I'm selling my system and buying a telescope.
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].
467 responses Add your response
But But there is no science... Nice post @rodman99999 may buy a set of their speaker cables for giggles. |
@recklesskelly 20k on regenerators is stupid. No argument there. I bought one for my listening system and it wasn't big enough so I bought another simple as that. Now I use one for the listening system and one for the professional system in my listing room.
|
| Post removed |
@rodman99999 I just saw your post about the NASA cable, thank you I’ll read it soon. I genuinely appreciate it. Best |
@rodman99999 I read your link to Home Audio. It was great and reiterated many of my frustrations with the audio cable industry. Home run! I would buy some of this cable. |
I’m a cable skeptic. Especially speaker cables. As long as they aren’t 20 gauge or something like that. But I am open minded. It could be that I just don’t know any better. That happened once before. Just once though. I also suspect that most of it is psycho acoustics and doing an A B test is difficult because changing cables takes some time. So my stupid question is this. What about just putting the "better, new, trial" cable on one channel, the old one on the other and then compare left / right with a mono source. For good measure switch sides after a while. Presumably the difference should be more readily heard. I ask because right now I just have 12 g plain speaker wire. And perhaps relevant is that I’m using Magnepan LRS speakers that need a bit of current. Oh and plain wire connection, no bananas. And the same thing for the phono to pre cables etc. Just try one side first? |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
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. |
@donavabdear
I have some questions for you, and some suggestions to make that might help your troubled journey.
You had mentioned earlier that you have personally heard Anthony Hopkins in direct conversation and know what his actual voice sounds like, as with musical instruments and musical actuality, having good access to such as a former recording engineer. Would this not be a good basis to evaluate how close to reality playback sounds to you? Or do you not trust your listening skills sufficiently to be able to determine so?
You had also written that for all the cabling, cheap or slightly more expensive you have bought, you have not actually tried many cables. I believe this is what you had written…”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.”
First, I am truly glad you haven’t made your mind up, having just started out on your audiophile journey : ) That said, don’t you think you could begin demoing different cables of vastly different makes and price points in your specific listening space, using and developing your listening skills while doing so, in order to gather more experience regarding what is truly out there?
Regarding your request for greater logic among audiophiles; I’m not sure if you will be able to find the exact form of logic you seek among the most experienced audiophiles, because so much of what they have discovered and know is precisely through experience, and not from graphs, numbers and in ways that are easy to factually explain. However, I have a little description of my own regarding cables and signals that might help.
You remarked earlier that few audiophiles realise that electricity doesn’t actually travel, or get conducted in the cable itself, but through the magnetic field around it. You had said…”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).”
As I am not an expert on the matter, please forgive me if what I suggest next seems completely implausible, but I believe the answer that may satisfy you logically, already lies in the knowledge you have about signals and electromagnetism.
You see, if the signal is indeed carried in the field outside the cable itself, does the only means (or in fact, the most vital means) of measuring that signal come from measurements taken off the electrical impulses from within the cable? Or should the measurements that mean the most actually come from the magnetic field that carries that signal? And, by ‘magnetic field’, I do not mean magnetic flux, or strength, which albeit important, do not most accurately describe what a three dimensional field that changes with time actually looks like, in all its complex beauty. The simplest magnetic field generated by a basic bar magnet gives subtle clue as to how profound and beautifully nuanced an actual signal of musical origin can be - how in God’s name does one measure that? Perhaps this is what is meant when audiophiles tells us that if the measurements don’t correlate with the sound, that we are measuring the wrong thing.
And if indeed this is the case, and the nuance and fragility of that magnetic field is the most vital and precious thing to protect, would the simple cable not be such an important part of its transmission? Regardless of how badly degraded a signal might become in its passage from source to speaker, wouldn’t any particular segment of cabling in the signal path be vital in preserving whatever is still intact?
I believe that while some measurements of electrical current do tell us something about the way a signal sounds, the most important clues actually lie embedded in the realm of the magnetic field, that ever changing, elusive, beautiful, unbelievable and all inclusive world that electromagnetism truly is.
If nothing else, it helps me somewhat logically explain why some cables are just so amazing, they seem to unlock (in the prior words of those with experience) and transmit as close to a hundred percent of the original signal that began the audiophile journey.
I wish you well, and hope you begin to hear those electromagnetic differences.
In friendship - kevin |
This might be a good read for some, for others maybe not. @donavabdear working on a TV show (I do not own a TV so I have no idea what that show was or is) hardly makes an expert, EE, or Lab Tech. Should read this as it may turn a light on for you. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/audiophile-sonic-terms-redux.36485/ |
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.
|
@kevn : Great post. Unfortunately, I am afraid you wasted your time. Donna is not going to read it. Too long for him. Besides, he just enjoys himself too much.
Oh he has made up his mind. Just read one of his “why audiophiles don’t get it” threads, especially the very long one staring the famous Cin Dyment in disguise. His journey is painful. And very frustrating indeed. I feel for him. My guess is, he found it much easier and convenient to troll audiophiles in the internet, rather than working to accomplish anything real with his system. This is NOT about trying and listening. It’s plain vanilla trolling, or, as someone eloquently put it earlier here, sealioning
|
| Post removed |
@kevn Thank you for your thoughtful post. Your 2nd question - I will test some new cables I have over 70 speakers in my house and 4x dolby atoms systems so new expensive cable would cost a fortune. I'll order some of the cables that @rodman99999 showed me I agree exactly with their philosophy about cables. I really liked what you said about audiophiles and logic, I may be barking up the wrong tree about technical issues, but these guys on this forum are not dumb they would know that a logical fallacy or a physical law always trumps feelings about electronics. I was wrong. Professional recording and audiophile communities are completely opposite of course there are exceptions. I also loved what you said about the nuance and beauty of the electronic field around the conductor, true this idea is so misunderstood probably because electronics were not taught like that. Last question you asked, Yes some cables sound amazing compared to others, this is a scary thing to say cables are simple compared to the internal electronics in components that put the audio signal through gymnastics all the time. You have a great attitude, hopefully you didn't think I was trolling or just wanting to fight as many here think of me. Best
|
| Post removed |
I was always wondering if PVC is not a really bad insulator for signal wires: the very large chlorine atoms with three pairs of unpaired electrons in their outer shell are bound to interact with the electro-magnetic field around a wire. But I did not act on my suspicion until I found XLR ICs with silver wire running in a PTFE tube and a shielding mesh of silver-plated copper. They are made in HK and the price was right and thus I bought two pairs from my DAC to my preamp and from my preamp to my power amps, replacing the Mogamis I had for years. I can only say that they did indeed make a significant difference, not ground-shaking but clearly audible and in a very pleasant way: more clarity and headroom, especially with solo voice (Shirley Bessey with "Big Spender", for example, where I can now understand each single word), but also deeper sound stage and dry and punchy bass. Overall money really well spent. Since then I began making my own speaker cables, by running a single 5N silver wire in a PTFE tube filled with Argon gas. The latter has a dielectric constant similar to air, meaning almost unimpeded signal transmission, but has no corrosive effects on the silver conductor. A small tank of Argon can be rented in any hobby brewery-supply shop, and after filling the cable I seal both ends with sticky heat shrink. These speaker wires work very well and are not at all overly bright, as many audiophiles claim it to be a silver drawback: great headroom and extension, clear voicing and again taught and yet powerful bass. So, form my own experimental experience I can attest that wires can indeed make a significant difference in the overall musical experience, but I would never spend more than a couple of $100 on them. |
Thanks for your kind words. I’ve occasionally found that what we sense as aggression or arrogance is often a cover for uncertainty and sincere confusion or the frustration of inability to communicate more clearly 😉🙏🏻
So glad you understood what I’ve tried to communicate 👌🏻 - if you’d like to read a little more of my thoughts regarding how to know when a component or room sounds realistic and accurate to any recording we had not experienced the actual sound engineering of, I just made another post in another thread @dean_palmer started on high fidelity - https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/when-are-speakers-considered-hi-fi-and-not-mid-fi?lastpage=true&page=2#2575397 |
That’s an insane number of speakers for one single house. I understand your frustration @donavabdear . I agree with you, attempting to cable them all to function independently and simultaneously, including their electronics, will cost a fortune. But I guess helicopters noise from the ceiling sounds good enough for me in my modest 5.1.2 HT, so here is that. I have basic cabling in my lowly HT, I don’t really pay much attention to having a great HT.
My question for you is, out of those 70+ speakers, can you isolate the best two speaker you have (a matching pair) for stereo, 2-channel playback? Perhaps in a dedicated room for two channel audio, with dedicated 2-channel equipment (not multichannel). That should not cost too much in wiring. Only two speakers out of your 70+. Just a wild idea 😱
|
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. |
| Post removed |
@thyname @cleeds 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. They don't want to do looping and you are always on defense in production sound there are HMI light that are often buzzing and if you need to tell the DP his light needs to be fixed he'll tell the director the sound guy is going to take an hour out of your day for his sound while I relight, there is constantly problems like that even on huge shows. Recording a single actor or 20 actors in a room is the hardest mixing and recording I've done by far you can't make a mistake in live the mistake is over in studio you can simply fix it (studio is the easiest). You couldn't be more wrong about that part of your post. Sure recording an actor in the studio is easy except for matching the production sound in a studio takes a lot of talent and listening effort. The microphone boom operator IMO requires the most talent for listening, when I did that I would cary the boom with the main microphone everywhere I went with my headphones on all day so I would get to know the polar pattern of the microphone, in the studio you point the microphone at instrument that doesn't move or interact with other noisy things while they are changing positions, recording music is easy compared with production sound. I have no extreme reverence for knowing what the original record was I'm just saying 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 make the tightest bass ever just add gating, ducking, and lots of compression. Tighter and wider on every recording isn't always correct.
|
@donavabdear : having a dedicated room solely for two channel audio is huge. It is a great starting point. Now, in addition to two (matched pair) speakers, you would need the 2-channel equipment. Preferably dedicated to two-channels (stereo), and not multichannel. Amp(s), preamp, DAC, etc. etc. All two channel. And of course, room treatments, which I think you are pretty familiar with and knowledgeable. You can then experiment with cables, ideally with a return policy and no risk trial. There is no substitute to experimenting for yourself. And it is fun. That is if you enjoy experimenting. Not a chore, if it becomes a chore, and frustrating, it’s not worth dealing with. We all do what we enjoy. This is a hobby, not a job.
Enjoy the process, and hopefully the results. |
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.
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. |
It’s refreshing to see the two-way learning in this thread. I had written you off as coming here to make a point, rather than share a point of view and accept that it might be challenged and your initial perspective may be improved. I was wrong about that. Many of us who have developed strong opinions about hifi cabling based on our unique empirical experiences and some understanding of both theory and uncertainty associated with connecting a bunch of boxes with various electronics inside with wires forming a complex “system” driven by variously clean power from the wall and played in infinitely variable acoustic room environments. Every time there is a thread on here or another forum containing the word ‘cable’ some collection of theorists join the thread and talk about graphs and what they know about resistance, and many of us have developed sensitive trolling antenna. To folks that have learned to keep an open mind and trust theirs and others’ ears, it resembles a chorus of the flat earth society. It’s tiresome and interferes with productive sharing. So forgive our collective fatigue. I do have to admit I am taken aback by your name dropping, even if it is sincere and in support of a point. I am much more convinced and interested in your description of the physical and acoustic challenges of recording sound in complex and noisy environments with the sources moving around, and then trying to mix that in ways that make sense and support the moving images in a film. That’s cool. I regularly work with rich and famous people, and I find that name dropping NEVER succeeds as a validator of my thoughts or points, and it is almost always a turn off in a conversation. Just a suggestion of something to consider in this and other discussions. Back on topic, you said; ”I have no extreme reverence for knowing what the original record was I'm just saying 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 make the tightest bass ever just add gating, ducking, and lots of compression. Tighter and wider on every recording isn't always correct” The improvement by good cables with respect to reproducing soundstage width and depth and timing aren’t some technicolor hallucination that appears on all recordings. Mono doesn’t become stereo, flat or not particularly well-miked stereo recordings don’t grow width or depth that wasn’t captured or mixed into the final cut. Good gear and wires just tell you more of whats going on, good and bad, and sometimes that can make you want to listen to certain recordings on your Bluetooth speaker in your kitchen rather than your two-channel big rig. Enjoy the journey, kn |
Yup! And cannot blame us. It becomes tiresome. Take a look for example of Jason Bourne trolling in EVERY SINGLE CABLE THREAD. Always the first to reply with 3-4 consecutive posts saying the same thing. Over and over. Therefore:
|
@knownothing @thyname Wow thanks for understanding, honestly I came from physics, engineering, and acoustics in these fields they aren't understanding on audio goals being unverifiable they are antagonistic to it. I had the American rep of a big audio company at my house yesterday (not name dropping), we hit it off perfectly and I was telling him how I was understanding the immeasurable attributes cables can make in a system because of you guys. He said his company felt the same way all the engineers fought very strongly against psychoacoustic principles so they didn't let in any "magical" effects that real people have in the audiophile world. He told me about a test they did with a CD player being set on 4 different kinds of racks like glass, wood, carbon fiber and such using long cables and everyone could tell the difference, this is a group of engineers that fought against "magical, unquantifiable" ideas, this experiment has a lot to do with changing these German engineers minds. I understand the frustration and I have a thick head I always put logic and physical laws above feelings, but it's clear I don't know everything and the magic is why I can't stop listening to music all my life. Thanks and Best! |
@cleeds My point about recording an actor making $20M and the amount of money a musician gets paid was not what I was talking about. If you have an actor like Tom Cruse, Anthony Hopkins, Jack Nicholson making $20M there is a boat load of pressure on the entire crew perhaps 150 people to do your job perfectly with no mistakes. Here’s what you have to understand, in an orchestra you set mics as you have for years, violins sound good with this mic at this distance if the trumpets are this far away and so and so. In movies you generally have 2 or 3 actors moving around a set or walking down a hallway through many different lights and with all the noises that the crew and efx people make inevitably. The miking in most cases means that you must remember all the dialogue first of all to get the cues correct then move the microphone based of the projection of the actor and look at his or her body language to guess on how loud they will deliver there lines and move the microphone so there is no shadows on any part of the set that the camera is seeing all the while making the actors sound consistent remembering that you can’t simply mic the actors over their heads you have to give them space considering proximity effect, and listening to the acoustics of that room to mic moving actors closer and farther from the frame line while making them sound the same and all this as you are walking backwards holding a 12 foot boom pole that is so sensitive that you can hear your own heartbeat in it. Orchestras are a walk in the park. Hope that helps. |
You believe "up till now" based on an article not on experience.
I imagine there is a difference between audio engineers and audiophiles when it comes to listening to music. Audio engineers or audio reviewrs could prefer an amplifier such as the Benchmark AHB2, which is neutral very detailed, but dull and lifeless. It exceeds in accurately playing the source fed into it. An audiophile prefers musical amplifiers over analytical ones. Many use tubes to induce second harmonics into the music. So for me, if my system could improve on Anthony Hopkins’s voice by introducing some harmonics I would be very happy with that. |
| Post removed |
@tjag I agree I like my tube system much better than my professional system that is much more accurate. Again I think the only way you can tell accuracy is to have a system that images razor sharp and reveals mistakes that the mixer didn't hear or he would fix them. Best
|
@cleeds
True. Reading reviews online, the majority I found appreciate musical amps, hence the connection to tubes.
I noticed that. Could you recommend a good recording? |
To each is own, if you have a 100k system, you'll buy a $10k cable, if you have a 200k system, you'll buy a $50k cable. I've aways stuck by 10awg copper cables and they have sound no different than others. Open any amp or speaker and tell me what kind of wires do they use to connect them with? Copper AWG |
This is pretty simple. Two “rules”:
1) Buy only what you can afford 2) Buy what you prefer (after personal experience, listening for yourself)
But I have to say: whoever says a cheap box store $50 pair of speakers sounds just like a $50,000 pair of speakers, or some cheap headphones for 50 years ago… I want to have what you are smoking. Please share. It will save me a bunch of money (maybe for a super duper bike, which I obviously don’t ride 😉🤦♂️🤷♂️) |
The usual ignorance (willful, or otherwise). A FIRST PAGE replay:
|
Then too: the typical SS component's total internal wiring can be measured in scant inches (copper AWG or not/if any at all*) and thus: inconsequential. The combined total, internal wiring of my PTP wired, Cary valve monoblocks = 16". *Many have all inputs, outputs and AC/power supply, attached directly to their PC boards. |
Thank you for the inspiration.
Wait till you hear better sounding interconnects. You might then gladly part with money to own that sound. ☺ If you ever decide to purchase expensive cables, buy second hand. I got my AQ Fire RCA cables for 1/4 of the original price.
I found this tutorial for a DIY interconnects using silver wires with interesting aircoil design geometry aimd to achieve low L and C. TNT Aircoil MKII Interconnects
Tutorial for the building of TNT Aircoil MKII Interconnects
|
Better crossover components in speakers make a much bigger improvement in sound rather than replacing the internal wiring. Replacing the electrolytic capacitors in less expensive speakers with roll film caps or at least bypassing the bigger electrolytics with a small film capacitor is the biggest bang for the buck. I was doing that back in the 1990s. Better inductors and resistors in the crossovers will help too. Then after all that, internal wiring may or may not make a sonic difference. It is typically not too difficult to get to the crossovers in speakers. Film capacitors for a given value can be quite a bit larger than their electrolytic counterparts. That’s why sometimes it better to just put a small value film cap in parallel with the large valued electrolytic. Gain most of the improvement in sound that way. |
