why do people feel the need to keep asking questions like the OP? Does it make them feel better?
why do people feel the need to buy expensive cable
I have tried expensive cables and one's moderately priced. I would say there were some differences but I can't actually say the expensive cables were better. IMHO I believe a lot of people buy expensive cables because they don't actual trust their ears and are afraid of making a mistake. They figure the expensive cables are better for the fact they cost more. If you have a difference of opinion or share the same thoughts, I would like to hear about it.
1,088 responses Add your response
twoleftears ... I don't understand why people get so worked up about pricing of components (cables) and--other thread--double-blind testing ... I don't think the people raising those issues are sincere. If they were, they'd do something about it, rather than resurrect the same few tired arguments here over and over and over again. |
I just don't get it. I don't understand why people get so worked up about pricing of components (cables) and--other thread--double-blind testing. Cables measure differently. A lot of people hear differences. Scientific understanding of the physical universe and of electronics is far advanced, but it's not like it's reached complete, perfect, utter understanding. Hawking was a milepost on the way... For me, the much bigger issue is (a) whether different is always better, and (b) the cost-benefit ratio. Different cables will sound different, but the inherent bias is almost always to perceive difference as improvement. This is what needs to be worked on. Secondly, not, why are people willing to buy 5K interconnects, but how can we calibrate their improvement over the $50 i/c's, and not just to arrive at the familiar law of diminishing returns, but rather to question whether those $4950 could not be spent profitably elsewhere. I've heard the argument, I've got my system where I want it, now I just want to squeeze the last 5% out of it, but perhaps we need to think of that 5K in terms of changing another component in the system rather than just optimizing the cables. Perhaps a different pre-amp would give you 10%. How you quantity those trade-offs is another question, best left for another day. |
willemj I think I let them continue to rip off people like you. I have better things to do, and unlike in the US, there are no damages to be had.So sue them in the US! If your case is so sound - based on the legal precedent you cite - it should be a slam-dunk. And the US is filled with lawyers! You won't have any trouble finding one, I can assure you. I've never been "ripped off" by a cable manufacturer, by the way. But don't get me started on banks and cable/Internet providers. |
dynaquest4 cleeds says: "There is actually a whole industry base on high-end cables - pick up any audio magazine and you’ll see the expensive ads. "Actually, I don’t think you know anything about the cables I use, or what they cost me. And I had a pretty good idea of cable pricing structure well before I pointed out to you the cable ads common to audio magazines. So, when are you going to file that lawsuit against the deceptive marketers?? |
“Trying to get me to spend 60% of my budget on cables instead of using my hard earned dollar towards the speakers and amplification.” ^^^^ If true such salesmen should have to wear a dunce cap and take their place in the dunking machine chair, the public being handed free baseballs until they get their proper dunking and public shaming. The cables scam sucks. |
willemj Not court cases, but effectively with the power of a court ... So, aside from the technicalities that I had not remembered quite correctly, society has acted against these crooks.Given that you cite this action as having "the power of a court," why don't you use this decision as a precedent and file your own suit? Think of the riches you'll collect. |
dynaquest403-15-2018 9:21am I think exotic/expensive audio cables and the misleading advertising about them have not gotten much (legal) attention because so few people actually buy them.There is actually a whole industry base on high-end cables - pick up any audio magazine and you'll see the expensive ads. Some of the critics of this industry have even called it a "lucrative" business. So I think the reason that it hasn't attracted legal attention is that the critics have no case, or a very weak case. |
I think exotic/expensive audio cables and the misleading advertising about them have not gotten much (legal) attention because so few people actually buy them. That is because, in my opinion, few believe the hype and even fewer want to spend more money than makes sense for system connects. Quite frankly, over-priced audio cables are of so little importance, in the scheme of things, and only used by the few that are unable to readily identify the marketing as mere misleading hype, they don’t really pose a "truth in advertising" threat to the masses. Oh...and watch this...🍔🍟🏈🎯🥇 😋 I’m so cool! |
Not court cases, but effectively with the power of a court. Typically, in Europe the state tries to leave such things to the self regulation of an industry (in this case the advertising industry). If the industry fails to clean up a sector from misleading and deceptive practices, the state will step in. Here in the Netherlands, that has led to very expensive court cases for banks, for example. So, aside from the technicalities that I had not remembered quite correctly, society has acted against these crooks. |
See here for a more recent case: https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-chord-company-ltd-a14-274211.html The snake oil sellers keep trying. See here for a US example, though not about cables: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/11/sony-computer-entertainment-america-provide-c... |
folkfreak The BBB comparison is not quite fair as the ASA is a statutory body (ie a government agency), more like the FDA ruling on a drug claimSorry, but ASA is not a "statutory body" or government agency at all, but a self-regulatory agency very much like the BBB. According to its own website, it was first established by the advertising industry as the Committee of Advertising Practice, which then created the ASA in 1962. |
Here is an active link to the final ruling. The BBB comparison is not quite fair as the ASA is a statutory body (ie a government agency), more like the FDA ruling on a drug claim https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/russ-andrews-accessories-ltd-a13-228690.html |
@geoffkait I believe this is the lawsuit in question. Advertising standards fraud claims are quite a thing in the U.K. ... https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/13/russ_accessories/ but they won on appeal https://www.whathifi.com/news/russ-andrews-wins-asa-case-and-cleared-misleading-consumers sounds like a win for those among us who spend on accessories no? ps the links to the underlying rulings are dead as they are over five years old and the ASA removes all the older links |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
If I’m not mistaken there was no court case in the UK. That’s an old wives tale. It was something along the lines of some pseudo skeptic writing an embarrassing article in the local newspaper. If there had been a court trial everybody and his brother in UK would be taking all the audio companies to court. Hel-loo! Unemployment is up. Besides, how would they assemble a jury? Nobody can hear. 🤡 |
willemj"It has already been done in a UK court of law: the cable seller lost and had to withdraw the product from his chain of stores" Great you have a precedent to invoke that is wonderful start your own suit after all it is a massive fraud and very lucrative as you say go have the lawyers make themselves and you a bundle of dollars think of all the fun you will have go Willie go sue them all - one at a time of course! |
willemj"It's indeed just a fraud, that is all there is to it. And a lucrative one." If you can prove that it's a fraud rather than just endlessly repeat your faith-based belief you can be rich beyond you're wildest dreams! What is stopping you go for it the lawyers will have a field day getting them rich and you too, especially because it is so "lucrative"! Go Willie go prove your claim for once and for all in a court of law it is so easy it is just such a massive fraud! |
It’s case of small runs of custom and sometimes quite unique manufacturing. You can’t have exclusive impossible to find products (compared to lets say a salt shaker, or keyboard, or coffee table) somehow priced as a mass market item. As well, costs change. They do it all the time. Ie, one batch of raw materials may be twice the cost of the old when the new arrives at the dock. It is not unusual to get a new price sheet from a supplier, where you need to put a seat-belt on your office chair before you open the PDF file...then see the new numbers (50-100-200% increases) and suffer severe shock to the mind and heart all while your orifices contract mightily. This has been the way of the manufacturing world for at least the last decade. Some materials are eliminated and have to be bought on the second hand market, or bought in massive bulk, before they are deleted as a catalogue item. Eg Charles Hansen of Ayre talked about how many transistors they had to buy before a certain item was deleted, and Nelson Pass had to pay a quite serious sum to have a custom run batch of SIT transistors made up for him by southwestern. Seemingly minutes later, southwestern closed their doors (bought out/shut down). Similar thing for many others. In our case, it is a utterly unique (on all fronts) technology that merely looks like an audio cable, as we’ve bent it to that design direction. Different and greater set of benefits and a few new problem areas never before encountered. Cutting edge products appearing in poorly understood areas of science and physics (as applied to human life), are going to be expensive. The end. You are buying products built of exploratory work, in some notable cases. If one wants rubber stamp mainstream pricing on items that are common and not invigorating, go to walmart and buy a $19.99 dvd player, or a $0.50 bar of soap. You are here for quality and cutting edge. Kvetching about the cost of such is not productive and not about to achieve much of anything. The only place it will be effective is if the person involved does not hear the differences (ie, incapable or all the way over to mentally blocked from it) and then writes off the companies that do provide the cutting edge. Like the equivalent of saying that one's own driving skills are in the formula 1 area of driving expertise and that they can out-drive these formula one drivers..while in their Chevy sunfire. Bizarre and, well, illiterate. The only place such a thing gains ground is when talking to people who swim in the same waters... (us vs them mentality of sameness being somehow elevated into a command of all reality form/function) and that's equally unproductive and insular. |
Why do people buy into expensive cables? They do give you more of resolution, frequency extension, etc., but while you get more of this and that, sometimes the balance taken a back seat, but then there is another important reason people feel the urge to buy expensive cables: *Marketing tactics by cable manufacturers* Case in point: The LessLoss C-MARC power cable was press reviewed by 6 moons in May 2017, and by Mono and Stereo in August 2017. Note that in both reviews, the price of the power cords was alleged to the respective reviewers as USD 735 /2m. Shortly after the reviews, the price of the LessLoss C-MARC power cable went up by a significant 56% to USD 1148 /2m within a couple of months. LessLoss’s website has a description of the technologies for making this cable, which is essentially the same as that quoted by Mono and Stereo in its press review, word for word. The external appearance and picture illustration of the cables geometry also seems unchanged between the time the review was published and latest. What is happening, that a 56% price jump shortly after the press reviews? Wouldn’t a reviewer comments have been changed if he knows the product is going to sell at much higher price level, or at least have his enthusiastic tone tempered if he knows this is going to happen? Now here is a new formula for marketing audiophile cables that all audio manufacturers need to acquit themselves of:
The standard reply from a cable manufacturer would goes along the lines like “we introduce some new design elements after the press reviews that makes our cable much better, and we want our customers to have the best, but it also means our production cost runs up as well…”. That may well be true, in some cases. That said, what would be the reasonable level of wages paid by LessLoss to their workers for making these cables? Mercedes-Benz announced some time ago that it already sold more than 2 million units before reaching end of 2017. Our engineering and modernization has reached a point where, with few exceptions, making a cable is pretty much a semi-automated process, however fanciful claim a cable manufacturer may postulate that justify significant jump in price level within a short time. Other than that such self-justifications failed the law of diminishing returns, it begs the question that if it is true the new version is much better than the one submitted to the reviewers, wouldn’t it be sensible to launch to the market and, for that matter, submit to the reviewer the final version rather than some sort of early prototype? Everyone can see it would make more sense to do it the other way around, as all manufacturers would want a rave review of their products in order to sell more, so it would be in their interest to submit to the reviewers the final version, which presumably would be the better product than the prototype – why otherwise would you not launched the original prototype to the market? If LessLoss somehow come up with a new fanciful formula to make a significantly better product within a couple of months, what would be the reason for that seemingly sudden revelation that makes the substantial technology advancement possible? Even if such epiphany from God do happen to LessLoss’s president Louis Motek and his team, you would expect the manufacturer will name the subsequent much better product differently (“performance series”, “signature series,”, etc.). Diligent audio manufactures do this in order to distinguish the performance parameters between different series. Why would a manufacturer stick to the prevailing product name now associated with some rave reviewers, if the new product is really that much better? While I commend LessLoss for its marketing genius, I can see few of their practices as doing service to the audio industry. |
| Post removed |
I have to say I am using Transparent Ultra Gen 5 cables with my new Focal Kanta No.2’s (Krell amplification and Yamaha CD S2100) ....just absolutely riveting! So lifelike on all levels...shockingly realistic to the point of enveloping me in the acoustic and textures of the original event. Never have I heard audio reproduced so compelling and alive with every last ounce of low level details coupled with such a massive dynamic range and glorious harmonics. |
System dependent. If you have great components and sources. You should get quality cabling. It depends on what you like. I have a system that consists of that I have 35k in components and speakers retail. I have about 7k retail in cabling and power cords. I’m extremley happy with my system. Cheap cabling didn’t work for me. I’m extermley happy and I’m done. All I do is look for music now. Do what works for you. If you have a system that’s not resolving and transparent then cabling is less of a factor. |
bar81 ... I decided that $30k ish was my upper limit for any amp. Then I heard the D’Agostino M400 and decided that it would increase my personal enjoyment of my system to such a degree, that although I still deemed the price ridiculous, it would be money well spent. Here I am a couple of months later and I now feel that it was a "bargain" ...I understand completely and I think many audiophiles can relate to this. My introduction to the high end of audio was an ARC D76A amplifier that a friend of mine bought used for $600 back around 1980. I thought that was crazy-money for a 60 watt amp - until he let me try it in my system. Then I saw the light. Adjusted for inflation, that $600 would be about $1,900 today. That now seems to me a rather modest price for an audiophile amp. |
