Price Isn't Always Indicitive of Quality or Performance

My Lavricables were given a 150-hour burn-in prior to shipping, so their good sound straight out of the shipping box was not a Hugh surprise. Well, they are improving as time passes. I have to say that they present a fabulous pairing of much transparency and very open sound with really excellent tone/timbre/harmonic overtones. Nuance retrieval (Retention?) is impressive.

They are providing an upper tier level of SQ for a very manageable cost. An added feature is they are very flexible, light and non-bulky. I am very pleased with the outcome of this purchase. I strongly recommend them for consideration for those shopping in their price range.

Charles

People should get into the habit of purchasing what sounds best to them, in their own system. Doesn't have to necessarily be terribly expensive. But of course, that cost is also dependent upon an individual's income and what they are willing to spend.

Hi, old thread, but I came across it and seeing what guakus wrote, decided to respond to a couple points of his.

First - "I had spent over $1000 on a Synergistic Research Cable. The Atmosphere Level 1 level, to be exact. I was using this as my main source cable to my powered speakers. It was absolutely DE-MOL-ISHED by Lavricables’ Grand line for a mere $500." You’re entitled to your subjective descriptions, of course, but when I hear about one cable "demolishing" another, I tend to be skeptical. As others have responded here, such impressions are also system-dependent. And yes, I do buy and believe in the audible differences between audiophile cables- but those differences tend to be more subtle than that, IME, unless one of the cables is clearly awful in one’s system.

Second- "The average MSRP markup on goods in CA is 3000%. To compare, Texas’s MSRP markup is 300%." Umm, guakus, could you source those figures for me? It sounds like you’re just pulling those out of somewhere in you, I’ll leave the description at that. If those figures were true, then CA would be an absolutely uncompetitive state economically, instead of being the 5th largest economy in the world, more or less, if regarded as a distinct sovereign entity. Also, there wouldn’t be so many competitive audio brands in CA if that were so. So that figure seems countersensical- as does the one for Texas, but to a lesser degree.

When I hear random numbers like that, that sound absurd, and for which the sources are not provided, confidently bandied about, suddenly it’s hard to seriously regard any impressions or conjectures by the poster. I just get the sense that they either hold a crude bias against a certain place (such as CA) or are grasping for some superficial (and unverified) notion as an overarching explanation.

So please indicate here, if you see this, where you came up with those figures, so we don’t have to regard it as another simply crazy rando statement online, the kind that hemorrhages the credibility of the speaker/poster.

@aubullience ,

That California MSRP markup comment is of course as ridiculous today as it was back in 2022 and not in any way based in reality. If it were, something that cost $10 to manufacture in California would cost $300 to buy while the exact same thing manufactured in Texas would cost $30. No answer for a source in 2022, don’t think you’re gonna get one now. But, that still shouldn't detract from the point of the thread.

@aubullience 

First of all, I am not beholden to you.  I posted my opinion.  If you don't like it, cool. If you do like it, cool. 99.999% of the counter opinions on this forum, come from a negative place where the concept is nothing short of an attempt at ridicule.  So, you may lambast my credibility, but that street goes both ways, sir. You have about as much credibility to me as I do of you.

That said, resistance is the primary hurdle when dealing with conductors. Cable companies have the tech, the know how, and the means to create a cable that has next to no electrical resistance.  If they did that then they'd have only ONE cable to sell you; that's no good! So they take their "perfect" cable and break it so they can create lower tier product for the budget minded. They lower the quality of materials and lower the geometry and lower the shielding to lower the cost. Obviously, that increases the electrical resistance. As a result, the gains or returns on audio quality will be minimal.

Silver is a better electrical conductor than Copper. That's just a fact. A helix design of multiple shielded conductors is better geometry than a standard three-way twist. Just a fact.  Teflon is a better insulator and shield than polyurethane.  Facts. Now, if you want to argue that less electrical resistance doesn't mean better audio....knock yourself out. Arguing that is the same as arguing politics and religion. I don't care enough about you to have that discussion because YOU haven't earned that.