Funny so everything affects the sound ,But it's better to you the most expensive cables you can afford....lol....Next
Science that explains why we hear differences in cables?
Here are some excerpts from a review of the Silversmith Audio Fidelium speaker cables by Greg Weaver at Enjoy The Music.com. Jeff Smith is their designer. I have not heard these cables, so I don’t have any relevant opinion on their merit. What I find very interesting is the discussion of the scientific model widely used to design cables, and why it may not be adequate to explain what we hear. Yes it’s long, so, to cut to the chase, I pulled out the key paragraph at the top:
“He points out that the waveguide physics model explains very nicely why interconnect, loudspeaker, digital, and power cables do affect sound quality. And further, it can also be used to describe and understand other sonic cable mysteries, like why cables can sound distinctly different after they have been cryogenically treated, or when they are raised off the floor and carpet.”
“One of the first things that stand out in conversation with Jeff about his cables is that he eschews the standard inductance/capacitance/resistance/impedance dance and talks about wave propagation; his designs are based solely upon the physics model of electricity as electromagnetic wave energy instead of electron flow.
While Jeff modestly suggests that he is one of only "a few" cable designers to base his designs upon the physics model of electricity as electromagnetic wave energy instead of the movement, or "flow," of electrons, I can tell you that he is the only one I’ve spoken with in my over four decades exploring audio cables and their design to even mention, let alone champion, this philosophy.
Cable manufacturers tend to focus on what Jeff sees as the more simplified engineering concepts of electron flow, impedance matching, and optimizing inductance and capacitance. By manipulating their physical geometry to control LCR (inductance, capacitance, and resistance) values, they try to achieve what they believe to be the most ideal relationship between those parameters and, therefore, deliver an optimized electron flow. Jeff goes as far as to state that, within the realm of normal cable design, the LRC characteristics of cables will not have any effect on the frequency response.
As this is the very argument that all the cable flat-Earther’s out there use to support their contention that cables can’t possibly affect the sound, it seriously complicates things, almost to the point of impossibility, when trying to explain how and why interconnect, speaker, digital, and power cables have a demonstrably audible effect on a systems resultant sonic tapestry.
He points out that the waveguide physics model explains very nicely why interconnect, loudspeaker, digital, and power cables do affect sound quality. And further, it can also be used to describe and understand other sonic cable mysteries, like why cables can sound distinctly different after they have been cryogenically treated, or when they are raised off the floor and carpet.
As such, his design goal is to control the interaction between the electromagnetic wave and the conductor, effectively minimizing the phase errors caused by that interaction. Jeff states that physics says that the larger the conductor, the greater the phase error, and that error increases as both the number of conductors increase (assuming the same conductor size), and as the radial speed of the electromagnetic wave within the conductor decreases. Following this theory, the optimum cable would have the smallest or thinnest conductors possible, as a single, solid core conductor per polarity, and should be made of metal with the fastest waveform transmission speed possible.
Jeff stresses that it is not important to understand the math so much as it is to understand the concept of electrical energy flow that the math describes. The energy flow in cables is not electrons through the wire, regardless of the more common analogy of water coursing through a pipe. Instead, the energy is transmitted in the dielectric material (air, Teflon, etc.) between the positive and negative conductors as electromagnetic energy, with the wires acting as waveguides. The math shows that it is the dielectric material that determines the speed of that transmission, so the better the dielectric, the closer the transmission speed is to the speed of light.
Though electromagnetic energy also penetrates into and through the metal conductor material, the radial penetration speed is not a high percentage of the speed of light. Rather, it only ranges from about 3 to 60 meters per second over the frequency range of human hearing. That is exceptionally slow!
Jeff adds, "That secondary energy wave is now an error, or memory, wave. The thicker the conductor, the higher the error, as it takes longer for the energy to penetrate. We interpret (hear) the contribution of this error wave (now combined with the original signal) as more bloated and boomy bass, bright and harsh treble, with the loss of dynamics, poor imaging and soundstage, and a lack of transparency and detail.
Perhaps a useful analogy is a listening room with hard, reflective walls, ceilings, and floors and no acoustic treatment. While we hear the primary sound directly from the speakers, we also hear the reflected sound that bounces off all the hard room surfaces before it arrives at our ears. That second soundwave confuses our brains and degrades the overall sound quality, yielding harsh treble and boomy bass, especially if you’re near a wall.
That secondary or error signal produced by the cable (basically) has the same effect. Any thick metal in the chain, including transformers, most binding posts, RCA / XLR connectors, sockets, wire wound inductors, etc., will magnify these errors. However, as a conductor gets smaller, the penetration time decreases, as does the degree of phase error. The logic behind a ribbon or foil conductor is that it is so thin that the penetration time is greatly reduced, yet it also maintains a large enough overall gauge to keep resistance low.”
For those interested, here is more info from the Silversmith site, with links to a highly technical explanation of the waveguide model and it’s relevance to audio cables:
https://silversmithaudio.com/cable-theory/
213 responses Add your response
"I am indeed "an Englishman in NY", with 32yrs professional/broadcast engineering under my belt, and I find most of these "Audiophile" claims to be absolute nonsense." Kudos to you for making that your career (really). I will say however, & maybe it's just me, but... I've never been all that impressed with the SQ of any radio station I've heard. That stated, cable changes (in my system) have been successful in improving upon it. |
There’s 3 electrical parameters in poor quality cables that "can" influence the sound. Then is it possible to use a neutral cable and a DSP? |
There’s 3 electrical parameters in poor quality cables that "can" influence the sound. A combination of Resistance, Inductance and Capacitance, which ’’can" create filters with the output impedance of the source/input impedance of the load You find all three parameters used in speaker xovers to roll off the individual speaker drivers into each other, so they work "hopefully" as a summed flat response. Cheers George |
the differences in capacitance alone between different makes should be enough to understand how sound may changeA fast look at spec sheets says mogami interconnect has about 70pF/meter. So a (very long) 2M interconnect has 140 pF. And a relatively high output impedance of th edriving stage is 500 ohms. So the roughly -3dB point is >2 mHz. (if my mental math is correct). So, is this true? |
It's not very different than some of the golf threads I read. "A brand new set of irons or a new driver will definitely improve my game." Scientifically, it might. Then again, if you think it will, it might. Can it be measured? Yes, the spin, the flight, the carry distance. But does that mean it will help lower your score? No. But how does the iron feel? Fantastic. Like a forged buttery smooth iron should. Measure that. (I'm not going to get into how some like the sound their driver makes, as that is too close to what we are discussing. ) And then you go out with your new gear and your partner outscores you with a set of (quality) 10 year old mixed bag equipment. He has better skills. That might be learned, that might be due to biological genetics. He just prefers this equipment. It's all about synergy. And that person who outplayed you is a senior, with a reduced swing frequency response, and cannot see past 150 yards. Analogous to many recording engineers who produce masterful recordings. |
Clearthinker, I think you are being a bit too harsh on theIf someone insult all a group of people indiscriminately for example : "audiophiles", it is truly wrong, and not very subtle... The reason is simple, nobody can describe this group, composed of too many people with complex experience and history, including musicians and even many engineers....Then insulting all an indefinite group speak more about who is the personn throwing insults than about those who are insulted... Most people audiophiles or not, think that we listen to the sound coming from the audio system...Then they point to the importance of electronic design...It is not wrong at all for sure.... It is a half truth though, it miss the other part of reality: embeddings controls and acoustic especially.... Secondly, you are right about me.... I am an audiophile because of my listening experiments, but i am first a music lover and i think the opposite of the majority of audiophiles: I listen the sound coming from my speakers/room/ears mainly....Not from the gear mainly.... This explain my position concerning the useless obsession to upgrade BEFORE embedding rightfully in their working dimensions, mechanically, electrically ands especially ACOUSTICALLY all the electronic designed pieces of gear....The urge to upgrade is re-inforced by marketing method from the engineering perspective in the audio community... The basic history of electronic design is mature for the last 50 years... It is then easy to buy a good piece of electronic design at low cost...Out of the new hype .... Myself I think against the "objectivist" and the kind of people who vouch ONLY for measurements like the anti-audiophiles that room/ears/speakers acoustic and psycho-acoustic science and ART are more important than electronical measurements of the gear to reach S.Q. nowadays... We are no more at the Marconi era... For example room microphone connected to an electronical equalizer measurement are a secondary tool only an help, not the ONLY way to tune and fine tune a room for the speakers AND our ears at all... That is my experience, not an opinion of an audiophile or the dogma of a non audiophile... My experience is not based on soldering or computer driven dials evaluation, but on listening experiments then on acoustic art and Helmholtz mechanical method... I dont reject measurements, but some of the uses which are promoted in some circle about what is audio and musical experience... I dont reject the necessity and the importance of a very good piece of electrinical engineering design, i only say that nowadays it is easier to purchase one than to LEARN how to LISTEN acoustically speaking and also musically speaking... In one scientific word: Timbre is not spectrum....Physical acoustic science is not psycho-acoustic scence...our ears are the missing and always present link between these 2 in audiophile experience... Or in brief: I always listen WITH my system or any other one , THROUGH the controlled and mechanically and psycho-activated room/speakers, i listen to the the "RECREATED acoustic translation" of a past lived event recorded and which become always an ACTUAL "different" acoustical event in my room or in any room anyway ... Most people think the opposite: They think they listen WITH their uncontrolled and passive room/speakers ,THROUGH their system the "magical" electronical "REPRODUCTION" of a lived PAST event, identical or almost to the original lived event....Because they imagine the recording microphones naively like a true memory not like a string of choices and TRADE-OFF which will modify the original performance anyway.... |
To those who don't believe cables make a difference, I often wonder at what point they would hear a difference. Would they think a solid piece of coat wire sounds as good as the Silversmith? I often hear that any competently-engineered wire will sound as good as something else. Well, what exactly does competently-engineered mean? Does the lamp cord from Home Depot meet that criteria? As far as measurements, the differences in capacitance alone between different makes should be enough to understand how sound may change, but to the none believers this seems mute. Furthermore, I have yet to see a measurement that explains how I can detect a vocal passage in a complicated song mix better through one cable, but not another. That kind of measurement still does not exist. For those believing otherwise, you sound like a 16th century alchemist who says that all science and knowledge is already uncovered. |
@tommylion First, thanks for the attempt to inform our readers about something they may find interesting. Second, I admire the bravery you showed in waving your red cape in front of some of the angry bulls that populate this site. I am always amazed at how so many amateurs believe they know more about a subject than people with actual knowledge and training, And why some people's first reaction to a different idea is to dismiss it out of hand, without even the courtesy of a valid counter argument. Don't get me wrong, I have no idea if Jeff Smith is 100% correct in his assertions, but I am honest enough in my limited knowledge to not argue his point. After all, Jim Smith's theory may turn out to be the audio equivalent of the "Fosbury Flop". |
Clearthinker, I think you are being a bit too harsh on the englishman-in-newyork. He is just making generalizations that are more true about the individuals in this group than other groups excepting mahgister because I am not quite sure which group he fits into. englishman-in-newyork, I am a doctor who has a science centered education. I make furniture and subwoofers. I started building Dynakit amplifiers when I was 13 and in high school constructed the power supply racks for dbx 32 channel noise reduction systems.(child labor) I am 67 I can still hear to 16 kHz and do not yet have tinnitus. I use 8 foot electrostatic loudspeakers. I am of course totally anecdotal. Excepting the population dynamics I agree with everything you say. If you want to know why these silly trends get started I politely suggest that you might want to study articles on psycho-acoustics, the way we interpret what we hear. There are solid reasons why these people believe what they hear is true even though it is just an illusion. Magicians do this in a visual manner. |
I just replaced a set of speaker cables by the same company with a significant upgrade over what I'm trading in...although there's a 60 day return policy, they claim they sound best after around 500 hours of use so I'll report back in mid January...or February...My first experience with better sounding cable was a long while back with an early pair of Audioquest wires used with Vandersteen 1B speakers...surprise, surprise! Major improvement over whatever the hell I had been using previously, and various cables since have always been a good thing, leading to a substantial pile of wire in my personal "cable museum." |
If anyone would really like to begin a journey into what **might** make some difference, i suggest you watch a series (or any one is probably sufficient) of talks that that Rick Hartley gave to the Altium user conference. Altium is probably the leading PCB layout program, and these users are dealing with how to achieve good grounding in complex PC boards, possibly in the gigahertz region. he has a second one on differential pairs that has similar but complimentary information. He goes into the science hand -waived about above - that the energy is really in the fields, and the fields are in the insulation. The conductors simply guide the wave (hence the term waveguide). Several caveats:
But its still really good stuff. I think the one of differential pairs builds on this nicely. https://resources.altium.com/p/us-how-to-achieve-proper-grounding-rick-hartley-expert-live-training I have always maintained that the insulation was the most important part of any interconnect or speaker cable. If you;d use polypropylene, or Teflon, or at least Mylar in capacitors, you probably ought to in your wires too. G |
Then i apologize if sometimes by my lack of the mastery of english language i mistake sarcasm with claim.... Yes I believe so.In the limit where one just has a $100k cable and no speaker, then the cable will not make magic. My point is all changes are important, cables included, but their meaning and characteristics CANNOT be assessed WITHOUT acoustic treatment and control over a room related to the specific speakers charracteristics...If an RCA, or a speaker cable, cannot be AB identified in a 1/2 blind test, then one could argue that they are not in the group of “All changes are important”. And why does it bother you what someone does with their money? Most of those studios are running specific interconnect cables that are not “magical”… they are just using shielded twisted pairs with low capacitance and inductance. Anything that enters the CD is either coloured by them, or it has not been coloured. If I use those same cables on my playback system, then will it sound different than if I use some high $ cables? And why are the studios not using kilo-$ interconnect cables? With a liquid metal cable, for the liquid metal, it is all surface. there is no depth to penetrate. It is ’liquid’ down at the molecular alloy level, which is about as close to being a pure atomic/pure element level fluid, as you’ll ever get to. Conductive.Usually metals are most conductive as we approach 0 Kelvin. I am not sure how one makes a classical atom, or molecule, or alloy of copper (or silver) metal differ from the known melting point and boiling points that have been observed for centuries? And how would a liquid version of it stay put?I would assume it would drop out like a melting fuse So I was assuming ^that stuff^ was what this quote was referencing: Given the ABSURD claims of many audiophiles/audiophools, I find it absolutely hysterical that the NON believers (ie. the SANE sector of the "audiophile community" are the ones being labelled as "Flat Earthers". |
@clearthink +1 @englishman So, your vast knowledge, has it precluded you from doing a simple A/B test to try any of these things that you are taking a dump on? And why does it bother you what someone does with their money? Guess you just want them to know what you do, right? Because you are the be all and end all of audio knowledge because you were a button pusher in a studio? Which is why you start off by calling us audiofools? Look up Maxwells equations. They help to outline how much we thought we knew at one point, and they shed light on how science still has much to discover. But you don’t need to look them up, as you already know all there is to know. |
englishman-in-newyork"I am indeed "an Englishman in NY", with 32yrs professional/broadcast engineering under my belt, and I find most of these "Audiophile" claims to be absolute nonsense. It’s really that simple. Of course, bankers, doctors, businesmen, retirees, whatever they are, with zero professional experience but a subscription to Stereophile (or wherever these hifi myths eminate from) know more than me, because they "can hear it". Lol, sure, with their rolled-off HF hearing loss and a touch of tinnitus....sure they can hear the difference" That is AMAZING that you are able to conduct medically valid and scientific analysis of users haring without ever conducting an examination you truley have benefiied all of us with your experience, knowledge, wisdom and professional prowess! |
Lol @ Ignatius. See, this is exactly the problem with people like you...full of "conspiracy theories". Like, you MUST be right that I used to be on here under a different name. (Well, you're wrong, not sure what else I can say). I have never been on here before. I am indeed "an Englishman in NY", with 32yrs professional/broadcast engineering under my belt, and I find most of these "Audiophile" claims to be absolute nonsense. It's really that simple. Of course, bankers, doctors, businesmen, retirees, whatever they are, with zero professional experience but a subscription to Stereophile (or wherever these hifi myths eminate from) know more than me, because they "can hear it". Lol, sure, with their rolled-off HF hearing loss and a touch of tinnitus....sure they can hear the difference made by swapping the fuses for "audiophile fuses" (etc ). I find it amusing, but also rather silly. |
Any thoughts on who @englishman-in-newyork was prior to this latest incarnation? There should be some kind of lottery we could enter, and the admins could award prizes for the correct guesses. You do realize this is an audiophile forum, right? You sound like you might be dealing with some “issues”. Also sound like you’ve got a chip on your shoulder. Possibly something to do with how the “Elite” robbed you of your potential? How they are all stupid, undeserving of the money they wrongfully obtained and spend so foolishly? Too dumb to separate fact from fiction, or the truth from the lies being peddled by the almighty snake oil salesmen? But the englishman knows the “truth” and is here to set us free Thank you Ignatius J. O’Reilly |
Given the ABSURD claims of many audiophiles/audiophools, I find it absolutely hysterical that the NON believers (ie. the SANE sector of the "audiophile community" are the ones being labelled as "Flat Earthers". Buffaloes have a group as an “obstinancy”.However here is no word for a group of chefs. The idea of a Heston chef approach where one cryogenically cools the cables in liquid nitrogen, and then needs to cook, or “burn in” cables has a sort of witches brew, or cauldron feel to it… So coven comes to mind. Maybe “A Resonancy of Audiophiles” since there is a group think to it? |
@maghisterInteresting room! He even use Helmhotz resonators, he knows something for sure and the sound could be interesting.... Thanks very much for this....... My deepest respects.... |
Given the ABSURD claims of many audiophiles/audiophools, I find it absolutely hysterical that the NON believers (ie. the SANE sector of the "audiophile community" are the ones being labelled as "Flat Earthers". I rather think you've got your cryogenically-treated wires crossed! Cables raised off the floor?? That's a nutty as the nuttiest Flat Earther. We really need a collective term for a group of nutty audiophiles. Maybe a Placebo of Audiophiles. An Idiocity of audiophiles? A mid-life-crisis of Audiophiles? A Brainwashing of Audiophiles? So many great possibilities. |
@mahgister Decware sells amps & speakers & cables. No one here is discounting room treatment not even Steve. I get it you're a room treatment guy... got it. You should take it to the room treatment thread. This a discussion about cables and the science of cables. Maybe the two ears one mouth philosophy should apply here. |
@mahgister - guess who just put a pair of solid cherry QRD17 quadratic diffusers in front of his speakers on the listening wall? Reflection and diffusion behind the listener and in front of the speakers play a role which is fundamental to create the listener envelopment acoustical factor (LEV)... I am not surprized at all.... I lived through the same experience..... my best to you rix.... |
@mahgister - guess who just put a pair of solid cherry QRD17 quadratic diffusers in front of his speakers on the listening wall? Oh my goodness the difference isn't small. My wife agrees, and loves them. I called Jeff Smith of Silversmith Cables who makes the Fidelium the other day, and asked him on the progress of the XLR interconnects he's soon to release. Not soon enough, well, not soon enough for me :-P |
The perception of a cable change, for the worst or better, and his evaluation, like the evaluation of a speakers are HEAVILY dependent on the acoustic treatment and control of the room linked to these speakers... Then saying that cable are more important than speaker , even on the same level of importance, make no meaning... All is important yes, but nothing beat the improvement of the speakers/room acoustic wedding... He sells cables, i dont sell anything.... Acoustic is the sleeping princess and all piece of gear are only the 7 working dwarves... |
It was actually my post quoting Decware's creator who said cables were more important than speakers and of equal value to the amplifier. This was based on his experience building $1200 speakers and playing them with $12,000 dollars worth gear. I'm sure there is a point in all cases where increases in the costs are not a value proposition for the increases in sound quality be it speakers, amplifiers. DACs, turntables, room acoustics or even cables. The real expertise comes in getting the most increase in sound for the dollars spent and it's not always a speakers first decision. |
Then i apologize if sometimes by my lack of the mastery of english language i mistake sarcasm with claim....Then i will say that cables could be miraculously good but they will not replace marvellous speaker nor room acoustic like someone just said erroneously... But he also said that cables are more important than speakers... Is it a sarcasm too? My point is all changes are important, cables included, but their meaning and characteristics CANNOT be assessed WITHOUT acoustic treatment and control over a room related to the specific speakers charracteristics... |
This clip of the blind "batman" Daniel Kish is better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob-P2a6Mrjs I will add this one to make my point clearer about seeing sound and music... synesthesia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88s6guf9egs |
I dont want people think i denigrated cable impact here.... My posts were aimed against an exxageration and meaningless hyperbole...Cables cannot be an upgrade exceeding speakers upgrade or room upgrade.... The Silversmith cables though seems to be a real deal and more than good.... Even me i am interested by them and tempted to buy some for my speakers ....I will be able to do so in few years... Now if someone want to know what and which is all the information we miss in the sound when we receive the sound waves coming from our own room acoustic : Listen to "batman", fatality make him in the obligation to learn how to hear....His ears are the same than yours... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a05kgcI9D2Q Now think a second about what i am speaking about : If the acoustic treatment and control in a room are well done, and if the gear is good and well chosen, we are able to HEAR tonal TIMBRE instrument playing of notes microdynamics like if each note was a 3-d object in his space speaking details which we can see and decipher like a human face physionomy.... Anybody could develop his hearing and especially is listening skills to some level...It is a traning of the focused and peripheral attention in their interrelated rythmic playing..... I am not batman nor Toscanini by a large margin...But...... The truth is simple: our hearing are way more powerful tool to decipher information about material oibjects in our surroundings than we are able to dream of...I learn that my way through elementary acoustic behind Helmholtz method...I am a very average guy in musical and audio terms by the way..... Then i will say that cables could be miraculously good but they will not replace marvellous speaker nor room acoustic like someone just said erroneously... |
@danager Steve is very much one of the greats! Love his minimalist approach to audio design and I have the utmost of respect for his skill. Owned a pair of DM945’s that were a wonderful bookshelf speaker. He is by no means a peddler of BS, just straight up audio. Trust him over Tinysoft any day of the week… @nonoise Totally agree. WTF is the doofus doing on an audiophile site? Don’t ASR and Audioholics exist for small tools like him? |
I’m not positive, but I think Teo Audio and Townshend Audio also use a similar model in designing cables.With a liquid metal cable, for the liquid metal, it is all surface. there is no depth to penetrate. It is ’liquid’ down at the molecular alloy level, which is about as close to being a pure atomic/pure element level fluid, as you’ll ever get to. Conductive. All kinds of crazy things going on in there that are utterly unique in the conductor world. if it wasn’t, the patent would not have been granted. Have a elemental physicist and/or practical electrical physicist (specializing in these sorts of areas) read the patent. There are aspects to the patent that will intrigue and excite them. Has anyone here ever actually read the patent? If one actually understands the physics and science of conductivity, at the atomic level... it will will make their eyeballs bulge. eg, that us making audio cables out of it .....is about a 100th or less of it’s interesting potentials. |
Your 40 years of "selling" your cables dont beat acoustic, psycho-acoustic and all speakers designers experience in the world... I think he is claiming that his 40 years is in-line with the psycho-acoustic part. Which makes sense if he was selling cable to people and using psychological methods. Speaker designers are different than the cable people. |
maghister I’m not reading anything of that because it’s all ridiculous poop unless you eventually come to the same conclusion as mr. “Einstein” @danager. I will not comment... Save to say that someone who claim cables beat not only speakers design but especially acoustic science, if not ignorant, sells cable with the wrong marketing ploy.... Your 40 years of "selling" your cables dont beat acoustic, psycho-acoustic and all speakers designers experience in the world... Your claim is the most ridiculous one i ever encounter here... Huge boner indeed... i apologize but i could not resist after my "pooping"..... 😁😊😊😊 Enjoy your cables.... |
@maghister I’m not reading anything of that because it’s all ridiculous poop unless you eventually come to the same conclusion as mr. “Einstein” @danager. Speakers are the least important link in the chain. Your speakers don’t matter. BRB need to listen to these new cables. New speakers come in tomorrow, Logitech 5.1 THX certified setup, hopefully they complement my wires well or I’m going straight back to mr. Quest (audio, that is) to ask for a refund! |
I am not a tech guy nor a scientist... This thing being said... I learn ONE thing... Cables cannot be more important than speakers and amplifiers...And certainly not beat the room... In my experience for most people systems, NOTHING could compare in upgrading power to acoustic mechanical active controls with Hemholtz method and passive conventional material treatment... Thinking otherwise is negating 2 thousand years of acoustic science and thinking...Sound come from the acoustic settings of the original event to be acoustically recreated in your treated and controlled room through and with your ears.... Timbre is NOT reducible to a frequencies spectrum NOR explanable for the times being by frequencies spectrum... The reason is AS deep than simple: Timbre is a subjective perceived event, frequencies spectrum is an objective translation... Your room acoustic CORRECT or DEFORM this original acoustic event translated PARTIALLY by microphones location and choices before the recording process itself.... Acoustic is not electronic engineering.... Cables are conveyor that matter for sure and different from each other....But Acoustic is so powerful i am astounded that so much people never experience that which is evident on all counts... The sound speed cross average room 15 times in fraction of a second and your 2 ears syhthetize all the acoustic information of the recording through your INFORMED room...Which is a complex distributed sound resonant pressure zones... Nobody listen the original recording, everyone listen to this original event through his speakers/room INFORMED relation... Or through the shell chamber of an headphone.....It is the same acoustical event through different rooms uncontrolled or controlled with all the possible scale in between... Ouffff ! Cables are different, yes like amplifiers, speakers, dac, microphones, etc.... Acoustic is the sea where all this boats are floating.... And the laws governing sea are not the law governing the boats...The boats are constructed for the sea not the sea here for the boats.... And by the way psycho-acoustic science is not reducible either to physical acoustic....And psycho acoustic science is more harder subject than only physical acoustic , including also with acoustic itself neurophysiology ,phonology, music, etc ... I apologize but i could not resist.... 😁😊 |