John Dunlavy's reputation notwithstanding, the proof is in what I hear, and I hear a difference. I would not consider myself a "Golden Ear", nor are all others that have experienced the same noticeable differences between various manufacturers' interconnects and (to a lesser extent) speaker cables in my system. I would respectfully suggest that the "Food for Thought" is why a reputable speaker manufacturer (and Dunlavy is not alone here) and respected engineer opts to dispute many a persons listening experience, instead of attempting to find out why their experience isn’t supported by the measured data. Certainly the quest would be a noble one. The “Holy Grail” of audio? Perhaps not, but it could put an end to a lot of posts and flames here. |
Most Audiophiles would probably agree that somewhere between 60 and 90 percent of the cable manufacturers have technology based on snake oil and other magic potions. The problem is we (at least I) don't know which 90 percent. There are a few that I do know use sound physical measurements along with listening tests. John Dunlavy has apparently taken it on himself to conduct an independent survey (tests) of a variety of cables. I really wish he would publish this, so that we can see, not from opinionated and potentially biased listening tests, but from independent measurements. That's not say that some people won't find that brand X with high capacitance doesn't work well in their system. As Mr. Dunlavy pointed out, equipment problems are sometimes rectified (or covered up) by cable design. It would be very interesting just to get the facts from that survey--then we might be able to better draw our own conclusions. |
It is interesting that two well - established audio engineers and designers such as John Dunlavy and Frank Van Alstine appear to disregard much of the claims of cable manufacturers. However, both of these gentlemen do admit to there being some audible difference in some cables. I think that what Mr. Dunlavy is objecting to is the outrageous and irrational claims made by some cable manufacturers (whereas Mr. Van ALstine objects mainly to the prices charged).
An interesting addittion to this discussion can be found at John Risch's DIY cable web site (at www.audioasylum.com under "FAQ"). The subjective blind and double blind tests that he conducted found that the best SOUNDING cable also had the best scientific measurements - subjectivity backed up by science! It would seem that a good starting point, then, might be to build his best DIY cable, and use it as a reference when comparing cables in your system. |
When I worked at Garland Audio in San Jose, CA, back in 1978, speaker designer Robert Fulton (the massive Fulton "J" was one of his products) walked in with an armload of what looked like suspension cable pilfered from the Golden Gate Bridge. "Where's the fire, Bob?" laughed owner John Garland, eliciting a frown from Fulton.
Fulton went into the sound room and, without so much as a "by your leave," replaced--after some gnashed-teeth grunting--the 12-gauge cable running from an ARC amp to a pair of Maggie Tympani ID's with his "Fulton Gold." Then he put a record on. Within 30 seconds, there was no more laughter, not from Garland, not from any of the rest of his sales staff, including yours truly.
I still hear differences in cable (sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse). And when I read treatises that say they can't exist I'm reminded that from an aerodynamics perspective the bumblebee can't fly, either. |
Isn't it interesting that Dunlavy sells there own speaker cable for $480/ 8' and yet he claims it sounds no better that $10/ 8' Rat Shack wire?
We should all remember John Dunlavy forgot more about speaker design yesterday than we ever knew. The problem is he seams to be forgetting alot at a very alarming rate! (If you know what I mean) I just spoke with him again two weeks ago, and I still don't have a clue as to what we talked about. I'm not sure old John will be hanging around the plant too much longer, maybe a buy-out is on the horizon. |
There are some DIY cables that can be made very cheap. I can find the site and post it if you like. |
Out of curiosity Ken, what speaker cables have you tried using in your current system ? Depending on the specific amp & speaker combo, i have noticed some rather drastic differences on this end. Sean
> |
I hate getting involved with religious debates (although I am in this case), but my own experiences agree entirely with John's assertions about speaker cables. As yet, my system shows no real improvement over 12 gauge wire with any higher end cables that I've tried. However, with respect to interconnects, I've found pretty big differences in many of the low to mid-line cables. In fairness, I haven't tried very many higher end IC's, and it wouldn't surprise me if the differences beyond a certain point were somewhat less than dramatic. However, between cables such as Radio Shack Gold, the MIT Terminator series, and Nordost Blue Heaven (relatively low cost cables), I've found that the differences are clearly audible.
As always, your mileage may vary, and I'm willing to accept that other folks do indeed hear differences that I do not. However, since personal musical enjoyment is my only goal, I'm content to spend a wee bit more on IC's where I do hear a difference, save my money on the speaker cables where I don't, and spend the rest of the time sipping wine and playing music.
Cheers,
Ken |
One should dig through the archives at AA and read how badly Mr. Dunlavy was "scorched" after making similar comments. One does NOT have to have "ultra hi-end" gear or the utmost in resolution to hear some cable changes while others are minimal at best. Sean
> |
Dunlavy talks about the transmission line properties of the cables he designs. I guess I have not forgotten as much as John Dunlavy because I clearly remember my Electrical Engineering professor saying that an audio cable would have to be many miles long before transmission line properties would come into play. It is at 100's of megahertz that a 1 or 2 meter cable can display those properties. I feel that that we need to investigate better methods of measurement. |
Why is it that several of the above posts hurl aspersions at John Dunlavy, yet not one post has hinted at any semblence of concern or displeasure with the cable manufacturers? Can someone explain the psychology at work here? |
No JH, just having a little fun. Remember that is was once proven scientifically that it is impossible to travel at faster than the speed sound. The cables used all "measure" the same, but that only means they are the same for the things measured. Can anyone be sure they are measuring the right things or all things that influence sound. What is "Golden Ears"? How do you measure that? Or is it just Golden Egos? |
Sugarbie -
Trotting out this analogy again? Your strawman has no bearing to anything Dunlavy has said.
JHunter |
Kelly -
At shows, Dunlavy uses his own design of cable (Z6 at CES 2001). And yes, he feels that there is (in the overwhelming majority of real world systems) little to zero AUDIBLE difference between his technically superior cable and zipcord.
If you ask John Dunlavy (and he'd be most happy to answer), you'd find out that they use both measurements and listening tests when designing and testing speakers. And he feels that buyers must listen; and that measured accuracy is a means towards superior audible results. He is honest, though, and admits that some of the measured results (phase accuracy, in particular) may have little sonic benefit.
John's forgotten more about speakers and electronics than any given dozen posters (almost typed "posers", might've been more accurate at that) on this site will ever know.
JHunter |
I found that article interesting. I believe, I have been sucked into the belief that more expensive is better, or that fancy cabling is better. I expect a $1000 pair of speaker cable to sound better than a $200 one. Truth is, they both may sound different but not better than one another. I too, am taken aback at the marketing machine of cable makers, in particular, of late, power cord makers. Ive started other threads in regards to internal speaker wires and the majority of those who replied, stated, likely correctly, that a speaker is "voiced" using the stock cable and dont mess with it. How does that change then, with an amp, preamp, or Dac which came voiced with a stock captive power cord? Is it better, or different? Believe me, I have aftermarket powercords on all my gear, but am disheartnened at the amount of $1000 midlevel power cords, and $3000 top of the line power cords. This claims that are being assosiated with these cords I believe is akin to the comments Dunleavy was making. |
If Dunlavy isn't a fan of cables then what must he be wiring his speakers with?
Chilling isn't it? |
I don't think he was saying that there's no difference between cable and cable technology...I believe he mentions that they make their own(?)...he's just saying a lot of the so-called science that goes into the cables is just a bunch of marketing nonsense, and not very scientific. That's probably very true (and I use various Cardas, Coincident, JPS, etc).
He must also think that there's no difference in speaker drivers as well. I was told that he left Duntech and started Dunlavy, used a very similar design, charged just as much money, but he used cheaper drivers. Hmmm. :-) |
anybody ever seen dunlavy speakers setup for show or at "approved" dealers using zip cord? anybody who owns dunlavy's use ratshack wire between amps and speaks? no? well, why not? that's what the speaker's "inventor" and namesake would do. i wonder, i really do, whether john dunlavy also recommends that one choose which speakers to buy based sole on "scientific measurements." -kelly |
After my experiences this weekend listneing to AQ Clear Se, AZ Satori and AQ Dragon SE in my system...I'm afraid I don'd but this. In a high rez system, differences between cables are very much audible. |
I don't hear John talking about any of the great cables out there.Has he listened to them? How can you react in a vacuum? |
Measurement proves nothing. Let's have John measure a group of tenors singing a line of music. Human vocal cords are made of the exact same material. If all the tenors sing all the right notes, the sound will "measure" the same on John's equipment. If John is correct, then all tenors must sound the same, and any difference we heard between the sounds created by Pavarotti, Bocelli, Domingo and your local church cantor is just an illusion. I can tell a difference, so I guess I better go get some Prozac. |
I found Dunlavy's comments to be very interesting. One note regarding his "experiment" proposing to show that so-called golden ears are indeed incapable of hearing the differences between cables: by not removing and changing the cables during the test, he did not prove that the subjects could not hear differences. Instead, he showed that these audiophiles believed that they COULD hear differences when none existed. This doesn't prove that the same subjects would not be able to hear differences between different cables. Anyway, interesting post!
k |
Plasma, take a look at my post on the "Are Audiophiles Obsessive Nuts?" thread here on Agon, and I won't bother to repeat it here. Thanks for the link to the essay by Dunlavy; he sure speaks more authoritatively than do I. Thank God there are some, albeit precious few, who are willing to speak the truth about the widely accepted, yet critically unexamined high-end orthodoxy. |
