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

@ieales ^^^

The above is utterly pointless. Any deltas are specific to that system and room and unlikely to translate to an entirely different system.

There are plenty of expensive cables that are demonstrably designed to be ’tone controls’ and are by no means an improvement on any but a small subset of equipment.

 

Have you ever tried it? What were there results? "Unlikely" how, share more?

The same tests can be repeated at home too with similar results. Tests like these are pointless to those who’ve never tried it, or shared results in a group of peers.

Having worked for a speaker company, where blind listening tests were executed with groups of 30-50 university students in different room settings; The speakers were designed and developed with access to an isoberic chamber. Cables were swapped too. One could argue none of this translates either once the speakers are brought home for use. None of it was pointless. A lot can be learned in tests. Sure, one can argue all cables are passive tone controls, and poor designs impacting sound more than others.

Any deltas are specific to that system and room and unlikely to translate to an entirely different system.

Completely baseless claim that offers neither scientific nor experiential justification. This kind of claim is, however, a good argument against selling keyboards to just anyone who can type.

I hear what I hear. Everything in my system is relative and has made an improvement or it goes out the door.  

Blame it on Noel Lee!

Some of us were experimenting with cables & connectors long before 1976.

 

Ieales needs a graphic equalizer- much easier for adjusting the tone of his system.

@tonywinga

Ever viewed the phase response of a graphic? It’s horrendous.

For longer than I care to remember, I’ve said "It’s not the frequency response. It’s the Time!!" Asynchronous harmonic arrival causes a musically educated brain to work overtime trying to rearrange the harmonic structure. Good time and phase response is why the Quad electrostat still sounds amazing and something like the Tekton Moab and its ilk are initially impressive but ultimately extremely fatiguing.

Many systems can be vastly improved with the minimal EQ with a ’tilt’ of ±1 or 2 dB around a mid frequency. In the studio, we used to fake it with two band really low Q parametric EQ, especially when disc mastering. Today it’s a doddle to implement in the digital domain.

 

Completely baseless claim...

More than 50 years ago, pals and I began experimenting with listening to cables and electronics in our various systems. Initially we tried A/B testing, but found that what we had was C/D.

We all had separates. Some examples: Mitch Cottter, Apt, SAE, Ampzilla, Marantz, HK, db, Dayton-Wright, KEF, Celestion, Tannoy, AR, etc. No Bose, API or Japanese speakers.

We schlepped everything but turntables and speakers to one another’s homes. We mostly agreed that systems were better with the familiar than interlopers. About the same time we agreed that specs were so much twaddle.

 

 

Ieales, I love the sound of Quads.  My first encounter with them was in the late 1980’s pared with an ARC SP-8 and Quicksilver amp.  A Sota Star was generating the magical music emanating from those modified Quad ESLs.  That was where my true hi end journey began.  I had planars too but eventually moved on to Thiel speakers.  To me they were fast like planars but with stronger bass.  Agreed, time coherence is critical but I’m not convinced cables can alter that- at least they shouldn’t.  I even had MIT cables with the LCR networks for a long time.  I have since moved back to non-networked cables.

I’m saying that generalizations about cables are inaccurate.  Cables have progressed over the decades as much as any other stereo component, ie. DACs, amps, preamps, etc.  The disappointing part, as I have said is that it is not a regulated industry and finding true and legitimate technology can be a challenge.  And I have also found, just as with any other stereo component- some bargains exist that make great sound for the money but mostly the good stuff tends to be more expensive.  Expensive or cheap what we are all looking for is something genuine.  It is not easy to make the OCC copper wire which sounds the best.  And how many people have their own metallurgical lab to verify they are getting what they paid for.  It comes down to how it sounds and for sure, we can get fooled into thinking something sounds better only later to discover it doesn’t.  It’s happened to me.