Islander Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Wasn't there a "cable face-off" at an audio show about a year ago? Some of the general public couldn't tell the difference, but Michael Fremer from Stereophile and one or two other reviewers could pick out the more expensive cable every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I'm currently using the cheapest HDMI cables I could find (Daytons from Parts Express) and I'm quite happy. Me too. Mine are from monoprice and I think I paid around $20 total including shipping for three of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 My suggestion would be to try a newer cable from this century, lots of improvements in cable technology in the last 10 years. Ummm....care to share some specific examples? The Nordost Blue Heaven is a modern design that I've offered out for trial. Try and keep up Doc. I don't see anything modern about that design. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Mark, they had the typical B&K 1/3 octave RTA as their baseline RTA, with both B&K sipplied and Telefunken microphones. Things got interesting when they would trot out a military RTA that would do a 100 Hz display and ten or twenty data points(more resolution.) They would listen to some warhorse standards, zero in ion what they thought was the main difference between two cables by listening, and THEN measure with the B&K and the military RTA. If the B&K overlay trace showed no difference between the two cables, they would note they were showing psychosympathetic behaviour and move on. If there was a difference with the B&K, they would zero in on the military RTA. Different hearing and different musical tastes meant different responses. They liked me being there because I was a raccous peanut gallery of one. Most of them were so infatuated with their gear they were rendered incapable of falling in love with some gorgeous recordings. Champagne tastes, a beer budget, and a Stalin gatekeeper budgetmeister ensure I get most stereo items via trade, Craigslist, and estate sale giveaways, so I can't fall for any snake oil. It is fun watching cases of someone who knows they don't like an expensive "improvement", and they also know they can't say they don't like it to the audience captive at their listening session. For this thread, I say more power to everyone who likes their cables. If it helps you enjoy your music with your gear, it is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
germerikan Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 I would think the jux of it is that, yes cables do effect the system. The question is do they have to cost goobs of money and be special made to improve. I would say no. Others say yes. Quality cable, quality connectors and a manufacturer that takes pride in quality assembly should do the trick. Quality does not always = expensive. Now we can discuss where expensive starts eheheheheheh[:$] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 THIS DOES IT! PM your address Don and I will send you a pair of Nordost Blue Heavens .6 meter RCAs. Yours to try and evaluate for the simple fee of posting your findings here Thank you, Jim, for your generous offer. However, my system does not use that type interconnect. The only equipment that I own with RCA jacks are two CD players, and they require XLRs on the other end to plug into my active xover, In the near future, when I get an outboard DAC with XLR outputs, I will not be using any unbalanced connections at all. This is the best way to go if you want to secure any performance gains via interconnect technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Sounds like a great setup for measuring speakers. I can't see how that setup would reveal anything about the subtle differences in cables, or amplifiers or anything which have nominally flat frequency response - which they all do. I expect every single cable from 49 cents all the way to 49 thousand dollars to measure perfectly flat in amplitude v. frequency. Only the coarsest level of differences would be found using that setup. I don't think any wire or cable people are making claims which can be measured in 1dB or 2dB increments, or for that matter .1dB or .2dB increments. I'm not speaking for anyone but myself here, but these differences we refer to in cables and amplifiers has nothing to do with "dB." It's not an amplitude v. frequency phenomenon. This is why I suggested that they don't have a measuring tool that explains why A sounds more clear, more focused and more detailed than B. We seem to be hung up on this "dB" thing. Why? Because, as I have said already, it's what we know how to measure. What other factors do you think might be causing an audible difference? Cables possess varying amounts of resistance, capacitance, and inductance that yield a characteristic impedance. Construction methods and shielding influence noise pickup and electromagnetic radiation. Anything else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 A few years back I went on a capacitor binge and tried all kinds of "1uF 400volt" capacitors in a preamp circuit. That circuit would measure the same "dB" or "THD" so to speak, no matter which cap was inserted. (i.e. There would be "no difference" when looking at in in your RTA setup). And yet, the caps clearly sounded different. Excellent example of why specs don't tell it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Thank you, Jim, for your generous offer. However, my system does not use that type interconnect. Sorry to hear that Don, I was hoping to make a convert out of you yet. [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 I guess that means Marks house is the first stop for the cables. Mark please PM your address and I'll get these out to you next week. When you're finished, you can mail them to Speedball, and then from him on to whomever else wishes to play. Maybe we'll post our findings over in the two channel forum and get some more folks involved. I'm going to make some more comparisons before I ship em out, but I'll hold off posting my findings till everyone else has a shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 A few years back I went on a capacitor binge and tried all kinds of "1uF 400volt" capacitors in a preamp circuit. That circuit would measure the same "dB" or "THD" so to speak, no matter which cap was inserted. (i.e. There would be "no difference" when looking at in in your RTA setup). And yet, the caps clearly sounded different. There are specifically two kinds of response to that. One guy says, "can't be because the RTA says it can't" and so he inserts the cheapest cap and creates more to the ever growing heap of generic products. The other guy says, "ok, that's interesting" and inserts the one he likes best and creates a product for audiophiles - other people like him who hear the difference between a Panasonic receiver and a Mark Levinson amplifier. You forgot the third type that would conclude that the capacitance and voltage rating of the cap isn't the only criteria for the cap's performance. That third type might also suggest that your frequency response measurement or THD measurement weren't the right tools for quantifying the audible difference either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Excellent example of why specs don't tell it all. More like an excellent example of someone incorrectly correlating specs. Your comment is as absurd as someone noting that they are the same color....since one can measure that the wavelength of light is the same, but it sounds different, then surely specs are meaningless! Edit...I just wanted to expand that there are more specs than just the marketing specs of voltage and capacitance. The characteristic impedance of a capacitor is all over the place - both in the voltage and frequency domains. There are also thermal nonlinearities, leakage currents, microphonic effects, crossover distortions etc...The type of dielectric used will dominate most of these factors, but the physical attributes can have effects too. Good capacitor manufacturers actually publish these specs and clever designs can benefit from taking them into account. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedball Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Some people just don't know when to quit being so analytical and just enjoy the music and camaraderie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.