Who thinks $5K speaker cable really better than generic 14AWG cable?


I recently ordered high end speaker, power amp, and preamp to be installed in couple more weeks. So the next search are interconnect and speaker cable. After challenging the dealer and 3 of my so called audiophile friends, I think the only reason I would buy expensive cable is for its appearance to match with the high end gears but not for sound performance. I personally found out that $5K cable vs $10 cable are no difference, at least not to our ears. Prior to this, I was totally believe that cable makes a difference but not after this and reading few articles online.

Here is how I found out.

After the purchase of my system, I went to another dealer to ask for cable opinion (because the original dealer doesn't carry the brand I want) and once I told him my gears, he suggested me the high end expensive cable ranging from $5 - 10K pair, depending on length. He also suggested the minimum length must be 8-12ft. If longer than 12ft, I should upgrade to even more expensive series. So I challenged him that if he can show me the difference, I would purchase all 7 AQ Redwood cables from him.

It's a blind test and I would connect 3 different cables - 1 is the Audioquest Redwood, 1 is Cardas Audio Clear, and 1 my own generic 14AWG about 7ft. Same gears, same source, same song..... he started saying the first cable sound much better, wide, deep, bla...bla...bla......and second is decently good...bla...bla...bla.. and the last one sounded crappy and bla...bla...bla... BUT THE REALITY, I NEVER CHANGED THE CABLE, its the same 14AWG cable. I didn't disclosed and move on to second test. I told him I connected audioquest redwood but actually 14AWG and he started to praise the sound quality and next one I am connected the 14awg but actually is Redwood and he started to give negative comment. WOW!!!! Just blew me right off.

I did the same test with 3 of my audiophile friends and they all have difference inputs but no one really got it right. Especially the part where I use same generic 14awg cable and they all start to give different feedback!!!

SO WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK? OR I AM THE LAST PERSON TO FIND OUT THAT EXPENSIVE CABLE JUST A RIP OFF?
sautan904

Showing 50 responses by dynaquest4

Of course it is true.  The higher you price an item, the better the quality becomes.....Or not.

The Value Equation keeps us sane and smart.  Quality ÷ Price = Value.
dynaquest410 posts12-31-2016 7:59amAs an aside, Note that if you HAVE spent mega-bucks on interconnects or speaker cables, there is not a chance in hell that you (on this forum) would EVER change you mind that THAT purchase must have made your system sound better - even if you cannot hear it.  It is called the audio placebo effect.  If you put out the big-bucks on cables, a better sub a DAC or just about any component, once you get it installed your system WILL sound better.  

Crazy-expensive cabeling is proof positive that, on some products, if you overcharge you will sell more to the duped masses.

Some time ago, I replaced the Kimber (speaker) cables that came with a slightly used pair of B&W 803's with a 20 dollar set of Monoprice cables.  I had no way to do a "blind" A/B test but after I switched them out those 803's continued to sweetly sing...no difference that I could tell.

Cats can easily be herded, NoNoise.  Just show them shiney, bouncy, visually appealing things that cost way more than barn mice...and smell like they might taste better, and they will jump toward them.  Not knowing (or caring) that the decrepid ole barn mouse was, in all meaningful ways, a better deal.

Also, "doing things on the cheap" as you say, sometimes makes you the smartest guy in the room.  It is always a measure of value.
jperry: Please don't make the misstatement that I made a misstatement. Three clicks would find you here: https://www.musicdirect.com/vibration-control/nordost-sort-fut-resonance-control-system

Actually the price isn't that bad compared to their Odin cables.  Feet for two speakers would only set you back $3000.00
jperry: What? Is this some game? What was the misstatement you highlight but do not reveal?  Is it my use of the generic term "rubber feet?"
In an earlier post someone was touting (promoting? selling?) Nordost Odin cables (see link at bottom).  A quick and dirty calculation determined that to equip a stereo system (preamp/amp/player/speakers) with this line of cables, it would cost $176,000.  Let's say that these cables provided a significant 5% "improvement" in audio quality.  My math says that the rest of your system should cost about $3,500,000.00 for this purchase to make sense.  

This is a very exaggerated example of why this topic is of interest to so many...and won't go away.  

Oh...and Nordost also sells rubber feet for your speakers and components for up to $350/ea.

That these exist is almost laughable.  That someone would have so little respect for the value of money to buy them is incomprehensible to me. That otherwise intelligent "audiophiles" would fall for the "science" that goes into these WIRES is just funny.

Here is the Nordost webpage:

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/nordost-odin-cables#RVL875dvXyhkwk1P.97

Some related reading expensive cable buyers will hate:

http://ethanwiner.com/audiophoolery.html

and: http://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/top-ten-signs-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-oil


folkfreak: All I was "researching" was the price. Don’t really care what they are made of since they seem to fix a problem that does not exist...or at least is not audible to the human ear (an opinion)...or provide an increase in audio quality so infinitesimal that moving a sofa 1/4" might work as well.

So, you are correct, "...I have no interest or belief," which is the point of my comment.

These over engineered, ridiculously priced cables and other "accessories" seem to say more about the buyers and the marketeers who gladly sell them. Kinda like a Rolex vs. Timex. Both tell time accurately but only the Rolex says you have money to burn. It is a piece of jewelry. Just like a $16,000.00 RCA connect is a piece of jewelry. I want good music from my $30K system...not a personal financial statement.

Think I’ve made my opinions known so I will leave this forum now. If anyone needs the final word, fire away.

Thanks for that link, frame11…I had not seen Roger Russell’s “History of Speaker Wire” before. I didn’t need convincing but I found his closing comments revealing. He says:

“When confronted with the truth, believers do not want to hear about it. They want to remain in the magical world of fantasy where they think they can hear improvements in their wire, often arrived at by making listening tests without adequate controls or understanding of the problems involved including speaker impedance and amplifier stability. One of the prime tools in creating such a faith for the average consumer is by capitalizing on fear and ignorance as in many other things that aren’t readily apparent. There is fear that the wire currently in use is not good enough. There is ignorance because most people do not have scientific knowledge in this area and lack adequate measuring equipment to prove otherwise.”

Since those touting the increase in SQ with “expensive” cables, can, without any scientific proof, only fall back on….well…"I could hear the difference."  Hmmm….the sense of hearing proves their case? Russell takes this “sense” and flips it to a sense of sight analogy…seeing, arguably a more reliable, testable and provable sense and continues with this…which, for some reason, I find quite refreshing:

“We have been told by advertising that the exotic speaker wires offer fabulous advantages over ordinary lamp cord. It would seem reasonable that using this same wire for lamps would also enhance their performance. In the same vein as wire literature, you can have your lamp reproduce light with the full spectrum color fidelity of natural daylight, finally allowing you see light the way it should be seen and bring out the natural performance of your lamp. It could offer greater warmth, detail, brilliance, definition and speed by providing wider bandwidth and reduced skin effect. It can provide a distortion free illumination that reduces eye strain, resulting in clearer vision and optimal color perception. It can allow you to work for longer periods of time with less visual distraction or fatigue. Just imagine what it might do for your electric razor or microwave, etc.!”

Bravo, Russell!!


Hifiman: read this entire thread, my previous posts and Roger Russell’s article and you will find your question to me superfluous.
Ha!  Busted!!  Just couldn't resist after reading Roger Russell's "history" of audio wire.  

There is just something fascinating about how people, that I will assume are otherwise intelligent, can get duped into giving excessive money for a product that cannot possibly "work as advertised" and then (maybe subconsciously) convince themselves that they can actually hear an improvement where none is scientifically possible.  Even when proven over and over again that listeners (without a monetary investment in said wires) cannot hear a difference....or at least tell the difference.

Those with this compulsion feed the industry that continues to up the ante and now bring you wires and interconnects that you can, if you like, spend $176,000.00 on a single stereo system.

And....I really don't think I am being "snarky;" but feel free to take it that way if it helps you sleep.
@rodman: assuming that derogatory comment was directed at me, I'd reluctantly counter with: "It is amazing how much one can read without, in any meaningful way, understanding."

Now....if you have nothing of significance to contribute to the subject ($5K expensive cables), why just just sit in the crowd and refrain from useless, personal comments.
zkzp: This fellow, Soo,has an extensive website that does exhaustive reviews of tons and tons of audio products with a staff of ten people.  Clearly this is his livelihood and he somehow makes a living doing this.  It is no secret that reviewers like him, and those in major audio magazines, rarely (if ever) publish a bad review - or that product maker will no longer send him products to review.  With cables/wire/interconnects/power cords, a review MUST say that there is a positive sound quality difference in order for it to be a positive review.  Accordingly, Mr Soo and his staff do so...and as a result are NOT unbiased reviewers.  

I read a couple reviews  on cables and in one the reviewer mentioned "dramatic and eyeopening" differences once the 24 and then 120 hour break-in periods had elapsed.This "break-in" of wires is just another woowoo, magic theory debunked by science.
Dumb to continue to debate the HDMI cable issue.  Other than physical durability the digital signal cannot be "made better."  I'm fairly sure most of you know (or should know) this.  My only point in bringing it up was to highlight how people can be duped into giving away money and, even more surprisingly, convince themselves there is a real (better) difference. See here:  https://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/
benjie: You said-

"My question is to all of the people who feel that cabling and equipment has no effect on the sound quality of the music..."

"That a $100 system sounds just a good as a $100,000 system."

"My question is then why is this one of your hobbies? Why would you be involved in something that is ( in your opinion ) just fleecing us out of our hard earned money? That this is one big corrupt industry...." 
 
Well...perhaps you need to read more than the past ten posts.  This thread is NOT about the audio industry nor the audio "hobby" nor audio systems; it is about the audio cabling industry that preys on those with some sort of an audio quality addiction that causes them to ignore science and get sucked in by slick marketing, bright and shiny cables and other butterflies and rainbows.  

I recently bought a slightly used Oppo 105D and the guy threw in an HDMI cable.  When I was hooking it up I noticed the directional arrows on this "Chocolate" brand HDMI cable.  Recognizing that scam, I googled it and found it on Amazon for 90 bucks.  A digital cable for 90 bucks!  I read review after review from people saying how much better both the audio and video quality were from this one meter DIGITAL "Chocolate" cable.  Even most of the "audiophiles" who empty their wallets on analog cables know that in digital signals, it is all ones and zeros and either thy arrive or they don't. Probably the best example of the "audio placebo effect."

  
nonoise says: "If only we can agree on this then the conversation (debate?) can focus on what price point is too much? "

I think all this would lead one to believe that as long as basic cable requirements are met, any price over that is too much.  Basic requirements for various cables have been mentioned numerous times in this thread.

As for power cords.  If they can actually make a difference, then one would ask: "What about the other miles and miles of cable that brings power to your outlet.  Certainly upgrading all that wire would make quantum improvements in audio, video, lighting, air compressor performance, how well the vacuum sucks and how quickly your blender can take you to Margaritaville!"  Ha!  Can hear it now..."You wouldn't believe how much better my margaritas taste since I changed the factory power cord to that super-duper one that only cost me $699.00!"
aberyclark said: "I have to say, if I were able to afford the much higher end gear, I would probably invest in cables of the same level."

Good comment.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, explains why an audio geek who has spent $3,500,000.00 on his stereo audio system would not mind spending another $176,000.00 to purchase Nordost Odin cables and speaker wire to obtain a 5% "improvement" in SQ.
Was thinking the other night, after a near two day pause in this discussion. A number of acoustic engineers have been quoted saying that if basic cable requirements are met, spending more on "designer" cables/wire cannot achieve a more superior sound quality...It is a waste of money and a poor value. These engineers/audio experts have absolutely nothing to gain by publicly stating their educated opinions.

On the other hand.... who praises the significant, if not impressive, improvements in sound quality that can be achieved by buying very expensive "high end” cables? Two groups. Those that manufacture, distribute and sell these products at a serious profit and those who were talked into drinking the Kool Aid and would NEVER fess up to being fleeced. Actually there is a third group. This group gulped the Kool Aid and are victims of the incedious audio placebo effect that causes you to hear the advertised, albeit impossible, sound quality enhancement.
So dill...You took the time out of your busy day to reply to...no, actually defame my previous post.  Do you have a point?  A comment?  A remark? A question?  An opinion? Or was your sole purpose just to assume that the entire audiophile world Is on your side of this issue?  Please don't do that?  State an opinion....don't insult a post.
213runnin says: "The idea that a manufacturer can "choose" to sell $5/ft(their cost) cable for $750/ft shows a complete ignorance of basic economics."

The above statement demonstrates a complete ignorance of the reality of high end cable/IC/wire marketing and sales.  Though the numbers are estimates, the concept is real.  If these over priced audio products were under the perview of the FDA or the FCC, they would be under investigation by the government...but they physically harm no one and generally only take advantage of the those with money to waste, little understanding of science and no interest in research.  I'm not too concerned about those that are duped into giving money away, but it does bother me that these manufacturers get away with hawking this 21st century snake oil equivalent.
A manufacturer can produce a cable of "exotic" design and beautiful appearance for $5 a foot.  He can then choose to sell it for $10 per foot or $750 a foot.  If it looks good enough, he might decide to market it as exceptionally high-end and sell it for the higher amount knowing that those with a higher disposable income, but no particular knowledge of basic acoustic science, will assume if it is priced at $750 it MUST be better and will, accordingly, sound better.  Once the cables are changed out their eyes will widen and their jaws will drop at the amazing increase in sound stage, transparency, texture and openness the new cables provide.  This actually is science...the field we know as psychology.

I found that article specifically objective.  Did you read more than the first and last sentences.  Anyone who finds this test less than objective just doesn't want to see/hear/believe the results.  The psyco-placebo effect personified.  
dlcockrum says (regarding the DR. Waldrep article/test): "My point exactly. Based on his opening, the author was intent on proving there are no differences, thus he proclaimed to hear none."

What you failed to mention, in over site, is that  other audio professionals were involved in the test; to wit:

 "A group of professional audio engineers that work in other studios in the building (including a Grammy award winner) couldn’t detect any difference — and neither could I! I simply let them listen and switch between the DACs — and no one reported hearing even the slightest change. If the designer of the cable notices a “dramatic” difference at his place, I don’t know how he does it. In my “high resolving” studio, no one could hear any fidelity change when using a $3000 power cord vs. the $1.50 one that is supplied by Benchmark (and which they recommend!)."

Dr. Waldrep has a Masters and two Phd's in music and computer science and over thirty years as a recording and mastering engineer.  Who do you think I'm going to put credibility in?
goef...sorry, I do not get your comment: "Sorry to say, that just screams Appeal to Authority. You know, an illogical argument. An excellent example, actually."

What does this mean?
Goef: thanks for the explanation.  Part of that sounded algebraic or similar to finate math; but I get your point.

Dlcockrum: I get that you do not care for my point of view and beliefs relative to this issue... but getting personal and lobbing insults doesn't enhance your auruments, it is just that - insulting.  Not to worry, I have thick skin.
@ dlcockrum: I may have missed your point but I doubt seriously I missed the point.  That point is that before people spend hundreds or (even) thousands of dollars on pretty cables with shiney connects, that come in felt bags and wooden boxes, that they are aware of the insideous power of the subconscious that will lead their ears to justify the money they spent on accessories that are incapable of improving audio signals.  That psyco-effect is real.  To deny it is sophomoric.

Some points:

1. The link to Dr Waldrep’s test was recently posted by another member (scroll up)….I had never heard of the guy before. I had no original intent to “cite” that test except to counter dlcockrum’s slam on the good doctor's objectivity.

2. I didn’t “cite any other results to support my point…” because that is not my job. Google the issue, there are numerous, unbiased test results available online. What is hard to find is a test that supports “exotic” accessories performed by an unbiased manufacturer, retailer or owner.

3. My issue is not so much with those that fall for this wowwow magic…it is with manufacturers and retailers that get away with this scam.

4. My system is, likely by Audiogon standards, “mid-fi”  - B&W/Emotiva/Oppo. Mostly Monoprice cables. Spending more money on more expensive components would be a poor value due to diminishing returns. And purchasing “exotic” accessories would be a total waste of disposable income I can contribute to support other hobbies and interests I have.

5. Expectation bias (placebo effect): It is absolutely amazing what the brain can imagine. Once an “improvement” (new equipment/accessories) is added to a music system, one listens – this is a physical and, of course, mental process. You cannot isolate the brain from the experience for a number of reasons, and the more that is spent, the greater the expectation for improvement. The placebo effect will always be there because the listener/big-spender knows that there has been a change. Since virtually no consumer does, or has the capability to perform, an instantaneous AB test (the only kind that are really valid) on the old/new equipment, his expectation will allow him the pleasure of experiencing superior performance – even when there is none. In almost every case, once very basic requirements are met, more expensive cables, ICs and speaker wire do nothing to improve sound quality. It is science. Wowwow, voodoo magic wire is a scam.

6. On a light note, here is what one reviewer noted:  “With the help of these cables, I can now experience music the way it's meant to be heard. I find that plugging them directly into my ears helps transmit the cleanest, most pure sound. Make sure you clean your ears out though (with liquefied dark matter, of course), because quality will suffer if your ear-holes aren't sparkly clean.”


My opinion continues that if you have decent cables to begin with, any improvement in sound quality, if any (and I don't think there will be any) is going to be so subtle that the only way you will be able to discern a difference is with an instantaneous A/B switch.  Hardly any consumer has the capability to do this so improvements are more likely to be the result of expectation bias.

"Cables need to SETTLE."  Really...now they need to settle?  Is that after they are burned in?  Before they are "elevated?  Holy Moly!  I am still chuckling at the comparison with flowers growing.
"Cables need to settle!" Actually I thought this was presented as a joke. Now I see it is just another snake oil input into the overall high-priced cable joke. Do not be offended. My beef isn’t with those who who are unknowingly victims...but with the manufacturers, distributors and dealers who perpetuate the scam. My $10.00 12ga Monoprice cables do a fine job. Or...I could spend $137,000.00 on Nordhost Odin cables. Yep, I’m still chuckling.
zephyr24069  - While I agree with almost nothing you stated regarding expensive "high quality" cables, I found your response refreshing, polite and well written.  

Regarding the Rolex analogy; audio systems play music, watches tell time. You can dramatically improve audio quality with better, more expensive equipment (to a point).  It is almost impossible to buy a watch that tells the time more efficiently, effectively or accurately...regardless of how much you spend. The Rolex level watch is not purchased because it is a watch...it is purchased because it is jewelry.  Or, in some cases, an outlandish personal financial statement.
Actually, and I’ve said this before, and with science on my side, it is not that I cannot hear the difference, I do not believe there is a positive difference to be heard once basic, minimum cable requirements are met (gage/length). And even if there were a "difference" who determines whether is is "better" or "worse?" Just hearing a difference is moot. I can put my hands behind my ears and hear a difference. I can close the drapes and hear a difference. I can toe in my speakers and hear a difference. I can change the EQ and hear a difference. Some people WANT an "improvement" so badly they will do really, really (to me) dumb things. On another thread here a fellow paid $225,000 each for a couple speakers and then proceeded to change out the internal wiring . What? He researched what he thought were the best speakers on the planet and decided that the manufacturer was not smart enough to include appropriate crossover wiring? And, of course, he said the difference was stunning! Same audio placebo effect and expectation bias....that is the only science involved in expensive cables/interconnects/power cords.....and crossover wiring.
dill: You are saying the same thing "to me" that you have said before. I only restated my position on this subject because I was called out "by name" in gmcleod’s post as he was "passing through."

Also, I did not say: "Hearing a difference is moot," I said "Just hearing a difference is moot" and that within the context of the rest of my post.

Not sure you recent post accomplished anything other than taking another personal shot at me.
dill.....Really?! What are you trying to accomplish here? Can’t imagine how long it took you to search, cut and paste all those snippets. I think... "Thou dost protest too much."

We would all be better served if you would stick to the subject and not to me.
infirthemusic: As long as you knew which cables you were listening to, your ability to actually faithfully "judge" comparative performance is compromised.  But whichever ones you think sound better are the ones you should use.
Sorta like putting $15,000 tires on a $40,000 BMW...and then saying how it rides now like a Ferrari....just to justify the purchase?
cleeds: Exactly!!  Just like there shouldn't be any such thing as $5,000 speaker cables.  

BMW is, though, full of scams.  For instance, when we bought my wife a new one, they (in 2014) deleted the spare tire so they could sell you pretty expensive run-flats (that you could insure for an extra $1200).  Then they want you to fill them with nitrogen...which isn't free like ambient air.
Seems I am (again) being called a "troll." Really? I shed name-calling in junior high.  According to some here, if you disagree with the general audiogon consensus regarding exotic cables, you are a "troll."  Seems that if you go back to the OP's original post, he was asking if $5K cables can possibly be better than generic.  I agree with the OP that if you spend more than is required to meet basic length/impedance requirements, you are wasting your money and are being scammed by companies that know they are scamming you.  I'll say again, those who have purchased this overpriced wire are more than welcome to do so.  Just don't confuse and misdirect newbies into thinking that this stuff actually does anything over basic wire.  Then...you become part of the scam.
stfoth: Well said and I pretty much agree with everything in your post. Have I purchased things that are more "showy" than they are functional? Sure I have. Would I pay a bit more for "pretty" cables just because they looked cool? Yep...as long as I could see them. The Kimber Kables I have going to my speakers are visible and look cool...but I don’t believe they accomplish much else over basic generic cables.

jmcgrogan termed my tire analogy "ridiculous." Yet I priced out a set of Nordost Odin cables and interconnects for my stereo system and it came to $137,000.00. I think that included one of their $11,000.00 power cords (snicker). People who buy this "bling" would also put a set of $15K tires on their car if they were actually produced. Or are autophiles smarter than audiophiles?
Assuming that exotic cables do, in fact, cancel out or mitigate external influences that distort or otherwise modify pure audio signal transmission, it would seem that the more expensive your system, the less you would need  cables and other interconnects to assuage these issues.  But, no...it seems otherwise.  The more you spend on your system components the more you need to spend on wire to cancel out these external influences.  Interesting.

Also, one poster continues to push the theory that the more affluent you are the less spending matters.  That is BS.  Whether cables actually work or not or whether they are a good value are not has nothing to do with your bank account.  It they do nothing, they are a poor value.  Affluence does not excuse poor judgement.
Well, geoff, are you saying that cables actually and actively "change" the audio signal.  Who would want that?  Good audio equipment should neither add nor take away anything from the audio signal.  If you want to modify the sound coming from your speakers or the pressure waves reaching your ears, use EQ or modify the acoustic qualities of your listening area.

If expensive aftermarket cables, are made to approach perfection in audio transmission, wouldn't perfection be doing nothing to the signal while preventing any outside influence from changing the signal?

If you buy these as bling to please your eyes and impress your friends, then I get that.  That has value....just like a Rolex.

For cleeds: Value is a mathematical formula; to wit: Value = Quality / Price.  The only thing somewhat subjective is quality...but that still has nothing to do with your bank roll.  People with more money are just less impacted by purchasing a poor value.
geoff:  settle down, my friend, no one is putting words in your mouth.  I was just attempting to clarify your vague reference to the benefit of more expensive cables.

cleeds....no need for name calling;  though we had gotten past that.  If you believe my point of view is merely disruptive, I'd suggest you just refrain from answering or addressing my future posts.

Pricing/Quality/Value in marketing: "...as years and years of research have shown, pricing is a strong psychological component which can manipulate customer’s decision making. Keep the pricing high, and the customer will think that the quality must be high too. This expectation of the customer is because he wants to receive value for his money. So when he is paying more money, he is expecting more value. And you are better off giving him a high quality product."

That is my issue with expensive wiring.  High pricing gives you the expectation of high quality and therefore a good value.  Except the high priced cables do nothing to improve audio signal transmission as proven by science.  So unless it's the "look" you are after, you are purchasing a poor value.  I think I've said this three times already so no need to repeat it again after this.
kn: Thanks for the polite, well written explanation of how you view the efficacy of "expensive" audio cables.  I should have responded sooner but have been tied up with a whole list of distractions.

I think my overall point of view is that I've personally never noticed ANY significant difference in cables (once basic length/impedance is met). Yes, I currently use some Kimber/Wireworld products that did nothing that I could detect.  You'd have to agree that any "difference" cabling can make (good or bad) is going to be very subtle.  I don't know anybody who would agree that something "jaw-dropping" (a favorite here) is a subtle effect.

I also have trouble with this: The ONLY people who recommend/praise the positive effect of exotic (high priced) cables are those that manufacture, distribute, retail, install, review for compensation or, lastly, have purchased these products.  And the ONLY measure of efficacy is extremely subjective - one's perception of what is being heard.

People spend crazy amounts on lots of stuff...but a Rolex tells time well and makes a statement...a Bucati goes really fast while turning heads and definitely makes a statement.  Expensive cables, wires, ICs, PCs, USB/Ethernet cables and other digital connects, IMO, do nothing beyond what similar basic, good quality, inexpensive (eg: Monoprice) products do.  

Not trying to change anyone's mind...just pointing out scientific reality as I see it.
Ctsooner: read your post and, unfortunately, find noting there that merits further response from me.  Sorry.
NoNoise....significant "differences" are moot.  What is important is whether there are significant "improvements."  Science says overpriced cables are just that.  Over priced, pretty, sparkly, fat, colorful and interesting...just not accoustically effective in my opinion.

Small differences may be worth it...but given the power of expectation bias, seems most would want some measure of effectiveness beyond the overstated claims of how "good it sounded.".