| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cables
I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects, price
points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons can you lose etc. I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the "If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates. Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights I mean we've spent all this money on beautiful looking amps, CD players, speakers, racks, turntables and subs. How could we possibly hook it up with radio shack and lamp chord and call it a thing of beauty? |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
John Royer wrote:
I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects, price points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons can you lose etc. I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the "If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates. Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights I don't think so. I think most of these people really, honestly believe they are buying a better-sounding product--either because it sounds better to them or because they trust whoever told them it sounds better. And, frankly, why should you or I care why they do so? It's their money, and they're happy. I mean we've spent all this money on beautiful looking amps, CD players, speakers, racks, turntables and subs. How could we possibly hook it up with radio shack and lamp chord and call it a thing of beauty? And that is a perfectly good reason to choose a cable. In fact, it's why I try to keep my lampcord hidden! bob __________________________________________________ _______________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
On 4/28/04 11:45 PM, in article oT_jc.42116$YP5.3141755@attbi_s02,
"Nousaine" wrote: And that is a perfectly good reason to choose a cable. In fact, it's why I try to keep my lampcord hidden! bob But a common pitch given to a purchaser of a new amplifier or other device is "you wouldn't want to compromise this great sounding amplifier with cheap cables would you?" I was never given that pitch, though I can see how an unscrupulous salesperson might do so. If I ever buy "high end" cables it would be to upgrade the looks of the rats nest behind my stack, or if I needed some shielding also and the cables in question offered real shielding. Or I wanted that neat battery pack on the cloth bound cables from AQ! :-) |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"John Royer" wrote in message
... Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights I mean we've spent all this money on beautiful looking amps, CD players, speakers, racks, turntables and subs. How could we possibly hook it up with radio shack and lamp chord and call it a thing of beauty? I'm pretty much in total agreement here. Another thing might be the peace and comfort in their knowing that they bought the best their current available funds permit. After all when you feel good about yourself everything sounds and looks better. Since the whole shebang is in your mind anyway, they *are* right despite DBT and measurements. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
John Royer writes:
I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects, price points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons can you lose etc. I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the "If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates. Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights It doesn't seem to be right to bag everyone into the groups "Subjectivist" or "Objectivist". It seems to me that there's a spectrum of beliefs in audio. Here's a few examples of things some people claim make a difference to their listening experience: The P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen Tice Clock Shakti Stones Green CD marker pens Expensive cables with special properties Amplifiers with ineffable properties CD vs. SACD Supersonic tweeters Valve amplifiers Loudspeakers Room acoustics Aesthetics and Bragging rights don't explain all the things in this list. Everyone interested in hi-fi reproduction believes in some of these. There's a spectrum of belief here, not a simple yes/no. Andrew. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"Bob Marcus" wrote in message news:qKQnc.65610$kh4.3888785@attbi_s52...
There are a few things on your list that are a bit more complicated. For example, most of us would agree that valve amps can sound different from SS amps. But we disagree about why they do, and we disagree about whether the differences are good or bad. But opinions on these questions tend to break the same way that the simpler matters/doesn't matter question breaks: I don't know of any "objectivists" who think that tube amps really sound better. And I don't know too many tube enthusiasts who are willing to accept the idea that their preference is merely the result of euphonic distortions or frequency response anomalies caused by high output impedances. The line looks pretty clear to me. bob Despite many claims regarding the 'euphony' of tube amps, I dislike the mushy, distorted sound I hear from them in most cases. I was in a salon a couple of years ago listening to some fairly large speakers being, I believe, underdriven by some well-regarded tube amp. I pointed out that it stunk(!), and they switched to a more powerful tranny amp. Better. Much better. I am sometimes disappointed in how poor the hearing of audio salon personnel is. The combination was quite poor, and they didn't notice it. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
... "Bob Marcus" wrote in message news:qKQnc.65610$kh4.3888785@attbi_s52... Despite many claims regarding the 'euphony' of tube amps, I dislike the mushy, distorted sound I hear from them in most cases. I was in a salon a couple of years ago listening to some fairly large speakers being, I believe, underdriven by some well-regarded tube amp. I pointed out that it stunk(!), and they switched to a more powerful tranny amp. Better. Much better. I am sometimes disappointed in how poor the hearing of audio salon personnel is. The combination was quite poor, and they didn't notice it. Any equipment running outside its operational envelope, like the example you sited, is going to be audibly distingushible from equipment that is not being overdriven at the input, or running into the output clipping level, etc. etc. One of the high-end audio stores here is run by a blind guy. Talk about someone who knows about "blind testing"! From my brief meetings with him, I would be absolutely positive that he would have heard the issue you noted above -- in about 2.5 seconds or less... He may just have the ultimate marketing excuse for being selective, I don't know. But I do know that when he says he can hear the difference, I believe him. -afh3 |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"One of the high-end audio stores here is run by a blind guy. Talk about
someone who knows about "blind testing"! From my brief meetings with him, I would be absolutely positive that he would have heard the issue you noted above -- in about 2.5 seconds or less... He may just have the ultimate marketing excuse for being selective, I don't know. But I do know that when he says he can hear the difference, I believe him." The blind notion was tested, a group of blind folk did no better in identifying gear by listening alone then do sighted folk. The "blind folk have superior hearing" is an urban myth. Blind folk pay more attention to sound as clues for the space they are in and only listen differently to the sound clues there for anyone to hear. They can determine spacial information more easily from the practical practice of benefiting from doing so. I think it possible they can be aware of more spacial information on a recording and perhaps realize the recording is therefore more "real" then some other recording with regard to fidelity of spacial information. That the guy is blind doesn't exclude him from all of the distortions of perception sighted folk have when knowing which bit is being heard. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"afh3" wrote in message news:YBdoc.28561$536.5392150@attbi_s03...
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message ... "Bob Marcus" wrote in message news:qKQnc.65610$kh4.3888785@attbi_s52... Despite many claims regarding the 'euphony' of tube amps, I dislike the mushy, distorted sound I hear from them in most cases. I was in a salon a couple of years ago listening to some fairly large speakers being, I believe, underdriven by some well-regarded tube amp. I pointed out that it stunk(!), and they switched to a more powerful tranny amp. Better. Much better. I am sometimes disappointed in how poor the hearing of audio salon personnel is. The combination was quite poor, and they didn't notice it. Any equipment running outside its operational envelope, like the example you sited, is going to be audibly distingushible from equipment that is not being overdriven at the input, or running into the output clipping level, etc. etc. Tubes just don't have the power that transistors do. I have never heard a tube amp that I liked. Never. One of the high-end audio stores here is run by a blind guy. Talk about someone who knows about "blind testing"! From my brief meetings with him, I would be absolutely positive that he would have heard the issue you noted above -- in about 2.5 seconds or less... He may just have the ultimate marketing excuse for being selective, I don't know. But I do know that when he says he can hear the difference, I believe him. -afh3 |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Bob Marcus writes:
wrote: It doesn't seem to be right to bag everyone into the groups "Subjectivist" or "Objectivist".B It seems to me that there's a spectrum of beliefs in audio. As in anything. But there's also a very clear line between some beliefs and others. Some beliefs are supported by empirical evidence. Others aren't. That's true. Here's a few examples of things some people claim make a difference to their listening experience: B The P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen B Tice Clock B Shakti Stones B Green CD marker pens B Expensive cables with special properties B Amplifiers with ineffable properties B CD vs. SACD B Supersonic tweeters B Valve amplifiers B Loudspeakers B Room acoustics Aesthetics and Bragging rights don't explain all the things in this list.B Everyone interested in hi-fi reproduction believes in some of these.B Please explain what it means to "believe in loudspeakers." Oh come on, Bob. I'm talking about whether making a change to X will have an audible effect. You're trying to create some equivalence between the real and the imaginary here. No, I don't think so. I'm making no judgment in this post about whether people's beliefs are true or false. That's like saying, some people believe in chemotherapy, and some people believe in laetrile. That is in fact the case. The point I'm trying to make is that almost everyone is skeptical with regard to _something_. Even the most credulous hi-fi tweaker probably has difficulty believing that The P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen has an audible effect. There's a spectrum of belief here, not a simple yes/no. No, for most of the items on your list, there is a simple yes/no. Either we have empirical evidence that it can make a difference, or we don't. That's a different question. I'm talking about a spectrum of belief, not a spectrum of reality. Perhaps the most vocal "subjectivists" here would draw a line somewhere in the region of Shakti Stones. Your primary concern seems to be "does this have a real sonic effect?" That is an interesting question, but another interesting question is "what do people believe?" closely followed by "why do they believe it?" Andrew. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Panzzi wrote:
wrote in news:x96oc.71447$Ik.5193990@attbi_s53: Your primary concern seems to be "does this have a real sonic effect?" That is an interesting question, but another interesting question is "what do people believe?" closely followed by "why do they believe it?" Andrew. I am a believer! A believer of not all things (indeed, very little things)can be proved by present so called science. But we still live in this world. If you don't believe what 'so called science' has to say, on what basis do you believe what you believe? So when people said, "you can't prove it by using physics, maths, chemistry, or what so ever, it is not true!" Then I will say, "Prove to me that your next step will not make you fall." Or "Prove to me that you love your mother." And I will say, what do you accept as *proof* of anything? What are *your* standards of proof? People believe they can hear and are hearing the difference, as quoted from Andrew, is a "spectrum of people"; people believe that there is no scientific prove, so there is no difference, when they heard the difference, they thought of something else to disprove it, that is another "spectrum of people". Do you believe that it's possible for a statement to objectively be *right* or *wrong* , or is it always a 'spectrum of beliefs'? -- -S. "They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason." -- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"Panzzi" wrote in message
... wrote in news:x96oc.71447$Ik.5193990@attbi_s53: Your primary concern seems to be "does this have a real sonic effect?" That is an interesting question, but another interesting question is "what do people believe?" closely followed by "why do they believe it?" Andrew. I am a believer! A believer of not all things (indeed, very little things)can be proved by present so called science. But we still live in this world. So when people said, "you can't prove it by using physics, maths, chemistry, or what so ever, it is not true!" Then I will say, "Prove to me that your next step will not make you fall." Or "Prove to me that you love your mother." This a rather specious argument which I regularly need to clarify for my students. In explaining the difference between knowledge and belief, I hold text book in my hand away from my body and ask, "Who believes that if I let go of the book it will fall?" Invariably someone will catch on and say that it's a silly question because there is no need for belief as the question is one of known fact. Gravity works and we know the book will fall. I then ask for them to prove it, which they can't do and get flustered about. I remind them that we don't need to prove it for this particular book in my particular hand at this particular time for it to still be a known fact. The proof was constructed centuries ago. That's how proof works. The green CD pen has been proven not only not to work, but to have no mechanism in which to work. Such belief in a disproven theory is the definition of misguided. Bruce People believe they can hear and are hearing the difference, as quoted from Andrew, is a "spectrum of people"; people believe that there is no scientific prove, so there is no difference, when they heard the difference, they thought of something else to disprove it, that is another "spectrum of people". So, when people told me the little magic green CD marker can make their music sounds better, I can only say, "I wish your green CD marker can do the same thing to my music!" With a smile. Panzzi |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
|
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
|
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
wrote in message
news:vLNnc.19847$z06.3270558@attbi_s01... John Royer writes: I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects, price points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons can you lose etc. I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the "If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates. Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights It doesn't seem to be right to bag everyone into the groups "Subjectivist" or "Objectivist". It seems to me that there's a spectrum of beliefs in audio. Here's a few examples of things some people claim make a difference to their listening experience: The P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen Tice Clock Shakti Stones Green CD marker pens Expensive cables with special properties Amplifiers with ineffable properties CD vs. SACD Supersonic tweeters Valve amplifiers Loudspeakers Room acoustics Aesthetics and Bragging rights don't explain all the things in this list. Everyone interested in hi-fi reproduction believes in some of these. There's a spectrum of belief here, not a simple yes/no. There was once a fad for CD dampers. Mod Squad had one. Following that one following that one was another by Mel Schilling of "Music and Sound". His first location IIRC was in Pennsylvania. He was the first dealer in the USA to sell Magneplanar and Audio Research. He sold a SP3-A-1 and Tympani IIIA (8 panels in all) to a long lost friend of mine where I spent many an hour of listening. I remember his also having bought a Technics SP-10 turntable fitted with one of the first, if not THE first, Decca tonearm and cartridge, also from Mr. Schilling, whose "Music and Sound" moved to California. So for my little reminiscence, but these $20 disc dampers, little platters placed over CDs, could hardly come under the headings of aesthetics and bragging, being more like the green marking pens. Included in this group might be those little rings applied to the CDs outer edge and Armor All :-). I recall one of the first exotic, but short-lived, loudspeaker cables by Mark Levinson (the man), pure copper in a flat and very pliant plastic like casing. I remember listening to a Mark Levinson HQD system (Hartley sub-woofers, double stacked Quad speakers and Decca ribbon tweeters. Amps, preamps and crossovers for the whole system again by Levinson. It's nearly impossible for me to compare that system to today's modern marvels, but I feel it could more than hold its own. After all short term audio memory recall is said to be amazingly short, but 35 years? |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Back when used to look at some of the literature I read an article
about "high quality" cable. The writer came to the conclusion that yes, there is a difference, but that cheap wires may sound better than expensive, heavy duty cable. One of my Probe Jades ( powered by Mac tubes) has heavy cable, the other the cheapest wire possible...no difference in sound. BTW I am easy to please with TV...a 19` set is OK for me, but I require great audio for music. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
I think you're right. I mean who doesn't want garden-hose thickness speaker
wire going from their super amp to their super speakers? Unfortunately, the garden-hose thickness wire can cost as much as a good amp. Fortunately, I have hit on a sensible and economical solution that provides esthetic chic, excellent performance, and reasonable cost. I use 12 ga. speaker wire from Lowe's and run it through a length of 1/2" garden hose. (I find the braided-look green style works best.) Cost me about $10. Works great. Thinking about contacting a garden hose company about having them make up a run of the hose with a ground wire (oxygen free copper) running through it and selling into the audiophile market. I think if I price it high enough (not too high, though, I have some scruples) and place some ads, those guys at STEREOPHILE will come through with a favorable review. What do you guys think? -- - GRL "It's good to want things." Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer) "John Royer" wrote in message ... I noted with interest the differing opinions on cables, interconnects, price points value for money etc. I noted the debates as to how many electrons can you lose etc. I've noted the shrillness of the blind test, sighted test debates and the "If it costs more" it's gotta sound better debates. Might I humbly suggest that the majority of the reason people buy these various cables and pay the amounts they do are for two reasons? Aesthetics Bragging rights I mean we've spent all this money on beautiful looking amps, CD players, speakers, racks, turntables and subs. How could we possibly hook it up with radio shack and lamp chord and call it a thing of beauty? |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
|
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"Bromo" wrote in message
... On 5/16/04 8:07 PM, in article , "GRL" wrote: I think you're right. I mean who doesn't want garden-hose thickness speaker wire going from their super amp to their super speakers? Unfortunately, the garden-hose thickness wire can cost as much as a good amp. Fortunately, I have hit on a sensible and economical solution that provides esthetic chic, excellent performance, and reasonable cost. I use 12 ga. speaker wire from Lowe's and run it through a length of 1/2" garden hose. (I find the braided-look green style works best.) Cost me about $10. Works great. Thinking about contacting a garden hose company about having them make up a run of the hose with a ground wire (oxygen free copper) running through it and selling into the audiophile market. I think if I price it high enough (not too high, though, I have some scruples) and place some ads, those guys at STEREOPHILE will come through with a favorable review. What do you guys think? Sounds like a good busness plan - good luck to you. I think a lot of the interconnect malarchy has a lot to do with the speakers, length of wire and the output impedance of the amplifiers in question. I have spent countless hours in the lab designing RF amplifiers changing impedances by 0.5 Ohms or less and seeing a fairly substantial change in output power, gain or so on. And while Audio amplifiers are supposed to be more robist to this sort of tweaking - the loads are entirely arbitrary (speaker + cable) and I do wonder if there couldn't be an effect. Perhaps if you are open minded, you could get 3 of those zip cords, braid them and take 3 hot leads and 3 grounds and see if you can sense any difference on a recording you understand. Though if your speakers are not good, it won't matter. So many things have been said and written about the sound of all things hi-end, including cables. From all amplifiers and cables sound the same to they sound different...even, "little wooden disks stuck to the wall worked wonders." Much of it is bologna. However, facts are facts whatever anyone says. One fact is that switching out the MIT MI 750 Bi-wire speaker cables in my system with Analysis Plus Oval 12 not only changes the sound, but the entire characteristics of the system. Which if either is closer to right? Well, that may very well be a subjective matter. Right now, I do not really care why cables change the sound of my system, and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Glenn Garza wrote:
So many things have been said and written about the sound of all things hi-end, including cables. From all amplifiers and cables sound the same to they sound different...even, "little wooden disks stuck to the wall worked wonders." Much of it is bologna. However, facts are facts whatever anyone says. One fact is that switching out the MIT MI 750 Bi-wire speaker cables in my system with Analysis Plus Oval 12 not only changes the sound, but the entire characteristics of the system. The fact is that the St. Louis Arch is higher than it is wide. Oh, wait, actually, it only *looks* that way. In fact, the height and width are found to be equal, when they are actually measured. Perceptions aren't necessarily *correct*, you see. It's a fact that you *believe* the switch you made changes the sound. Whether it does, in fact, cause a change in sound, remains to be determined. -- -S. "They've got God on their side. All we've got is science and reason." -- Dawn Hulsey, Talent Director |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Glenn Garza wrote:
So many things have been said and written about the sound of all things hi-end, including cables. From all amplifiers and cables sound the same Actually, no one's ever said that. to they sound different...even, "little wooden disks stuck to the wall worked wonders." Much of it is bologna. However, facts are facts whatever anyone says. Yes, and facts are such difficult things. One fact is that switching out the MIT MI 750 Bi-wire speaker cables in my system with Analysis Plus Oval 12 not only changes the sound, but the entire characteristics of the system. No, that's not a "fact." The fact here is that you *perceive* a change in the sound of your system when you make this switch. Whether the switch *actually* changes the performance of your system, or whether this is merely a perceptual illusion on your part, is an open question. Which if either is closer to right? Well, that may very well be a subjective matter. Right now, I do not really care why cables change the sound of my system, Which is your prerogative. and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. Which may be true, but there are some people out there who DO know what effect a cable has on a signal. You could learn something from them. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. Why will you care then, if you don't care now? Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit. Well, jeez, can you think of a cable that way??? Look, no one's ever said that switching cables can't make a difference. What's been said over and over again is that the performance of cables is well understood, and that *if* a cable switch makes an audible difference, it will be because of significant differences in the measurable characteristics of the cable. Not knowing anything about the two cables you have, I can't say whether they are different enough or not. But until you do a blind comparison, you haven't any basis for making that determination either. Now, you may not want to bother with doing a blind comparison, and you may be perfectly happy choosing between your two cables based on what they sound like to you. As I said above, that's your prerogative. Just don't start telling us about "facts" unless you've done the work to back them up. THAT'S the bologna here. bob __________________________________________________ _______________ MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/...ave/direct/01/ |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
Why are you assuming his perceptions are "wrong"? You cannot "prove" or
"disprove" anyone's perceptions. Perceptions are in the eye (ear) of the beholder. And just because the electrical engineers cannot measure any difference in cables does NOT mean they cannot produce a perceptional change in people that may even differ from person to person. But, everything in Life is filtered through our perceptions. We cannot live without our perceptions since that is HOW we interact with our world. So, who cares whether they measure the same or not? They can STILL produce a perceptional difference. Otherwise, WHY have different types of wire, different companies and different product lines? Because even if they measure the same, they are all perceived as different by different customers. If everyone agrees on the same perceptions, then there would only be one cable, period. -Bob Bernstein. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
On 6/2/04 1:27 AM, in article Tydvc.30476$IB.17093@attbi_s04, "Glenn Garza"
wrote: and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit. So.... If you think you hear a difference, you will ignore it until someone gives you an explanation? |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"Bromo" wrote in message
news:uyyvc.1471$%F2.631@attbi_s04... On 6/2/04 1:27 AM, in article Tydvc.30476$IB.17093@attbi_s04, "Glenn Garza" wrote: and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit. So.... If you think you hear a difference, you will ignore it until someone gives you an explanation? If I hear a difference between 2 cables, and cannot think of any technical reason why I should, my first step is to find out whether the difference is there when I don't know which of the 2 cables is actually in-circuit. If I can consistently tell which cable is in use without extra-audio information, then I will turn up heaven and earth to find out why. I'm just like that. So far, cable changes have never survived the first test, so I haven't had to address the technical issues. Norm Strong |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 05:27:15 GMT, "Glenn Garza"
wrote: So many things have been said and written about the sound of all things hi-end, including cables. From all amplifiers and cables sound the same to they sound different...even, "little wooden disks stuck to the wall worked wonders." Much of it is bologna. However, facts are facts whatever anyone says. One fact is that switching out the MIT MI 750 Bi-wire speaker cables in my system with Analysis Plus Oval 12 not only changes the sound, but the entire characteristics of the system. Which if either is closer to right? Well, that may very well be a subjective matter. Right now, I do not really care why cables change the sound of my system, and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. How about caring about whether they really *do* sound different, before chasing the cause? Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit. Maybe it is simply inaudible................. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Cables
"So many things have been said and written about the sound of all things
hi-end, including cables. From all amplifiers and cables sound the same to they sound different...even, "little wooden disks stuck to the wall worked wonders." Much of it is bologna. However, facts are facts whatever anyone says. One fact is that switching out the MIT MI 750 Bi-wire speaker cables in my system with Analysis Plus Oval 12 not only changes the sound, but the entire characteristics of the system. Which if either is closer to right? Well, that may very well be a subjective matter. Right now, I do not really care why cables change the sound of my system, and I doubt most (but not all) who argue about it know anything at all. When a verifiable reason for differences is revealed, then I will care about why some cables sound different. Maybe it is simply a matter of component quality and design, if a cable can be thought of as part of a circuit." We have now done enough blind testing of amps and wire we need no longer wonder if all the writing and speaking done has substance, and we have a good insight as to the source of differences heard. The blind tests using listening alone show results close to the same level as guessing would produce. This strongly suggests that any difference is a product of the perception process that occurs in the brain after the signal reaches the ears. The differens so frequently written and spoken about absent controled testing disappear when even simple blind is done, such as putting a cloth over the wire connections so the active bit of gear is not known. We are no longer slave to the "some think and write this or that and some others think different things", we now have a listening alone benchmark against which all reports can be evaluated. This includes the report you make, do you think your experience is an exception to the testing bemchmark? Isn't mit one of those wires with the network, in which case the difference is because it is likely acting as an eq filter on the signal by changing well known properties of rcl in an electrical circuit. A tone control knob makes similar changes to sound. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Comments regarding: Cables, Hearing, Stuff!! | High End Audio | |||
| Can network, video and sound cables be combined to save space? | General | |||
| Magnan Cables | High End Audio | |||
| How to measure speaker cables? | High End Audio | |||
| Making my own speaker cables... | High End Audio | |||
Hybrid Mode
