I am in general agreement with the OP.
Though I think the section about the importance of the recording methods could essentially have gone without saying. I don’t know any audiophiles - "tweakers" or not - who don’t realize the role the recording/mastering etc methods are to the sound of any track.
It’s in the playback system that there is lots of confusion and disagreement.
I myself put the emphasis on the biggest bang for the buck: speakers, modifying room acoustics, and speaker positioning. To that end my cabling is simply "competently manufactured cables, chosen for the task." For instance I have a long run of belden (10 awg, probably over-kill) speaker cables that go under my floors from my source room to my speaker room. (Which must be a frightening to those who believe they need cable risers even in the few feet from their speaker to amps. Imagine the audiophile house of horrors to which I’m exposing my cables!). I use stock power cords, and a mishmash of interconnects. Still using an old Benchmark DAC1 - not even usb!
For me the importance of putting money into good speakers, and paying attention to acoustics, is re-enforced every time I listen to another system employing expensive cables, DACs, etc. For instance I have been auditioning many different speakers for the last couple years or so.
Inevitably the speakers - usually ones well lauded and essentially competing around the same price range as my own - are hooked up to fire-hose cables (or Nordost or whatever), super expensive AC cables, conditioners, expensive CD transports or servers, etc, etc.
And pretty much every time I come home, play the same tracks on my system, it sounds at least as good or better - I hear every reverb trail, every this and that, all presented smoothly, with finess and dynamics.
The tens of thousands in additional expense for cabling and accessories sure don’t seem to show up as any advantage in the store auditions - certainly not enough to overcome good speakers and acoustics.
(That’s also true when I listen to some pal’s systems with crazy expensive Nordost cabling).
So I’m really happy not to have been convinced that I need to have spent time, thought, and MUCH more money on cables and tweaks.
(I’ve seen some people around here actually recommend spending something like 30 percent of your budget on cables!).
None of that is to proclaim that none of the expensive accessories can make a sonic difference; it’s only to say where I find my own money is best spent.
That said: I have in my own experience seen the effects of amplifiers on a system. I prefer certain tube amplification over SS in my systems. Even though we may be talking objectively subtle differences, they seem to play a large role subjectively. I find myself much more drawn to sitting down in front of my system when using certain tube amplification.
Further, at one point I re-did my 2 channel room to do home theater duty as well. This meant switching the usual speaker/listening sofa position 180 degrees. Talk about a rude reminder of the effect of room acoustics! Once I did that, the change in acoustics made my speakers sound like crap! Sucked out, dry, brittle, you name it. I was utterly despondent as I didn’t even want to listen to anything any more. But I had been temporarily using an old Harmon Kardon SS amp (because my CJ amps weren’t working). A good amp and I’d always enjoyed my smaller systems using it - in fact it had been powering my speakers and things sounded fine before I switched the room around. So it wasn’t the problem, it was the acoustics.
The HK amp went on the blink and I had to borrow another. My pal had an old Eico HF-81 14W side tube amp lying around and lent it to me. I knew nothing about that amp, just wanted sound coming out of my speakers. When I started playing music I was gobsmacked by the sound - big, rich, full, organic. There was that sound I’d been longing for and was used to in my previous set up! My butt was suddenly stuck in the chair listening. That’s all it took to show me I could still get in to two channel audio. Afterward I commissioned an acoustician when remodelling the room and now my 2 channel sounds better than ever.
So I’m certainly an audiophile who can obsess over little things. I’m super sensitive to alterations of tone in my system. But I reap so much more in dialling acoustics and speaker positioning than anything I’ve heard from a cable or conditioner of any type (or other tweaks - and I have had access to many tweaks and high end cables etc).
|
^^^^^ Ha! Nice one Centurion! Like it, like it.... |
rbstehno,
Your point about synergy is certainly well taken. The idea obviously makes sense.
On the other hand, the end of your post seems to imply the common audiophile idea that if you are spending big bucks on speakers (and amps) then one should expect to spend significant money on cabling.
I and others have found that to not be the case.
As I mentioned in my system description: I have high end speakers (Thiel flagship 3.7, MBL Radialstrahler, etc) yet I haven’t spent a cent on "upgrading" any stock cables to audiophile AC cables, and my speaker cable cost a mere $1.20 a foot. Yet I find my system holds up no problem against those with tens of thousands of dollars in cabling and power conditioning.
And I could probably have spent only .60 cents a foot to get the next higher (thinner) AWG version, and could have realized the same sound.
|
hifiman5,
I respect your experience with your system!
I’m not looking to turn the thread into a "cable" thread beyond simply stating my experience and view. And since you asked...
Over the years I have had experience with fancy cable. Especially having done some reviewing long ago and knowing other reviewers, people in the industry, high end shop owners etc, I’ve had some experience with quite a number of fancy cables over the years.
And often enough I would get cast off cables from higher-rolling friends, or if I have to borrow a cable, I’ll end up with some far higher priced cables than I would buy.
So various cables have been in and out of my system, and I’ve heard tons of the highest end cables in reviewer’s systems.
Nothing ever convinced me to spend money on the high end cables. (In fact I did some blind tests on some Shunyata AC cables that cured me of ever wanting to spend money there...)
I’m not at all adamant that high end interconnect or speaker cables can’t sound different. In theory of course they could be made to sound different. (Though "different" and "more accurate" aren’t the same of course. I’m a bit more skeptical that super expensive cables are passing higher fidelity signals than a competently built cheap cable - which would seem capable of passing everything in the source signal just fine. None of the the many incredible old recordings (let alone many new) that are still reference quality today were using boutique cables and the cables used in recording, mixing, mastering etc seemed to perform just find. And I’m even more suspicious of AC cables. But, again, I’m no expert and I’m just making inferences from my own experience and the most trustworthy info I can find elsewhere).
|
SB,
While I can see some of the arrogance in the OP in "dropping the truth" for this forum....I don't see how you can pull "jealousy" out of that post.
Also: what do you actually think is "rubbish" about his advice? |
duckworp,
Whether all DACs sound the same or not (and I think many that some presume sound different may not actually be distinguishable when you don't know which you are listening to)....
...I think it's certainly defensible that DAC maturity reached a point - and quite a while ago - where one doesn't have to spend a lot of money to get accurate, high fidelity sound, hence it wouldn't make sense to rank DACs high on the scale of an important place to spend your money.
A good DAC is easy to find and not very expensive. So concentrating money and time on, say, better speakers, room acoustics, proper amp matching etc are going to make more sense. |
I’ll just take some issue here: - The electronics - preamp and amp / 4 / the amount of money wasted on $5,000 preamps and amps is amazing.
"wasted" is of course subjective and depends on the value anyone puts on something. My current pre-amp, a Conrad Johnson tube pre-amp, retailed at around $8,000 when new (long ago), but I bought it for much less used. Still...it was pretty expensive. I’ve tried all manner of pre-amps over the years, solid state, various tube, passive, and I’ve also bypassed pre-amps both using a digital pre-amp, and running a DAC with volume control (e.g. Benchmark) direct in to my amps. In general I always found I lost one thing, gained another. I own my current pre-amp because it is, to my perception, the best combination of everything I was looking for - a sense of transparency that approached bypassing a pre-amp, yet without the darkening of tone I always found when bypassing a pre-amp, combining fabulous clarity with a tube-like ease to the presentation. I value that hard-to-find combination quite highly so the price paid was far from"wasted" in my estimation. I would make a similar case for my tube amp (CJ monoblocks). YMMV of course. (And, that said, I certainly don't think you need to spend lots of money for "good" or "accurate" sound in many cases regarding amps and pre-amps). |
Agreed, glupson. I don’t see what is gained by broadening the term "tweak" to encompass everything, because doing that makes the word "tweak" meaningless. My son just "tweaked" by turning his iphone music on. But I can tell you: he ain’t no audiophile.
As I said earlier, the value of what any audiophile is doing with his system will be subjective. What may be a waste of time for you may not be for me. That’s obvious stuff. But value and objectivity also shouldn’t be mixed up either, otherwise we can’t know what we can achieve in reality. It’s one thing to value what you are doing; another to ask what is happening in reality.
On tweaking, I had a lot of fun constructing an isolation base for my new turntable. It was valuable learning from others, and from my own efforts along the way. So I certainly don’t consider my turntable base nonsense or a waste of time. Though, if asked what it has actually achieved in terms of it’s effects, I can say it has measurably isolated the turntable from external vibration like footsteps very well. But I couldn’t lay claim to it’s sonic effects beyond that, if there have been any at all. But, hey, that’s ok, I’m not making any claims, and I had a good time! |
tattooedtrackman,
Well....that depends on what you mean by "opinion."
Sure any individual is going to be motivated by and care most about his own opinion. But it's good to remember that "having an opinion" doesn't make that opinion true. There are opinions about matters of subjectivity, but also opinions about matters of fact. And it's good to keep open minded, listen to other people's experience and views, to be ready to alter our own opinions that turn out to be unjustifed.
So, case not quite closed.
IMO. ;-) |
@rbstehno Prof, not much I can say if you can’t hear a difference between a Home Depot cable and a synergistic research cable. That’s like saying you can’t hear a difference between a pioneer amp and Classe monoblocks. What can I say? I guess being in to high end audio since my teens, having obsessively listened to high end systems of all price brackets for decades - including having many friends in the reviewing side and thus constant acquaintance with extremely expensive well regarded gear, having reviewed speakers myself, having had many great speaker systems through my room (from MBL to flagship Thiels to Von Schweikert, Audio Physic and many others...) having access to high end cables and tweaks, attending all the audio shows many other audiophiles attend, having a career in post production sound and almost daily hearing the difference between live vs recorded/reproduction of those sounds, using my own recordings of my instruments and familiar voices to evaluate speakers and compare to their live sources...having designed a major reno of my room for great sound in consultation with acousticians, and on and on... ...I guess all this has left me with ears of cloth. I just mustn’t be a sensitive enough listener. Or I have a crap system. I believe those are usually the two choices assigned to anyone who didn’t hear differences in a set of cables. ;-) (Btw, I haven’t compared HD cable to synergistic research cables). |
geoffkait,
Are you ever going to get a fallacy correct? Your record is thus far perfect! (Hint: no claim to authority was made, no argument via appeal to authority either).
rbstehno,
My reply was largely tongue in cheek, but also with a point.
First, you came in with a strawman "if you can’t hear a difference between a Home Depot cable and a synergistic research cable."
Nowhere did I of course say such a thing, nor did I imply it. In fact I was explicit, when I wrote: "None of that is to proclaim that none of the expensive accessories can make a sonic difference; it’s only to say where I find my own money is best spent."
So I did not claim cables make no sonic difference; only that I have reasons for how I spend the balance off my money and time on speakers/room acoustics.
The point would be that, you combined a strawman with a dig at my hearing acuity (the most common, tired refrain from cable-lovers...along with "or your system sucks.") And you did so without knowing a thing about my hearing acuity or experience in audio, which is just fine for detecting subtle differences, thank you very much.
But that’s ok, I’m sure you have a faaaaar better system than anything I’ve ever encountered and nothing I’ve done in audio could prepare me to hear the obvious differences you speak of, so I will just have to defer to your wisdom.
If only I could trade these cloth ears in somewhere for golden ones. Where did you get yours? ;-)
|
Geoff. For someone who so often mentions fallacies, you'd at least have a running start at being coherent if you actually looked them up and understood them.
(There are valid appeals to authority, and fallacious appeals to authority - neither of which I indulged in).
Go ahead: look up the formal structure of the fallacious version of appeal to authority.
Now make yourself a nice bowl of popcorn, and entertain yourself for hours trying to find that form presented in what I wrote.
I'm rooting for ya! |
I do it professionally. LOL. Geoff, that you are so thoroughly confused about fallacies and the nature of reasoning helps explain your web site and products. Which is why you did not, and could not, produce what I asked: Show the logically fallacious form of argument from authority, and show where I made such an argument. (Hint: aside from your messing up the premises, what do you even imagine to be the *conclusion* of an argument I made? Where is that fallacious *conclusion* found in my response to rbstehno?) Do you want to put the bullseye shirt on, sit on the dunking chair, and try again? ;-) If not, I’ll hand hold you through the process of pointing out why you can not do this. |
*dunk! Splash!* . (Here’s a towel...)
geoff,
Simply repeating "yes you ARE being fallacious!"....is not an argument establishing that conclusion.
Your objections could be interesting if you at least showed a grasp of the distinction between repeating assertions (as you keep doing) and actually making an argument. That’s why I tried to get you to actually produce an argument - even as a starting point what you think to be MY argument - if you are actually going to call it fallacious.
If you are attacking a purported argument as fallacious, the first order of business is to actually point to the author’s premises and his CONCLUSION < --you know, the part you are supposed to show to be fallacious!
Yet you’ve been asked twice to do so, and to point directly to the CONCLUSION you claim I argued for, and why it is fallacious. That’s why I’ve said, please scour what I answered and try to find that CONCLUSION you are objecting to.
Kinda basic stuff that seems to escape your notice. You don’t even seem to recognize the relevance of pointing to an arguments conclusion, when arguing it is fallacious. Let alone being able to show it is in fact the conclusion argued for!
So, I’ll leave you spinning your wheels I guess.
But if you want to try again:
What do you take to be the argument I made, including it’s CONCLUSION?
(Hints: Did I argue there was no sonic difference in the Home depot/synergistic research cable comparison raised by rbstehno? Of course not. I never compared those items. Did I argue for the conclusion no sonic differences exist between cables? Nope: I explicitly said I was not making any such claim. So what in the world do you think I was arguing for? What conclusion is haunting your imagination that you could show I *actually* made?)
(And, again, you mistakenly point to yet another form of argument I did not in fact make - argumentum ad hominem, but it seems we have to deal with one fallacy at a time here).
|
geoffkait: this conversation can serve no purpose any more Agreed, it couldn't serve the purpose you had for it ;-) |
I’m all for audiophile jewelry! That is I do like manufacturers to pay attention to the design and finish of their components. At the expense of sound quality? Of course not. But these items are not going in to a closet - especially speakers which become part of one’s furniture. So I’d like to be able to think "that looks nice" when looking at these items. It matters to me. I bought a very nice looking turntable and took much care to place it on a beautiful roasted maple wood isolation base. I truly get great satisfaction every time I look at or interact with the set up because it's so pleasing to the eye. (There are reasons people buy beautiful analog watches when they could buy cheap, crappy looking digital watches that tell time even better. It's not irrational considerations that drive these preferences.).
I have certainly seen quite a number of audiophile systems from the "looks mean nothing" camp and...yeesh!...no thanks! I prefer good sound and good looks.
|
