Why Do Cables Matter?


To me, all you need is low L, C, and R. I run Mogami W3104 bi-wire from my McIntosh MAC7200 to my Martin Logan Theos. We all know that a chain is only as strong as its' weakest link - so I am honestly confused by all this cable discussion. 

What kind of wiring goes from the transistor or tube to the amplifier speaker binding post inside the amplifier? It is usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper. Then we are supposed to install 5 - 10' or so of wallet-emptying, pipe-sized pure CU or AG with "special configurations" to the speaker terminals?

What kind of wiring is inside the speaker from the terminals to the crossover, and from the crossover to the drivers? Usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper.

So you have "weak links" inside the amplifier, and inside the speaker, so why bother with mega expensive cabling between the two? It doesn't make logical sense to me. It makes more sense to match the quality of your speaker wires with the existing wires in the signal path [inside the amplifier and inside the speaker].

 

 

kinarow1

Showing 16 responses by cleeds

Oh, I will add that if you want to get nice cables just because they look nice, that is a valid reason. 

Anyone can select any cables for their system and the choice will be valid. No one here needs your permission or blessing.

Specialized speaker cables often incorporate shielding to protect the audio signal from external electromagnetic interference.

I've been at this a long time and have never seen a shielded speaker cable. If they're so common, @tokushi why don't you provide a link to a few?

donavabdear

...listening is futile if you don’t know how the instrument sounded originally it’s futile if you don’t know what mic was used to record it, it’s futile if you don’t know the room and the circumstances it was recorded under.

It obviously disturbs you that so many here are listening, and also enjoying it, in open defiance of your proclamations.

I’ve done $200,000,000 dollar movies ...

So what?

Hope you can understand my poor way of communicating, I know Im not very good at it.

You’ve made yourself very clear. You’d be embarrassed if you knew how clearly you communicate.

Let's cut the nonsense here folks, and get to a simple fact.

What @donavabdear is doing is known as "sealioning."

here's Mirriam-Webster:

'Sealioning' is a form of trolling meant to exhaust the other debate participant with no intention of real discourse.

Sealioning refers to the disingenuous action by a commenter of making an ostensible effort to engage in sincere and serious civil debate, usually by asking persistent questions of the other commenter. These questions are phrased in a way that may come off as an effort to learn and engage with the subject at hand, but are really intended to erode the goodwill of the person to whom they are replying, to get them to appear impatient or to lash out, and therefore come off as unreasonable.

So many on this forum have such knee-jerk reactions to anyone not bowing down to the cable religion, I never said cables don't make a difference, I never said I haven't tried different cables (only a few I'd have to say) I've spent 10s of thousands on cables, I never said my mind is made up and I won't demo cables, I'm just pointing out logical problems with the audiophile community as a whole. It is very poor thinking to point out some friend or a studio that is an exception to a general statement about a large group.

Why doesn't the worlds most complex and exact machines use special AC Cables and interconnects?

Why don't audio test equipment makers like Audio Precision send their equipment out with boutique cables?

Why does the audiophile community constantly throw up straw man arguments by saying something like " well if you wan't to use cheep (leaky) cables then you obviously want to stay in your state of willful ignorance"

Why does the audiophile community think that cables bring out the design of the components. 

Why don't engineers design components with particular cables in mind if they are such an important part of the systems fidelity?

Why doesn't the audiophile community understand that nearly every channel has DSP on it when mixed. Limiting dynamics, EQ, reverb, phasing, imaging, airiness, and all the other toys used all the time. 

Why do audiophiles think the electronic signal goes down the strands of the medium (the signal moves in a field on the outside of the conductors). 

Why do audiophiles think that inserting a very high quality AC cable between the romex and the Amp fuse makes the audio signal change (there is no audio until after the transformer where the power is changed to DC). (Also I've spent 100 of thousands on Power conditioning personally).

Blind tests vs. ABX tests vs. visual confirmation cable tests. As you all well know the visual test with the very expensive cable always sounds better. 

Why is it that audiophiles generally can't accept the idea that an amplifier designed for a specific speaker driver is the best practice for more accurate sound. (I watch a guy on YouTube who has gone through 300 exceptionally expensive power amps). 

Why is it that the "break in period" is not testable, I understand cables aren't always quantifiable but break in changes should be, and they are not.

Why is it that sample rate information has so much BS, the AES did a large study on this years ago and showed experienced listeners were not able to hear any differences between CD, SACD and 96/24 (I spent $8k on my SACD player).

Why is it that audiophiles think that resolution (sample rate) is the same as resolution in pixel rate in vision, it is not. (this myth still hasn't gone away).

-little harder question-
If boutique cables are so important to the sound than why is it that cables with similar resistance, capacitance and inductance sound the same, you immediately say "they don't" but if there is a problem one of these characteristics is damaged).

And again why is it that audiophiles think they can add any information to the sound with expensive equipment and cables (yes, some people have delt with this question but I think they were all recording engineer who understand this concept.) 

 

 

you insist science doesn’t matter and I shouldn’t be posting here.

I have never, ever, said or written any such thing, here or in any other forum. You seem to be a purveyor of "alternative facts."

How can I put any credence into any cable suggestions if its all biased opinion with billions of variables.

Only you can answer your question. If what you prefer is to reject all empirical evidence, rely solely on purely "scientific" data devoid of opinion or interpretation, and to challenge or question those who are reporting their experiences, perhaps you are in the wrong place. This is a hobbyist’s group, not a scientific forum.

Well you sure can troll like the rest any disagreement its wrong ...

Logical fallacy, ad hominem.

I look at what I’m really buying and get what I need.

That’s interesting. I’d have expected you to be one of those who wouldn’t buy without a double-blind ABX test. So it seems you use logic and science when it’s convenient for you, but choose to ignore them otherwise. That’s not how real science works.

Notwithstanding what you might see on TV shows, premium power cables are indeed used in the medical industry, with actual case studies supporting their use. Shunyata has a whole division devoted to it.

 

When I first got into streaming seriously, I used a cheap but convenient USB cable from an Aurender N100H to my Bryston BDA-3 DAC. To make the install tidy, I later bought a Wireworld cable in the proper length to replace the cheap-o cable. I was surprised at the sonic difference, especially because I wasn't expecting a one.

The two cables were slightly different lengths, so I suppose it wasn't a truly scientific comparison. Oh well.

Audiophiles give me the impression that they can evaluate the proper mixing goal of the artist, producer and audio engineer by saying things like this or that sounds natural or to the presentation or the image is thus and so. It is impossible to make judgements like that if the image is bigger with a particular component or cable how do you know that's what was originally recorded. you can't.

That is why judgment about how a system sounds has to be made over time, and why I distrust "shootout-out" style demos. 

Extreme reverence over the "original recording" is a bit of a red herring. For enjoyment and demo purposes, I like to make my own recordings. But what microphones were used? How far were they from the stage? What mic preamp? Changing those things change the sound.

The notion that it is takes some exceptional, extreme talent or expertise to record, say, a famous actor's voice is absurd. Most people can recognize a familiar voice over a lo-fi cell phone. A real recording challenge would be a symphony orchestra, or a intimate jazz band.

donavabdear

I have recorded and mixed 100s of orchestras and it's much more forgiving than doing a recording of an actor who is getting $20M to act in a movie ...

I don't think there's any correlation at all between what an actor or musician gets paid, and the difficulty in recording them well. It's silly to claim otherwise. Certainly, you're entitled to your opinions, but recording the dialogue of a single voice - something easily transmitted over any telephone - is inherently simpler than recording the complex sounds and wide dynamic range of an orchestra. Of course, fidelity for film must be better than cell phone quality, but the phone proves it doesn't take much to record the identifiable qualities of a human voice.

... if you didn't do the original recording then haw can you or anyone else talk about the proper image or the tightness of the bass ...

You can't rely on any single recording. But you can rely on groups of recordings, some with consistent, repeatable, identifiable characteristics (such as the Mercury Living Presence series), to tune the sound of a system. If you also make your own recordings, as I sometimes do, the task is made easier.

ossicle2brain

Power cables are psychoacoustic nonsense. Placebo effect and expectation bias ... On the other hand, the placebo effect does work.

Not so. Placebo effect won’t cure cancer for example.

As for expectation bias, many a doubting cynic has been surprised by the results a cable can make, so that would be in defiance of expectation bias. There’s a whole thread on just that here.