Another opinion about cables...

[Speedball]

Wow, this is almost some confusing stuff.

I also do not have to prove anything to anyone, except maybe my boss or my wife.

[Mallette]

“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.” - Albert Einstein

“Everything you see or hear or experience in any way at all is
specific to you. You create a universe by perceiving it, so everything
in the universe you perceive is specific to you.” - Douglas Adams

There's no choice. Without perception nothing exists whatsoever. And thus far, we have no means of sharing perception specifically. Language is a system of crudely attempting to share perception, but most important things in life can not be found with language.

People have different and varying skills in sports, music, and art. Likewise, they have varying degrees of skill in perception.

I think you got it boiled down, Mark. That is what I mean about the arrogance of suggesting that anothers perceptions can't be. It is the assumption that YOUR perceptions are the truth and THEIRS is fantasy.

In fact, BOTH are fantasy. The fact that we agree on anything is truly amazing.

Dave

[Mallette]

In fact, BOTH are fantasy. The fact that we agree on anything is truly amazing.

Hi Dave-

Yeah, it is amazing. I think the reason "people" can occasionally agree on things is that language is incredibly imprecise and a very gross representation of any phenomenon or manifestation. So, even when we are truly perceiving different things, we can select a word that is close enough to both perceptions to form some agreement.

I think people in general don't take seriously enough the idea that every-"thing" is an illusion and that each intelligence "spins up" it's own universe in real time. Of course, you were always into the Tao, so you are tuned in to that idea already. There's just no such thing as a fixed reality.

Well, Mark, we are headed into a one on one here which few will even WANT to make sense out of...

It took me over 40 years to get comfortable with the idea that the only thing that exists is my mind, and that it is highly unreliable. However, you can really mellow out about things if you can get there. For one thing, death becomes irrelevant...

Anyway, time for some relevant music. "Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring" comes to mind. That is one I always felt is playing infinitely in the cosmos, and I occassionally join the flow for a while until it leaves me. Looking forward to joining it permanently some day...there HAS to be a way!

Dave

[DrWho]

I speak for no one else's process, but I think building a musical sounding system is more art and subjective synergy than simple science. I've spent hours and hours and hours sometimes tweaking a phono cartridge and tonearm setup trying to squeeze one more "penny" out of it. I'd be the first to say, sometimes it is not easy to immediately hear the difference between A and B - - - long or short term. But, the difference between AAAAAAAAAAAAA and BBBBBBBBBBBB is often incredible.

I agree with your premise, but bring it back to the real world and you're right back to my comment about polishing turds. The relative magnitude of even compounded minor things doesn't come close to many of the other problems plaguing almost all systems out there. I also wanted to add that your premise is essentially stating that you can identify AAAAAAA and BBBBBBB in the listening test. I think it would be interesting to conduct some tests where we actually put that to the test....My experience leads me to believe that many of the little tweaks are going to be far less noticeable than some of the other problems that often go ignored.

Btw, I believe that which defines a good spec is entirely a subjective process. In other words, I believe it is impossible to say "this specs better but sounds worse". If it sounds worse, then it doesn't spec better simply by definition of what defines a good spec. Citing a case where something has lower THD but sounds worse just means you don't understand what THD sounds like.

[fini]

OT...Have you seen the new cent reverse? Lincoln's 200 y'know...

[DrWho]

Little things only matter after the big things have been taken care of.

[JBryan]

So....our perceptions are limited by our reality and our reality is a based on a decision to perceive? Therefore, those who can hear a difference in audio cables and components have already decided that they will hear a difference while those who don't hear any difference have decided the converse. Wouldn't that tend to negate the results of a blind test of any kind? If by example, a Klipschorn was being demonstrated for us and we were thoroughly convinced that even though a curtain had been drawn in front of it, the Khorn remained although it had been replaced by a Bose computer speaker, would we still hear a Klipschorn? What effect would our memory of the recently demonstrated Khorn have on the new set of stimuli that is presented to us by the Bose?

[Mallette]

So....our perceptions are limited by our reality and our reality is a based on a decision to perceive? Therefore, those who can hear a difference in audio cables and components have already decided that they will hear a difference while those who don't hear any difference have decided the converse. Wouldn't that tend to negate the results of a blind test of any kind? If by example, a Klipschorn was being demonstrated for us and we were thoroughly convinced that even though a curtain had been drawn in front of it, the Khorn remained although it had been replaced by a Bose computer speaker, would we still hear a Klipschorn? What effect would our memory of the recently demonstrated Khorn have on the new set of stimuli that is presented to us by the Bose?

>Wouldn't that tend to negate the results of a blind test of any kind?

"Of any kind," no, of issues that deal with nuance like cables, yes. Even an theoretically acoustically transparent curtain would likely impact the way some hear the sound. OK, leave out the curtain and turn off the lights. The darkness itself would impact some peoples perception.

Fool me with Bose A/B'd against 'horns with any material with which I am familiar? Only if I am very, very, very drunk.

Dave

[Don Richard]

>Someone saying they hear a difference does not convince me of anything, People who make incredulous statements must prove to me that they actually do hear a difference, and they cannot do that. Therefore I remain skeptical.

So if someone says the building is on fire you want proof before you evacuate? Alrighty, then, nobodies gonna make a fool out of you. Perhaps a crispy critter, but you'll still have your pride.

I was not writing about hearing warnings of impending danger, I was writing about those who claim to hear great differences in interconnect cables and/or loudspeaker cables.I do not remember if this was brought up in this thread or not, but there are actually definite, measurable differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables. However, the largest difference is slightly less than 1 dB at 20 kHz, with the rolloff beginning at 15 kHz. With speaker cables, the typical difference between #12 zipcord and high-end cables is .5 dB at 20 kHz. Unless you are a young child your hearing probably doesn't make to 15 kHz at all, and if you are over 40 it probably won't even make that.

I view with great skepticism the contention of some who, by implication, suggest that they can hear .5 dB difference at 20 kHz. Maybe they can, but in order to convince me they need to do more than simply say that they can.

I cannot say about you, as we've never met, but I can say that I find skeptics very annoying in general. While it's fine for you to believe one way or the other, it is not fine to say "It didn't happen because you can't prove it did."

Skepticism is what drives science. It is not faith or belief in what others say that causes orderly, efficient learning of new knowledge. If someone says that he saw an extraterrestrial vehicle in the sky, or that he was abducted by aliens in a flying saucer, I will not believe them. If they claim to have seen Bigfoot I will not believe them. If they say Joseph Newman has invented a machine that can generate more power than than it takes to run that machine, I will not believe them because Joseph Newman is a fraud and what he claims to have done is impossible in this space-time continuum. It is not only fine for me to not believe any of these things, but it is also fine for me to say that "you are wrong, and you cannot prove that you are right". I know better than to believe any of these sorts of things and I feel compelled to inform others of fraudulent claims and practices. It is my right to voice my skepticism, and I get way beyond annoyed when someone suggests that I shouldn't.

Mythbusters is a TV show that is watched by many, probably because of their devotion to the truth. Many people yearn for the truth, while others are content to believe whatever BS they read, hear or see on TV. I will not apologize for my being in the first group, nor will I apologize for the ignorance of those in the second.

[jacksonbart]

I agree with your premise, but bring it back to the real world and you're right back to my comment about polishing turds.

I'd like to try this story, courtesy of Dean Sluyter, as told in "The Zen Commandments" ----

When I was ten years old I was a devoted coin collector. Pennies, the most worthless of all coins, began to reveal an ever greater value and beauty. Through my focused devotion and love for them, I started to see aspects I had never seen before: this one was Extremely Fine condition because all the lines of the wheat stalks were sharp and clear, that one was rare because it had the designer's initials (VBD) on the reverse. My enhanced perception of the coins in turn fed my deeper love of them, which further enhanced my perception, which in turn fed my love....

I think the story is self explanatory and needs little explanation as to how it relates to the art of paying attention to small things.

Sh!t life is too short to spend that much time examining GD coins.

[Hifi jim]

If someone says that he saw an extraterrestrial vehicle in the sky, or that he was abducted by aliens in a flying saucer, I will not believe them. If they claim to have seen Bigfoot I will not believe them. If they say Joseph Newman has invented a machine that can generate more power than than it takes to run that machine, I will not believe them because Joseph Newman is a fraud and what he claims to have done is impossible in this space-time continuum.

I don't remember who used these examples first, but there are major differences between cables/speaker wire and the references made above. First, people who believe in Bigfoot and UFOs are the minority. There maybe publications dedicated to such things, but not on the scale that audio magazines and reviewers, who by reviewing and printing their thoughts in such publications are staking their reputations on such claims. Now of course there are skeptics here about such magazines and their advertising dollars. And I've heard car magazines be called out for the same supposed bias when Honda wins shootouts time and again, but we all know Honda happens to make one heck of a car. Additionally, while I've heard these magazines take heat for always picking Honda, or BMW, or whomever... I have never heard them called fools and all the other names that some direct at audio reviewers... well at least not in the same numbers. Lets face facts. These are professional reviewers who have heard more gear than most of us here combined. They are experienced listeners and many have long careers within the audio field. To claim that they would put their reputation at stake for advertising dollars is nonsense. Could it keep them from bashing a product? Yes, I've read instances where they've danced around the fact that a product was subpar, but it wasn't a cable review. To suggest that they fudge cable reviews, suggests that all of the other reviews are also inaccurate. Do they not generate even more revenue from speaker and amp manufacturers? Ever read a review of a component you own, perhaps your Klipsch speakers? Most reviews I've read were strikingly similar to my own findings. Try reading some of the British reviews on What Hi-Fi. They use a panel of reviewers that come to a consensus rather than one individual, and they do not hold punches... which is the one criticism I'll level against some US mags. No surprise though, that their findings often parallel the stateside mags. And, lets not forget the millions of customer reviews that circulate the web. Are the same deaf, or influenced people who write about their experiences with cables, the same ones who write glowing reviews of some of the components, or maybe Klipsch speakers that we own? Do we not agree with them then? To create this conspiracy theory that wires are snake oil and the mags and customer reviews are all false, means we must also discount all of the other reviews then. That becomes one gigantic conspiracy. Or perhaps, the minority, the few who have not tried for themselves, or who have not spent time listening and tweaking their systems are the ones who are mistaken?

[Hifi jim]

You raise a good point Mark. However, I don't think you'd make exclamatory remarks about the person, or the $20 bottle of wax.

[maxg]

18 pages on cables? I am guessing - I only perused the last couple.

FWIW my take is this.

Yes - cables make a difference and no I cannot explain it. The effect can be quite dramatic at times but usually one suspects a fault somewhere when it is.

I rarely find, however, that cables are a wise investment in terms of improvement of sound for your $. In most but the most ideally matched and setup systems component changes, room treatments, experiments with speaker positioning and so on can make a far greater improvement for the same or lesser investment.

I recently listened to a system with a $5000 CD player connected via Nordost Valhalla cables to the pre-amp. The Nordosts are about $3500 over here - maybe slightly more.

One wonders - does the above provide a better result than, say, a $8300 CD player and $200 cables - for example?

I would be kind of surprised if it did.

Obviously if you have maxed out your system equipment wise then cables are certainly one of the tweaks you might look at. The funny thing is that I have often found I prefer the sound of less expensive cables over more expensive ones - so playing with cables does not necessarily mean increasing the investment in the system.

Just to quote an example from my own experience (not one I am wildly keen to share mind you):

I bought - at some point - some pure silver Synergistic cables to connect my main speakers. These were expensive - can't recall the exact price now - thankfully. I remember being terrible impressed with them at the time as I thought they stomped all over my Monster cables.

A few years later a guy comes round with a set of Van Den Hull D103 hybrids. These were about 1/10th of the cost of the Synergistics and to my ears sounded way better on my system. I have had these in place ever since. The Synergistics are in a cupboard. (Offers anyone?)

[jacksonbart]

*** life is too short to spend that much time examining GD coins.

Or the sonic differences in components, or reading poetry, or very carrefully preparing a mean, or just contemplating the beauty of a rose, I suppose.

Now you understand what separates the devoted hobbyist from the dilettante.

Oh you must be correct, so what muscle car do you drive? What vacuum cleaner do you use? If everyone concentrates on the detail on everything well hell, they get nowhere that was one of the stupidest replies ever. Focus on coins if you like, focus on subway cars, your lack of hair follicles, I don't care about them. Music is another thing, given your response you can't give enough time to anyone subject to be worthwhile. Sucks to be you, now I understand why you are the way you are.

[Mallette]

>Skepticism is what drives science.

I thought we laid that to rest with the mention of a number of the greatest scientists whose minds made great leaps beyond that which was supported by available research in in spite of the skepticism of their peers (whose names are largely forgotten). It's mainly the masses of salaried scientists who are skeptics. In fact, IMHO, skepticism virtually assures a scientist whose name will not be remembered. History suggests that the ones who make the big breaks are those whose minds are open to the possibilities and unfettered by skepticism...or optimism, for that matter.

Now, this part is not a reply, but more of a question:

I was not writing about hearing warnings of impending danger, I was writing about those who claim to hear great differences in interconnect cables and/or loudspeaker cables.I do not remember if this was brought up in this thread or not, but there are actually definite, measurable differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables. However, the largest difference is slightly less than 1 dB at 20 kHz, with the rolloff beginning at 15 kHz. With speaker cables, the typical difference between #12 zipcord and high-end cables is .5 dB at 20 kHz. Unless you are a young child your hearing probably doesn't make to 15 kHz at all, and if you are over 40 it probably won't even make that.

I view with great skepticism the contention of some who, by implication, suggest that they can hear .5 dB difference at 20 kHz. Maybe they can, but in order to convince me they need to do more than simply say that they can.

Wouldn't the above mentioned measurable difference be depended upon the gauge + current? Seems to me that a fraction of an amp applied to zip cord would be so far below it's capacity as to exhibit no more changes that if it were passing through 3 gauge. PWK indicated to me that zipcord was fine for Heritage because the currents involved to drive them to high SPL's were so small and well within tolerance.

No science behind that statement (mine, not PWK's), just head logic, which, considering the head it originated in may be entirely falacious. Any comment from Pauln, Mark, the Dr., or any of the other engineer types around here?

Dave

[Don Richard]

I do not remember if this was brought up in this thread or not, but there are actually definite, measurable differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables. However, the largest difference is slightly less than 1 dB at 20 kHz, with the rolloff beginning at 15 kHz. With speaker cables, the typical difference between #12 zipcord and high-end cables is .5 dB at 20 kHz. Unless you are a young child your hearing probably doesn't make to 15 kHz at all, and if you are over 40 it probably won't even make that.

At the risk of breaking into your discussion with Dave-----

What if the differences aren't IN the amplitude of the frequency response?

The freq response variations mentioned were the only differences observed between wires. What other factor could cause an observable difference in wire performance? Group delay, perhaps? Well, that would be caused by the LPF caused by the L, C, and R values inherent in that piece of wire, and would be manifested in a rolloff in HF response, maximized at a point well above the audible range of humans. These delays are in the microsecond range, too fast to affect human auditory response.

So what differences are referring to? Resistive losses? The X factor? Energy from the UFOs?

[Don Richard]

I was not writing about hearing warnings of impending danger, I was writing about those who claim to hear great differences in interconnect cables and/or loudspeaker cables.I do not remember if this was brought up in this thread or not, but there are actually definite, measurable differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables. However, the largest difference is slightly less than 1 dB at 20 kHz, with the rolloff beginning at 15 kHz. With speaker cables, the typical difference between #12 zipcord and high-end cables is .5 dB at 20 kHz. Unless you are a young child your hearing probably doesn't make to 15 kHz at all, and if you are over 40 it probably won't even make that.

I view with great skepticism the contention of some who, by implication, suggest that they can hear .5 dB difference at 20 kHz. Maybe they can, but in order to convince me they need to do more than simply say that they can.

Wouldn't the above mentioned measurable difference be depended upon the gauge + current? Seems to me that a fraction of an amp applied to zip cord would be so far below it's capacity as to exhibit no more changes that if it were passing through 3 gauge. PWK indicated to me that zipcord was fine for Heritage because the currents involved to drive them to high SPL's were so small and well within tolerance.

Those differences that were measured would be caused by the impedance of the wire, which changes with frequency. Impedance is a vector summation of inductive reactance, capacitive reactance, and resistance. Basically the gauge of the wire and the metal that the wire is made from affects resistance. The type of insulation and spacing of the conductors affects capacitance. Inductance is affected by the length of the wire and the shape of the conductors.

Skin effect is a factor that the high-end cable guys say is a big deal. At audio frequencies and considering the wire sizes used for audio hookup this effect is very small but is likely to contribute somewhat to the .5 dB rolloff above 20 kHz, which is inaudible at those numbers.

There is a point of diminishing returns on wire sizes. Efficient speakers definitely do not require large gauge wires to perform properly in terms of power delivery, although larger wire will allow better utilization of a SS amp's damping factor, which may affect bass response in a positive way.

[Mallette]

*** life is too short to spend that much time examining GD coins.

Or the sonic differences in components, or reading poetry, or very carrefully preparing a mean, or just contemplating the beauty of a rose, I suppose.

Now you understand what separates the devoted hobbyist from the dilettante.

Oh you must be correct, so what muscle car do you drive? What vacuum cleaner do you use? If everyone concentrates on the detail on everything well hell, they get nowhere that was one of the stupidest replies ever. Focus on coins if you like, focus on subway cars, your lack of hair follicles, I don't care about them. Music is another thing, given your response you can't give enough time to anyone subject to be worthwhile. Sucks to be you, now I understand why you are the way you are.

Owie. Never seen a rise from JB before. Reminds me of Don Rickles, "Ya hockey puck!"

Dave

[Don Richard]

The freq response variations mentioned were the only differences observed between wires.

Observed.........but not necessarily the only differences.

Once again, to what other differences are you referring? You wrote about dots, books, and quoted from a movie that is a work of fiction. The books from which I learned may or may not be complete as to the knowledge contained within, but they are not works of fiction.

Back to wires, what is not being measured that could affect the sound? Your epistemological ramblings are not informational pertaining to that subject.

[maxg]

I bought - at some point - some pure silver Synergistic cables to connect my main speakers. These were expensive - can't recall the exact price now - thankfully. I remember being terrible impressed with them at the time as I thought they stomped all over my Monster cables.

A few years later a guy comes round with a set of Van Den Hull D103 hybrids. These were about 1/10th of the cost of the Synergistics and to my ears sounded way better on my system. I have had these in place ever since. The Synergistics are in a cupboard. (Offers anyone?)

Hi MAX-

LTNS.

And what words would you use to describe the difference?

Hi Mark,

LTNS?

Anyway - differences (Bearing in mind I am recalling events that took place a good 4 or 5 years ago):

Biggest difference was in the base. There was just more of it, fuller and more credible. Not enough to make me switch the sub off or anything - but enough to allow me to lower the X-over point it comes in at by 10 Hz (this was with the REL sub I had at the time).

With the improvement in the base everything else appeared to lift - again not as dramatically as it might appear from the description here - but enough to make it a clear choice for me at the time.

I recall that on one ocasion I did re-visit the older cables and the results were similar - even commented upon by a non-audiophile friend.