It seems to me that there is too little scientific, objective evidence for why cables sound the way they do. When I see discussions on cables, physical attributes are discussed; things like shielding, gauge, material, geometry, etc. and rarely are things like resistance, impedance, inductance, capacitance, etc. Why is this? Why aren’t cables discussed in terms of physical measurements very often?
Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivist” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in cables.
I know cables are often system dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.
When aftermarket cable makers measure, that's not good enough, huh? David Salz at WireWorld, Grant at Shunyata... No good, eh? When Mogami measures, that's good enough.
Hyprocrites. Imo, you're cheapskates. Your wallet rules your decisions. You don't compare because you can't stomach the idea of spending anything on it. Defense of Pro cables is to guard your money. You love them because their cheap, and you bought the marketing. LOTUS POSITION, EVERYONE! Do you guys sit with your legs crossed to get the most out of your Mogami cables? ;)
Chintzy. That's closer to the truth.
I know, I used to be a cable skeptic. :)
So, who among our skeptics wishes to try Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement?
I'm sure that at this point our cable skeptics are really appreciating the gross generalizations I have made. i.e. cable skeptics are chintzy.
It's not so different than gross generalizations characterizing persons who use (even expensive) aftermarket cables with negative religious allusions or calling them unscientific.
Perhaps a bit of mirror gazing would be helpful for our skeptics.
When aftermarket cable makers measure, that's not good enough, huh? David Salz at WireWorld, Grant at Shunyata... No good, eh? When Mogami measures, that's good enough.
Hyprocrites. Imo, you're cheapskates. Your wallet rules your decisions. You don't compare because you can't stomach the idea of spending anything on it. Defense of Pro cables is to guard your money. You love them because their cheap, and you bought the marketing. LOTUS POSITION, EVERYONE! Do you guys sit with your legs crossed to get the most out of your Mogami cables? ;)
Canare is obviously more scientific than Mogami. All you who bought Mogami aren't very scientific. Canare has better charts, and even a DF chart. Much more scientific. Absolutely proves Canare sounds better.
As we all know, a DF chart demonstrates how a cable sounds in an absolute fashion such that no consideration of the rest of the system is necessary.
Mogami users were duped by the anti-scientific marketing. Better buy Canare to be assured of better sound.
Pro audio cables are expensive and not a good value when you consider that skeptics should be using lamp cord. They should be using the interconnects from their 1980's stereo. That is, if they want to be consistent.
After all, they think no one can pass ABX testing, so why would they spend the money on Pro cables? It's all about fear of looking bad, prestige, feeling like a Pro! Yeah! They think, "If the Big Boys in audio do this, then when I buy their products I'm a Big Boy home system builder, too! I'm so much smarter than all those fools who spent more than me...
After all, look at that graph/chart! PROVES I've got the best possible sound. I use Canare, so much more scientific than Mogami! Only a loser would use such a thinly supported, unscientific cable as that. Look! They're religious with their guy sitting in Lotus position! Who can trust a cable company like that?"
Were it to stop at that it would be understandable and reasonable, I mean, some folks, and rightfully so, do not share either the fundamentalist understanding of science that is a large part of the skeptic’s "intellectual" arsenal, or what it ultimately represents as a world-view. But words like foolish, stupid, gullible, and deaf are routinely tossed around when describing those who have committed the apparent sin of buying anything more than inexpensive entry level cables. But the fun doesn’t stop there, any manufacturer who dares step outside the carefully prescribed circle of cable righteousness is branded a liar, or a charlatan, or a snake-oil salesman, or a thief....Sweet, real sweet, and definitely not a strategy to develop some form of solution or understanding....no, its more like building a justification to burn witches at the stake.
What’s funny is this level of vitriol is not routinely being used by the other camp in this, errr, discussion.
This from the Mogami site...where they are selling superior sound that apparently is somehow real special and superior......
Mogami has been the top choice for wiring professional recording studios for decades. Recording engineers have come to depend on Mogami’s superior sound quality, clarity, silent background, and consistent quality. Mogami is so widely used that if you have commercially recorded music, chances are overwhelmingly good that Mogami is part of the vital signal chain
.
But here we have better cable, also by Mogami, so is this stuff supposedly superiorestistical or something.... its the most neutral, dynamic cable made....read the most, as in nothing better....like mo bettah than anything even their own other simply superior stuff....
( ...and please note this... superior itself is already an absolute superlative form
....so you can't have something like most or more superior...)
What could be accomplished if sound quality was placed above all else but not at the expense of others? Mogami answered this challenge with cable we call Platinum, the most neutral, dynamic cable made. Like all Mogami cable, the sound emerges from a silent background, but with more dynamics, frequency extension and detail than anything before it. A larger diameter cable, Mogami Platinum is flexible enough for the most active performers yet rugged enough for road use with reasonable handling. It’s why so many of today’s top touring bands trust only Mogami Platinum
.
And always love the use of the term no compromise when a sentence or two earlier we see more economical....weird eh, no compromises but cheaper....like how is that even remotely possible....
Mogami Silver is genuine Mogami microphone and instrument cables built for more economical budgets than our Platinum and Gold assemblies. Despite having an attractive price, each Mogami silver cable is made without compromise to quality using top quality connectors. Every cable is hand assembled, then tested for performance before it leaves the assembly bench. Mogami Silver cables are backed by our no excuses lifetime warranty. Fortunately, with this level of quality you will probably never need it.
Hmmm....don’t want to jump to conclusions but seems the emperor and his clothes parted company somewhere along the line....that being said these guys also sound a lot like heretics to me, so lads, should we go get some firewood, and wieners ?....
It’s worth noting that Mogami was originally used to name a set of 4 Japanese heavy battle cruisers that Japan deployed during WW2. All of them were sunk during the war.
“TheMogami class cruisershave been seen by naval architects as a design failure.”
Not a great background for such a storied line of the best cables in the world.
Not to mention a very serious nomenclature failure on the cable end. Now I don’t want to jump to conclusions yet again but that sounds like maybe we’ve discovered a snake-oil spill that will make it very slippery for certain folks to get around cause their certainty has now got all uncertain like, like oil spills do that eh....hopefully science will save them.
I really prefer most more much superioristical ...like it goes to 11 and beyond to explore new galaxies and universes and dimensions and so on and so forth, very trippy stuff eh...you know I’m thinking that Mogami is drawing on alien technology from Area 51, yup that is exactly what I’m thinking.... I mean what other explanation could there be....like the concept of most superior just can’t even be grammatically expressed in human language, ergo, alien...gee I wonder what of kind of spooky science those guys have...
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the undisputed Breakfast of Champions is Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs....no contest....like more alien technology eh....
There was a time that I would've agreed with you but as I've gotten older, I find myself preferring good old fashioned Kroeger's Frosted Shredded Wheat. That, and crullers with white icing. Even white chocolate. Can't explain it. 🤔
So, we have skeptics, I'm sure, who use a higher AWG speaker cable.
Ok, so Canare insists that what yields better sound is lower AWG. (I concur; I have confirmed it through numerous listening comparisons.) Canare has a chart showing DF in relation to speaker cables and AWG.
So, skeptics, are you going to change your thinner wires to heavier based on this science? Or, do you trust your ears. Have you even ever tried a comparison between your favored high AWG speaker (smaller conductor) cable and a low(er) one (larger conductor)? Would you trust a chart to determine what sound you would like, or would you trust your ears?
What if Canare's plan is to sell you more cable by recommending thicker speaker cables? How do you trust them? By the numbers? Or, would you trust your ears? And, if you just your ears by foregoing the recommendation of Canare's science, then doesn't that make you unscientific?
Are you suspicious of a Pro speaker cable maker's recommendation, or do you give the Pro cable maker a pass, and do not subject it to scrutiny? If you prefer subjectively a thinner speaker cable conductor (higher AWG), do you see Canare as disingenuine, not trustworthy for recommending a heavier AWG speaker cable? Do you apply the same kind of suspicion to the Pro company as you do to other speaker makers who are not "Pro"?
BTW, Schroeder Method of IC Placement was first tried by myself because of my conclusion that lower AWG is universally superior. I saw that it wasn't in use in interconnects and I thought it worth a try. I suppose that if I had a chart like Canare you would "buy it". So, because I don't have a chart, I guess that means it can't work, right? :)
Mapleshade Omega Mikro interconnects, which I’ve listened to extensively over several days, employ a solid core copper conductor that is 54 gauge. In case anyone’s not sure how thick 54 gauge wire is, it’s the thickness of a human hair. Oh, did I forget to say they are absolutely great sounding interconnects? Very open, revealing with great bass performance. So, as far as wire gauge goes, I don’t really believe anyone trying to make a general or universal statement.
Before I forget what’s the deal with directionality for DS type interconnects? Any consensus?
Can you honestly hear the difference? I would be curious to do a blind test on cables costing $250 to $10,000 and see if you can hear the difference. The question is how much better for every $100 spent. I would think you would be better off buying more expensive speakers instead.
"I don’t let Pro marketing dictate what I do, and what cables I select. :)"
Nor do many people on this thread. They are labeled as "skeptics" or whatever else is supposed to be derogatory by pros or wannabe-pros touting their wares here.
glupson, I would be interested in seeing listed, or better yet, seeing imaged, your system in its entirety, including cables. Please post your system for us to see. Thanks!
I would be interested whether you use Pro cables, or whether you use aftermarket cables. Perhaps you already discussed this previously; if so, I apologize for my forgetfulness. You can direct me to such discussion if you already have told the community. :)
glupson, BTW, in another post of yours I see that you have Kharma and Wilson speakers. But, I do not see the rest of your system listed.
The speakers are older, so I presume that you are attempting to remain in a budget and get the best result. Is your resistance to more expensive aftermarket cables a matter of your fiscal priorities?
I suggest that if you use aftermarket cables that are older and much less costly, then that might explain your resistance to current aftermarket cables and your repeated inference that persons such as myself are, "touting their wares here." Btw, I consider that extreme bias and skepticism. :)
My system is not a secret although there are no pictures of it anywhere.
It is very modest and would not qualify for Schroeder method, just based on price.
It is Luxman 505UX amplifier and Revel Performa F208 speakers connected by Monster Cable speaker cables bought in 1994 for about $30/spool of many meters.
The sources are Technics SL-Q2 turntable, fully stock except for Soundsmith Otello cartridge, SONY HAP-Z1ES player, and Luxman D-05U SACD player (mostly used as a DAC on the rare days any of these actually get turned on). Interconnects are Shunyata Venom XLR (1 meter, I think), and JIB RCA from eBay ($20 or so for a pair). There is one more 90cm USB cable, unknown brand, bought for $10-15. Power cords are whatever came with actual machines.
All in all, a mix of stock and aftermarket cables with perfectly functional electronics on the lower side of passionate discussion. Once I use any of the above for a career/earning, it will become Pro. Until then, it is just a conglomerate of metal, rubber, plastic, and whatever else goes in it.
To keep in line with the title of this thread, do you have any thought why it takes $25 000 or 50 000 system to notice the difference/improvement with the Schroeder method while it took $60 to notice the difference between earphone cables (it was not for better, though)? Any science behind it? Theory? Wild guess?
I have no experience with it, but from douglas_schroeder's post a few days ago...
Also, I wouldn’t expect to hear big changes with systems in the $5-10K range if I were changing a single pair of ICs. I remember doing all that and many times there was marginally different result. It takes a rig at about $25K to always hear changes to any cables. Rigs at $50K it has been easy, universal in hearing changes. YMMV
glupson, thanks for sharing about your system, as it is helpful for me to know your involvement, priorities, etc. It helps to see what you are wiling to do in the hobby, fleshes out more your discussion.
Two things for clarification; If you are primarily referring to me as a "pro" reviewer, you seem to connect this with income, and it seems you distrust my input because you think I’m paid. I have never been paid to review for daggo.com. I largely volunteer my time/cost involvement versus the "pro" reviewers who are paid. So, please correct misinformation that is tacitly suggested about my being "pro" when associated with payment or income. I actually have spent far more than most audiophiles on their systems simply to attend shows on my dime so that I can develop better systems for myself. I have spent far more of my own money on this hobby than most, so yes, if it’s experience and building hundreds of systems that makes a "pro", then yes, I am a pro.
The second inference you have brought up about three times, though I have corrected it, is that somehow I am benefitting (perhaps by the mistaken notion that I am paid as a reviewer) from associations from Schroeder Method and use of cables. I have stated clearly my involvement in my Method, and have said that I have no financial incentive other than perhaps a patent that assured no gain/income that won’t even materialize for years. I have zero investment with cable makers, and the only benefit I have had to date is a loan (I never consider cables on loan for review purposes to become mine; something that distinguishes me from some reviewers) of cables that can be called back at any time.
In case it would be pointed out that I do obtain an accommodation on purchase as a reviewer, yes that is so. However, I have also stated publicly that my time investment per dollar/hour would be so low that the vast majority of persons here would not put in the effort. I happen to love building systems and would do so anyway, and I love writing (I guess that's obvious enough!). So, the invitation to review years ago was up my alley. :)
Now, with those misnomers corrected, I’ll answer your latest post: You have what I would consider a mid-level HiFi system. On your system you would most definitely hear distinctions between interconnects. You intentionally misquoted me by omitting the word "big" in your summary. Then you proceeded to conclude that I am in error because you add that you could hear changes with a $60 earphone cable.
So, you attempt to discredit me with that comparison. However, you have failed for two reasons: 1. I discussed "big" changes, which is my subjective judgment of what is worthwhile to pursue, not an absolute statement of whether there was a change. I think your misquote shows your agenda, to discredit me due to your deep skepticism.
2. I know that changes of cables to inexpensive systems are audible. I recall taking an aftermarket power cord to a boom box and hearing a difference! If you can hear a change of a $60 cable on earphone, and I can hear a power cord change on a all in one system, then I guess we’re not so far apart on audibility of cabling after all. :)
I don’t think you have any clue what the spectrum of performance is for audio systems. I speak of a VERY wide spectrum of performance when I say that it takes a $25K rig to get more out of cable changes. I don’t expect you to understand that. So be it. I suspect the vast majority of people who have made $25-100K rigs would agree with me that there is a disproportionately more profound influence of a cable change on a $50K rig than a $5K rig. i.e. You can hear a lot more of what a cable is doing on a $50K rig than a $5K rig. I am certainly not interested in an ongoing debate about that with you if you have never set up a $25-50K rig. It’s like arguing with someone how a high performance sports car handles who has never driven one.
So, in further assessment, "perfectly functional" electronics in no way means superior performance. You’ll get music, but the character of the music can be profoundly improved - for instance, by the Schroeder Method.
I can also answer your tacit objection about the earphone cable compared not being better. You have a 50%/50% chance of any cable compared being better. If that one didn’t do the trick, try another. To conclude that there is no efficacy in aftermarket cables from one comparison is imo in keeping with the tendency to write off my input with an incorrect characterization that you cannot hear changes with lower end rigs.
I think you have demonstrated my premise clearly, that cost determines your "cable worldview", and that any one who would dare to promote use of expensive cables you suspect deeply, even when they have explained themselves. I consider you not just a skeptic, but an arch-skeptic, as you continue to hold that there is some latent agenda, some manipulation, where none exists. I attempt to offer the community a great, and potentially super-inexpensive method, and you rail against me for it! Wow, I am about done with that.
I have spent too much time doing what I said I wouldn’t. I am debating my credentials, methods and motives. Frankly, I put in the time not for you, but for the community. If you change your mind, I will be elated for you. But, I suspect you are too confident in yourself, too entrenched to accept experience from someone who could help you get a much better sound and imo more enjoyment for not much money.
So... I will attempt again to commit myself to not engaging in lengthy arguments. If I can’t gain your trust through explanation, then I’m not going to indefinitely spend time on it. I’m very happy to help those who want insight, but to this point you want to incite distrust. I can be doing more important things, like, yes, writing reviews, etc.
Meanwhile, I suspect there are some who are trying Schroeder Method, and I hope you are having a great time with it! :)
This last page is the most unscientific hilarity seen in many a long while.
My company wired LA studios for about 15 years. We used Belden, Mogami, Canare, Monster, <some I forget> depending on what the client wanted.
The studio owners expended many hours listening to obtain the best sound with their equipment. They had the opportunity to make comparison with live performers, be it a Marshall stack, really famous vocalists, 50 piece string section, ETC!!! Without any shadow of a doubt, you all have recordings you rave about that were recorded in these rooms.
Children, cables sound different depending on the connected devices. There is no magic bullet. Skinny AWG might sound good with a speaker with one set of flaws and fat AWG better with a different set of flaws. Change length, geometry, insulation, connectors and all bets are off.
Not 1 in 1000 has any technical expertise whatsoever or been within 100 miles of recording studio. You're all talking out the side of your neck!!!
ieales"Not 1 in 1000 has any technical expertise whatsoever or been within 100 miles of recording studio. You're all talking out the side of your neck!!!"
In truth, reality, and actuality there are many users, contributors, and posters to this forum who have extensive, detailed, hands on experience, education, and qualifications so just because you wired studios does not render or result in the superiority of your beliefs, opinions, or proclamations.
If cables all sound different dependent upon connected devices, then by what right do the people who are supposed to know that - the Pro cable companies and the studios who offer their support for them - promote their cables as the best technically with charts and graphs? Perhaps these companies and studios cannot be trusted when skeptics suggest that cables are "system dependent", then argue that they have demonstrated their cable and recording is superior.
i.e. Marketing would rule the day, then, wouldn't it for both pro cables and studios?
You are reinforcing the point that subjective opinion was used to determine the choice of cabling, not measurements. Did the studios go with the brand of cables that purportedly measured better, or the ones that were deemed better sounding?
Simply because a selection of pro cables was used for a studio does not mean the result is that great. It may be the best possible with pro cables, bu it in no way means the best in an absolute sense.
Nothing you have said, ideals, has countered factually my assertions about pro oriented cables. You have appealed to authority, and tangentially, rather than discuss my criticisms. Based on your reaction, I suspect you have not used many different cables in your home system. Perhaps I'm wrong, and I stand open to correction on this, but I suspect you have simply plugged in Pro cables because that is what you used in the studio. Is that correct? If so, then I suggest that while you are eminently knowledgeable about the studio, you are ignorant of the use of cables in a domestic rig. I suspect that because you think that cables have no inherent characteristics, it doesn't matter so much which ones you choose as long as they are in the ballpark, i.e. have acceptable specifications. It would stand to reason, then, that you simply put into your home rig what would be used in a studio.
I suggest that is a recipe for mediocrity in a home system.
Perhaps you could share here your entire system setup for the home, including cables from power to speakers. I am open to being educated on this topic. But, I will not be intimidated by an appeal to authority and derision. If that is what you have to offer and will not discuss the technical aspects of my criticisms, then I am not interested in talking further about it. :)
Pro and HiFi cables are made to make money. FULL STOP. In both cases, the uninformed consumer is fair game.
Holding Pro companies’ feet to the fire is extremely hypocritical given the mountains of malarkey which pervades the HiFi cable market.
In the Pro world, it’s about getting clients through the door. The cables need to get the job done to the satisfaction of the client. Most of it is buried in the walls so has ZERO jewelry appeal, which is oft foremost in HiFi. The only place pro cable has any value is between the client’s ears.
Just as with a home system, depending on the room and equipment, Mogami may sound better than Canare. In the end, all the matters is the quality of the recording. In the studio, we would use mic cables dating back to the 40’s or the latest and greatest or something in between, depending on the singer, microphone, equalizer, limiter, recorder and tape. We also had patch cords made of Mogami, Canare, Monster, Belden, etc. Some cables had silver plated connectors. Some, gold. All had a signature. Regardless, all were replugged at the start of a session. IMO, most audiophiles fail miserably at rigor when evaluating new kit. Hence a never ending attempt to hit an always moving target.
As far as measurements, what and how are you going to measure. Who cares if they measure well but don’t sound very good in the application. "If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you’ve measured the wrong thing." -- Daniel R. von Recklinghausen, HHScott
Based on your reaction, I suspect you have not used many different cables in your home system.
I was evaluating cables, by calculation, measurement and sonics, as an educated audiophile, long before you purchased your first Rat Shack receiver or I became a pro. I have bins of them in the garage. About the time you went RS, I was using Yamaha Class A amps, Mitch Cotter silver phono cables and interconnects and Oracle speaker cable, custom twisted. A friend owned a Rat Shack store. I still have my Minimus 7s, but the electronics? I’m sure they measured well, but "How could you?"
As far as my speaker cables, Kimber BiFocal-XL. Why? Because they sound very nice. Inconsequentially, they are also engineered for the job and provably so. The missus HATES them!!!
You may be reading too much into anything related to your method.
The word "pro" was referring to your sentence "I would be interested whether you use Pro cables, or whether you use aftermarket cables." Not to you as a person or anything else.
"You intentionally misquoted me by omitting the word "big" in your summary. Then you proceeded to conclude that I am in error because you add that you could hear changes with a $60 earphone cable."
I am not sure where I omitted the word "big". The quote from your post was copy/paste so if computer omitted it, I am guilty as well. Otherwise, it is what you wrote. I would not try to make my case by playing tricks. On the other hand, there is a word "big" somewhere in there. Maybe you omitted it by accident. You would not have done it to discredit me, I am sure.
In fact, I was not even trying to make any case but just asking about your thoughts. It was not a trick question, it was a real question. "I have no clue" would be a perfectly legitimate answer. I have no intention of discrediting you, as far as I am concerned the whole world can switch to Schroeder method if it works for them. Still, it was not me who, based on experience, mentioned price of the system as something relevant. It makes sense to me on some primitive level (better is better and more expensive is most of the time better) so you do not need to defend your claims. It is just that I still do not know if you have any thought about the reasons for it or explanation of such observations.
As far as me having Karma and Wilson speakers, the bug is saved and geoffkait will stay hungry. My only experience with Wilson speakers is passing by a pair of used Duetta (or something like that) in the hallway of JS Audio in Bethesda. They were not playing at that time. As far as budget goes, my choices are not influenced by budget, but by overall interest of the moment. That extends to audio cables, too. I passed by a Revel showroom just the other day and they have my speakers there at their full price ($5000). Maybe an older design, but still current. I would buy them again, unless some other model comes in yellow.
Nobody is railing anything against you and your angelic offers to this community. You are really overly sensitive about things nobody ever spent time to think about. Great that you offer, now let’s go back to the title of this thread and let us know more about the science of it all.
My conclusion from this thread is that I was right about geoffkait. He can figure some things out quite well.
Wow !?.....really!?.....that is sooooooo cool !?....can I have your autograph?.....purty please....and for those keeping score please enter the preceding as a tongue in cheek joke....
And please note, over the last few decades I’ve been to several hundred studios, recording locations, and editing facilities....and the take-away?....the vast majority not only sucked, they sucked big time....even the ones in which highly regarded recordings were made....in fact most living rooms sound better, though admittedly they aren’t as pretty or impressive looking or loud...Just saying eh.
glupson and ieales, I do not concur with your assessments, but I'm not spending more time on this at the cost of my work. Blessings to you both, and thank you for at least cordially debating me. :)
If either of you ever wish to try Schroeder Method of IC placement I would be happy to discuss it with you and to see your impressions. I will say this, I think you will miss out big time if you dismiss it. Short of that we know pretty well where we stand and likely further jousting would not be productive. I will try to keep an open mind to your comments going forward. :)
Despite the stance of a misunderstood prophet that you frequently seem to want to project, nobody is dismissing your method. At least not on the last page or so. It seems that most of us with relatively cheap systems should not expect much difference with it, rendering an attempt futile for now. We can only believe it is great and be thankful for an opportunity and enlightenment you generously bestowed upon us. Thank you.
Now, if you could follow this thread’s title and clarify the science of it for those who are tired of empty promises of $50 000 bliss. That would be a much bigger contribution than everything you have done here so far.
I was just getting ready to try the Schroeder Method on my cheap Sony Walkman. Then I realized my system is not a $50K system, it’s more like a $5 system. And I don’t even use interconnects. Boy, is my face red!
astelmaszek99 posts02-24-2019 7:24pmLet me just mention that majority of the recordings you listen to were done with about 500ft of Canare microphone cable, and that's if the studio was fancy."
I always wonder about these types of comments, this is all the more reason to fix the audio chain that we can control in our own environment.
People say the same thing for power conditioners and power cables. Yea the power system is messy and dirty if it were perfect we wouldn't need to correct things on our end.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
