I am sick of cables

IMO it costs bucks to get good neutral transparent sounding cables made with quality materials and good construction. Neutral cables are not cheap, but the better a cable is, the more it gets out of the way by causing less distortion, kind of like the focus on a camera lense. If your equipment sounds bright, forward, lean, etc... you might prefer some of the cheaper-made cables as filters to cover up or offset some annoying sound characteristics. If you want to transfer a quality signal between your nice sounding equipment and speakers with minimal distortion then pony up and buy good used cables but stay within your budget. Many of the ultra-expensive cables get out of the way the best with the least amount of distortion, but who wants to spend 10 times more for a 10% improvement?

To Audphile1

Have a look at my system...:)

I realy enjoy the conversation.

But lets not take it to the other side of things. Of course a very good cable can be really really expensive. But that is not the case most of the time...;)

your system page lists Argento Serenity. Are those the cables you consider inexpensive?

This is a pretty active thread.

Apparently a lot of people are really not all that sick of talking about cables.

Viva la Audiogon!

Argyro

Seriously do you consider the cables/interconnects you're using inexpensive ??
Perhaps in comparison to the rest of your system you could draw that conclusion ..but that's a stretch imo

I was wondering why studios that record the music we are listening are not using super expensive cables...

I believe recording studios use cables that are far cheaper in comparison to what you have right now.

Guys if you read my words better you will see that I never said cheaper cables are better. I said the most expensive cable is not always the best.

Yes It is inexpensive when I have compared it with purist audio 20th century i/c, valhalla i/c, indra i/c but I chose the Argento. I actually owned these cables except the Indra.

Also I replaced the Virtual Dynamics Revelation speaker cables with a new DIY cable from Greece, because...it was better. (In my system always). Keep your eyes and ears open.

Regards,

Michael

Personally, what threw me off, is that you mentioned AZ Silver Ref MkII as one of the expensive cables.

You current interconnects retail for several times more than the AZs do.

And isn't DIY means Do It Yourself? How can a set of cables that you bought be called DIY?

Someone who praises a several thousand dollar interconnect says he's sick of cables?

I am keeping my eyes and ears open...which proved to be a total waste of time when it comes to listening to what you got to say.

Ok dude, happy listening.

...And with their irons holstered the two strangers rode separate ways as the sun set like a sliced cantalope on the horizon. Grown men bowed their heads and removed their hats as each of the gunslingers passed, one heading east, the other towards the sun. And so another chapter ended, only to spawn the beginning of yet another, and another. These are the stories that young boys would read by flashlight under their sheets decades later. These are the times when men were men, and a wire was not just a wire, it was a way of life. Fortunes were made and lost. Blood was shed and some men died leaving their wives and children with only the wires they fought for so fearlessly. I was there my friends, there when legends were made. I would be able to tell my grandchildren, if I actually had any, that I was there when those life-affirming words of wisdom were uttered;"...a man incapable of discerning a $2000 wire from a $3000 wire must be either deaf or seriously hearing impaired." Those are words not just to build a system on, but words to live by and to teach your children lest they never be forgotten.

ROTFL.

-- Al :)

LOL Jax2. What story/movie was that from?

Argyro, you have every reason to be absolutely fed up with this high price crap and voodoo of the month club approach to marketing cables. I've had upwards of $30K rigs and everything else in-between with tons of different equipment both tube and SS. Recently I put together the most cost effective system I could that would still convey the essence of my favorite music. Well, I traded my fancy cables for a pair of Wilson Sophias...a great start right! Then I went with my favorite integrated, the Krell 400xi (don't even bother with the new S300i). Next I needed the best CDP I could find for around $2K. I bought a used BAT VK D5 24bit (msrp $6000)...after a few days I realized just how dated and wrong sounding this player was. Sold it, and then I came across an advert for the newest Sony SCD XA5400ES for under $1500...well, after checking out the specs and securing a good deal, I figured what the heck, I'll bite! Next, I wanted to get as close to the sound of some of my best systems wt previously overpriced cables. I remembered trying a pair of Monster Cable Z200i IC's (soon to be discontinued for sounding too good) and thinking they sounded better then my MIT Oracle V2.2 IC's. I also remembered a friend of mine telling me that the Monster Cable M2.2s speaker cables were designed as well or better than the Transparent Ultra/Reference spkr cables...they also have the same networks in them! I bought both of the Monster products, hooked up my system and immediately heard music being made that was so far beyond anything I had heard before that I just smiled and spent the whole day digging through my CD collection for epipheny after epipheny:) I owned the Transparent's before...the Monster M2.2's and Z200i combo was better and lest you think I'm easy to please, I've been know to dump $15K components right after I bought them if they did not deliver on the promise of the reviewers and manufacturers. Expensive anything is not necessary if you know what you are after...it just takes wise purchases and alot of experimentation.

I'm just polishing up the re-write. Eastwood has an option on it and we're in negotitions for a final number. Working title is currently "The Autogonian".

Dave_B - let me get it straight: You've never heard your new system with your "fancy" cables because you traded them at the very start - yet you claim that Monster cables are better? Am I missing something?

Many moons ago, when I lived high above the waters of Biscayne Bay in the Kingdom of Autogonia, I chanced upon a beautiful used Goldmund RCA coax cabilia which I purchased for the princely sum of $1500. The Goldmund was the single most expensive component in my stereo by moonlight system.

One sorry day, my 4 year old nephew destroyed my beloved Goldmund with his teeth becuase he thought he was killing a snake. I was heartbroken and vowed never again to buy an expensive cable.

And so, with a heavy heart, he rode north towards the border.

Kijanki, I had the cables available for a couple of weeks after the setup, so I had time to decide whether I would cash them in or look elsewhere. Synergy can be a large part of any system, and tastes vary, but something clicked big time with the Monster cables mentioned. One caveat, I held on to my pricey PC's...MIT Oracle AC 2 for the Krell and a Transparent MM Reference for the Sony. Providing pure power is not something you can skimp on I'm afraid:) By the way, I still have some MIT Oracle V1.1 IC's around for comparison as well as the Cable Co. Library of cables which I have used to decide on cables...the only way to know is to have something in your own system for an extended time period.

Dave_b - I just wasn't sure if you compared them A-B in the same system. Like with any product there are some very good bargains but there is a correlation (unfortunately exponential) between price and quality (transparency, clarity etc). I don't have extended experience with cables but I tend to agree with Bradleyc that people often use cheap cables to fix certain system deficiencies (calling it synergy) while neutral transparent cables that "disappear" are more expensive. Cables are non-perishable (don't wear out or age) and therefore deserve a little more investment. As it is right now in my system it would make sense to sell IC (AZ Absolute) and get better speakers - but I will buy them eventually anyway.

How can one tell when a cable "disappears"?

Does that mean if I substitute another cable and the sound is the same, that they both disappear? That would seem to make sense if "disappear" means do nothing to change the sound.

But I was under the impression that different high end cables sound different as well. Does that mean that they might not always disappear either?

Personally, I have never heard two ICs that sound the same on my system, so I have to believe that none of them truly disappear.

It is easier and more practical to determine the effect a particular IC has in a particular system versus another one, like any other system component. I feel more able to do this and determine the right "synergy" that sounds best to me than I would to be able to determine that a particular cable "disappears".

A system is the sum of its parts (including room and the ears listening) anyway, so what difference does it make if something does dissapear or not? THe rest of the system is not going to. SO in the end I do believe it is the overall "synergy" that counts.

Its like making soup. The right combo of ingredients works to make good soup. A bad combo will not work as well. Even so, some may still like the soup and others not.

Mapman -- Excellent thoughtful post.

Some of you may be interested in the following, written by the late distinguished speaker designer and manufacturer John Dunlavy.

http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html

Towards the end of this post, he describes controlled experiments he performed in which audiophiles visiting his studio were asked to compare the sound of various cables to zip cord. Invariably "the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best - even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time."

Regards,
-- Al

I owmed a pair of Dunlavy SC-V speakers (my first high end speakers). To be fair, I think Mr. Dunlavy's experiment was padded, given that the only variable was the individuals own psychology and bias. Everything makes a difference and all of it has a worth best determined by it's owner:)

In regard to people hearing differences in a false double blind test.

There is no doubt the placebo effect affects some people some of the time. However, in the long term, those taking the placebo may suffer needlessly, just as the guy listening to the inferior cable will. Another reason double blind testing doesn't work in audio is, what constitutes an objectively agreed upon sonic preference amongst the experimental group. It is impossible to ojectively quantify changes to a subjectively defined model. We only have our sonic preferences to judge by, the sound of live music is not reproducable on audio systems to this point. Until it is, we cannote have an objective experimental group (audio system).

I've never understood the objective argument amongst audiophiles, empirical evidence, even if subjective and anecdotal, is much more valuable to me. If someone prefers cable A to cable B, who am I to say he doesn't hear cable A as preferable. Cable A may be more or less expensive, either way, it doesn't involve me, why should I care.

Objectivity and/or measurements only tell some of the story, often, we don't even know how measurements correlate to certain sonic attributes.

In the end, I guess it shouldn't matter to us whether someone prefers ultra expensive or inexpensive cables, whatever floats their boat makes them happy, that should be enough.

Bravo Sns!!

Al

This kind of thing has been demonstrated many times. One of the most lauded systems on Audiogon suffered a similar fate. Sighted the "special" cable sounded best without doubt but unsighted it was not possible to tell when the "special" cable was in the loop.

I've never understood the objective argument amongst audiophiles, empirical evidence, even if subjective and anecdotal, is much more valuable to me. If someone prefers cable A to cable B, who am I to say he doesn't hear cable A as preferable. Cable A may be more or less expensive, either way, it doesn't involve me, why should I care.

You'd better think twice about that choice and start care'in a whole bunch, cause those who don't believe will burn in audiophile hell for all eternity, while being forced to listen to Yanni on an optional 8-track from a '74 Gremlin in an eternal loop through damaged speakers.

Almarg - I read article. The problem is that people often try to find sanity in the laws of physics. According to them only inductance and capacitance play part while most of people can hear difference between silver and copper cables. I don't know how power cable affect the sound but I don't question that they do.

I had once very thick stranded cheap speaker cables. I had at this time amp with tone controls. I had to set treble to more than +3dB to get balanced sound. I replaced cable with Audioquest Indigo and balance dramatically changed - too much of "treble" and not enough of midrange. It was very pronounced and I could easily tell the difference. Take two inexpensive Audioquest interconnects Ruby and King Cobra. First has absolutely no bass control while the second gives more bass extension and very good control. Can you explain it according to laws of physics?
Please don't even bring laws of physics into audio forum - as far as I know we cannot be even sure how electric current flows (and I'm in electronics for over 30 years).
Do you believe that there is no difference, as article suggest, between lamp cord and best cables? Do you have lamp cord in your systems?

As for "disappearance" of the cable - it might be intuitive and difficult to describe term but it seems to me that cable that has no particular sonic characteristic will sound the same being 0.5m or 5m (with some loss of clarity). Maybe I'm thinking of "average" sound or "clarity/transparency" - I don't know.

Directionality of the cable, so laughed at in the article, is described by Audioquest as an effect of how cable is drawn (crystal formation) but I think it has more to do with the fact that unbalanced IC has shield grounded on one side only. This side in my opinion (and Audioquest's) should be receiving end. Talking about Audioquest - a lot of people laughed at their high voltage dielectric polarization (battery attached to cable) calling this complete nonsense while people who review them could exactly tell and describe difference when battery was connected and disconnected. I tend to trust manufacturers, not suspecting them of evil conspiracy, but at the end I trust my ears.

Kijanki -- You raise some good points, and also some that I see somewhat differently. I too, by the way, have been an audiophile and in electronics (not related to audio) for around 30 years.

This is how I see it:

-- You have a good point about cable "disappearance" correlating with a short cable sounding the same as a longer cable of the same type. But I would expect that very few people assess cable differences that way.

-- I believe there are many more factors involved, both known and unknown, than inductance and capacitance. Just to cite one example, which I mentioned in another recent thread, what is called "spectral contamination" caused by intermodulation effects resulting from ultrasonic and rf interference coupling. See http://wiring.svconline.com/ar/avinstall_designer_cables_critical/index.htm

-- Certainly a cable that has a shield grounded at only one end can be expected to be directional. I made the very same point in the current thread about fuse polarity. I assume, btw, that you are referring to single-ended interconnect cables that have both an inner shield and an outer shield, with the outer shield being the one grounded at only one end. If there were only one shield, as might be the case in an inexpensive cable, there would be no (direct) signal return path if one end was not connected.

-- I believe that system synergy is important at all price levels, as Mapman stated well.

-- Partially as a consequence of that, I believe that while some degree of correlation obviously exists between cable price and cable performance, it is far from a perfect correlation (i.e., the correlation would be well below 1.0 if it could be expressed mathematically).

-- I tend to take manufacturer claims and literature with several large grains of salt. Partly because it stands to reason that it will be self-serving. But also due to the fact that as a person with a technical background I feel that much (though certainly not all) of the contents of technical "white papers" and other manufacturer literature, and the technical explanations that are offered to account for the claimed differences, often approach (or actually reach the point of) being utter nonsense. Examples that fall into this category, in my opinion, are articulation poles, golden ratios, and time alignment. I certainly don't mean to imply that the makers of those cables don't provide excellent products, that will provide good performance and value to many users, just that the explanations are speculative at best, and utter nonsense at worst. And as a potential customer, I find that sort of thing to be a turn-off.

-- I think it is pretty well established that even in the case of the most sincere, open-minded, and perceptive listener there will be a correlation between what is heard and what the listener is expecting to hear. One reason for that may be increased concentration being brought into play when the cable that is expected to be better is being listened to.

-- Another factor that probably misleads many listeners as they assess cables or other components over time is failure to recognize and control extraneous variables.

-- While I don't believe in "evil conspiracies," I do believe that manufacturers take advantage of our natural expectation that more expensive = better, in combination with the fact that cable differences are elusive, system dependent, and to a large degree unexplainable by conventional science, to hype unnecessarily expensive product with bad science.

Regards,
-- Al

Al - I do agree that correlation is far from being 1 but still exist. Article on the other hand claims that people can very seldom tell the difference between any cables.

I know that this is not true and I won't applaud articles like that one.

Manufacturers are not lying to us, I'd like to believe, but just either exaggerate (called marketing) or pursue particular construction that will give them advantage over competition.

At certain quality of cables I won't be able to tell the difference but people with better systems and better hearing might. What right do I have to tell other people that they cannot possibly hear any difference because I don't. That is pretty much spirit of many posts here - "I bought Home Depot wire and it sounded to me as good as my Stealth Indra". Fine, but don't judge other people's choices. All is subjective. Even if at certain point it is only a placebo effect, as article claims, - why to spoil it to other people.

If there is any correlation between spects and sound, in case of the SS amplifiers, it's inverse one. There are some technical reasons why amp with 0.0001% THD won't sound as good as one with 0.1% THD but I would not even read most of specifications. Brand name is important to me and I don't see a reason to mistrust Jeff Rowland or Audioquest.

There is no honest or dishonest price and the hype of unnecessarily expensive product (with bad or good science) is called advertising and is part of the system we live in.

>> 02-12-09: Velo62
>> Maybe you should pursue a less stressful endeavor such
>> as tube rolling? ; )
>> Velo62 (System | Threads | Answers)

Velo62, I had a hearty laugh with this one!!
Written very tongue & cheek by you (& seems to have gone over their heads!). LOL!

Tube rolling is less stressful....but given the price increases for NOS....just wait.

Cable disappearance...is when the CD or a record no longer sounds as such...it's not live...but it's not reproduced either...but that can be said for all parts of the system.

Also one other reason i'm done with cables....it's funny how some manufacturers have their cables sonic quality measured by price....In fact nailed....so you think...there's not science involved....BS! I buy used or discounted heavily....I finally got wise.

A friend of mine, who is no audiophile, looked at this thread and hypothesized the following: interest in pseudo-problems, like getting an amplified current unmolested through ten feet of wire, is directly proportional to the impossibility of solving real problems--overpopulation, global warming, and getting a decent plate of food anywhere on the coast in the southern US. But no gd way that's true, no way!

Welcome back Jax2, we've missed you.

And "getting a decent plate of food" is supposed to be on the same level of importance as the two previous? If the comment is in jest, fine. If not, it's pathetic, and myopic. :)

bathos, not pathos

Stewie, lovely concise clarification. You never know, with society being inundated with the likes of the "Food Channel", who's overboard on eating. I find it shocking what some people spend on eating out. They could afford a nice system on a year's delicacies they shove into their mouth. They could also do something productive to aid the world - absolutely this also would apply to the obsessive audiophile who spends too much on gear without regard to society's/the world's ills.

Thanks Douglas--you're right, you never know, and my shock is your shock. But like you, I find myself saying jc what a waste: $60 for a bottle of wine when you could have a Nos Mullard gz32, er, I mean, 20 meals for the homeless. The Bard said it best:

"If to do were as easy as to know what were good to do,
chapels had been churches, and poor men's cottages
princes' palaces." Cheers.

"cables" are a special chapter. I know a family, the Dad is a true "100% fanatic Audiophile".
His kids don't call him "Dad", they call him "Cable" :)

I am no expert but my opinion continues to be that expensive cables make a very subtle impact. An entire system of very expensive cables can easily exceed $10,000. I suggest finding a good cable that is transparent and spending the savings on upgrading components. For instance if I have $15,000 speakers and $7500 worth of speaker cables, the sound would ultimately improve more if I substituted $1500 for good speaker cables and $21,500 for an upgrade in speakers (and so on).

hi doug (and others):

before judging other people, look at yourself in the mirror. he who is perfect may cast the first stone.

since we are imperfect, we either do, at times what we shouldn't or don't do what we should. it would better to correct our own behavior, than find fault with others, lest we be judged hypocrites.

OH MY GOD!!! I got my hands on a new MIT Oracle V1.2 Proline IC for my system (front end CD/SACD)and I must say that I have NEVER HEARD ANYTHING as transformative in any system...ever!! This isn't subtle folks, this interface does what no other cable I have heard, owned or demo'd or could ever imagine any other cable doing...words cannot convey the majesty and awe inspiring beauty that this cable enables my components to pass along. Any serious audiophile NEEDS to at least demo this IC asap in their system just to realize what is possible..Joe Abrams at Equus Audio can help anyone interested in hearing beyond the ordinary:O)

First off, how is it some kind of revelation that price does not necessarily correspond to performance; the shocking part is that someone just now figured it out.

With regard to MIT, if you think the Oracle 1.2 is something, try Magnum MA or, if you're feeling bold, Oracle MA.

"First off, how is it some kind of revelation that price does not necessarily correspond to performance; the shocking part is that someone just now figured it out."

MIT Dave_b example says otherwise - unless you think that Oracle v1.2 Proline retailed at $6500 is inexpensive? In that case I'm perhaps living on the wrong side of the tracks.

I'm quite sure my statement does not say that price never corresponds with performance.

I'm confused at Bar81's statement...the revelation is not that the cable cost alot and that I think it's great, even though both are true. I have owned MIT Oracle stuff up to V2.2 level and Transparent Reference XL. The revelation is in just how much better the V1.2 IC is compared to any other high priced IC's I've owned or demo'd, irregardless of price. In the end however, we are on the same page...I think?

I think bar81 was commenting on the original poster's statement that price does not automatically correlate with quality.

OKEE DOKEE!

Mmike - I finally got it (I'm slow). I think we agreed there is some correlation.

Thank you Mmike84, that is precisely what I was referring to.

How long do the Oracle IC's take to FULLY break in on a front end connection Bar81?