you measure "speed" with a scope
- duh
- duh
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?
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?
1,019 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
@randy-11 thanks for your reply. I think you are talking about this: http://www.analog.com/media/en/analog-dialogue/volume-41/number-1/articles/hgh-speed-time-domain-mea... I am talking about the speed of audio signal rise and decay as experienced by our ears in our listening rooms. Perhaps better termed "attack", more like is described here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Sound/timbre.html While you could conceivably use sensitive instruments to measure this in your listening room, it would be interesting to see if such devices can be parameterized to show subtle differences in attack, decay and timbre across a full spectrum of instruments and sounds presented by a jazz or classical orchestra simultaneously. Taken to the extreme, can an automated system be set up to evaluate gear more productively for auditioning and decision making on a possible purchase than humans with trained and acute hearing? And assuming you could measure some of these characteristics with electronics more effectively than our ears, most of us (except one of my in-laws) don't currently have highly portable acoustic measuring systems we can take to the brick and mortar or set up in the sweet spot on the couch at home to tell us what sounds best and what we should buy or pass up, and therefore most of us must rely on our ears to make these decisions. I know that sounds like heresy to some, but there you have it, stuck with our ears to sort out all this controversy about what sounds good to us and what doesn't. And speaking of bad ears, the link from @willemj is a hoot. Did most of the participants have crappy hearing. Had they all been in the artilary division in the military? Were there synergy problems with the higher end gear chosen, with the higher end amp-speaker-cable combination compared with the budget amp? Did all the participants run out to dump their multi-thousand dollar rigs for a Beringer amp and an old Sony DVD player based on the results? A hifi dealer's worst nightmare! Instead of fancy measuring devices or old men's clubs, How about a double blind cable test where only one parameter is changed and done with all adolescent female acoustic musicians who have yet to attend a rock concert? I might believe those results... |
I agree that that link was real fun. However, it reflects exactly what has been found in other double blind tests. Personally, I was once Peter Walker of Quad fame's guest at a blind demonstration of his three famous amplifier designs. At the time people were arguing that his tube design sounded better than his 303 and that the 303 sounded better than the 405. Against such nostalgia he argued that they all sounded the same, if used within their specification. So he had this rig where levels had been carefully matched (this is crucial, and has to be within 0.2 dB), and you could listen, blind. I thought I could hear differences, but he cheerfully demonstrated that I had not been better than random in my identifications. The norm for amplifiers is a straight wire with gain, and that target has been reached a long time ago. |
The Wireless World publication of the underlying research is here: http://www.keith-snook.info/wireless-world-magazine/Wireless-World-1978/Valves%20versus%20Transistor... |
As the reviewer for Stereophile reported in his 1997 article regarding "the geek meet in the desert" - CES 97, to the uninitiated - "most of the exhibitors have not yet figured out how to get up out of the noise floor." Here we are twenty years later and you still don’t have to look very far to find some professionals somewhere who cannot hear the difference between amplifiers or systems that are still stuck in the noise floor. |
As one spends more on cables they are far less likely to be one size fits all - so to speak. For instance Naim and LAvardin can't use goertz style cables due to high capacitance although they love DNM cables - so however much one spends and tries using a high capacitance cable it is not going to be an improvement on the cheaper DNM. So, as you spend more there may well be system matching issues - indeed the more you spend may result in worse sound. All said and done, despite some companies saying otherwise such as Nordost (I have some of their cables BTW) cables are 'tone controls' IMHO some allowing more details than others, with various other tonal differences as well. |
Parrot, not all are tone controls. That's the reason I am using only the Audioquest cables. They have been the only ones I've had in my room that are just neutral. I've had the Odin and other top of the line cables. If you need to use cables as tone controls, then something is wrong with your speakers, amps or source. Probably a combination of all. |
Parrot, not all are tone controls. That’s the reason I am using only the Audioquest cables. They have been the only ones I’ve had in my room that are just neutral. Sorry, but I agree that all cables are tone controls. You like Audioquest because it sounds neutral to your ears, in your room, with your gear. Some folks will prefer bright leaning cables on warmer gear, and conversely, warmer sounding cables with brighter gear. Many different paths to "neutrality". Probably a combination of all. BINGO!!!! Remember, you are not listening to the cable, as the cable emits no sound. You are listening to the system as a whole. You can tune the sound of the system by changing cables, speakers, amplifier, cartridge, CDP, etc. In essence, everything is a tone control. |
@ctsooner I'm a fan of Audioquest cables as well. For me, the AQ line of cables' sound is totally predictable. As you move up the higher end of the line each step up reveals a larger soundstage and more detail. The big leap is when you jump up to the PSS (perfect surface silver) part of the line. An example of the above was a comparison I did between AQ Columbia IC's and the next step up the line, the Colorado. The only difference between the cables was a PE tube dielectric in the Columbia to a Teflon tube in the Colorado. So what was the sonic difference? Bass impact and depth. The Colorados it was/is. So in the end, all cables can be used as tone controls. The AQ line just has a predictability about the changes you'll hear throughout the line. One more example. I had used AQ speaker cables in my system for years. They were in the Earth Series and thus were composed of a lot of copper. When upgrading my speakers, the sound was too bass heavy and not allowing me to hear all that the advanced tweeters in the new speakers were capable of. After much research and reading (especially here at A'gon) i went to all silver Clear Day Double Shotgun cables. Voila! Bass heaviness (mid-bass especially) was ameliorated and the treble maintained its smoothness but was more detailed and open than with the copper-heavy AQ's. So...yep, cables are tone controls and are an important aspect of voicing a system. |
I have a Tyr tonearm cable, and some heimdall speaker cables in a system that has a Transfiguration Temper Cartridge, LAvardin IT amp, Yamaha NS1000m speakers - @ctsooner please tell me where my system is defective??? I have heard various Nordost cables in various systems whether at shows or at dealers, and of all the cables out there - they really do have a cool slightly bodiless tonality that has a treble lift. Nordost do a great marketing job in persuading us that they are the benchmark in terms of neutrality - but I am not so convinced. If anything they have confirmed my belief that cables are a tone control |
Parrot, when did I ever say your system is defective? I'd never use that term. We all hear differently. Systems, rooms and hearing are all subjective. I PERSONALLY feel that cables have a signature sound. Maybe I'm not typing things properly, but as you said, the Nordost cables to most I know are somehow a bit hot. Great cables and I've liked them in many systems I've heard them in. I wouldn't own them, but I fully get why folks love them (or don't). To ME, that's tonally adjusting a system with cables. That's something that I personally don't like to do for MY system. Nothing wrong there. Doesn't mean I don't understand why some do use cables to 'tune' their systems. Maybe I'm 'tuning' using AQ cables that I use. I have never heard my tonal balance change when upgrading or downgrading within the AQ line. What I hear is a larger stage, more detail things like that. If you want to call that tuning, then that's cool and I agree that is what I do. Parrot, I have no idea how your system sounds in your room and to your ears (or anyone else's). Not sure how you turned what I posted into me saying your system is defective? |
I have heard various Nordost cables in various systems whether at shows or at dealers, and of all the cables out there - they really do have a cool slightly bodiless tonality that has a treble lift. Nordost do a great marketing job in persuading us that they are the benchmark in terms of neutrality - but I am not so convinced. @parrotbee , I agree with your assessment. Many folks misinterpret emphasized high frequency tones for neutrality. In my opinion, neutrality means neither the bass, midrange, nor treble regions are emphasized. Of course Nordost could sound 'neutral' with gear that has rolled off high frequencies. |
Personally, I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions about any cables one hears at shows or dealers mainly because they are usually new and not broken in *at all* or perhaps overnight, if your lucky. That goes for cables, speakers and electronics - none of them are broken in at shows. The sound you described is that of many high end cables, speakers and electronics that have not been broken in. |
I dont think anybody needs to get worked up and riled by a subject that at best is subjective to say the least. You could put ten people in the same room with the same equipment and music and get ten different opinions, we all hear differently from state of your hearing ,to your depth and spatial perception and ,of course even though it is denied by some, a form of expectation no matter what. I used to be one of the largest sceptics on cabling there ever was but I realised it was mostly my lowfi equipment that was not resolving enough to hear any difference rather than a fault of the cabling itself. Now as older age has allowed a little more "play money" i would say my level is now midfi and yes i can hear changes in cables for sure. Not always better but just changes, some actually have been profoundly worse, as when I tried a set of Anticables solid copper core speaker cables, Lordy did that really mess up the bass big time, they lasted about a week before being returned and replaced with some VanDenHul cables. Have I dipped into the market for 4 figure plus cables yet? No, will I, maybe, I am certainly not adverse to trying but you can bet it will be on a minimum 30 day return trial basis....just in case! |
From op SO WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK? OR I AM THE LAST PERSON TO FIND OUT THAT EXPENSIVE CABLE JUST A RIP OFF? Some are, some are definitely not. It really is a matter of discovering what brands out there (and there a lot) offer the best performance for your money. Some are really worth the money and clearly they offer a big increase in sound quality. It seems the dealers you used were not very discriminating about what brands they carry. This does not surprise me since I have found many are not well informed. You really need to seek out somebody who has compared different makes of cable and really believes in what they are selling. |
In my experience cables can only ruin the sound. OFC with decent insulation is all you need. The more money you throw at them, the more marginal and skewed the results become. What you might hear with expensive cables is their filter effect. I like the effect produced by silver braid. Internal cabling is where any gains can possibly be made. However that should be down to the manufacturer of the equipment. |
Ok here's my take as I recently tried the so called $5000.00 cable. I have been using the JW cryo nova 10.00 a foot solid core wire (can't bring myself to call it cable) which has done a fine job for me. Equipment is Proceed Pav, adcom amp, B&W 803d speakers, Sony TT and Musical Fidelity CD. The $5000.00 cable is a Transparent music wave ultra 12 ft long about 5 yrs old unused for the past 2 years belonging to a friend. So here is my experience, on first connection the expensive cable sounded like crap. Harsh in all frequencies, unlistenable. After about 30 hours burn in the harshness in lower and mid frequency s disappeared. At 60 hours burn in there is still some at the higher frequencies but it's much improved. I will continue burning in until I reach 200 hours at which time I'll form my final opinion on this subject. As of right now I'm convinced there is something to be said for the more expensive cable. I noticed improvement in decay, soundstage, clarity, presence, vocal inflection at this point in burn in. Is the difference worth the extra $$$$$? I don't think so. The extra expense far out weights the subtle improvements. Now I'm also retired and on a budget. We're I to have unlimited income or funds I'd certainly would enjoy the more expensive cable as I find there to be enough improvement to warrant the expense. As is I'll have to wait and win the lottery, but if I do I will for sure get a better cable. Until then my $10.00 a foot Cryo nova wire will just do fine. So finally I'm in the camp that says there is differences in cable and how they perform. If you can afford the expensive go for it with no regrets if you can't be happy with what you got and look for better on the cheap. I am hoping my friend will offer these cables as a Christmas gift. Fat chance. Although I'll try to buy them from him for what they may be worth to me. If he's willing to sell but my offer is not going to be anything close to $5000.00 |
@ gillatah: Not sure I get a "burn-in" on cables that were used for three of the past five years. Do they "un-burn" when not in use? You talked about improvements in decay, soundstage, clarity, presence, vocal inflection. I don't believe cables/wires/interconnects can "improve" anything in the media. All I think they could possibly do is (maybe) mitigate other outside influences that might interfere with the transmission of the signal from playback source to speakers. And I'd opine that any cables of proper length and impedance will do all that just fine. I use a mix of WireWorld, Kimber and Monoprice and they all work just fine....none better than the other. And no "burn-in" (a myth) was required. |
Per Transparent cable will revert to its original condition if no current is present, for a long period, something about molecules in the dielectric changing when a current is present. I'll take their word for it as my ears have proven it to me. I was as much of a sceptic as anyone. Believe as you wish. I was not attempting to convince only stating my experience. |
Geoffkait, I'm not done with this evaluation. Stated my experience at 60 hours of burn in. I don't have a clue if it will improve from here or not. All I can say for sure is the cable improved from 0 hours to 60 hours quite a bit and has also improved on the audible experience. I'm no novice at this. All equipment is in a dedicated and treated listening room. Maybe that's why the JW wire sounded also very good. |
Dialectric gets loaded up and will negatively affect the sound. That's what the AQ DBS units do. They don't them them build up if you would. No expert, but that's basically what happens. I think some of the major problems high end has had IRT cables are that they are so easy to make, that so many got involved. Many were charlatan's and many folks screwed themselves over paying too much for crap cable. To do a cable properly and effect a positive change, not just a change, isn't as easy as many want you to believe. The other thing is that the mark up in cables is similar to cartridges. I'll never forget speaking with the Grado guys when I was in HS. I used to sell audio gear on the side to make extra money. I asked what the differences were in the various Grado cartridges. He told me that as you went up in price, they sounded a bit better. I asked him why they cost so much for basically the same parts and process to make. He simply said, because they can. Said that it costs them pennies more for the various tips they were using, but that they could charge 2 to 3 times more for the more expensive and complex stylus. Then we talked about the Polk cables that I was just starting to use with my Polk 10's (loved those speakers, lol). I defiantly heard a positive difference. They were very expensive, but looked teh part too. All of a sudden things went crazy and cable manufacturers were popping up all over the place. Are 5k cables that much more expensive to produce? Not really, but they can charge these prices, because many will pay as they feel the differences is well worth it in their systems. Should someone use a 5k cable in a system worth 10K? I feel that's a waste as do most. I'm a firm believer that most folks should take that extra cable money adn upgrade their components. That said, you do need to spend a certain about on cables to max out your system IMHO. |
Just to have something to argue about, I find every component, every tube, every solder joint, every resistor, every capacitor and very piece of wire requires a break-end period. And hopefully, it sounds better afterwards, but this is not always the case.i have had 6 different pots for volume controls to find one that has the sound after break-in that I seek. And i only changed them out every few years after they began to degrade. Today, I have hand-made ball bearing, single resistor in path, dual mono gold plated stepped units that sound neutral. Interconnects? AQ solid silver and silver covered copper. The full silver 1 meter interconnect to between DAC and preamp cost about 3 times the price of the DAC. And yep, I can hear the amazing quality of this cable. And i bought almost every cable here on Agon and have sold a few too. So, buy a few and if you don't like one, sell it. The cost is minimal and you can keep it as long as it makes sense and swap a much as you like. I bought 4 DACs here and resold 3 and I think the total cost was under $300 all-in, not including the Wadia I kept. One caution for AQ is that there are fakes out there, If yu have ever owned a real AQ, you will know the fake almost immediately. I have bought 2 of these fakes and they has a very soft, velvet like cable finish that look like AQ in pictures, but every AQ is more of a hard finish tightly woven nylon. And those fakes sound like crap. Fortunately, both Seller's provided a full refund and I believe they did not know or they would not have offered them for sale. |
Geoffkait and Dynaquest14, thank you for you supportive insight. I have been very fortunate to work with some very knowledgeable and open minded audiophiles that have very impressive backgrounds in electronics. And we have tried so many things over time to develop better sound. From building circuits to match various tube requirements including amps with full sized transmission tubes. And stuff like tracing over copper circuit boards with silver just to see if it improves the sound of a solid state preamp. And on and on. So, I may not be an "expert" but i have spent more time and money chasing better sound than I can even believe. But it is the journey that is the fun of this hobby and stops in between are enjoyable. So, when some say that the journey leads nowhere and is waste of money, which implies we are mere stupid fools, perhaps they are correct. I just don't see it that way. |
Yep. If you can't hear the difference between "garden variety" and "quality cables" then this audiophile endeavor must be most mundane for you. Hold on naysayers...I didn't say "mega-buck, I have to take out a home equity loan to afford them" cables! Just cables with high purity conductors and low loss dielectrics with well made connectors. There are lots and I mean LOTS of them out there. Have at it! |
Hearing varies from person to person as much as intelligence and mental orientation and conditioning. Smart in one way does not specifically relate back to smart ears. Cognitive capacity in the mind can also express itself in cognitive capacity of hearing in ears and mind as a pair. This cognitive variance in speed and precision (as a pair) from person to person (Human IQ of 100 vs 200)... can be as high as a million to one. It's a non-linear equation. This definitely DOES encompass human HEARING function as it is a ear/brain function, tied to neural functionality and interconnectedness, tied to it as much as vision, motor drive, intelligence, and so on. From Wikipedia: Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon in which the mind responds to a stimulus, usually an image or a sound, by perceiving a familiar pattern where none exists... This holds true for cable deniers and cable believers. To hear new things, one has to defeat this mechanism as it is tied to hearing function. So one can have a dumb ear/brain combination and project this form of blindness, this forced blindness, upon others..others who don’t suffer from it. And audiophile arguments are born. Like this thread. The more difficult a problem is to solve, the more fundamental the error in the formulation of the question. It gets into how the whole thing comes down to small variances in the signal, and some of us who design and work on gear, know how this works. The lore holder and lore workers are not going to explain exactly how they make a living to the pouting, demanding, demanding, and dismissive deniers . Not gonna happen any time soon. That: Some may help you.... but they don’t owe the denying forceful types - anything. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Before a given thing is in the textbooks, it gets worked out like this. The lore is the component that is tightly held, or not easy to understand, then it works it’s way into the common lexicon..then it is in the textbooks and is accepted... Then the deniers move on to the next thing they want to pout about as a being a false paradigm (not in the dogmatic books, so it can’t be real!!) for fools to follow.... Rinse - repeat. |
Hearing varies from person to person as much as intelligence and mental orientation and conditioning. To clarify.. what is that ratio? It is: every increase in 5 ’IQ’ points is roughly equivalent to a required rumination time to reach a functional conclusion with said problem..this requisite time ---is halved. Roughly, and overall, in humanity. Each 5 iq points higher - half the time to figure a thing out. Thus, the average person, IQ 100, working on a problem, may take lets say..114 years of 24/7 work to reach a satisfactory conclusion in a given problem scenario. the 200 IQ person can reach successful conclusion with the same problem, in one hour. All things being equal, which they are not. Then comes hearing function, which is wholly integrated with this neural system, and thus suffers similar (not exact but similar) ratios and considerations. You might have a person who in this lifetime will never hear a given thing.... when someone with really good and well trained ears and connected neural function....might hear it in 30 seconds or less. No mystery. Thankfully the brain is plastic so ignorance is a matter of will, in some ways, and it is not truly a native state. Unless one forces it. Audiophile, fix thyself. |
TEO - That was some great info on the mind, intelligence and hearing relationships. I have a more technical question for which you may have some insight. I have been thinking about why vinyl and some Ethernet cables can have relatively lousy stats, but sound better than the more technically (verifiable test data) correct. Could it be that more cross-talk is beneficial? Or are there multiple issues that have yet to be measured that result in improved sound quality? |
While we’re off the subject, when you play an LP, the Time Coordinates from when the recording was made - and that is preserved on the recording - interfere with the listener’s own "internal clock" (local time) and confuses his brain. The human brain relies on a single time source to be able to perceive sound correctly. The human brain is not pleisiochronous. It’s as if the two time coordinate sources produce jitter in the brain. |
