Isn't it always....try them all.....one will be just right. I made my own...Acrolink cable with top of the line Furutech connections. Very pleased.
The Truth About Power Cords and there "Real" Price to Performance
This is a journey through real life experiences from you to everyone that cares to educate themselves. I must admit that I was not a believer in power cords and how they affect sound in your system. I from the camp that believed that the speaker provided 75% of the sound signature then your source then components but never the power cord. Until that magic day I along with another highly acclaimed AudioGoner who I will keep anatomist ran through a few cables in quite a few different systems and was "WOWED" at what I heard. That being said cable I know that I am not the only believer and that is why there are so many power cord/cable companies out there that range from $50 to 20-30 thousand dollars and above. So I like most of you have to scratch my head and ask where do I begin what brand and product and what should i really pay for it?
The purpose of this discussion to get some honest feed back on Price to Performance from you the end user to us here in the community.
Please fire away!
The purpose of this discussion to get some honest feed back on Price to Performance from you the end user to us here in the community.
Please fire away!
472 responses Add your response
I own a brand new pass lab XP 27 and I also purchase some Cardas cables to hook up to my amplifier which is also passed lab when I first started listening to it it sounded so horrible that I could not take no matter how much I adjusted the dials to get to the right cartridge response my feelings were that things just had to break in but after a month and it was still almost terrible to listen to I got heartsick spending all that money and afraid to play my turntable it wasn't until a friend suggested that I put a high-quality power cord on my XP 27 to solve the problem so I bought a Kimber kable PK 14% right off the bat I heard the best sound the come out of my stereo and a long time so power cables definitely make a difference |
"boxer12 Can you tell us what you had them counted to?" $200-300 / Oyaide (DIY) These were connected to everything (I have several). Some are still in place (to the amps & TT power supply) $400-500 / Cerious Connected from wall to exactpower transformer (everything but the power amps go through this dedicated transformer) $600-$1000 / Acoustic Revive Connected to the power supply for the phono preamp & dac. Also connected to the Acoustic Revive "Power strip" (from the transformer) >$1000 / Jena Labs Connected to the preamp |
"Question? In your humble opinion, what is the best Power Cord and what do you like about them from prices that range:" $50-$100 / None $200-300 / Oyaide (DIY) $400-500 / Cerious $600-$1000 / Acoustic Revive >$1000 / Jena Labs Obviously I haven't tries all cables available but these are the ones I've left in my system for any given time due to sound quality. It goes without saying that this is only my opinion. Yours will vary. |
By the way cables, and power cord are last in my list of priorities....They are system dependant, and before your audio room are completed by some treatment, your house electrical grid cleaner, your audio system under vibrations controls and more, it is waste of money to buy high cost one...At last perhaps it is an idea to try some... And if your system is sufficiently refined and even with ordinary ears you will hears the difference... It is my own experience....For sure what is big money for one is peanuts for another tough and choice of cables are not only soundwise dependant but money dependant... I apologize for my 2 cents remarks... I understand for sure that Blumartini is there with a complete hi-fi system already and it is interesting to know the experience of others I thanks him for the thread… My best to all,,, |
Be careful, we don’t want to wise up these guys too much. It can serve no good porpoise. 🐬 Wasn’t it WC Fields who said never smarten up a chump? I only mean that in a nice way. Joke. Two guys are sitting next to each other on the airplane. One guy is looking out the window and says, hey, those people down there look like ants! The second guy says, they are ants. We haven’t left the ground yet. |
2,265 posts11-27-2019 12:46pm mahgister, It’s often hard to tell on the internet so I have to ask: Was your last post a joke, or do you really make/use the tweaks you described? Prof I understand perfectly well your question...No need to apologize, you are very tactful and polite...If I was in your shoes and seeing my system and reading my description, I will think the same thing that you think of... But yes this system is born with my desire for a true HI_FI system, but without money, it is difficult to bought that... I create it myself for peanuts with used components, and mostly with tweaks of my own design, inspired by many audiophile company that sells tweaks at too much high cost for me... Then I create, sometimes originally, by listening experiment,for example my own stones cabled grid in my audio room...Nobody gives me this idea but that works for my ears... I create also my singing resonators that works in my small audio room , astoundingly...This is the story in one word... My best to you Prof... By the way I post images of my system without fearing ridicule,because my point is with almost no money, with some basic understanding, and listening experiments, and very low cost modifications of the room, house, and electrical grid, and components, we all can gain HI-FI at low cost... HI-fi is simply for me listening music with smiles without being discouraged by the 2-d low resolution.non holographic imaging, and unnatural rendering of timbre that I was afflicted with my system before my homemade modifications...My system is not the best in the world, but it is now so good for me that I do not resent anymore not being able to afford anything more now...Invention even in a modest way is the mother of joy... |
atdavid ..... but ..... just like always, it predominantly comes down to good speakers that you like, learning how to and actually treating your room, buying an amplifier that your speakers and you are happy with, and then accessorizing with and appropriate quality source and pre-amp, and if your source is vinyl, prepare to allocate more into that. Anything on top of that is gravy. I do that exactly...But I did not fall in love with my audio system, even if each link in my audio system is good, so good and carefully choosen, that the solution that appears to me was not upgrading and buying better gear ... It was instructing myself about some basic facts, and experimenting in some alternative way...I fall in love after creating my stones grid and homemade linked Schumann generators, and making my homemade Helmholtz resonators, and my homemade low cost "singing resonators"... And last but not least treating homemade my central electrical grid with stones... I am now in love with my audio system... Sometimes it takes more than good links in the audio system, even more than just a conventional room treatment, I think that some tweaks act for the good...It is not snake oil by the way, I make all that myself, without measuring anything, and by my ordinary hearing declining ears...My best to you... |
If being "on high" is making posts that hopefully teach the vast number of people that read forums, but don’t post, that the path to audio nirvana is not standing on your tiptoes, with your head exactly in line with mid-point of the tweeter and midrange, while holding your breath, but only on Tuesdays, and only after you have paid $60/minute for telephone audiophilia, and certainly not before you have consulted with the guy on the corner, the one with the trench-coat, who you must allow to ply you with his wares, and don’t worry, his "trust-me" is worth more than any PhD, and absolutely not before personally going on expedition in preferably an Amazonian rainforest for raw materials to build at least 8 bisymetrical structures, ..... but ..... just like always, it predominantly comes down to good speakers that you like, learning how to and actually treating your room, buying an amplifier that your speakers and you are happy with, and then accessorizing with and appropriate quality source and pre-amp, and if your source is vinyl, prepare to allocate more into that. Anything on top of that is gravy. It doesn’t matter what wheels and tires, or spark-plug wires, or ECU upgrade you do, that 1979 Chevette it still a Chevette. |
geoffkait18,554 posts11-27-2019 11:58amI suspect nonoise is mistaking courteousness with sanity. By his own admission mahgister is not a towering technical genius. He’s a nice guy, though. 🤗 I am not completely objectively sane, and I agree with Geoffkait also that I am not a "towering technical genius" and not even " a technical genius" and alas " not a genius"... Only a creative normal guy who love books... But if I can made a remark, in society, and this thread is a society, courteousness is social sanity, in an asylum, if all the fools were polite, the doctors would be in pain to make a bad diagnostic...I can say that humor and comedy is akin to courteousness...Not sufficient tough but a very promising societal trait... Thanks Geoffkait for saying that I am a nice guy, that will make my day... |
Hmmm.....
Enjoy your algorithmic virtual turkey Geoff! 🦃🦃🦃 |
@mahgister, it wasn't my intention to disparage you as you are one of the most sane and much needed voices around here. It's just the way things were going, which was nowhere in particular, like any other thread that made the mistake of taking on cables. @prof, please, don't ever think of me as someone from "on high". I've never shunned the light. Unlike the overwhelming majority on this site who are subjectivists and wish to remain anonymous so as to not incur the wrath of the objectivists, I don't mind it: I just sometimes grow weary from it. There's much to learn from the more knowledgeable and less dogmatic here who have the patience to proffer advice without exacting subservience. To each their own, live and let live, etc. All the best, Nonoise |
delkal So it appears there is no way to set up a "scientific" test test that will make everyone happy audiophiles will be debating this for the rest of time............. >>>>By Jove, I think he’s got it! 🤗 |
nonoise, Thank you for dropping in to supply a judgemental and disparaging description of the people in this thread. That always contributes to the tone of a forum. It's nice to get the view from "on high." You have quite an imagination in what you manage to "see" in this thread. In any case: You can rest easy knowing you have now been seen. ;-) |
|
Every time I come back to this thread I’m reminded of something primordial going on. It’s about dominance. Chest pounding, bush shaking dominance. See me. Listen to me. Obey me. It’s all very authoritarian. One can almost take the dialogue here and insert it as a closed caption on the first act of 2001, A Space Odyssey. The monolith can be the sound system and the proto-humans the debaters (too kind a word) as they fight over what they heard. I hope you can at least enjoy the holidays. All the best, Nonoise |
I hate to judge too harshly but it seems a lot easier to satisfy the Naysayers as to what constitutes a “scientifically controlled test.” The reason I say that is because, by their own words, naysayers almost always have the least firm grip on what all the variables are. Not to mention anyone with bad intent can make the test impossible to pass. Thus, Naysayers are LEAST able to control all the variables. Make sense? |
Unfortunately delkal, people are arguing from a position lacking knowledge and I have to wonder what agenda they have? Sighted Test: The subjective evaluator 100% knows that they are evaluating. Single Blind Test: (This is a blind test). The subjective evaluator has no direct knowledge of what is being tested. The tester may accidentally or on purpose give clues to the subjective evaluator. This test method is used where the potential for bias is low, or the expectation of bias is low by those viewing the results. This is used day in / day out in scientific testing as most of the time, there is no desire to introduce bias and the results are not life/money critical. For that reason, having your friend administer the test for cables, would be suitable assuming they have no skin in the game for the outcome. Similarly, having a supplier administer it would be a no-no as the potential for bias is too high, and the results would be questioned due to that potential for bias. Double Blind: Neither the subjective evaluator nor the person administering the test knows what is being tested, therefore there is no way for clues to be passed to the subjective evaluator. The almost gold standard of subjective evaluation. Triple Blind: In addition to the double blind, all test data is coded so that results cannot be linked to a particular item under test during the data processing and analysis stage. ... and again, if you are only proving or disproving a single narrow claim, you don't need multiple subjects nor a complex protocol. |
delkal ... it appears there is no way to set up a "scientific" test test that will make everyone happy ...I don’t think that’s true. The protocols for a controlled, scientific, double-blind listening test have already been established. They can be cumbersome, so some seek a shortcut to the protocols, which is fine, of course. The only issue is when they also proclaim that their compromised test is as valid as a properly controlled test. That’s a truly odd claim, but there are only one or two people here asserting it. What is subject to debate is the actual value of a proper controlled, scientific, double-blind listening test. That debate will continue as long as audiophiles inhabit the planet. ... what about doing something simpler? Just prove to yourself which cable is best for your system (blinded). Have a friend swap the cables for you and you listen and decide ... If you tend to like one over the other that is the cable to use.I think that’s exactly what some audiophiles do. Some make it even simpler and omit the blind cable swap altogether. |
So it appears there is no way to set up a "scientific" test test that will make everyone happy audiophiles will be debating this for the rest of time............. But what about doing something simpler? Just prove to yourself which cable is best for your system (blinded). Have a friend swap the cables for you and you listen and decide what the differences are. If there is an audible change it should be obvious without you having to look at your friends face to try and cheat and get a clue. It doesn’t even have to give a statistically significant outcome. If you tend to like one over the other that is the cable to use. This test would be best if you have some different demo cables to pick from. After you already spent big bucks on a cable it will be more risky. Its not fun to find out you like a cheaper cable but like everyone said cables are system dependent. There is no reason a cheaper cable might not sound better. Also, this test will not prove anything to others, It will just give you more confidence that you picked the best cable for your system. Regardless of cost, how fancy and thick it looks, or biased audio reviews. |
atdavid ... a blind test is not a sighted test ...Agreed! They are two different things. In a true blind test, neither those conducting the test nor the subject of the test know exactly what is under evaluation at any given moment. But if anyone involved in the test actually knows what is under evaluation at any given time - and they know this because they can "see" - then it isn’t a true proper blinded test: blind/blīnd/adjective ...
Anyone who has any experience running tests with subjective results has used single blind testing ...I don’t know whether that claim is true or not, but you make a fair point. The results of a "single blind" test are subjective, not objective, because the test doesn’t even try to control for all the known variables. That doesn’t mean the test has no value, so there’s no need for you to feel such hurt over this. But its value is limited to about the same extent as other sighted tests. Perhaps that limitation is not nearly so severe as some believe. It’s confounding to me why you refuse to acknowledge the difference between "blind" and "sighted." Perhaps you simply seek to continue argumentation. |
One irony for cable tests, blind tests or whatever, is that new cables almost always sound quite bad relatively speaking, so what purpose would testing new cables serve? The other irony is perhaps more subtle, especially for you new guys, but unplugging a cable destroys the delicate electrical mechanical interface where the cable is connected. It takes at least a day or two to establish or restore that delicate connection once the cable is plugged in. Same for power cords. Conclusion, all (rpt all) cable tests are bogus unless you are willing to be extremely patient. Most cable swappers are like bulls in a china shop. As Bob Dylan says at the end of his records, good luck to everyone! Of course the big chicken 🐔 in the room is wire directionality. Why would anyone test cables that are in the wrong direction? Hel-loo! “Because it’s what I choose to believe.” - Dr. Elizabeth Shaw in Prometheus |
cleeds, "The tester’s bias - or even his personality traits - can poison the test."I think you are taking this whole thing a little too serious. Whole thing with double vs. single blind test is also a little exagerrated. I may be wrong, but it seems you extrapolate some, not even all, clinical medical research practice and apply it to something that does not require that particular level of stringency. True, double blind testing will practically always be easier to defend than single blind testing, but in this case it is just for argument’s sake and not for any real world application. As far as science 101 goes, thousands of mice die daily during tests and experiments that are not blinded at all, not to humans at least, and results are considered valid and used for whatever purpose intended. Ok, mice do not know much about it so you could say it is single blinded. Subtle cues during some cable swapping experiment could happen, but it is expected that a person doing swapping would be an adult with at least some self-control. I guess you could call it bias, but it should be negligible. What is swapper going to do? Wink at the listener when installing a certain cable he wants to win? Clear her/his throat at that time? Again, double blind testing may be ideal but it also may not be necessary. In cable swapping test, single blinded with a reasonably behaving swapper may be all you need. Fully sighted may not be enough, if you are really trying to be scientific. |
| Post removed |
So a double blind test is better than a single blind test? How about a blind test with just one eye open? Does it count as blind test? What if it’s sighted test but you really squint very hard to the point you are kinda unsighted and everything is very blurry? It should count as unsighted I believe. Or single blind. Basically if both eyes are closed, it double blind, if one eye is closed is single blind. And if you are squinting is 1/2 blind. Another scenario is like when you cheat a little bit. Like you move the black clothe just a little that you can glance. How is that called? |
What I am saying is that a blind test is not a sighted test and that it is the height of intellectual dishonesty to even claim that. Anyone who has any experience running tests with subjective results has used single blind testing as well as double blind testing depending on the rigour required for the test and the potential bias of the tester. To say that a single blind test equates to a sited test is an ignorant position not based in facts, or born from experience. |
| Post removed |
atdavid Single blind testing is used regularly where tester bias is deemed to have overall limited impact on the results.What you’re saying is that your sighted test is better than other sighted tests. That’s just nonsense. If you want to conduct a scientific test - of any sort - you need to eliminate as many potential sources of bias as possible. That’s a fundamental scientific principle, whether it suits your belief system or not. |
Cleeds, You are a broken record. Prof and I have schooled you on this many times and clearly showed how you are wrong. You keep coming back with the same tired and wrong answers. 1) We are not trying to implement a study or test that applies to every case, i.e. whether JoeBlowCablesInc model 2112 is the worlds best cable. We are only, repeat Only trying to implement a study that either proves or disproves One persons claim, and under the conditions They make. Therefore, one only needs to repeat the conditions of their claim and use them (or who they designate) to prove or disprove their claim. 2) That you even attempt to argue that a blind test is not far superior to a sighted test removes any credibility you had or have. Your argument is akin to "Well even people who use parachutes sometimes die, so we should never use parachutes". That you repeatedly do this combined with your repeated attempts to refute (1) by describing something completely unrelated drops, at least in my mind, your credibility to 0. Single blind testing is used regularly where tester bias is deemed to have overall limited impact on the results. You really need some new material as these tired wrong arguments are stale. |
atdavid While ideally the test would be double blind, that is not always a viable thing to do.Quite so! Conducting a controlled test with the goal that it will be scientifically valid is a tricky business. It’s time-consuming, tedious and cumbersome, so not likely to be fun for most audiophiles. I’m sure that’s one reason such tests are uncommon in our community. There are two biases, subject bias and observation bias. Single blind removes subject bias, which is usually the dominant bias. While double blind is the "gold standard", single bias is still used as it eliminate subject bias, and provides significantly more statistically relevant results. To suggest this is no more valuable than sighted tests shows a gross ignorance w.r.t. this type of testing.Sorry, but you don’t know what you’re talking about. You can’t allow potential bias to creep into a test, and then excuse the bias by proclaiming that isn’t the "dominant" bias, whatever that is. The test you describe is a sighted test, and subject to whatever flaws such tests might include. That’s especially so in this instance, where you’ve acknowledged that the tester will have to "lie" to the subject about whether he might be hearing the A or B component. The tester’s bias - or even his personality traits - can poison the test. For example, the tester may reveal a "tell" (as a poker player would call it) that could be even unconsciously detected by the test subject, thereby influencing his responses. And that’s why I said that your partially-sighted test has no advantage over a fully sighted test - bias can affect results either way. If you want to conduct a scientific test, you have to control for as many variables as possible. This is science 101; there’s no disputing this basic stuff. I think it’s rather odd that some of those who clamor most loudly for scientific listening tests have such poor understanding of what’s involved. Perhaps that’s why they are so confounded that controlled tests are so rare: They think such testing is simple and straightforward, while nothing could be further from the truth. |
Not what he asked |
@thyname I don't listen to those poor souls. Sad that they were not allowed to play with others subject to misbehavior. There negative cry for attention is the demonstration of the lack of. Carry on man, no body really is interested in their party of 1 antics lol. P.S. Alright I will admit that a few comments have cracked me totally up lmao:) |
The unfortunate situation is that once the cable hater crowd has already polluted an audio thread, it will be tough to get anybody chime in with recommendations on what you ask for. How can they? Do they like to be ridiculed by recommending anything other than stock power cords? I don't. But maybe someone is brave enough to step forward... |
