Why Do Cables Matter?

@donavabdear we are apparently talking past each other here a bit.  To the degree you called me out on that, you sound like my wife.  She is quite smart, so that’s a compliment.  

Like others who just posted to this thread, I never said I was trying to get 7.5 worth of information value out of a recording that only has a value of 7.  OK?  We straight on that?  I think pretty much everyone on here has addressed that issue in a way that is consistent with your point, so we should be good.

I also maybe misinterpreted your point to mean it is hopeless to use way more expensive cables than the recording studio, because you might be trying to score a 12 out of 7 in replaying the recording, and that is just such a ridiculous concept, right?  Nobody would claim that.  Right?  At least I haven’t read a single post in this thread where anyone claimed that.

I think what folks are getting at here is that better hifi systems, including their better and finely optimized cable looms, more closely approach reproduction value of 7.0, say attaining a value of 6.45 (subjectively) compared with less capable systems with less resolving or higher loss cables which may only be capable of achieving a reproduction value of 5.9 or 6.2 (subjectively) for the listener.

My point was also that as systems become more resolving and more closely capable of reproducing what is actually on the recording (nothing more), the variation between quality of different recordings and their pressings becomes quite apparent, and this can either lead to more enjoyment or less enjoyment for the listener.  Again, with system and cable qualities adding synergistically to the approximation of perfect replay of only that information captured on the original recording and source material, be it analog or digital formats.

All that said, I am having a distinct sense of deja vu, so I’ve either had this exact same discussion in the past on this or other forum, or I am doomed to have it again.

kn

 

@yoyoyaya I'm saying that the audiophile view of cables is not one of science but religion. People on this forum and on YouTube along with salesmen at EXPONA often describe the characteristics of their components as creating something in the music while using their 100k components that are much better and finer tuned than any recording studio. This is not possible because despite the statements of $80k DAC's or $40k XLR's with the same neutrik connectors on the ends covered in 3x colored shrink-wrap, you are not going to achieve anything better than the Canary or Beldon star quad XLRs that were used in the studio. Logically $80k cables will get you close to simply welding the amp to the speaker but that cable is never going to give you anything positive. 

As far as getting to the point in audio quality as the original recording I think that level can be surpassed in speakers but with musical attributes that are not mixed and A.I. in the near future will be able to give us all very high quality by filling in the musical harmonics and subtracting the unintended noise in the recordings. The mindset in the audiophile world is not trying to get back to zero (the original recording) but it is buying exceptionally expensive things like cables in which at the original studio used cables 1/10th the price and therefore theoretically is not capable of producing a fraction of the quality of signal in the playback recording if all the thought in modern audiophile cable technology is correct. It's always the same picture. Super turbo mega cables inserted between a skinny fuse and the crossover wire a speaker can't make a difference just like inserting a firehose between two garden hoses can't make a difference. In physics in called Kickoffs law. 

@donavabdear 

Thanks for that lengthy exposition but could you just please give a direct answer to the question that I asked. A simple yes or no will suffice.

 

Thank you.

I don't believe the limitation is in the recording.  It is in the playback system and the ears of the listener.  One reason I say that is from my visit to Axpona 2022 in Tampa.  On Friday night a recording engineer did a seminar in the large room displaying the Acora speakers.  He had a digital version of the master recording of Night at the Opera by Queen.  The original master was analog being that it was made in the 1970s.  One of the fascinating things he said is that he can hear the splices in these old master tapes when playing them back on his stereo.  Try as I might I do not hear them.  I'm not trained to hear them.  His entire demonstration of how the mix down to two channel is made was a new experience for me and very fascinating.  

Vibration is the single most limiter to resolution.  Unwanted vibrations cause smearing.  A good example is a Scanning Electron Microscope.  The more the SEM is isolated from vibrations the better it's resolving power.  I can recall seeing my first SEM in 1980.  It was mounted on its own separate concrete pad from the plant floor and stood atop a thick cork underlayment.  Audio is the same.  The better the recording studio and its components are isolated down to the playback system and its components- including the cables then the more resolving the playback will be.  

I agree and understand your point and that is exactly how I think about it.  If say the live performance is a 10 and the studio recording is then possibly an 8, then the average system playback will be around 2.  Mid-fi might hit 4.  Hifi might hit 5-7.  Thing is, only a small subset of listeners may be able to discern the difference between a 6 and a 7.  I also understand that the live recording and the final mix down to 2 channel will not have a lot in common.  That was another interesting thing that night at Axpona.  After hearing many of the 24 tracks separately on the master tape, I tried and tried to hear many of those sounds in the 2 channel version but I could not make them out.

@yoyoyaya 

Yes

I’m saying that the audiophile view of cables is not one of science but religion. People on this forum and on YouTube along with salesmen at EXPONA

All I have to say… it’s Axpona. Get a real life dude. You are sick

 

@knownothing @yoyoyaya @tonywinga : you are wasting your time with this dude. Folks like this are a dime of dozens in the internet. I appreciate that, I have done that many times in the past. It’s an exercise in futility . These folks are all set. You will just waste your time and make you upset.

@tjag I think you make a good point about Paul of PS Audio, I've met him he seem like a great guy, what could make him pick another companies very expensive cables over PS Audio's own (I've bought them myself)? The answer is Paul needs to make money and he can make much more money selling Dragon cables than his own cables (especially at $34,100). Simple.

I spoke to some of the highest end cable makers at AXPONA this year they all told me the same thing they shrugged and said something like " I don't know why it woks it just does" the only exception was an old engineer at Beldon, I asked him how expensive cables between cheep PC traces, fuses, random connectors, internal speaker cable, crossovers, and on/off switches could justify expensive cables. He went off for 30 minutes about the speed of the signal, dialectrects and such. I said if the timing difference of the dialectrect was an issue why isn't the latency in digital circuits an issue? At least he had a reason no other manufacture had any idea why expensive cables made a difference.

 

@thyname Well I can say I believe @yoyoyaya is a recording engineer and he does know what he is talking about. I appreciate your advice and I'm learning you are right. I honestly wanted to see what the view of this group was about entropy and the bottleneck of components assuming that smart people pay a proper amount of money on a percentage basis to get the most out of their system. Best

 

I spoke to some of the highest end cable makers at AXPONA this year they all told me the same thing they shrugged and said something like " I don’t know why it woks it just does"

I call this BS. Please tell who was that. This never happens. I am 100% you made this up. Or you never talked to any of the cable manufacturers. Please share names & brands you talked to. I promise I will get to the bottom of this.

 

You have made the same made up claim before. Time to put names and faces to your claim

Well I can say I believe @yoyoyaya is a recording engineer and he does know what he is talking about.

Are you not a recording engineer of Oscar’s and Amy;s fame? If so, why do you have to drop names of other recording engineers?

 

The Audioquest cables are listed on the PS Audio website under Connections. Just rechecked and yes , the Dragon is listed at $34,100

And so in a thousand other websites, including Amazon. Point is?

 

Manufacturers must hate talking to know it alls at audio shows. 

Yes, +1 steakster

The signal is there all the time just waiting to be freed from the confines of a poorly made cable. The old saw about cables good enough to record with are all you need is a red herring.

My speaker and IC cables wouldn't last a week in a recording studio as they're fragile, comparatively speaking, not made for constant pulling, yanking and inserting. All that metal in robustly made terminations degrade the sound. Same for the overkill built sleeving and (if they need to use it) shielding. 

A cable that can get out of the way of the music will do a better job revealing the music that's always been there, dying to get out.

All the best,
Nonoise

So why doesn't  the worlds most complicated most expensive machine (the ASML Semiconductor chip makers) use fancy cables. These machines need to do the most exact measurements in the world. Why don’t audio test equipment like Audio Precision testers come with a boutique AC power cable? If your argument @nonoise is:
"The signal is there all the time just waiting to be freed from the confines of a poorly made cable."

Then why don’t these machines need their information freed? You arrogantly put me down and won’t deal with anything I’ve said. You call me a name dropper I simply used Al Schmitt because he is a known commodity and spoke of the principle we are talking about, maybe you would listen to what he said. Try to be nice.

 

I think you are the arrogant one.

Have no time or interest in anything you post.

ASR is a much better site for you.

@donavabdear 

Thank you for answering my question - I appreciate it.

Even the best recordings are a long way from the sound of live music, so anything we can do to get back what;s on the recording itself helps.

But we have a long way to go!

@yoyoyaya That is an interesting way to look at at recording. That statement has a lot to do with how you set up your playback system at home also. Todays recordings rarely sound like live performances being multitracked and remixed as standard. I have over the years set up 1 stereo mic over a performing group and loved it but if I did that today the sound would have to much depth, the producer must have close sounding instruments and singers. If you set up your playback system to be simply an extension of the original recording then you are really doing the old fashioned way of reproducing the live show. Today generally everything in music is not natural  I've set up hundreds of microphones on orchestras that sounded fine but it definitely wasn't natural it sounded better than natural. So perhaps there are no rules and even in playback there are no rules concerning fidelity to the original recording because recordings today don't have fidelity to original concerts anyway. As a recording engineer how do you feel about that? 

The first Cowboy Junkies album, Trinity Sessions is a great example of a stereo mic set up.  The original record has some faults but this album is a work of art from the music (I appreciate this music) to how it was recorded and the location.  The re-released record which came out a few years ago fixes a lot of the audio issues.  I appreciate the original but I listen to the new version now, also because it has two extra songs.  The new version does better at catching the ambience of the church they are in.   I feel that I am sitting inside that church while they play their songs.

This style of recording is much appreciated on a good rig.  Close mic'd multi mix down brings lots of things to hear in a high resolution rig, but these stereo mic recordings feel much more natural.  Both types are fun listening for me.

@donavabdear 

There's a lot packed into that post. So...

I don't think there is any relation between a recording setup and playback. There is a relationship between recording monitoring and playback. In both cases, you want a room that doesn't colour the sound and accurate monitors.

Regarding recording itself, recording engineering is like all engineering - it's trying to find the least bad compromise within the limitations of the available technology. There's a place for simple one or two mic recording techniques, just as there is for multi mic'd and multitracked recording and all points in between. But, at the risk of stating the obvious, there are massive differences in the quality of recordings made with all those techniques.

As far as high fidelity playback is concerned, the system is indifferent to the kind of recording it's fed. I want the playback system to recover as much information as possible regardless of how that information came to be on the recording in the first place.

@donavabdear ​​​​​​

Paul of PS Audio, I've met him he seem like a great guy, what could make him pick another companies very expensive cables over PS Audio's own (I've bought them myself)? The answer is Paul needs to make money and he can make much more money selling Dragon cables than his own cables (especially at $34,100). Simple.

This is just an assumption. That's not good enough as anyone could make any claim. The imagination is the limit.  

If the Dragon pc and PS pcs are just snake oils and no better than each other, then logically Paul could have earned even more money making his own superdooper Dragon killer snake oil pc and sell it for 45K. Who is to stop him? 

Instead he confessed that the Dragon pc is superior and that's unusual in business. 

 

 

You arrogantly put me down and won’t deal with anything I’ve said. You call me a name dropper I simply used Al Schmitt because he is a known commodity and spoke of the principle we are talking about, maybe you would listen to what he said. Try to be nice.

WTF are you talking about? I never called you a name dropper.

As for the part about Audio Precision analyzers, they're taking measurements and looking at graphs, not listening. They're missing the forests for the trees, conflating what they hear in their system with a graph. Again, the signal still gets through and better cables will reveal that in your system .

All the best,
Nonoise

@knownothing Sorry I didn’t answer your well thought out response. Here is where we were talking past each other.

you said:

I also maybe misinterpreted your point to mean it is hopeless to use way more expensive cables than the recording studio, because you might be trying to score a 12 out of 7 in replaying the recording, and that is just such a ridiculous concept, right? Nobody would claim that. Right? At least I haven’t read a single post in this thread where anyone claimed that.

I assumed that smart audiophiles wouldn’t waste money by spending such large amounts of money percentage on particular components like boutique cables. This is what I mean by creating information because of the money audiophiles spend on cables. Have you ever hear of anyone using the proper terminology saying this cable is closing the deficiency in my signal by adding such and such frequency, easy to say nope they say as well as every manufacture say these cable add air, space, musicality, depth, soundstage to the presentation...... It’s not a matter of semantics it’s a matter of fraud.

Nobody will answer the question - if you put a firehose in-between two garden hoses everyone knows it will do no good why is it that so many people think inserting an expensive cable between regular conductors is going to make a difference? That is exactly the question I asked all the cable manufactures I saw at AXPONA none of them had an answer. Thanks for being thoughtful.

 

@donavabdear 

You say: ”Super turbo mega cables inserted between a skinny fuse and the crossover wire a speaker can't make a difference just like inserting a firehose between two garden hoses can't make a difference. In physics in called Kickoffs law.”

Terrible analogy.  Let me give you a better one. 

“Super turbo mega cables inserted between a skinny fuse and the crossover wire inside a speaker can make a real difference in what you hear, just like inserting a leakproof section of hose with great leakproof fittings between two garden hoses can make a difference in conserving pressure and flow compared to an equal length section of drip irrigation hose with leaky connectors.”

You either refuse to listen, or you are completely incapable of understanding even the most simple concepts.  

We have all been here before.

kn

@knownothing You know the old saying:

 

@knownothing I hear you and understand what you are saying but no one who doesn't believe in very expensive cables advocates using poor or "leaky" cables. I use Kimber cables for speakers, AC and Canare star quad for interconnects definitely better than the average recording studio. I was the first person to ever be fully digital in my location recording system one of the reasons why it was so effective was because I bypassed cables all together being digital and wireless gave me exact signal continuity and I didn't have to worry about cables always causing a crackle or a hum at exactly the wrong time. I've thought a lot about cables in my career. I've been trying to understand why so many people are willing to spend so much money on cables, when no studio does, easy question really, 0 answers but plenty of attacking me and not the arguments. Best

Well….  
 

Try it or remain ignorant as most people with opinions. 

Make sure you get authenticate cables. 
There are a lot of fakes out there at cheap prices. 
 

In USA you can buy and return (30 days) from audio advisor. Try their Pangea cables made from Cardas copper.

Or borrow cables from the cable company.

They charge a small fee and have a wide variety of cables to borrow for audition.

So it’s no risk or little risk if you want the real answer. 

 

Good luck!

@donavabdear 

Have you ever been involved in a blind test comparing an array of, say, digital cables of different price points and quality rotated in a decent (not even SOTA) home sound system in a purpose built listening room and comparing across the same music tracks?  Or with headphones and a decent headphone amplifier and source gear?  Because, if you have done this, and you maintain that there is little to be gained in the sound quality coming out of your speakers (or should I more accurately say, much less being lost) by listening random through the price scale for offerings from reputable brands like say Nordost or Chord, then I can only surmise that you actually have tin ears.  Seriously, the differences between at least some cables can be quite astonishing, and will make you laugh out loud at what lesser cables are masking or leaving out of what’s actually in your recordings and present to be unlocked by the inherent capabilities of your powered equipment.

Frankly, the fact that you are stating you have a background in the recording industry and you cling this flat earth perspective on premium cables as a blanket accusation based on fundamentally misapplied principles and inept analogies without providing any evidence that you have actually done some serious blind testing with your own ears is really hard to understand or take seriously.  Sure, some expensive cables probably are lousy, overpriced or at least a bad match in some systems.  But when you get it right, it is really, really right and you will know it immediately. And you wont want to go back again.

Good luck,

kn

PS - Kimber is generally good stuff.  And they publish their cable specs, which I respect.

@donavabdear 

PS#2 - nice system and room by the way.

kn

@knownothing Thanks for your understanding you get what I’ve been saying. Yes I have been a recording engineer for many decades, I retired about 4 years ago and now have a studio in my listening room as well as a regular system just for fun. I have always been at the front end of making music doing live sound and recording dialog/sound for movies I haven’t been in the audiophile world long, I started in acoustics and putting in sound systems into churches and performing arts rooms mainly. I have tried a few speaker cables before my system wasn’t tuned in as well as it is now so my tests were meaningless. I just spoke with my dealer last week about upgrading cables because now my system is sounding as it should (it took so much longer than it should have). My mixing setup makes a lot more sense to me as far as accuracy all the speakers are internally powered and put together with Canare star quad cable. My professional system still needs work and I’m starting a movie tomorrow luckily it’s only 5.1 so it won’t matter that the rest of the speakers are not where they should be. In the professional world no one ever talks about cables, just speakers, preamps, microphones, room acoustics are the main details. When your making the product you don’t test it to see if it’s good the fact is you won’t get hired if your product isn’t worth the huge budgets of the movies and TV shows there is no room for error or poor quality. I know in the audiophile world cables are considered a component, I was a physics / engineering major in college and understood how cables could make a difference, audiophiles don’t understand that in the professional world making a difference only degrades the sound because you are making the original first recording everyday. Professional sound guys that I know don’t have good sound system in their homes the entertainment industry is incredibly grulling and generally takes 14 hours of the day then driving to the studio or location everyday leaves no time to listen to music. Here are my credits (some, just in the movie/TV industry)

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0213104/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

 

@donavabdear you can discuss and argue here till the end of time about your expertise and how cables don't matter, or you can just go to a hifi store and ask them for a demo on a system of their choice and get converted.

You will never ask for a demo. 

😀

@tjag Here is something I bet you don't understand, 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. I've done $200,000,000 dollar movies in which the carpenters had to keep working over the Oscar winners dialogue because it was the next shot up and they weren't ready. listening is generally always stupid because you have no idea what your listening to, liking the sound means nothing, arbitrary. I've said it before when you're working with Anthony Hopkins in a movie then have lunch with him and hear his voice when your sitting next to him you have an idea of how his voice really sounds, (even so, many actors and musicians don't speak nor play the same as when they are practicing or simply talking) but still listening to changes in the system means nothing unless you know how it should sound originally. The way music recording are made today that is practically impossible also, all you have to go buy is if the producer and artist like what you are doing and then hire you again. The entire foundation of "golden ears" on the audiophile side is ridiculous. Demos are BS, if you know how a particular microphone sounds because you have used it everyday for years you can go out and record a voice or an effect of someone or something you know exactly how it sounds to your ears  and the temperature isn't abnormal or the subject isn't feeling a bit under the weather, then you have a chance of making a proper judgement on if a system sounds accurate during playback. How do you know the component or cable isn't just adding frosting to the signal or double frosting and you enjoy it more? Demos will let you evaluate if you like the new component more or less but will practically never tell you if it is making the signal more accurate. Hope you can understand my poor way of communicating, I know Im not very good at it.

@donavabdear "I've been trying to understand why so many people are willing to spend so much money on cables, when no studio does, easy question really, 0 answers but plenty of attacking me and not the arguments."

To provide at least part of the answer to your question. There are two overriding reasons why specialist hi fi cables are not more widely used in recording studios: cost and logistics.

Recording studios are businesses - usually businesses struggling to make money these days. When they publish a gear list they want product that will attract customers and generate a return for them. So to make a comparison, if the studio spends six grand on microphone cable versus the same amount on a Neumann U67 microphone, it's a slam dunk as to which will generate the better return.

Secondly logistics - and I'm using the term widely. A lot of hi fi cables are too unwieldy to use in long runs. In addition, studio mic cables are effectively consumables. And, back to cost, consumables need to be cheap.

Finally, it is not to say that hi fi cables are not used in the recording industry. Van den Hull makes quite a range of microphone cables.  For example, Channel Classics' Jared Sacks uses them. Bob Ludwig's Gateway mastering is cabled with Transparent Audio cables.

PS Could you clarify your various references to the second law of thermodynamics as I'm unclear as to what you are driving at there?

@donavabdear

Cables make a huge difference for many.

Therefore, you will not convince people here.

You have the opportunity to test at Hifi store and experience something different, but you refuse.

You are not a seeker but a preacher.

You are not misunderstood you don’t need to explain more. You will never ever change your mind. And that’s fine.

 

 

 

listening is generally always stupid because you have no idea what your listening to, liking the sound means nothing, arbitrary

Wow!

The entire foundation of "golden ears" on the audiophile side is ridiculous

Wow! Wow!

Demos are BS

Just Wow!

I've done $200,000,000 dollar movies

Then what are you doing here in a forum with "lowly" stupid audiophiles who don't get it? By the way, if you put the $ (dollar sign) before a number, you don't have to write "dollar" after that number.

I’ve said it before when you’re working with Anthony Hopkins in a movie then have lunch with him

Dropping names again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Might not be very good at communicating, but you do bang on.

Wows abound.

Especially that listening is stupid. I tried it, not listening. It was stupid. Couldn't hear a thing.

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.

Cable theory 101:

No cable= no sound

bad cable= bad sound

good cable= good sound

best cable= best sound

Audiophile behavior 101:

No sound= sometimes happy

Bad sound= never happy

Good sound= not unhappy

Best sound= sometimes happy

 

@donavabdear

I will venture at least one guess as to the cause of your intense resistance to listening seriously to and evaluating premium audio cables, and soldering on to come up with all manner of irrelevant excuses for why it can’t make a difference. With 73 speakers at your home, even using only mid-level audiophile products from reputable makers like Kimber, Audioquest, Nordost, etc. would cost you an investment approaching that for all of your electronics combined.  Especially if you are trying to drive all speakers in a home theater system with hard wires versus wirelessly. I can understand this hesitation on your part, and your valiant attempts to convince yourself it won’t make a difference.  But trying to enlist and seek support from the entire Audiogon community in your self deception is a fools errand.  I promise.

And bro, seriously, what does Anthony Hopkins have to do with the performance of audiophile cables?

@thyname 

”wow”.  100%

i hear with greater acuity when i am having a small serving of warm brain with a glass of chianti

@jjss49 don't forget the fava beans. 

 

@kinarow1 

If you are seriously asking this question, then you should just stick to cheap cables and lamp wire.

                          Once again, hitting the REPLAY button:

      AND (incidentally): I DO have a number of recordings, of my own creation (using a John Oram board and complimentary cabling, FYI), that I've used to critique my system and it's accuracy in instrumental/vocal tonality, etc.

       But: a more scientific way, at least with which to determine if a system will/can recover room ambiance, describe the air between the above voices and image well, which (to me) are what is most greatly affected by cable choices, is the LEDR test, so easily found online and CD.

rodman99999 5,746 posts 05-31-2023 at 03:57pm           The adherents of the Naysayer Church will never accept that there exist a multitude of variables, when an accurate simulacrum of performers and their performance in a particular venue, is the desire/goal.         If their result differs from that of others, the aspects that they can't discern CERTAINLY MUST BE the product of the others' imagination.              Of this they are certain: it CAN'T be THEIR system or ears!                                       Perish the thought! A much more apropos view of the local, imaginary intelligence operative (et al):                                            (SNORT of derision)   rodman99999 5,760 posts 06-02-2023 at 08:35am         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 ("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!

     

      

rodman99999

5,760 posts

06-02-2023 at 08:53am 

     Feynman was and will remain, my favorite lecturer (yeah: I'm that old).

     He mentioned often (and: I took to heart) his favorite Rule of Life: "Never stop learning!"

     For all his genius, he never grew overly confident in his beliefs.    The perfect obverse to the Dunning-Kruger sufferer.

     ie:  “I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong.”

     and: “I have approximate answers, and possible beliefs, and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything.”

     Tesla is probably my favorite innovator, who (despite the incessant, projectile vomit, from his day's naysayers), took the World, kicking and screaming, into the 20th century, with his inventions.

                                                  His thoughts: 

     “Anti-social behavior is a trait of intelligence in a world full of conformists.”

     “All that was great in the past was ridiculed, condemned, combatted, suppressed, only to emerge all the more powerfully, all the more triumphantly from the struggle.”

 

rodman99999

5,760 posts

06-02-2023 at 08:56am 

                 Quotes from past Dunning-Kruger sufferers, here:   

"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?     

Ok, I didn’t communicate my point. I’ll try one more time and you don’t have to read my notes.
-Listening- to what? I mention Anthony Hopkins because everyone knows his voice but few have heard it in person, I’m not name dropping, If you have had season tickets to the London Philharmonic for 40 years you buy a record of the latest season, you still don’t know where the microphones were placed to record the performance, you don’t know what effects were put on each microphone, you probably aren’t even familiar with those microphones nor all the components and mic cables that were used in the recording nor the components in the mixing. You nor I or anyone other than the mixer has any idea what to -listen- for because you didn’t do the recording.

People with -golden ears- who evaluate sound systems who don’t do the recording and the mixing (which is very rare) have no right to say there is to much of this and not enough of that, the entire "listening" based on accuracy is silly. Sure some people are good at picking adjectives to describe what many people like but the idea that a cable is accurate is impossible. -More- is not always proper I used to use an old EV mic cable to record tubby sounding women in the studio it worked like gold we would go to a mic like the Sennheiser 421 dynamic first then if that didn’t smooth out her voice we’d use the special mic cable because it was screwed up which made it perfect to record big powerful women’s voices.

Cables are not a consideration in a recording unless there is a problem, you obviously always use good quality cables and if you do use cables you have to run them in ways they don’t get interference from the lighting/power guys who are set up right next to you in concert situations, this is why Dante and digital networking are used in concerts today because 1s and 0s stay 1s and 0s all the way to the decoder or else it doesn’t work at all.

What are you listening for? Answer, simply to enjoy the music.

Also with todays digital EQ and dynamic tools its easy to change the signal, for some reason audiophiles don’t want to manipulate the signal in the digital realm with no phase or harmonic coloration problems you used to have with analog manipulation. Why not save $80k on cables and boost the bass or whatever frequency to exactly match the way you like the sound?

@donavabdear -

"Ok, I didn’t communicate my point. I’ll try one more time and you don’t have to read my notes."

"Listening- to what?"

     APPARENTLY: you don't even bother to read the very first sentences of posts previous to yours.

ie:  

      AND (incidentally): I DO have a number of recordings, of my own creation (using a John Oram board and complimentary cabling, FYI), that I've used to critique my system and it's accuracy in instrumental/vocal tonality, etc.

       But: a more scientific way, at least with which to determine if a system will/can recover room ambiance, describe the air between the above voices and image well, which (to me) are what is most greatly affected by cable choices, is the LEDR test, so easily found online and CD.

From the next post:        The adherents of the Naysayer Church will never accept that there exist a multitude of variables, when an accurate simulacrum of performers and their performance in a particular venue, is the desire/goal.

         IOW:  The majority of us that are experimenting with better cables, do so that we might enjoy a more realistic presentation, in ALL aspects.

         Many of us have found that improving our interconnects, PC and fuses, has resulted in more accurate information retrieval, and/or less loss of information, throughout the system, NOT with the intent to, "...change the signal" or, "boost the bass or whatever frequency to exactly match the way you like the sound?"

          Nothing lost through the use of crappy cabling, can ever be recovered by you beloved digital EQ and dynamic tools.

               Are you really that obtuse, or just choosing to be argumentative*?       

                                     *AS IF that's not already obvious. 

@donavabdear I’ve been trying to understand why so many people are willing to spend so much money on cables, when no studio does, easy question really,...

 

Easy question and easy answer, which has been answered for you, multiple times.

Either you fail to read carefully and try to comprehend, or simply don’t want to.

When someone has not tested something first-hand, no point trying to debate it.

A friend owns a recording/mastering studio - and does not short-change on cables.