WHY CABLES MATTER!
I have seen the argument over and over again on why cables matter and the that wire is just wire and how scientifically it’s impossible for them to make a difference. The thing that surprises me the most is that different materials are used. Different shielding is used. Different connectors are used. Different braiding methods of the cables are used. Materials are sourced from different manufacturers and put through different creative processes but I always get some guy who comes on and says. WIRE IS WIRE AND YOU ARE NOT HEARING WHAT YOU ARE HEARING? To me it’s pure arrogance to think you know more than everybody else to the point where you tell me what we are hearing through my ears and we are not smart enough to know when are minds are playing trick on us. But using all these different materials, process and shielding and creative processes don’t make a difference. I spent the last 15 years trying all the cables I could try. Thoughts anyone?
I am not saying anything substantial. I don’t have anything substantial to say. I am here to learn. And, to that end, I’m asking you questions, which you are conveniently sidestepping.
to be clear, Calvin, I’m not attacking you. Is asking you to sell your product to me “attacking you”? Must suck to go to work every day, if that is the case. |
@smurfstain . If I misunderstood you my apologies. I’m an audiophile first. I’m not really posting to sell people my product. If people decide to try then that’s cool. If they don’t then that’s fine. Maybe I took your words the wrong way. If I did I apologize. Cables to me should not be a bottle neck. The music should flow through them. They should keep things that interfere with them out. That’s what our cables do. They let the music flow. I’m sorry if I came at you wrong. Didn’t mean to offend. |
@smurfstain i let people try them. If you like I could send you a demo. These cable sell themselves. I let people try them. I want folks to be happy not just sell them smthg that don’t work for them. |
This is known as "sealioning". Classic troll technique:
|
@cleeds I needed that laugh. 😂 |
@roxy54 I have pricing. I can send you. I can get info on connectors |
@roxy54 send me the lengths you need. |
I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear. I wasn’t looking to buy a set, I was just wondering what the RCA ’s were made of (brass or copper). The only reason I mentioned the pricing on the RCA version of the interconnects was that they weren't listed with the others on the price list, and I thought it might have been a mistake. Thanks. |
@roxy54 we give free demos if you are ever interested. I will talk to owner and get you answers. |
You all who may not know the meaning of ’smurf’ should look it up. I mean, they put it right in their user name! 😀 Entertaining seeing an allegedly complete newb to anything hifi related, magically stumbles upon a high end audio forum and then manages to focus every one of their posts in a ’cables’ thread. That’s textbook surfing! 😀😭 |
I can hear the differences easily...😊 My system is very detailed and balanced... Wavetouch win for me easily ... More natural sound ... The worst is the first i dislike it completely 😁... Second zantara better indeed but wavetouch win the cake and is not fatiguing as the first cable and more natural timbre than the second ... Congratulation milhorn !
|
Thank you for your kind words! Even better is that WT is 1/4 of Zentara price. Alex/WTA |
Transparent cable company offers a network box as part of its cable. it Adjusts the frequency range ever so slightly where it emphasizes those frequencies that are negatively impacted the most when sound travels through the wires. It sort of purifies the sound and avoids impact by the wire that otherwise occurs. It's a good cable company on the pricey side but Worth a review. I have several of their cables and I'm very comfortable. They also do well insulated power cables. |
4 sounds can be confusing to notice the difference. I am sorry to bother you! But could you compare 2 sounds only? Please click times ( 4:46 JPS, 18:53 WTPC ) to hear different cables. Time marks are in the description section under the screen (& in the comment section too). So, you can repeat quickly between time spots. Thank you for your time! Alex/WTA |
Your confirmation biased opinions are not relevant, and don't change science. In a blind test you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a snake oil $1,000 cable and a coat hanger. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Anyone who says otherwise is perpetuating what's wrong with this hobby and industry. |
@squared80 thanks for telling us what we are and are not hearing. I’ve had confirmation bias the last 20 years I guess. Lol 😂. All of us cable believers are just not hearing things or are we hearing things. |
@squared80 the brain is a powerful thing sir. I encourage people to trust their own brain. To trust their own ears. I think they should do that or trust someone off the internet who hasn’t heard or who will never hear their system. If they are using their brain like you said I think that makes sense to them. |
@squared80 (et al)- Rewinds: No one can tell you whether/how your system, room and/or ears will respond to some new addition. There are simply too many variables. LIKEWISE: no one can possibly know whether a new addition (ie: some kind of disc, crystal, fuse, interconnect, speaker cable, etc) will make a difference, in their system and room, with their media and to their ears, without trying them for themselves. Some companies offer a 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee, so- those that are actually interested, have absolutely nothing to lose by trying (experimenting with) such. Anyone that knows anything about the sciences, realizes that something like 96% of what makes up this universe, remains a mystery. For centuries; humanity’s seen, heard, felt and otherwise witnessed phenomena, that none of the best minds could explain, UNTIL they developed a science or measurement, that could explain it. The Naysayer Church wants you to trust their antiquated science (1800’s electrical theory) and faith-based, religious doctrine, BLINDLY (their credo: "Trust ME!"). Theories have never proven or disproven anything. It’s INVARIABLY testing and experimentation that proves or disproves theories/hypotheses. IF you’re interested in the possibility of improving your system’s presentation, have a shred of confidence in your capacity for perceiving reality and trust your own senses: actually TRY whatever whets your aural appetite, FOR YOURSELF. The Naysayer Church HATES it, when THAT happens! |
One shouldn't even mention, "science", (obviously) without a shred of background/education in the subject. another rewind:
Do a bit of research and you'll learn those primitives were limited in their understanding of what they saw with their eyes, based on their prior experience, education and BIASES. A rewind:
OR, two:
At the very first mention of something as simple as Wave Function (a BASIC tenet of Quantum Mechanics), the Cargo Cult will label you a KOOK. But remember: they can only view/understand you, based on their limited experience, education and BIASES. They have overlooked the fact that, if not for the hypotheses/theories and experimentation, regarding Quantum Mechanics: a plethora of modern conveniences, medical devices and the gear they so love, would not exist. Had scientists, chemists and inventors shared the doctrines of the Cargo Cult (Denyin'tologists), there would be no semiconductors, computer chips, LASERs, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging devices (MRIs). Solid State amps? OOPS (back to tubes)! Your Smart Phone? FA'GET ABOUT IT! Your car's GPS? NOPE! Then too: some may be willfully ignorant and just enjoy being contentious. Others: obtuse, uneducated*, misinformed? *Typically, from what's been exhibited here: H.S. STEM, if that, would be a safe inference. Either way: the result, when the Cult begins its rhetoric, is a classic demo of the Dunning- Kruger Effect. But, I digress: Bring up those pesky details, regarding the likes of QED, Dielectric Absorption, Poynting's theorem and possible application/effects, relative to frequency, that our musical signals are carried via photon or wave, outside the conductor and you're a KOOK? Again: the Cargo Cult can only understand anyone with an actual background, experience and education in Physics/QED, based on THEIR own beliefs, education, experience and biases Remember this?.
Oh well: let 'em go build a runway! references: https://uwaterloo.ca/ But: I'm a kook, because I believe in the SCIENCE, from which all that sprang? Einstein got that last one wrong (Quantum Entanglement), BUT- I still wish he'd been alive, when the Hubble Telescope proved, what he considered his, "greatest blunder" (his inability to bring symmetry to his field equation, without lambda). Another example of a hypothesis/theory, with no way to EXPERIMENT/MEASURE, what you're sure must be there, in some detectable way, or another. Just for fun: https://www. Happy listening!
|
YEAH, and: "Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction." (Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse , 1872) "The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon," (Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873) "The super computer is technologically impossible. It would take all of the water that flows over Niagara Falls to cool the heat generated by the number of vacuum tubes required." (Professor of Electrical Engineering, New York University) "There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom." (Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1923) "Man will never reach the moon regardless of all future scientific advances." (Dr. Lee DeForest, Father of Radio & Grandfather of Television) "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible!" (Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895) "The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives." (Admiral William Leahy, re: US Atomic Bomb Project) When the steam locomotive came on the scene; the best (scientific) minds proclaimed, "The human body cannot survive speeds in excess of 35MPH." Until recently (21st Century); and the advent of the relatively new science of Fluid Dynamics, the best (scientific) minds involved in Aerodynamics, could not fathom how a bumblebee stays aloft. Often; Science has to catch up with the facts/phenomena of Nature and/or, "reality" (our universe). I haven't been in school since the 60's, but- at Case Institute of Technology; the Physics Prof always emphasized what we were studying was, "Electrical THEORY." He strongly made a point of the fact that no one had yet actually observed electrons (how they behave on the quantum level) and that only some things can really be called, "LAWS." (ie: Ohm, Kirchoff, Faraday) PERHAPS: that's changed in recent years and I missed it? |
The general question of the new paradigm which had changed science in the last years since Turing , Marvin Minsky and Kurzweil, from materialism to techno-cultism and transhumanism is this one : will we change man to became a tool for A.I. or go on with the human genomic and biological integrity as superior ? A.I. is not a tool like printing machine was, A.I. is like the fire and more impactful on the long term than fire ; it will change our body and society on a scale which will exceed the discovery of fire impact... I had decided that human are superior for reasons i will not discuss here, then i trust my ears to decide which cable satisfy me ... I could not repeat Rodman reasons nor the others opinion here . This is mine rooted in acoustic basic training. I also know that the difference cables make are minor compared to the set of acoustics factors huge impact by modidfication of the acoustic parameters of the gear or and of the room and of the listener .. |
For my $.02, I have a set of DIY 13 gauge, 4 conductor cables from Parts Express, marketed as speaker cable. The gold plated banana connectors are soldered on with silver solder. They're bi-wire, but only to eliminate the bridge connector between the binding posts. They don't sound remarkable, they carry a signal to the speakers. I have a set of Kimber 8TC speaker cables, same length as the PE cables. In comparison, the PE cables sound like the signal goes through a layer of gauze. The Kimbers are clearer, cleaner, more detailed, and present a more open and coherent soundstage. Sure, a $600 pair of cables should sound better than a $20 pair of cables. And they do-in my rig, in my room. Whether or not a stranger on the internet agrees with me is irrelevant. Two of my uncles were engineers so I take them with a grain of salt. One uncle insists I should get Bose Cubes and an Acoustimess because "It sounds just as good". He's never heard my stereo. So being an engineer in no way makes one the final authority on anything-and frequently gets in the way of actually learning something. |
@alaric62 man you are speaking truth. You got to try for yourself. You can’t let random strays tell you what you are hearing or not hearing. |
And another engineer might tell you to scrap it all and get good headphones with a good headphone amp instead. Whatever floats your boat, and trying is learning. A good test comparing the PE vs the Kimber cables to get ideas and differences. As you try other vendors and designs, you may detect new differences yet again. And those who cannot tell a difference, that’s okay, maybe they can stick with the PE cables or others for lower cost. Only the listener can determine if/why different cables "matter" more for them or not. Point is you have to try them to know them, as you did here. For those who try very little and rant on forever, just ignore them. |
@decooney great observation. Some guys are just trolls or know it alls who actually know less or in some cases nothing. |
My 2 cents from recent upgrades. Changed speaker cable from Analysis Plus Chocolate Oval to a double strand of their Black Mesh Oval 9 gauge. Big difference. I had long runs and some of the effect may be due to Bowie if more than cable choice, but a worthwhile upgrade. I already had XLR balanced SR Foundation IC between amp and preamp, but as prior Streamer/DAC had only single post out, was using SR Foundation RCA IC between streamer and pre, and kept it that way when I got my current Gustard X26 Pro DAC. I finally got a SR Foundation SX balanced cable, and SQ definitely improved a bit - noticeably, not a lot, but enough that it was worthwhile IMO. When I got the new DAC, I auditioned 6 different cables, and was surprised to hear that they all sounded different, and sadly the Shunyata Alpha sounded best with my gear (fortunately found one used on EBAY). Again when I had my Innnuos Phoenix USB reclocker between my streamer and DAC, I thought I would probably could get away with a cheaper cable fro streamer to reclocker, and auditioned half a dozen cables again. Again they sounded different, and from what I heard, it still made sense interms if SQ to get another Shunyata Alpha. All my other cabling and power cords are SR, so to the extent I had bias, I would have expected to have heard the SR USB cable sounding better, but still heard the Shunyata as better.
Stereo System 2024 Amp: Bryston 4B3 300 w x 2 Pre: Parasound Halo P6 Speakers: Tannoy Cheviots, Analysis Plus Black Mesh Oval 9 gauge biwired cables (21’ run) Digital Streamer/Source: Heavily modified BlueSound NODE 130 (added Fidelity Audio clock board & LPSU)/ Innuos Phoenix USB/ Gustard X26 Pro DAC (connected by Shunyata Alpha USB cables. All other interconnects: Synergistics Research Foundation or better Power: Power conditioner: Synergistics Research Powercell 10 SE Mk 3 w SR Atmosphere level 3 cord; All power cords SR Foundation |
Hi @smurfstain - it’s been awhile since the last post, but if you’re still following this thread, I wanted to tell you I had a similar experience to yours when I first started out about five years ago. I didn’t really know what I wanted, what was truth or just talk, what actually made a difference to sound quality, or even what sound quality meant. I just knew I wanted facts and truth. You know, whenever audiophiles say to use your ears to decide for yourself, they’re actually saying something a lot more profound - it’s not always just colloquialism at play. You see, getting into hifi audio is much like getting an education, albeit one in listening, and hearing. In a similar way photographers learn how to ‘see’ better, an audiophile learns how to hear, and listen better, for nuance, inflection, and above all, timing. And as with a typical education, one cannot just head straight to college, or university - one would not understand a thing that’s going on in there, not having first been through grade school, middle school, and the rest of it. A ‘good’ education builds a solid foundation for all that is to come. So, I just started with the purchase of a well-regarded and somewhat affordable cd transport, a DAC, a solid state amplifier (all three from the same manufacturer, ps audio), and speakers that I’d understood could be placed flush against the walls. As with you, I really only wanted to hear the music i had in my extensive cd collection the way it was meant to be heard, through a sound system of ‘quality’. And it was good enough, Basic ‘lamp wire’ cables and all - my most invested cable was the i2s from ps audio to connect transport to DAC - I was shocked that it cost two hundred and twenty five US dollars. But I loved what I was hearing from my system - I was right there, every single evening, listening to my cds in a way I’d never heard them before - that was how good it all sounded : ) However, just a day or two into my journey/education, I began to feel that something didn’t sound right, glorious as it was. There was something in there that did not sound realistic, that the performers sounded distant, like a thin cloth separated me from the music. In between my nightly music sessions, I read about nearfield listening, and realised I was sitting in the incorrect location for the specific configuration of my room. A secondary, vital issue involved the design of my speakers - the Larsen speakers I had bought had been claimed to do away with early reflections for the perfect balance between fitting well into a lounge space, and delivering high quality sound, to the disadvantage of indirect tweeter dispersion. Like many who first started in our hobby, I didn’t want a dedicated listening room with speakers pulled well out away from walls, and I really did not want acoustic panels and room treatments, having read that such is possible with very specifically configured spaces, and under specific listening position locations. Definitely not perfect, but I wasn’t looking for perfection, now, was I? Sitting nearfield sorted out the realism….for the next week. I realised shortly after, that I wasn’t hearing the crispness of piano key strikes the way they sound in real life. This particular lack of realism would set me on the ultimate quest which would last the next four years. In the meantime, I got slightly better crispness if I held my head closer to each speaker, Larsens being as undirectional as they are designed to be. And I knew I had to get a more directional speaker for the listening space I was in, and something that would violate my need to have speakers placed flush against the wall. Damn. And that’s how my education began, as I’m sure many others also have. I moved to the greater cost/realism benefits of a tube amplifier for the depth of sound I wasn’t hearing, and the realistic timbre of voice and instruments my poor solid state amplifier was not delivering. It’s been four years now, many many speaker demos in that listening space and that of my second system and five times as many demos for DAC;, six speakers I’ve bought and three I kept; all kinds of cabling have come in and gone back out; and I’m back to a solid state amplifier, coupled with a solid state preamp that sound more realistic than the many tube amps from CJ, airtight, Aries Cerat, and audio research I’ve demoed for days at any time, in my systems in their specific listening spaces, and with my own ears. The two things that havent changed are my nearfield listening position, and listening spaces with no early reflections - these resolve the most fundamental problems with room acoustics And that’s the thing, you see, as with an education (demos aside), one can’t return any of it. You cannot just decide you didn’t need kindergarten, really; or primary school with all that basic shit, or even secondary school after that, to just head straight to college. None of the school fees you paid for can be reimbursed, none of your time refunded, not one school bag or school book may be returned. The kicker is, our audio journey is unlike that of education in only one most critical way - we don’t need a parent or someone else to decide for us where to stop. What we do have is our own pure desire to hear and listen more, the limits of ability to develop technical skill in building our listening environments and/or modifying equipment or making our own, and the limits of a bank account - to hell with anyone else who has decided to do it a different way. So, audio forums, reviews, technical knowledge, measurements, can tell you a lot - together, they create the basis for where you might want to take your next step, or not bother anymore, but nothing alone can tell you where to go or the correct decision to make - and that is what is meant by listening with your own ears, and finding your own decisions. It can be affordable, but do know that getting to a college education, expensive as it may be, is far easier than self-learning to the same degree and level. For most, self-learning takes far greater skill and ability than most of us could ever dream of having - kudos to those blessed few.
In friendship, kevin. |
Everyone new to hi-fi audio should know what they are getting into. 1st thing they should know is all audio systems in the world sound un-natural. Whatever people pay (money and effort) for the audio gears, it won't get remotely close to the original music. If they knew the hi-fi audio sounds un-natural, people won't be frustrated so much with the audio sound.
That thin cloth (sound coloration, glare, veil) between you and the speaker will be always there. In below video, all audio systems in the world behave like a left speaker which is veiled. If you say anything while your audio system playing, you will hear similar sounds like the left speaker. Alex/WTA |
So this video, which we are listening to on our phones/computer is supposed to show us how bad music reproduction is by comparing it to a natural voice speaking at the same time- through our computer/iphone speaker. Mr. Spock would say that is illogical. That speaker sounds bad with or without his natural voice talking over it. That much I can hear on my iPad. I have and so has everyone else heard people talking in front of their speakers and they still sound great, fantastic, realistic. If an outdoor PA speaker is your idea of hifi no wonder the low opinion of the art. Just another sham. If hifi really sounded so bad the industry would have died out long ago. In 1910, Thomas Edison marketed his new phonograph with stage shows. He had his phonograph and a live singer on stage behind a thin curtain. He would have the singer perform or he might play a record on his phonograph and then ask the audience to decide if the performance was live or was it the recording. He sold a lot of phonographs. And they weren‘t cheap. |
+1 @tonywinga Silly premise @mihorn . |
@kevn i enjoyed your post and response. The funny part is you got folks telling you that you are not smart enough or intelligent enough to hear the difference in different cabling. Man continue to do you. I think it’s kind of arrogant for some guys to think they are so much smarter than everyone else to the point where cable believers are suckers and cable deniers are the Einstein’s. I honestly think that if you let a random guy tell you on the internet what you are hearing or not hearing in a system that he or she will never hear then you are the sucker for taking his advice. |
About 8 months past since this oft-repeating thread first started , it has now bottomed out into an entirely predictable opposing binary choice, with no chance of movement on either side. On both sides, their respective “John the Baptist preaching in the wilderness” posts are mired in an intransigent Mexican standoff, that strongly craves that it’s high time to simply and mercifully shelve this futile thread .
but the Brits have a bespoke expression in their lexicon to best express the notion that applying the same naysayer opinion to all other audio systems - and especially high-end systems - as gospel : “ Bullocks!” Choose wisely, and carry on. |
Yes. PA speakers in the video sound bad. The purpose of video is to show how the all audio sound behaves like a left speaker which sounds un-natural (glare and bad noise) even if a’philes don’t hear it. More expensive hi-fi audio will sound better and nicer but the glare, veil and the sound coloration are still there. I hear it in all YT videos and audio shows. Many a’philes can adjust their ears to not hear the glare, but it is always there and women/non-a’philes hear it. I don’t mean the un-natural sound is bad, but it is just different art and expression from the natural sound. A’philes can accept the difference of Hi-Fi from the natural sound and still can enjoy Hi-Fi sounds. If someone told me that all audio sounds un-natural 20 or 30 years ago, I would save a lot of money, effort, and my time in my audio journey.
Human ears and brain are so amazing that it’s faster than some super computers. When we hear natural and un-natural sounds together, the brain switches between natural sound mode and un-natural sound mode very quickly (like 50 times a second). A’philes can do that better. Women can’t do that well. The brain switching between 2 modes is very tiring/hard and it is where real "listening fatigue" occurs. People didn’t have any other choice. Hi-fi and PA (un-natural sounds) are only way to listen music again (reproduction audio) and let people to hear because there have been no natural reproduction sound in last 150 years. Alex/WTA |
@calvinj The internet is filled with, not only more ’engineers’ (especially EEs!) than in reality but they’ve also all double-majored in psychology. All the while being rabid conspiracy theorists who believe tens of thousands of people are employed by companies who are professional, fraudulent scammers who feast on wealthy fools. The internet is an amazing, magical place indeed. |
@audiom3 exactly. I stopped posting on the platform for a while. Yes do some side work for a company and I’m upfront about it. But there are folks on here really shilling and trolling not adding a thing to our hobby. Just a lot of bimbo babble that’s useless. Claiming to be the smartest guy in the room. |
my post was about the only system you can improve at no monetary cost, your listening ability - it wasn’t about the money one chooses to spend on cables, a silly issue that imposes your limits, or lack of, upon someone else. We summarily accept at face value whenever someone says their sense of sight is better than their hearing, or that one has a more developed sense of taste than touch. It is, consequently, very amusing whenever someone makes a claim of snake oil based on their belief that the hearing of others must certainly be as underdeveloped as theirs : ) squared80, differences in human beings exist - seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, and listening/hearing ability is different for different people. The good news is that these differences are not usually biological, they’re psycho-acoustic. This means that one can learn to develop one’s abilities to listen, and thus ‘hear’ better, in much the same way one can learn to observe, or ‘see’ better, in order to depend less on a confirmation biased mind so as to critically ‘think’ better. The bad news is that it means more effort for some of us to develop better listening ability. For those truly biologically hard of hearing, I would say what a blessing, not needing to make all that effort to able to listen better, in building their systems. The effort and discipline to create a listening space where only one thing at a time is changed is far more difficult than bringing in that hard earned money to do it. I feel nothing but admiration for those who are more capable and skilled in ways I am not, be it with listening or modifying and building their own equipment and listening rooms that I try to learn from, instead ignorantly criticising others further along in their journey of listening ability in the same hobby we all share.- how idiomatically lazy and unkind your words are. Please read my additional post to smurfstain ahead, if you believe that there is always something new to learn. Do ignore me otherwise ; ) Alex, tonywinga’s comment notwithstanding, my post was about sound realism, not natural or unnatural sound. It may simply be a matter of terminology, but I suspect it isn’t. The sound quality of your speakers for their given electronic chain as evident in all your previously posted videos tell me you have created good and decent speakers for their value, but they are still quite far down the scale in relation to realistic sound. By realistic, I mean the same sound waves we all may hear differently internally as individuals, but that we can all identify as realistic, as they all emanate from the same external objective sources. Piano or guitar sound waves don’t change what they are just because we hear differently - realism sounds differently to different people but we will use the same term to describe it. Natural sound, on the other hand, is subject to what your definition of natural is. I suspect you actually mean to use the word ‘realistic’, in which case, your speaker still has some ways to go, however good a value it may be. In friendship - kevin |
@calvinj I also just wanted to say thanks for not driving your marketing on the forum as unrelentingly as some have. While you’re clearly no Ralph of atmasphere or Duke of audiokinesis, you’ve still practiced some restraint, and it’s not unappreciated. But do try to put your credentials at the end of every post you make, as a newcomer to audiogon might easily miss your affiliation to the commercial side of the industry - thanks again for your contributions : ) In friendship - kevin |
@smurfstain I am so sorry for my earlier rambling post that caught the wrong kind of attention. What I had meant to say, in response to your very specific original questions, was that learning how to listen is the only way to answer your questions, and no, you cannot just target top-notch equipment to get there - attempting to do so would be the equivalent of heading straight for a college degree without the preparatory foundation of all the lower levels of education before that - you will neither understand nor appreciate what you hear, never mind the fact that top-notch means different things at a variety and range of price points. Education with listening must involve equipment, it is the only means to understand the nuance of music, the time domain. As such, improving listening ability as an audiophile will involve spending money - how much of that, however, will be entirely up to you to decide. And when I refer to an audiophile listening education, I do so in relation to equipment, as there is no other way to achieve this. The thing is, we all know there is a difference between how different equipment sounds - and unfortunately, based on my listening tests with equipment of very different price points, circuit typologies, and makes, there is general but direct proportional correlation between cost and performance. The thing is, as another audiogoner had mentioned (funny how we are all goners in this hobby : ) there are no shortcuts, and no refunds for this education in audiophile listening. But there are no mistakes either, contrary to what some of us believe, as learning from a mistake commonly provides the biggest jump in our journey of listening. Finally, for you and the many others who participate in this forum, I would like to share knowledge that although there is a general direct correlation between cost and benefit in hifi equipment, and exceptions by way of giant killers (smurfstain’s equivalent of topnotch, in a sense) are very very rare in our hobby, they nonetheless do exist. The one that springs immediately to mind which I, and quite a few others here, consider the single greatest value for dollar investment in any system, will cost all of USD399, fully refundable, and it is called the Swiss digital fuse box. It takes the safety function of the fuse out of your equipment and into a small digitally calibrated container that shuts the power down in event of a surge, based on the power rating of the related piece of equipment it is used on. A solid piece of metal called a sluggo replaces the fuse, taking out the bottleneck fuses have been suspected of for a long time now. They offer a super sounding rhodium plated tellurium sluggo at similarly super cost, but the stock sluggo that comes with the fuse box will get you most of the way there. The digital fuse box will need to be connected between your existing cable and related piece of equipment, and a basic non-audiophile c13 female to nema 5-15p male direct adaptor will do the job - https://www.amazon.com/CGTime-Standard-Computer-XH-A03-1-60320-C13/dp/B07HRJKGFD The impact of the solid sluggo in lieu of the bottleneck fusion is so great, it renders the additional adaptor interface less consequential to final sonic outcome. Now, most will apply this digital fuse box on their amplifier, in belief that that’s where the greatest current flow and thus improved sound quality, would be most felt. Wrong. The greatest impact is putting one of these (with the correct rating, of course) to your server, streamer, or DAC, or if you have the funds, all three. The effect of adding this device upstream is so profound, it will be heard by the laziest of listeners, and it will fundamentally change everything disbelieved about power, cables and fuses. The Swiss digital fuse makes a joke of audiophile fuses, at a fraction of the cost, while simultaneously putting to rest any false science behind why fuses shouldn’t affect sound quality. I share this purely as an audiophile, so that you and others too may come to hear the realism possible with whatever equipment might be at hand, and also in hope that other conflicted and similarly less experienced audiophiles may come to understand that not everything at the highest performing audiophile levels is unaffordable, should time and less skill with DIY be of issue. In particular, this digital fuse is one I have come to realise is not just a tweak the cost of which you will have no need to justify; i believe it will spearhead the sort of technology that will change traditional fuse protection forever. Its basic idea will become a fundamental part of any system in time to come. I am not a dealer, nor do I earn any kickbacks or favours from verafi audio, the primary distribution source for the digital fuse box. I merely want you and as many wondering audiophiles to hear and understand this one rare ‘affordable’ and giant killing improvement to sound realism. In friendship - kevin |
Kevin, I apologize for coming across so harsh. I didn‘t understand your intentions. But I still vehemently disagree with that video. My brother talked me into buying this big Sony boombox last year. He thinks it is the greatest. He actually prefers the sound of that boombox over my stereo system. But then I cooked a delicious, very expensive prime rib and he didn‘t like that either. He told me he would have been happier with a hamburger. Lesson learned. I can‘t play that Sony boombox much louder than a whisper. The sound of it grates on me. Hard to believe we both came from the same parents sometimes. But funny how he kept listening to my stereo. What hurt the most was him frying his slice of prime rib, his perfect slice because he thought it was still raw. I couldn‘t convince him otherwise. We all see, taste, feel and hear in different ways. It‘s cause for rejoicing, not fighting. |
i think the apology is mine to extend, I am sorry for not speaking more plainly. My use of ‘he term ‘notwithstanding’ was not in disagreement to your post, but in addition and perhaps even extension to it. I do feel too that wavetouch Alex could be more relevant at times, especially since he has something in his speaker that could be developed to a more sophisticated level without any adjustment to price point that might steer away potential buyers. And @mihorn, Alex, please do not take my comments in a bad way, as I do not mean any harm, just constructive criticism that might help your own journey.
In friendship - kevin |
