannot. Some people can "hear" it's English horn and not an oboe.
What does this have to do with being an audiophile? Your system is a reflection of your mental model of what music should sound like. If you have a "good" mental model and further have the ability to assemble and setup an electronic system in your home that is close to your mental model, then other people of similar ability will say your system sounds good.
Trust your ears. Well, some people can trust their ears, but others should be working harder at developing better mental models of what they are hearing. On an internet forum such as this, it's near impossible to tell in which group a poster resides. This is particularly so when they don't list their system components. |
Audiolabyrinth,
You're right. One size does not fit all. What works for one person may not work for another. We have to discover through trial and error what works and what does not work in our systems. Suggestions from others may produce little gold nuggets -- or little brown turds. Ultimately, your have to rely on your own experience and your own ears. |
Sabai, I have abandoned the idea many years ago of what I call chaseing the cables by the tail syndrome, I have found running a full loom of a brand results to better sound for me, you may have different impressions, we all do in this hobby, if you believe that what you do, running cables in series is rare, well then, I got you beat, It has took me many years to come to my way of building, I use my cables as the reference, if a componet sounds forward on my cables, that componet is gone, if a componet does any thing I do not like with sound, that componet is gone, there are many ways to skin a cat here, my idea of building is against the masses entirely!, I have excellent results doing what I do here, cheers. |
Psag, With all due respect your comment doesn't make sense(unless I misunderstand you).The entire point of having an audio system is to listen to music. We listen by using our ears(and brain processing). If we don't or won't rely on our ears what is the alternative? When you play music in your home how are you judging it's sound quality or determine if you enjoy it without listening? How are ears removed from the act of "listening" to music ? I just don't see your rationale.
Thanks,
Charles, |
Psag,
You have stated "People in audio often say 'trust your ears', as if that's the end of any and all arguments. I don't believe that to be the case."
Audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear". Rene Descartes said "cogito ergo sum" -- "I think therefore I am". In audio this would be the equivalent of "I think therefore I hear". I do not feel that anything should or can replace a good set of ears. |
Psag,
I forgot to comment on your other statements.
You stated that "People in audio often say 'trust your ears', as if that's the end of any and all arguments. I don't believe that to be the case."
The word audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear." It seems to be putting things backwards to state that your cannot trust your ears when it comes to matters that ultimately concern nothing more than our hearing -- unless, of course, one's hearing is impaired.
And you stated that "My priority has been to use components in such a way as to convey the signal as it was recorded." In such a way? What way is that, exactly? Are you presuming that your way of using components, whatever that may be, is the only valid way of using components to "convey the signal as it was recorded"?
The signal is transduced into sound. How do you know what combination of elements will faithfully transduce the sound in all possible audio systems? Cables are just another element in the chain of electronic components that contribute to making the signal audible. Would you say an audiophile should not use a pre-amp -- and all the cables attached to it -- because it makes the signal path longer and therefore must introduce distortion into the signal and must therefore distort the sound?
And how about the addition of a power conditioner with filters? All power conditioners do not produce identical sound. One may fairly assume that distortion is one of the elements being produced by some of the power conditioners on the market. Are we to eschew the notion of using a power conditioner -- and all of the cables attached to it -- because some power conditions produce unacceptable distortion? Is the length of the signal path the ultimate deciding factor or is the sound the deciding factor -- or none of the above?
You started your discussion on this topic with a conclusion based on some sort of theory (that is not completely clear to me) that displaces the importance of the ears in an area where hearing is actually the most important thing. Your comments here reminded me of a post I read recently on a PS Audio forum:
"I do love the "I don't care what it sounds like, if it doesn't measure great it's crap. If it measures great then I have to buy it even if it sounds like crap because if it measures great it must be great." "Audiophiles"."
In your case it does not seem to be a matter of not measuring great. It seems to be a matter of not measuring up to some sort of theory -- some sort of mental measurement. In both cases the mind short-circuits the ears. I do not allow any mental intervention between the music and my ears. I let my ears make the audio decisions. After all, audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear". |
People in audio often say 'trust your ears', as if that's the end of any and all arguments. I don't believe that to be the case. My priority has been to use components in such a way as to convey the signal as it was recorded. Once a cable affects the signal in a particular way, the use of a second cable in series will only take it further from the truth. A cable in series can't add anything to the signal, other than distortion. |
Zd542,
Are you referring to the size of the cables or the sound? |
"10-07-14: Psag
I have had a similar recent experience with the latest and greatest Shunyata power cord. Thin."
The more expensive ones are really fat. |
|
According to Psag, it looks like I am not the only one with the same perception -- thin-sounding Shunyata cables.
Psag,
Running cables in series is no more about tone controls than running single cabling is, IMO. You expect tone with a single cable, do you not? If the tone is thin, if the harmonics are not there with a single cable, then what do you do? You join the cable bandwagon and buy and sell and buy and sell in the hopes of reaching your sonic goals.
I do not see the problem in trying to find a way to restore harmonics by using cables in series. The problem is a theoretical one. The problem is not an actual one if the ears say yeah. If the ears say yeah then what's the problem? You say "... your ears will eventually tell you that [this is not so]." Really. So, what you are saying is that I cannot trust my ears -- and that you know the answer about my system without ever having heard it!
You say " I would not run cables in series, ever. Its [sic] a mistake." Well, this is an interesting statement. How do you know it's a mistake if you have never tried it? Does dogma take the place of the ears in audio? It's like people who nay-say various tweaks and accessories but have never tried them. They know in advance the answer. Really? In which case the mind closes the ears before they have a chance to listen. This is not the way I built my system.
Onhwy61,
I don't think that listing my components will be any help at all. How can it be? You cannot taste the food by reading the menu. If I tell you that I have Raidho C1.1 speakers, a Shunyata Triton power conditioner, etc. what will you possibly learn from that about what my system sounds like with cables in series? |
Sabai, it might help the discussion if you listed your system and provided some pics. |
The last time we had this discussion, Sabai was running everything in a series. IC, SC, PC and Power conditioners. Anything else now?
Sabai, as long as you're happy with the results, go for it.
|
I have had a similar recent experience with the latest and greatest Shunyata power cord. Thin.
For the record, I would not run cables in series, ever. Cables are not tone controls. They are designed to present unaltered signal to the downstream component. Its a mistake, and eventually your ears will tell you that. |
Sabai, like I said, we're not going to agree on this. I'm glad your method works for you; that's what we're after, a satisfying experience. :) |
Douglas_schroeder,
Sorry, your logic is completely off track. You have not "tried this" in my system using the specific Furutech and Shunyata configuration that I use. You speak from "experience" but your experience is limited to the cables that you used in your system. "Trying this" -- series cabling -- in your system, and finding "it" does not work, is meaningless because I am not talking about your system. I am taking about what works in my system.
You have missed the point completely. The point is what works in my system, not what does not work in your system. You have no idea about what works in my system. So, dismissing what I have done by trying series cabling in your system is irrelevant because it does not duplicate my system and my experiment.
The important thing is not that "this" did not work in your system. Because your "this" is not the same "this" that works in my system. The important thing is that "this" works very well in my system. "This" may be "counter-productive" in your system. But "this" is not "counter-productive" in mine. You are talking apples and oranges. For you to take your experience and generalize it is as false as if I were to generalize my experience.
I have neither used the words "holy grail" nor have I implied anywhere that I am suggesting a "holy grail" for others. If you read my OP carefully I have simply asked if others have experienced thin sound with Shunyata cables. And I have let people know what works in my system to overcome the problem.
You have already come to a conclusion as to what is "not possible" -- and therefore what is possible. For you, improving SQ is not possible with series cabling. Well, you can talk about your own system here with authority. I would not presume to do so. But to talk about others' systems with equal authority is a whole other matter. You do not have the authority to do so, IMO. Your experience is limited to your system and to your experiment.
The problem is that you have generalized your conclusion based on your experience. Well, the conclusion you have reached may be valid for your system. But once you start to assume that what is true for your system is therefore true for all systems, you tread on ground you have no experience with.
For you, the theory calls the shots. Your theory tells you what is possible and what is not possible. For me, the ears call the shots. They tell me what is possible and what is not possible. Since you have not heard my system you have no actual basis for making judgments about what is possible and what is not possible with my system.
You only have iron-clad, indisputable theories that may, in fact, not be so iron-clad or so indisputable. But you would have to hear my system to find that out. Obviously. But you already know this is not necessary -- and that you would be able to improve the SQ of my system without ever having heard it. I find this quite amazing.
Series cabling is an art. It is like choosing the right component, but even more complicated because it is necessary to test dozens of cables in various configurations. How you can be convinced that you could improve the cabling and SQ in my system without knowing about this from first-hand experience is as presumptuous as my saying that I know how I could improve the cabling and SQ in your system without first-hand experience. Based only on theories and accepted "wisdom".
You may feel you have "exceptional" cables but to presume they would do anything for the SQ in my system is to be completely off track. It is beyond me how anyone can make cable assumptions and pre-decisions about another person's system with no experience at all with the other person's system.
I find it interesting that you already know that you would be able to make the sound of my system more to "your liking" -- without ever having heard my system in the first place to see if it is to your liking before the making the changes you have already decided it needs! You know beforehand that there "must" be "degradation" and "disadvantage" happening because your theory tells you so -- not your ears, but your theory. |
Sorry, Sabai, you are wrong in believing that I have not tried this. When you first posted your "series" idea a while back I tried it; I believe I used three brands of balanced cables in the experiment in different configurations. I found it to have marginal benefit, and I could get better results by continuing to mix a shorter run (no series) of cables than by adding unnecessary ones. In fact, the degradation of the sound was pronounced enough universally that I abandoned the method entirely.
Therefore, I do speak from experience, and my experience says it is counter-productive to add unnecessary cables. While you can adjust the tonality, you will be hurting the precision/clarity. That is my position, and I'm not interested in arguing, if cordially, about it. You are convinced you have a "holy grail" type solution, and after trying it I disagree. :)
BTW, I don't have to hear your system to reach my conclusion, just as you have not heard my system and cannot declare my findings invalid. So, people will simply have to 1. draw conclusions based on our disparate findings, and or, 2. try it.
If I were to hear it I would likely very much enjoy the sound of your system, especially since you have worked so hard to tune it. However, I am also confident that given the opportunity I would be able to improve the sound, that is, make it more to my liking, by being able to remove some of the "serial" cabling and mix in as I wished a more streamlined set of cables. Or, more likely, I would replace the mix of cables with an entire set of cables I feel are exceptional.
I simply do not agree with you when you say the system is at, "no disadvantage whatsoever." From my experience (not simply theory) that is not possible when adding cables which are unnecessary to the system. You may prefer the result, but I have experience which leads me to conclude there is degradation happening in your system as a consequence.
Based on my experiments a person may be able to adjust a sound to address a problem using serial cables, but it introduces a different set of problems unnecessarily when attempting to attain a more SOTA-like sound. |
|
Douglas_schroeder,
If you could hear my system you would change your mind. There is no loss at all of precision or information -- contrary to accepted audio "wisdom". The fact is that my system is at no "disadvantage" whatsoever. On the contrary, it has gained an advantage -- better SQ.
You are speaking from the point of view of audio theory -- not from the point of view of someone who is actually listening to my system. You have never heard my system. The ears tell the story -- not the theory. It is not a matter of changing my mind. This has nothing to do with the mind. It is all about the ears. My ears have been tested to hear 16,000 Hertz. Neither my system nor my ears are "disadvantaged". |
Sabai, I recall you working with the "series" concept a while ago, and I sincerely applaud your creativity and persistence. However, I feel you are disadvantaging yourself with this method. For every change achieved by adding an unnecessary interconnect to the chain, and an unnecessary connection, you are also losing information - you are gaining tonal variety at the expense of precision.
My perspective is that whatever goal could be achieved with the series method could be achieved better by selecting proper cables not in series, but if desired by mixing them. If you feel a particular cable sounds thin, then you place yourself at a disadvantage in using it at all. You are merely degrading the end result in order to adjust the thinness. That is not something I would recommend for the reasons I have stated.
I'm not under the impression that I will change your mind in this matter, but I'm sharing my perspective based on use of cables. |
Hi Zd542 and Guidocorona,
The tonality/harmonics are not what I like to hear. I would call the sound thin. There is definitely something lacking. Maybe it's just my system.
I have been using DIY Furutech PCs, ICs and digital cables in my system, on and off -- not in series. But I have experimented with series cabling in the past. Since the Furutech wire is OCC cryo-ed copper, just like Shunyata cables, I figured the synergy might be good. So, I tried the Shunyata digital and IC cables in series with my Furutechs. Wow! Stunning. So, I tried my PCs with the Shunyatas. Equally stunning.
How does this work? Since I run AES/XLR it's easy. Just piggy-back the cables. With PCs I use a burn-in adapter. Which cable goes downstream? Ah, there's the rub. It depends on which sounds better. This part is all trial and error. |
Hi Sabai, I have never observed Shunyata products of any series sounding thin. Could you specify what wires in what exact context? ... And what chaining configuration addresses the perceived issue in your view ?
G. |
"I run cables in series to solve the problem and the results are stunning"
That's very interesting, but I'm not sure I fully understand that you are talking about. Can you go into a bit more detail as to what you are doing? |
