Interconnect Myth Busted

[Dennie]

Darn it, I ran out of popcorn (Again), I'll be right back! []

Dennie

[Jeff Matthews]

"Wildly successful" is neither science nor sense.

That's not the point I was making to Don Richards. He was quoting PWK's many annecdotal references to amplifiers as though PWK could be considered an expert in that area of engineering compared to Stu Hegeman whom I used as a reference regarding his well respected wideband amplifiers. And when I say Hegeman was "well respected," I am not referring to silly audiophiles and antique collectors, I am referring to his professional peers in the field of audio engineering.

So whatever mountain of professional respect is due PWK for his work in loudpseakers, his legacy is not audio amplifier design. But there certainly are many others whose professional legacy IS amplifier design and a "quip" from PWK, or Colonel Sanders or Mary Poppins doesn't discount that legacy - PERIOD.

Well, I have come to conclude that beyond a certain threshhold, which is actually very low in terms of dollars, the whole idea that there is a science of audio that justifies more than, say, a $500 used amp (or a $1,000 new one) is bogus. Science only measures things. It doesn't tell you if you like them better or not. It might be capable of helping sift through total garbage vs. something pretty good, but it will do nothing to help disitnguish among those that are pretty good.

If you can show how such and such amp is scientifically better, this ad nauseum debate which has been going on for 50 years would end in one blink of an eye. It would be over. There would be nothing to discuss. Capacitors and resistors and transformers are not mystical, like the Coca Cola formula. If there really was a claim to superiority, everyone would agree scientifically, and all amps at all price points would be homogenous.

There is something much larger going on. It is psychological. I look at the McIntosh 250 that was given to me - a decent 60wpc amp. I can't tell the difference in its sound from my Crown Microtech 1200. I can't tell the difference between my Crown and an Adcom or many other models that people always wonder about, brag about, criticize, argue about, etc. They are about all the same.

I can say this, though, that McIntosh 250 is one ugly piece of equipment. It is just ugly.

I have my eye out for a Pioneer Spec-1 Pre-amp and Spec-2 or 4 amp. Why? Because they look good to me. There's really nothing more to it. My stuff is as good as what I am looking for, and I would venture to say that a great bulk of trades in components at this level result from people just getting bored and wanting to see different equipment. They sure won't hear the difference, although to save face, they'll swear up and down they can.

Anyone bored with Pioneer Spec stuff? Let me know.

[Mallette]

If you can show how such and such amp is scientifically better,

That's the whole point to me, Jeffers. SHOW? I don't look at equipment...though like, you it's nice when it looks cool...I listen to it. All the science in the world can't fool my ears.

Reading the specs on equipment is like reading the specs on a Van Gogh. May be technically interesting, but it isn't going to cause your ears to get a woodie.

Dave

[Mallette]

Here's my advice to everyone and anyone thinking about spending money on a stereo. Don't spend over $49.

Crikey, Mark. Don't go south on us. Your really aren't too far off. If you don't need a mass of volume, and don't need a mess of bass, a bit of waiting and watching can get you a pair of Frazier Super Monte Carlos. That and a T-Amp will set you back perhaps 120.00. Then, the odds are many already have a computer with an Intel 1708HD chip set. They are almost ubitqitous. The sound will be accurate, and marvelous.

You can get a replacement cord for the lamp you had to cannbalize for the fine speaker cable later...

Dave

[tom b. 57]

Here's my advice to everyone and anyone thinking about spending money on a stereo. Don't spend over $49.

Crikey, Mark. Don't go south on us. Your really aren't too far off. If you don't need a mass of volume, and don't need a mess of bass, a bit of waiting and watching can get you a pair of Frazier Super Monte Carlos. That and a T-Amp will set you back perhaps 120.00. Then, the odds are many already have a computer with an Intel 1708HD chip set. They are almost ubitqitous. The sound will be accurate, and marvelous.

You can get a replacement cord for the lamp you had to cannbalize for the fine speaker cable later...

Dave

Seriously Dave, let's be honest. Every dime spent on this nonsense is idiotic ego gratification and playing with toys. I have to laugh that someone would think it insane to buy a $250 wire, and then think it's fine to buy speakers the size of coffins for a simple living room. Who is BSing who here? This entire hobby, like ALL hobbies is impossible to justify on any rational basis. Jeff has already mentioned a good number of idiotic pursuits, and he barely scratched the surface.

Now, it's fine to have these hobbies and blow money like mad at them, but let's just be clear that is what we are doing. You can't possibly rationalize X and criticize Y within the same genre of hobby! People spend money because it is fun to do so. "This" - all this nonsense about amps and wire and speakers - is simply one of those excuses one can use to have the fun spending the money and playing with toys. Hey, if some cat wants to build a monster system out of nothing but exotic wires and a boombox, who cares? More power too him/her. IT IS ALL NONSENSE--- Laissez les bons temps rouler!

Very well put Mark

I couldn't agree more

Tom

[Mallette]

Tom, Mark, I'll say this as simply as possible.

Music is not a hobby for me.

Dave

[gnatnoop]

had to go look to see what kind of interconnects i was using. one pair was the cheap red/white stuff that comes free with components and the other pair was some model of monster (don't know how i got it, sure didn't buy it new).

i'd recently received my new vrd's two weeks ago and bought a used BBX a couple of months prior. hmmm, should i really ignore the wires.

in a weak moment, i ordered two pairs of belden interconnects from cables for less and received them yesterday, cost about $60.

there was in fact (to me) an improvement, not a huge difference but more than insignificant. about $60 worth of improvement i'd say (j/k).

i don't think exotic stuff makes sense (they sure are purty though), but probably should also avoid the $2 cables..

[tom b. 57]

Tom, Mark, I'll say this as simply as possible.

Music is not a hobby for me.

Dave

Dave, I was in no way insinuating that my agreement with Mark when it comes to the hobby of audio reproduction in the home as a hobby, had anything to do with your love for music.

I love music and it has been essential to me as a form of therapy at many different times.

The acquiring of speakers, amps, preamps, source components and yes, even cables and interconnects to a degree of overkill is pretty much for enjoyment and could certainly be construed as egotitstical to some degree.

Do I give a rats hiney?

I enjoy this stuff immensely.

Please accept my apology if you have taken my agreement with Mark's statement in any other way than I had intended it.

Tom

[NOSValves]

had to go look to see what kind of interconnects i was using. one pair was the cheap red/white stuff that comes free with components and the other pair was some model of monster (don't know how i got it, sure didn't buy it new).

i'd recently received my new vrd's two weeks ago and bought a used BBX a couple of months prior. hmmm, should i really ignore the wires.

in a weak moment, i ordered two pairs of belden interconnects from cables for less and received them yesterday, cost about $60.

there was in fact (to me) an improvement, not a huge difference but more than insignificant. about $60 worth of improvement i'd say (j/k).

i don't think exotic stuff makes sense (they sure are purty though), but probably should also avoid the $2 cables..

Don't fret you did good Belden based cables are a great buy!

[fini]

I'm getting quite bored with all this interconnect talk. When do we get to discuss expensive power cords?

[Mallette]

Please accept my apology if you have taken my agreement with Mark's statement in any other way than I had intended it.

No apologies required, Tom, of either you or Mark. This place is for debate, discussion, and idea sharing.

I didn't take it as an insult, but something of a gauntlet as offered by Mark.

I have considerable invested in my systems. However, it is from 40 years of very careful consideration of each item as to its actual value in helping to achieve accuracy.

I felt I agreed with Mark's statement about the 49.00 stereo to some degree in that audio nirvana can be had realistically (forgetting about the occasional 100.00 La Scalas at a garage sale) in the way I described...I actually have a system in my library of exactly that description at a cost of 150.00, excluding the computer that provides the source.

However, I took exception to the idea that any lover of music could be satisfied with a boom box from Target if there is an alternative, or that music can be lowered to the level of a "hobby" anymore than a love of nature can.

As Mark's piece can be construed as being directed at the guy who spends the most possible on everything as an ego trip, I may have generalized his response a bit, but there were a lot of "we do this" and "we do thats" and such in the middle so I felt included.

Dave

[Don Richard]

Don,

You left the world of physics back about 10 posts ago. You are simply citing annecdotal quips, which are fun, but have no bearing in engineering or science. I suggest you switch over to Mark Twain or Will Rodgers who were both far more entertaining and interesting to read. But, since you so much enjoy quips and quotes, here's one of my favorites which is appropos to the subject at hand:

It is a scientific fact that humans cannot hear 100 kHz. Go to the pet store and try a dog whistle, around 35 kHz or so. Not you, not anyone, can hear it. Nor will you hear those tones if played through any sound system. That is not an anecdote, that is a fact. Macintosh merely demonstrated that fact.

Stating that the probability of humans hearing sounds outside their audible range is zero is not an anecdote - it is an empirical Bayes prior.

[Jeff Matthews]

Don,

You left the world of physics back about 10 posts ago. You are simply citing annecdotal quips, which are fun, but have no bearing in engineering or science. I suggest you switch over to Mark Twain or Will Rodgers who were both far more entertaining and interesting to read. But, since you so much enjoy quips and quotes, here's one of my favorites which is appropos to the subject at hand:

It is a scientific fact that humans cannot hear 100 kHz. Go to the pet store and try a dog whistle, around 35 kHz or so. Not you, not anyone, can hear it. Nor will you hear those tones if played through any sound system. That is not an anecdote, that is a fact. Macintosh merely demonstrated that fact.

Stating that the probability of humans hearing sounds outside their audible range is zero is not an anecdote - it is an empirical Bayes prior.

It doesn't matter. The point was that what matter is the fact that some people consider inaudible performance important in audio. It's much like the Maserati that never is driven 175 mph. Many people still want to own one.

[Thaddeus Smith]

do hdmi cables count as interconnects? If not, I'm screwed because then I don't have any interconnects at all ..which means I'm hearing absolutely nothing, which means I'm crazier than initially diagnosed.

I DO have a $250 power cable though (street price) ..and while subtle, it makes a difference.

[Don Richard]

It doesn't matter. The point was that what matter is the fact that some people consider inaudible performance important in audio.

So the point of the hobby (or profession), that has the purpose of maximizing the fidelity of sound reproduction, is to design equipment to reproduce sounds that humans cannot hear? Man, I sure have been getting it wrong all this time.[:^)]

Folks who consider things that cannot be heard to be important are worried about the wrong thing.

[Mallette]

Well, I've said I believe there is no right or wrong to any of this. If a person hears a differences, or believes they hear a difference, I am:

A. Happy for them if they can afford whatever audio tweak du jour that did the trick.

B. Unhappy for them if that's what stands between them and audio nirvana and they can't afford it.

In my case, I frankly don't give a hoot in hell for audio science that I personally cannot hear. I make absolutely no judgements by ANYTHING I read or am told. Only the ears. OK, it needs to fool my cat, but that's another story...

I refuse to make fun of those who believe they can hear an effect from a power cable, solid gold speaker wires with crystal connectors, or NOS tubes stored in the pyramid of Cheops for exactly one leap year, or whatever. I find those who engage in such to have an over inflated sense of self-importance. One piece of science that I maintain is still unchallenged:

THERE IS NO WAY I CAN KNOW WHAT YOU HEAR!

The corrollary is: My system is optimized for me...and yawl can go to hell. OK, I'm just being Texan and I enjoy spreading the pleasure. However, I have had occasions...one in particular with a well known golden eared Forum spook of many years and posts...who heard just a little something in my right K'horn. He kept at it, and sooner or later it happened. I heard it too. Just a teenie, weenie, little SOMETHING.

Soon, it was all I heard. ARGGHHHH!!!!!!

Well, I got over it. The details are irrelevant to this thread...which appears to be going evergreen on us. Perhaps we should simply bring this one up everytime the subject arises.

Dave

[Don Richard]

THERE IS NO WAY I CAN KNOW WHAT YOU HEAR!

Me either, but I can say with certainty that I know what you can't hear. There is no human who can hear 100 kHz. If anyone thinks differently, lets make a bet.

[Thaddeus Smith]

is it possible to hear a difference between solid state and tube amps? different manufacturers within each type? it's not inconceivable to think that things such as interconnects, speaker wire, power cables, etc could have a similar albeit smaller effect. there is a ton of ego and fart smelling in audiophilia ..but no more than wine or foodie circles, auto clubs, or photography circles.

[fini]

THERE IS NO WAY I CAN KNOW WHAT YOU HEAR!

Me either, but I can say with certainty that I know what you can't hear. There is no human who can hear 100 kHz. If anyone thinks differently, lets make a bet.

Ah, but everyone can experience 100 kHz...

[Mallette]

THERE IS NO WAY I CAN KNOW WHAT YOU HEAR!

Me either, but I can say with certainty that I know what you can't hear. There is no human who can hear 100 kHz. If anyone thinks differently, lets make a bet.

That's because you are faith based, very much as anyone who accepts any philosophy, science, religion, or whatever as absolute. I am not. If a person who I've found otherwise reliable and credible tells me they've experienced something that defies science, I don't say "Oh, it was just a dream, or swamp gas, or a hallucination."

I meant that literally. All the science we've developed so far...which is precious little to the point of near complete ignorance...cannot give you the ability to know what another person hears.

But if you wish to believe otherwise, feel free. It certainly makes things easier to be able to simply call the black or white without the messy possibility of shades in between.

Dave