I used to think pricey interconnects were snake oil...

My son accompanied me to Axpona Tampa last year.  He was 32 then and I compared what I was hearing in the various rooms with the impressions of his young ears.  There were a few times where I did not detect subtle differences that he could hear but overall I was pleased that my hearing was still pretty good.

My son visited last week and I got a chance for him to hear my streaming setup and DAC with different sources. I played CDs, FLAC files and streamed 44.1/16 and hi res.  His conclusions all matched mine.  I did not let him know what source I was using.

The thing about cables which is true for audio in general is that the very expensive ones are on another level.  I know people don’t want to hear that.  You still have to sort the pseudo high end from the real deal and I think cables are the hardest component of all just because looks do not reveal how they will sound- in general.  I started out with basic receivers and such in the 70s and stepped up to hifi in the late 80s.  Started doing a lot of DYI upgrades to my speakers and amps.  Then in the 2000s I stepped into the higher end hifi gear.  As satisfying as DYI projects are, the expensive stuff- the good stuff has no equal.  

What I’m trying to say is that sometimes we are merely making lateral moves when changing a component or a cable and then experience disappointment and frustration when the gain is nil.  And that leads many to dismiss the hobby as futile and a waste of money.  It is difficult to do these days but hearing an outstanding audio system can be inspirational.  I can’t say that I would have been better off to have never heard some outstanding stereos over the years, Audio has been a bug in me since my college days.

That's the problem with many people in general and audiophiles in particular - they make too many assumptions instead of experiencing things.

Another problem with some audiophiles is that their hearing is not really good, so they simply can't hear the difference.

Cables can make big or subtle difference but they always do make a difference.

There ARE some parameters to look for or measure, like resistance, inductance, and capacitance. The latter also affect “characteristic impedance”, which is defined as the square root of inductance divided by capacitance. This parameter is independent of length. Years ago, Atmasphere suggested I use speaker cables with a low characteristic impedance with my Atma OTL amplifiers, and I subsequently found that he was/is correct; not only do cables with low CI sound best with my amps but also cables with high CI sound really awful, e.g., Nordost.  So I would never buy expensive cables, usually make my own, but I have found that low CI is a worthy goal also with ICs. I happen to prefer solid core silver wires, as well.

There ARE some parameters to look for or measure, like resistance, inductance, and capacitance. The latter also affect “characteristic impedance”, which is defined as the square root of inductance divided by capacitance. This parameter is independent of length. Years ago, Atmasphere suggested I use speaker cables with a low characteristic impedance with my Atma OTL amplifiers, and I subsequently found that he was/is correct; not only do cables with low CI sound best with my amps but also cables with high CI sound really awful, e.g., Nordost.  So I would never buy expensive cables, usually make my own, but I have found that low CI is a worthy goal also with ICs. I happen to prefer solid core silver wires, as well.

Here's my take on cables and power cords.  They work.  They make a difference.  There.  Okay, I have more to say.  It's frustrating sorting through cables and power cords- more than frustrating.  Unlike amps, speakers, phono cartridges and DACs cables do not have a lot of specs to look at.  Secondly, it's impossible to look under the hood.  I can lift the lid on an amp and ewe and aww at its innards but the best I can do with a cable is turn and tug a little on the ends to see how tight the shrink tubing fits.  Maybe I can look at the plating on the connectors and get a feel of their quality.  Setting aside the sound differences for the moment it is gut wrenching spending a lot of money on cables.  And the prices have gone past the cost of a decent amp and are approaching the price of a basic car, no less.  We don't know how much pure copper, silver and gold are really in these things.  Then, someone on Youtube will cut an "audiophile" cable apart and reveal that it is more filler than wire and the workmanship might even be suspect.  No wonder even the best cables are difficult to resale for any reasonable amount relative to the original MSRP.

In the late 1980s I started hanging out with the wrong crowd- audiophiles.  I got into the cable game.  Back then the big deal was speaker cables mostly and then interconnects.  I watched a buddy put some serious money into MIT cables around 1990.  But they worked.  I started with Monster Cable, then Kimber Kable, then AQ, Nordost and eventually worked my way up to some pricey MIT cables.  Today, I am primarily using Purist Audio Design cables- the upper end of their lines.  I try not to think about what I have put into cables and power cords chasing after better and better sound.  Secondly, the PAD cables are as plain looking as it gets.  No fancy blue or red anodized collars, no pretty braiding of smaller wires into a single big wire and no pretty red or blue anodized connectors.  Hard to impress with these cables by looks, oh but the sound...

The other trick about cables is the sound.  Say you have a pair of speaker cables and/or interconnects and you try out a new set of cables in your system.  If the tonal balance is a bit brighter, then at first you might interpret that as better clarity and more lively sound.  Listen a few days and you start to have fatigue.  Put the old cables back in and now the system sounds darker at first but the fatigue is gone.  What to do then?  Try something else maybe.  And so the frustration starts.

After going round and round and encountering some real junk cables over the years, I have learned to stick to the well known brands.  If I have to trust what is inside these cables then I stick to the brands with a reputation and a pedigree.  I also try them and listen to them over weeks to be sure that is what I want.  I haven't been able to send a higher end PAD cable back yet.

What I listen for: 1:  Tonal balance.  Not bright or fatiguing but not dark either.  Not just better speaker cables but the better interconnects make the bass more crisp and clear- more punch.  Highs are oh so sweet- not irritating or grating ever.

2.  Soundstage and background.  This one is easy to differentiate.  The better cables drop the noise floor.  Sounds come out of nowhere.  The soundstage is wide, deep and tall.  Better cables improve on this.  The better MIT cables that I started using in the early 2000's showed me this.  Imaging was startlingly focused.  It freaked some people out.  My grandmother was convinced I had a speaker hiding in the fireplace.  From MIT to PAD I found they did everything better.  

3.  Noise floor and detail.  Upgrading power cords, unfortunately improves the sound too.  They take more noise out of the system.  When I got the better PAD power cords I immediately could tell the noise floor had dropped even more.  I thought the system was already quiet but it got even quieter.  A PAD digital power cord on my DAC improved the highs.  Thought they were already good but they got better, more natural.  And then with all this comes more detail.  Detail is a two edge sword.  It is exciting to hear some things in the music that you have never heard before but it can also be distracting and take away from the music.  When I started hearing more detail I was distracted to the point that I wished I could undo it.  But eventually I learned to tune most of it out.  Still, it is difficult sometimes to listen to my system in complete darkness.  I sounds and feels like people are moving around in the room.  Be prepared for consequences to a clear, detailed system.  One blues singer has a wheeze when he breathes.  Love the song but that quiet wheeze is a little distracting still.

I think the top cable makers know their art pretty well.  They know how to create product lines that give a little more of everything for more money.  I don't know how they do it.  It's like a car model with a base 4 cylinder but for a little more you can have a 6 cylinder and the top of the line is a V8.  More performance for more money.  

And in the end it still depends on the parts in your particular system, your room and your hearing- not to mention your budget.

Cables- a quagmire separating the wheat from the chaff.

I shall not ask if you refer to the cables or the listeners! Or, if I were to take inspiration from the grammar police lately active here, I'd point out the inefficiency of using a quagmire for winnowing......😉

Cables- a quagmire separating the wheat from the chaff.

There was a couple threads on the fake Nordost offered on Aliexpress. I had a real set of Nordost Odin 2 in my system for several weeks… so I know what they sound like. So I bought a set of Nordost Odin2 from AliExpress. I can assure you, they did not sound anything like the real Nordost Odin 2. 
 

So, then comes the question… do they sound better than Blue Jeans or some low level interconnect. Honestly, I have better things to do. But, to me buying fake interconnects should not be one’s default. I would rather buy a low end Cardas… and know what I am getting, versus a fake Cardas… which is most likely to be inferior… with a small possibility of it sounding better. I would really rather live in a world where people get paid for the effort and quality of materials put into their products.

I believe it is taking on the name of the Brand that is is the factor that enables a increase in the asking price by the vendor, I don't see the mimicking of the products aesthetic only, being a reason that would encourage a buyer to increase their cost to acquire the item. 

Nordost Brand is commonly seen at a inflated price, does the Clones of Nordost vs the Cloned Cardas carry much cost difference to produce?

The Nordost Clone is typically seen with a uncreased asking price over many other Cloned Branded Cables. Which is most likely a reflection of the non-fake Nordost retail price.

So this comes to question the cables that are sold on Aliexpress like these Cardas Clone cables, and interconnects.

I know a few folks here have purchased these are they an upgrade? If so from what? Not the real Cardas or Nordost or other premium products. 

https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-Cardas.html?catId=0&initiative_id=SB_20230819101940&SearchText=Cardas&spm=a2g0o.detail.1000002.0

I used to think snake oil was pricy interconnects until I saw the light that snake oil is just oil made from snakes. 

I have been more loyal to a wire type used for the Signal Path, more so than a Cable construction, even though pure copper connectors used on both cable ends and chassis mounted connections is today seen as a mandatory requirement.

I will state with conviction, swapping a Copper Wire to a Silver Wire,  will usually create a sonic that is undeniably different. Depending on the wire type, the differences can be worlds apart, I have experienced Silver Wire, that had to be removed with immediacy, as it was such an unattractive sonic in the system it was used, on the same note I used a Silver Cable in favour of Copper for multiple years, until I discovered PC Tripe C Wire. 

I have found experiencing the same wire used in a cable, where a cable is  produced at differing lengths, between 0.5mtr - 5mtr. When undergoing a A/B comparison, where the 5mtr cable works along with a device placed in the system, that can use the shortest cable, there are subtle differences to the sonic, that are  able to be detected between these cable lengths. Usually a frequency can be controlled in how the projection is being perceived, using this method. No need trying anything like this if a 5mtr Cable is not required within the system.   

One of the biggest changes to a sonic outside of changing a wire type, was when what had become a very untidy mess behind the system was given a period of my time to have the cables organised, separated and avoid crossing over where possible, the organised Cables brought a sonic that was immediately noticeable  for being more attractive. 

I went through a variety of xlr interconnects from the likes of Audioquest, Moon Audio and others. They were okay, but it wasn't until I got some AntiCables gold/ silver alloy that I found what really worked for me and my system and at a price I could afford.

They are.

Hello saulh!  Take a magnet and check the plugs for ferrous metal. Plating won't help. If anything sticks, it's not what you want. Hoppy Listening!

My 2 cents worth.

1980's I read brochures from what I could get at stereo stores. Monster cable, interlink 250 $50.00 Straight wire. I settled on these 2 because of cost. Then circa 2018. I moved to Kimber Kable heroes and Cardas cables Iridium and crosslinks. ~ 200.00. The difference was immediately apparent. Clarity,imaging I still have the older cables and I often use them as a filler until new orders arrive. I'm a believer.

Refrain from what? I thought I was being amusing. So called "snake oil" does have some therapeutic properties however minimal, Perhaps we use that word recklessly and impertinently when we bandy it about in audio land.

@bolong 

Your uninformed, unsubstantiated opinions are of no value to those of that know better and to those that come here to learn. Please try to refrain.

"Snake Oil"

I’m reminded of Tolstoy’s beginning of Anna Karenina " All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

We could rephrase this "All bad sounding interconnects are alike; each good sounding interconnect is good sounding in its own way."

Good sounding interconnects and unhappy families are both more interesting to write about.

I used to use all WireWorld interconnects, but I found it difficult to fit them all into the spaghetti junction behind my equipment (six sources, phono stage, pre-amp, power amps, headphone amp). So I replaced them with skinny cheap interconnects. No difference to my ear. The only place where it does make a difference is on longer runs (pre-amp > monoblocks which sit behind the speakers) where cheapo interconnects pick up hum as they are not shielded.

@asctim ...I don’t see much review of cheaper cables. You’d think there’d actually be a lot more variation between inexpensive cables, resulting in a lot of very interesting perceptions to report on,...

People don’t report much because there’s not a lot to talk about. I’ve tried a handful of various low cost cables over the years. I was able to confirm there were no giant killers. You essentially get what you pay for - unless you find great second-hand cables that someone is giving away at a very low price just to pass them along.

@asctim ”…My experience has been that I can get various very inexpensive interconnects that all sound indistinguishable.”

Yeah… of course, very inexpensive interconnects don’t make a difference or make a negative difference. No effort has been put into design, material choice, cost of materials… just like you can’t expect high quality sound out of a $19 CD Player. 
 

There is little point in reviewing inexpensive interconnects because they typically sound the same as the freebies you get with inexpensive components. Just to make sure I was calibrated to the market I have tried, Monster, Blue Jeans, Belkin… and a few others… completely worthless.

You need to audition some more than , Cardas, WireWorld, Transparent, and DHLabs. This will give you some perspective.

My experience has been that I can get various very inexpensive interconnects that all sound indistinguishable. Fortunately I subjectively find that sound to be good, and I enjoy the consistency, dependability and readily available supply. I’ve tried more expensive cables that struck me as possibly sounding different, but never in a way that evoked a clear preference.

For those who do perceive and prefer the unique sounds of certain cables, perhaps that can be seen as an unfortunate expense. Or, a fun and rewarding avenue for exploration.

I don’t see much review of cheaper cables. You’d think there’d actually be a lot more variation between inexpensive cables, resulting in a lot of very interesting perceptions to report on, with more expensive cables becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish from one another on account of their approaching perfection.

I should point out that I have heard some degradation in signal quality from running single ended interconnects that were very long, and from attempting to use in-line attenuators between my DAC and pre-amp. Both of these introduced well understood and easily measurable problems. I am kind of curious to know if a 30 foot expensive single ended interconnect could sound noticeably better to me than a standard cheapy 30 footer. It seems if it is well shielded and low enough in any form of impedance, it should work. 

Although I’ve been involved in audio for decades, I never really went down the high end cable rabbit hole. That’s probably because when I built my biggest/best system, in the mid-80s, the uber-expensive cable market was just getting started. Then many years later, most of my audio gear that matters is jammed into a home office/desktop system that’s cramped and difficult to swap cables in/out of.

But recently I picked up a used pair of speaker cables (Virtue Audio Nirvana) and wired them in place of the inexpensive AQ cables I’ve used for 4-5 years. There were immediate and positive sonic changes, pretty easy to hear. Especially obvious was the greater depth, impact, and timbral nuance of the entire bass range. Big success.

Last week I finally picked up a use interconnect I’d read very positive things about, the Harmonic Technology Truth Link, a heavy, overbuilt RCA IC. Wired that in between DAC and tube headphone amp (Icon Audio HP8), and damned if that very good transformer-coupled amp suddenly sounded better. Another big success.

(I’m headfirst down the cable rabbit hole now...)

I will give an example of what is audiophile experience for me...

I lost my dedicated homemade acoustic room selling my house one year ago...

I am mostly on headphone without too much despair because my AKG K340 is the best kept secret in headphone world... I drive them with my Sansui alpha which is almost perfect...But i plan soon to buy a microzotl amplifier partly because the noise floor level will decrease a lot.... I already use a battery dac +music bank....

Then i recovered happiness...

But how about recreating an "acoustic corner" and optimizing my self powered M-audio RV40 desktop speakers (100 bucks) , i decided to arrange the corner of the basement using foldable screen and some absorbing and diffusive material... I use my homemade shungite+copper plate on the speakers with my quartz and minerals pieces on critical spot...

Now i have an "audiophile for the poor citizen" corner where i can listen from my computer....It is astounding what some tweaks and especially acoustic can do....There is no relation between before and after...For sure the basic specs of these 2 way little box dont change , but i had bass and clear highs and very pleasant mids and a soundstage and good imaging...

i will call that a miracle at no cost ? yes... 😊

It is the farthest system computer based with a Hifimedyi dac  the farthest  from high end one can imagine...😁

But surprizingly not the farthest from audiophile experience someone could deduce from the speakers cost and specs...😉

The optimization and acoustic installation take me few hours...

I am in ectasy because i can now listen to speakers too ....Peanuts cost...

But i will be in more serious audiophile ectasy soon , i plan to upgrade my marvellous Sansui alpha with the Berning microzotl....Then i will have one of the best amplifier and one of the best headphone.... I already have an "out of the head" experience " with a bass i hear with my feet by resonance... Think about any other high end headphone able to give me that .,...The zotl will give me more dead quiet noise floor and probably more fluidity compared to a S.S. amp so good it is...

Audiophile experience need acoustic but the right optimization and the right gear synergy...

Here my problem was electrical noise floor ... I could buy a battery and a converter +a purifier ... But it is as costly as the microzotl2... The zotl by design is dead quiet ....I could add more subtles soundfield from the tubes too ... We will see...

What is the link with interconnect?

I will keep my Morrow interconnect .... upgrading cables is the last thing to do....When you have a good one in the ratio S.Q./price...

mahgister is correct.  The music starts with our ears and brain.  The room is the next most important component followed by the gear and then finally the choice in music.  Careful selection of the gear is required to get great sound.  Tube amps, for example must be carefully matched to speakers and the speaker cables more so than SS amps.  That's because the damping factor of tube amps is much lower typically than SS amps.  Tube amps work better generally with higher impedance speakers and short, thick speaker cables- due to their generally lower damping factors.  That is all about bass control.  Preamp to amp matching is another important consideration.  But most importantly is the room.  Muddy mid bass, lack of deep bass and even sibilance can be caused by the room and speaker placement.  The room also affects the soundstage and imaging.  Sometimes the amp or the speakers or even the cables are blamed for the system sounding too bright  or too dark when the real culprit is the room.  I know first hand how true this is.  My current room was difficult to get right.  It has dormers and sloped walls.  Corner traps not only in the room but also in the dormers made a significant improvement in the bass.  I had diffusers on the front wall which improves the imaging but not until I added diffusers to the sloped parts of the walls did I eliminate the last bit of pesky brightness.  Absorbers at the first reflection point on the side walls also help with clarity and brightness.  

I had my stereo in a 24x36x13 great room in my last house.  It sounded magnificent- especially after putting in a hardwood floor.  The 7/8" hardwood stiffened the floor which made the bass sound better.  I finally have this room figured out, I think.  I've been in this house 6 1/2 years now.  (slow learner, I guess).

@tonywinga My point is: If you want to play in high end hi fi you have to pay. Everyone loves showing off their gorgeous new speakers or shiny amplifiers but do not want to put much money into cables. I don’t like buying expensive cables either but they are a vital part of a hifi system. People spend big money on speakers and amps, dac’s etc and then wonder why the system sounds no better than a good mid fi set-up.

Similar to a few buddies who bought expensive sports cars with special suspension and handling packages, and when the tires need replacing, they cheap out and go for the budget performance replacement tires.

Now wondering why the car handles poorly or does not drive the same as it did before. Next they realize they just bought suboptimal tires, and have to dismount them as a throw-away situation - and a total waste of money to realize this. .

Next, to go back and buy the proper level of tires required to get their expensive sports cars to drive, handle, and function as it was originally designed to do.

The response is the same, if you can afford the car and insurance, you can afford proper replacement tires too. Otherwise the whole thing is a waste of money, and go buy a daily driver car where budget replacement tires do just fine.

You are not even wrong , and not right either...

It is acoustic whch give us audiophile experience not the cables at any prices...Nor any pieces of costly gear...

But i never wanted to play high-end gear... What you call hi-fi is not synonimous with high end gear... Acoustic and the rightful mechanical and electrical embeddings matter way more than high-end costly gear price...

If you want to go hifi then it’s either all the way or don’t bother. This is a big boy game.

"big boy" do you mean big consumers wallet?

My game is acoustic learning.... It is for another kind of "big boy" ... 😊

If the gear system is like a F1 formula car , i can assure you that acoustic understanding play a role even bigger than the price of the tire in the car metaphor under my post... Acoustic in this metaphor  is the tires of the car and the ROAD itself...  Because sound experience evaluation need the ears/brain and this is psycho-acoustic...This is the road in the car metaphor...

Most people using this erroneous car metaphor focus on the price of a F1 compared to a Toyota...They forget the way the road will be designed... This is the acoustic factor... Audiophile experience is when the F1 race car or  the Toyota are coupled to the road (the acoustic field) .... In the 2 cases there is audiophile experience, but where do people go with a F1 car and with a Toyota ? ...There is a trashold of minimal or optimal acoustic satisfaction, after that it become a game of money more than an acoustic experience...

In audio those who play with price to define S.Q. are completely off the race...

Acoustic is the sleeping princess in audio , the kissing prince is your ears/brain , and the working pieces of gear are only the 7 dwarves...😁

An average Joe decides to take his wife to a fine high end restaurant for a nice anniversary dinner.  He stares at the menu, sees salads and appetizers start at $25.  He is thinking to himself, I can get two dinner size salads at Zaxby’s for less than that.  Then he sees the steaks with the prices starting at $75.  Of course he is thinking about how he could have gotten a whole steak meal for the two of them at Longhorns for less money.  Nearing the end of the meal he is hoping his wife is too full to enjoy a dessert.  The tragedy here is multifaceted.  First, he missed out on a fine dining experience with his wife and likely stayed quiet or didn’t listen to her very well because he could only think about the prices.  Two, he missed out on enjoying the best meal he is going to have all year.  (Yes, this used to be me.)  If you go out for a nice meal, count the cost ahead of time and then enjoy a really special time.

My point is:  If you want to play in high end hi fi you have to pay.  Everyone loves showing off their gorgeous new speakers or shiny amplifiers but do not want to put much money into cables.  I don’t like buying expensive cables either but they are a vital part of a hifi system.  People spend big money on speakers and amps, dac’s etc and then wonder why the system sounds no better than a good mid fi set-up.  Well, power cords- which were my last hold out, are the most important consideration, I found followed by speaker cables and then interconnects.  If streaming then, the USB cable and ethernet cables matter too.  

If you want to go hifi then it’s either all the way or don’t bother.  This is a big boy game.  Count the cost before even starting.  I really didn’t think I would ever spend half the cost of my new speakers on amp power cords and speaker cables but that is what it took to get the sound I was after.  

I have found all types of audio cables to be very necessary to be optimized for the best sound quality of the system. Once the sound quality of the system is brought up to at least a good level (and the audiophile ear becomes a little trained in identifying these effects), then sonic differences due to the cable design and construction become obvious and very important. This is regardless of whether blind tests were done to verify the cable evaluations. Blind tests are not reliable in finding the subtle effects of conductor purity and crystal size, dielectric, conductor construction (solid core, Litz,, ribbon), cable topology, etc. The trained human ear-brain system is vastly more sensitive than conventional electronic instrumentation. The meter-reader mindset ignores this fact.

Concerning the question as to whether digital cable quality is unimportant beyond a $300 or so retail price: The answer is that digital cable quality is very important, despite there being error detection and correction designs with many digital cables. The explanation for this in my experience is that the sonic differences with digital cables are even more important than with analog cables, and (unfortunately) the benefits of very expensive designs are immediately apparent.

I think the reason for this sensitivity of digital cable sound characteristics to the quality of the design, is that much or most of the sonic distortion in digital cables is due to pulse timing issues, which are generally ignored in conventional mass-market digital audio cable design. This is where the error logic of the cable interfaces is looking for the presence or absence of pulses within allowable time windows. Accordingly, fine errors in pulse timing within the overall error margins are not corrected for. Exact timing of the data bit pulses is very important to cable sonics, but low cost digital cables don’t try to optimize this parameter.

My favorite speaker cables are 10 AWG, cloth covered, 32 strand tinned copper with a pvc liner salvaged from a 1980's telephone transfer station and had relatively high voltage going through them on a daily basis for years, ie they were very thoroughly "burned in." I don't think there is anything more important than a very thorough burning in.

I felt like you until I put a pair of Nordost V2 Valhalla XLRs between my preamp and amplifier…..

@roadcykler “…things people believe… You can’t prove things with facts or objectivity so you have to have faith.“

I believe Audiophilia is more like a science, careful and systematic observation reveals important nuanced real world changes in sound quality produced by different components, and venues. Very little is taken on faith. It is not that science cannot explain these things, it is that there are so many variable… hundreds operating at once that science is not a useful way to a simply explain performance.

Consider five components, each made up with hundreds of parts with different materials, connected by wires with dozens if different variables, gauge, material, dielectric. This is not a situation that lends itself to say some five variables will explain the output, sound… and even if it did, the sound you get out highly depends on the speaker and room acoustics. I was a practicing scientist for over ten years… anything more than a few variables and simple prediction models become difficult… hundreds, useless. Look at the horsepower thrown at weather prediction. We don’t have supercomputers and dozens of measurement devices at labs developing electronics and in our homes to work out what effect a new preamp might have.

If that is not complicated enough, then you have folks with different listening skills and values in what they want to hear.

Then there is music… it is not a single test tone… but dozens of different tones… all varying in loudness and frequency over time and with harmonics effecting the sound in higher and lower frequencies.

Instead of all that, electronic designers listen to different designs and components to tune their products to perform a certain way. Audiophiles develop listening skills, developed and use a common terminology to describe sound quality in musical reproduction (see Robert Harley’s book, The Complete Guide to High End Audio), and we have professional reviewers review the sound of components and audiophiles on forums try to communicate general attributes of different components and how they might operate in each others systems.

In addition experienced folks try to coach those new to high end audio the ways of the Force… I mean audio.

       The adherents of the Naysayer Church will never accept that there exists a multitude of variables, when an accurate simulacrum of performers and their performance in a particular venue, is the desire/goal.

        If their result differs from that of others, the aspects that they can't discern CERTAINLY MUST BE the product of the others' imagination.

        Of this they are certain: it CAN'T be THEIR system, room, or ears!

                                       Perish the thought!

                WELL: the Cargo Cult's building another runway.

                                         Time for a rewind:

Cargo cult science is a pseudoscientific method of research that favors evidence that confirms an assumed hypothesis. In contrast with the scientific method, there is no vigorous effort to disprove or delimit the hypothesis.[1] The term cargo cult science was first used by physicist Richard Feynman during his 1974 commencement address at the California Institute of Technology.[1]

Cargo cults are religious practices that have appeared in many traditional tribal societies in the wake of interaction with technologically advanced cultures.

     Do a bit a research and you'll learn those primitives were limited in their understanding, of what they saw with their eyes, based on their prior experience, education and BIASES.

                                                A rewind:

                 It isn't that the Denyin'tologists are ignorant.

               It's they're knowing* so much, that's WRONG.

                       *heart of the Dunning-Kruger Effect

                                              OR, two:

     The Church of the Naysayer Doctrine (like every other faith-based, religious cult) has as many dopes as it does Popes.   

     Bring up anything resembling SCIENCE/PHYSICS, dated later than the 1800’s and they become apoplectic, not having the formal education to comprehend the concepts, or- possible ramifications.    THAT would be hilarious, were it not so pathetic!        

           Gimme That Old Time Religion, Gimme That Old Time Religion, etc.

        At the very first mention of something as simple as Wave Function (a BASIC tenet of Quantum Mechanics), the Cargo Cult will label you a KOOK.

        But remember: they can only view/understand you, based on their limited experience, education and BIASES.

         They have overlooked the fact that, if not for the hypotheses/theories and experimentation, regarding Quantum Mechanics: a plethora of modern conveniences, medical devices and the gear they so love, would not exist.

          Had scientists, chemists and inventors shared the doctrines of the Cargo Cult (Denyin'tologists), there would be no semiconductors, computer chips, LASERs, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging devices (MRIs).

                                         Solid State amps?

                                     OOPS (back to tubes)!

                                        Your Smart Phone?

                                        FA'GET ABOUT IT!

                                         Your car's GPS?

                                                NOPE!

    Then too: some may be willfully ignorant and just enjoy being contentious.

                        Others: obtuse, uneducated*, misinformed?

      *Typically, from what's been exhibited here: H.S. STEM, if that, would be a safe inference.

      Either way: the result, when the Cult begins it's rhetoric is a classic demo of the Dunning- Kruger Effect.

                                          But, I digress: 

       Bring up those pesky details, regarding the likes of QED, Dielectric Absorption, Poynting's theorem and possible application/effects, relative to frequency, that our musical signals are carried via photon or wave, outside the conductor and you're a KOOK?

         Again: the Cargo Cult can only understand anyone with an actual background, experience and education in Physics/QED, based on their beliefs, education, experience and biases

                                      Remember this?

     One anecdote  that some may find interesting: their walks in the woods and how Feynman's father would encourage him to look beyond the fact that something in nature exists, but into why and how.

     It saddened him that while attending college, during a visit home and one of their walks: his dad asked what he was learning in college.

     At that moment, he realized: if he tried to explain what he was learning, there was no way his dad could understand.                               

                            It wasn't an insult or condescension.

                                                Just reality.

                                    Oh well: let 'em go build a runway!

                                                    references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_quantum_mechanics#:~:text=Examples%20include%20lasers%2C%20electron%20microscopes,systems%2C%20computer%20and%20telecommunication%20devices.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/08/13/what-has-quantum-mechanics-ever-done-for-us/?sh=37c459944046

https://uwaterloo.ca/institute-for-quantum-computing/quantum-101/quantum-applications-today

          But: I'm a kook, because I believe in the SCIENCE, from which all that sprang?

     https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/five-practical-uses-spooky-quantum-mechanics-180953494/

           Einstein got that last one wrong (Quantum Entanglement), BUT- I still wish he'd been alive, when the Hubble Telescope proved, what he considered his, "greatest blunder" (his inability to bring symmetry to his field equation, without lambda).

  https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200507/history.cfm#:~:text=Einstein's%20original%20equations%20had%20been,how%20the%20universe%20will%20end.                                            How about that?

Another example of a hypothesis/theory, with no way to EXPERIMENT/MEASURE, what you're sure must be there, in some detectable way, or another.

                                               Just for fun:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/6-times-quantum-physics-blew-our-minds-in-2022/

                                            Happy listening!

Summary: Yes a "bad" cable can sound bad, but there is no esoteric magic cable can actually improve the signal transfer. They can filter it which may mask a problem and it sounds better. 
 

That same “filtering” is what can also hold back a component and you will never unleash its full potential.
When you get to a certain level with your system you don’t want masking, veiling or coloration anywhere in the chain. You want your components to shine. Unfortunately, I have not yet come across a giant killer in cables (or components for that matter). If anyone can tell me what sounds as good as the Nordost Tyr 2 interconnects and Audience AU24SX speaker cables for the price of BlueJeans or Mogami, I will forever be grateful. 

It’s not an all or nothing proposition.  The truth as usual lies in the middle.   Good wires need not cost a fortune in most cases.  If you are already spending a fortune and you hear differences with different wires you are more likely to go nuts. 

Your 8th post is great...😁😊

Welcome here....

Summary: Yes a "bad" cable can sound bad, but there is no esoteric magic cable can actually improve the signal transfer. They can filter it which may mask a problem and it sounds better. Cables have kept a lot of stereo stores in business, so maybe that is their greatest worth. :)

A few years back, I bought some "acclaimed" cables. Yes a difference. Worse.  I did some testing. My sonic results were good old Belden Brilliance 75 Ohm stranded on decent ( non-Ferris) RCA's made as short as reasonable.   With cables, less is more.   The old free cables were often well over 100 Ohms and the shielding well less than 100% so I do not blame the emergence of quality well designed cables. Seems like Monoprice, Belden, Amazon WBC etc. can produce the 99.99% as good as it gets only missing the .01% ego factor. Won't go wrong with Blue Jean but they seem to have moved the price to add ego to the mix. I at least respect their engineering as they are real engineers.  Some cables have marked "direction". Now for a simple cable, this is total marketing, but it is possible with cap coupling of the shield or single shield ground in a balanced cable for it to make a difference. Not magic. Tricks we use to combat RF and ground loops. Which end depends on testing. A wire does not know the difference. AC or DC.  

How big a difference?  Well, if everything else is SOA, maybe if you are still in your 20's, have been trained in listening, not damaged your hearing with ear buds or the defective Army ear plugs, the source material is good enough, yea, probably audible.  I am old. I have "decent" equipment and listen to CD's ripped to FLAC.  Amazon Basics is better than I can hear. 

I also tested USB cables doing a loopback through my Focusrite. Clear differences in noise, rise time and jitter.. Free garbage and all the rest.  Again Belkin, Belden, Monoprice etc.  I also use short as possible. My music server to DAC is 8 inches. Less is more.  Now, does it make a difference with todays DACs with vastlly improved USB receivers, asynchronous communication, and better internal clocks?  Not sure it does.  Walmart-DAC running WMP? Maybe. JRiver into a Schiit Unison or Cord? Probably not.  Lesson is to put your experience and bias to todays situation, not yesterday's. 

On to speakers. Here bigger differences ( damage) is common. Because you  hear a difference does not mean it is better. This application is very component sensitive as the amplifier behavior does change depending on the oad. When I was investigating why my wife liked my 800 series Rotel amps over my Parasound 1200s,( made John very upset) I had pictures of the current into the driver that showed clear differences.    FWIW the real difference she was hearing is how dominant pole compensation vs Miller compensation changes the distortion distribution. With a better tweeter, Mr. Curl was right.  This added to the testing we dis back in the 70's when the crazy cable stuff started.  Original Monster ( 11 ga, twisted, slightly higher L, slightly lower C) came out and remains an excellent choice. One member of the testing was an engineer that had designed wire for a living.

My money?  Quite surprised how big differences in DACs are. Of all I have listened to in my desk system, the JDS Atom+ is still the smoothest.  I have further testing with JRiver settings that may reduce the differences, Topping Schiit, JDS, SMSL etc.  I plan on testing a Qutest. Output reconstruction and filtering is 99% of DAC differences and that is exactly where the brands differ. 

Summary: Yes a "bad" cable can sound bad, but there is no esoteric magic cable can actually improve the signal transfer.  They can filter it which may mask a problem and it sounds better.  Cables have kept a lot of stereo stores in business, so maybe that is their greatest worth. :)

Cables matter. That said, the biggest upgrade worth having is simply to buy a good grade of cable engineered for what is needed, and that does not have to cost a lot of money. Once you get past the basic stuff that comes free in the box, and move to a connection that covers all the basic of conductivity, shielding, durability, etc then the benefits of going past that are truly minimal. You can't go beyond the laws of physics and electricity no matter how much hype you add to the product :-) Good cables matter. 

It is evident by experiment that cables can make a difference...

I bought my Morrow interconnect three because i was unsatisfied of my SYSTEM , I was not unsatisfied by my past cables as such at the times but by my system qualitative impression... I want an easy upgrade and did not know what to do first ... I experimented it with the Morrow and "i dont even remember the name" of the few cables i compared it with ...The Morrow at 100 bucks pleased me...

No need of a doctorate in science to experiment it...No need to ask Heinseberg to prove it ...😊 The ears are if we study psycho-acoustic able to detect acoustical informative quality WHOLENESS no simple physical instrument can detect and NAME... The timbre perception for example is a psycho-acoustic and acoustical concept irreducible to pure physical measurements of any kind...It is a subjective-objective QUALITATIVE phenomenon....

Sound is not a mere atmospherical simple physical wave, we can detect BUT as claim in an ecological auditive perception theory, sound is  ALSO a  REAL INFORMATION created by the vibrating sound sources and any interference with it...A cable is something acting electrically but also physically ( copper is not silver for example )  upon the audio system "vibrations" through the speakers/room...This action is perceived as a new quality, negative or positive quality according to the specific ears filters of the owner and according to the state of his actual system/room and according to his peculiar audio learning journey...

But i bought the upgrading Morrow cables which made a sensible small positive difference FOR ME BECAUSE i did not know anyway  what to do FIRST to improve my audio system at the times...

When i had learned how to embed properly , mechanically ,electrically and acoustically my audio system , the improvements became HUGE not small as changing a cable ...

Then i never tought again to upgrade any cables...Because the ratio S.Q. improvement/cost would be too high to do it...

Conclusion : Cables matter but are secondary upgrades if they are basically good as the Morrow 3 interconnect is now for me at a relatively low price proportionnated to my system cost...If we know what to do with a system we dont invest in cables generally, and when our audio system is optimized, it is already so good, we dont invest in costly cable for a small improvement...

My remarks are valid for people with a limited budget and acoustic knowledge not for Bill Gates infinite budget..

We must learn how to listen by acoustic experiment not by buying cables...

No, not going to pay stupid money on cables. But there are some really good cables to be had, not cheap but a definite improvement. Cables matter.

Let make this simple.Try kimber d60 digital cable vs monster cable see if you can hear the difference? Or Nordost try vs anticable.

Anyone needing a rationale for experimenting with new cables in their system and/or feeling dissuaded by the Church of Denyin'tology's antiquated electrical doctrines: take heart!

        Many new electrical facts have been established in the past 100 years, that support audible differences, between various cables, etc.

         I couldn't find anything like, "Updated Electrical Theory For Idiots", but- did manage to find something resembling a cartoon, that even a child could follow.  It neither mentions AC/sinusoidal waves in wires, nor does it go into the photon propagation of electromagnetic waves.   It does, however, emphasize/demonstrate how Electrical Theory has progressed, since the 1800s:

              (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJqykotjog)

        These next few presuppose a certain amount of knowledge, in the field of modern Electrical Theory.    Click, "more" in the first link's first answer, to get it's entirety.    Note how it mentions the OLD, "... commonly held misconception that the flow of electricity through a wire resembles a tube filled with ping pong balls...", to which the Denyin'tologists fervently adhere: 

https://www.quora.com/Are-photons-involved-in-all-forms-of-electricity-for-example-when-it-flows-through-wires?utm_medium=organic&utm_source=google_rich_qa&utm_campaign=google_rich_qa

                                            and:

        https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=2348

        It's an established (measured) fact that an electromagnetic wave's propagation and speed, are dependent on the materials, of which the transmission line (cable) are made (ie: Dielectric Constant/permittivity).     The better (lower) the Dielectric Constant the better the flow and the longer it takes for that material, to become polarized.     One reason anything that comprises an RLC circuit (ie: capacitors, cables, PC boards), takes time to, "form", or, "break/burn-in".*      

          *Something that makes the Denyin'tologists apoplectic.

   https://resources.pcb.cadence.com/blog/2019-dielectric-constant-of-pcb-substrate-materials-and-signa....

https://unlcms.unl.edu/cas/physics/tsymbal/teaching/EM-914/section5-Guided_Waves.pdf

          Even the most inane (regarding the Sciences) must admit; braiding and twisting wires eliminates/reduces EMI interference.              
          That must lend credence to various cable geometries.

          That better dielectrics enhance the propagation of electromagnetic waves (ie: your music signal), lends the same credence to choosing cables with better materials (ie: Polypropylene, Teflon, air, etc).

           Of course: anything the Church of Denyin'tology's popes can't fathom, they'll summarily dismiss.

Achieving “different” sound quality with cabling is certainly possible. 
 

Achieving “better” sound quality is in the ear of the listener. 
 

I often chuckle when I read of one component killing another. And making a purchase recommendation as a result. One can spend a lot or a little to make their system sound different than it did before. Whether it’s better or not remains purely a matter of perception and bias. 
 

In my humble opinion. 

Ear sensitivity, critical listening focus and perception, personal sonic preferences, etc all add up to a sound system add, say a new interconnect, being an upgrade to one person, a downgrade to another person and not discerned at all by yet another person. This is why for this discussion there are interconnects at almost all price points that will sound good or great to one person and potentially horrible to another person. Trust your own ears because the listening experience in your listening space should primarily only be for you, not what someone tells you you should like. Also, whether naysayers like jasonborne or kenjit want to believe it or not, every single element within a sound system impact the sonics in some way whether it’s very subtle or glaring.

The more I read of some of the things people believe the more I'm convinced that audiophilia is tantamount to religion. You can't prove things with facts or objectivity so you have to have faith. "I know what I hear." 😐