TBrennan Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 Ray---Well I never heard any B&W I liked so your comparison means little to me. I'd rather listen to a beater, ex bar-band A7 mono through 1 channel of a clapped-out Dyna 120 than listen to cones and tragic domes with Krells or Levinsons. But I'm a music loving horny and not an audiophile. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 I've participated in double-blind tests where competant zip-cord and "audiophile" wires couldn't be told apart. And I figure if more than competant wire was needed the old-timers like Thuras, Wente, Olson, Hilliard, Lansing and Voight would have known, these guys were serious scientists and engineers working for the telephone, radio and motion picture industries not "audiophiles" putzing around in the garage. And afterall PWK used bellwire in his speakers, personally I think he knew what he was doing. It's also highly suspect that audiophile wire came on the scene at the same time as the self-indulgent, gullible baby-boomers came in the hi-fi market, you know, the kind of ninnies who can't even have a simple cup of joe without making it a big deal. Also note that wires are touted the most by "high-end" types who have crummy hi-fis anyway, like I'm gonna take anything seriously from some overwrought, tin-eared ninny who thinks a Pro-Ac or Vandersteen is a good speaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 Tom, My point about comparing a decent speaker driven by an excellent amp with an excellent speaker driven by a decent amp doesn't really hold water with the kind of speakers you are partial to. ALL the speakers I've seen you refer to on this board as speakers you've spent time with, or built, or modified, or owned are, as a group, head and shoulders above the "typical audiophile" cones in a box thingie. They all fall into the "excellent" speaker category when we're discussing dynamics, articulation, transient response and the other characteristics that make horn speakers as a group sound so much more like live music. So, yeah, I'd rather listen to one of them driven by a Carver Cube than, say, a Vandy 2i driven by God's own tube amp. Wait, uh, maybe the Carver Cube was a bit over the top, there... not sure I'd REALLY want to sit and listen to 200 watts in a box driving something like a Voice of the Theater... have to check my dental insurance first, in case the holes it'd drill in my teeth needed filling... Actually, the newer B&W's sound very much more alive, particularly on alto / tenor range voice, than their previous lines did. Heard any of 'em? Ray ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prana-Bindu Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 To say that different speaker cables don't make different sound is more presumptuous than to say that they do. Electricity isn't a mathematical abstract that can be casually thrown into the "all else being equal" category. Perhaps an interesting question to try to answer would be How do we know that different speaker cables CANNOT or DON'T make different sound? There are many people who claim to observe a difference and there are many who claim to notice no difference at all. Both judgments are vulnerable to bias. TBrennan: what gear was used in the double-blind tests to which you refer? (cables, amps, pre-amps, sources, speakers, music, etc.) I've heard a difference between Monster, Kimber and, in a recent comparison, that wee-thin wire that comes with compact stereo systems. As would be expected, the perceived difference when comparing the wee-thin wire was greater than when comparing the Monster and the Kimber, but we're still talking about differences that aren't anywhere near night and day. Quieter background, more detail, somewhat faster dynamics, but I could still bang my head using any of the wires. This wouldn't apply to the context of music very directly, but I distinctly remember Ray posting recently that he could hear some loud nasties coming out of his speakers when he slammed certain cables against the floor or hit them with the handle of a screwdriver or somethin'. I don't wanna know what Ray is doing throwing his cables against the floor or attacking them with his toolbox, but such an observation would come very close to proving that the signal going through the wire isn't some mathematical constant unaffected by the nature of the medium through which it travels. Would you like to remind us Ray? ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 MY GOD YOU'RE RIGHT!!! I just plugged my old infinity two-ways into my daughter's stereo reciever (sony I think) via those thin wires that came with the reciever and YOU'RE RIGHT, they sound just like my main rig! I'M FREE!, I AM FREE, PRAISE THE LORD I AM FREE!... ------------------ *1993 K-Horns w/ ALK x-overs*Marantz 7T preamp*Dynaco MkIV monoblocks (modded to triode)*Sony CDP-CX350 and CX-230 CD changers*MSB link DACIII (96k upsampling)*MSB silver digital director (for switching and jitter reduction)*Technics M-85 professional Cassette Deck*SAE MK VIII tuner*Luxman PD-272 turntable, Grado Red cartridge*Cardas Crosslink speaker cable*Monster M550i for all interconnects*Monster HTS3500 Reference Powercenter Conditioner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discorules Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 quote: Originally posted by TBrennan: I've participated in double-blind tests where competant zip-cord and "audiophile" wires couldn't be told apart. And I figure if more than competant wire was needed the old-timers like Thuras, Wente, Olson, Hilliard, Lansing and Voight would have known, these guys were serious scientists and engineers working for the telephone, radio and motion picture industries not "audiophiles" putzing around in the garage. And afterall PWK used bellwire in his speakers, personally I think he knew what he was doing. It's also highly suspect that audiophile wire came on the scene at the same time as the self-indulgent, gullible baby-boomers came in the hi-fi market, you know, the kind of ninnies who can't even have a simple cup of joe without making it a big deal. Also note that wires are touted the most by "high-end" types who have crummy hi-fis anyway, like I'm gonna take anything seriously from some overwrought, tin-eared ninny who thinks a Pro-Ac or Vandersteen is a good speaker. Right On TBrennen! I couldn't have stated this any better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 Ray---Yes, I recently heard B&W's big gun, the Nautilus with the 15" woofer, driven by Levinsons. It actually sounded pretty good but not as good as a horn. But it sure sounded better than the kazoo-membrane Maggies that were in the same room. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 Ray, whose general state of coordination and mental health can be deduced from the fact that he works for an Internet B2B dotcom, first noticed the speaker cable noise effect when he dropped the leg of a rather heavy coffee table on top of the speaker cable that was laying on a tile floor. Made kind of a "splork" noise. Extrapolating from "giving a goodly whack to a speaker cable produces some weird noise from the speakers" to "speaker cables are affected by airborne vibrations and can mess up the sound if not properly damped or isolated" is a nuther issue.... ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 Prana-Bindu---As a product of Western thought and civilization I believe in cause and effect. If wires make a difference in sound there must be a physical reason. Signal passing through wire is simple stuff and has been understood a very long time. Therefore it's up to the proponents of wires to make thier case as they are the ones making unusual claims. One could certainly design a wire that would effect the sound but such a wire would by definition be inaccurate and be more in the realm of audio jewelry or EQ than a simple device intended to pass a signal. Mind that sighted tests are notoriously unreliable. I've been with this hobby for 30 years and I've heard so much BS that my BS detectors are finely tuned, certainly more finely tuned than the ears and minds of many gullible audiophiles. As I said before it's telling to me that the true Giants of this business had no truck or interest with wires past the simple need to pass the signal unaltered and that it was the midgets who came after who brought us this wire business. As to the wires compared in the DBTs I took part in; they were some Monsters and some very expensive wires the names of which I don't remember, as the results were unremarkable I didn't waste any memory on them. The hi-fi was a very good one, esoteric SS electronics and DIY direct-radiators of very high quality for the type--ScanSpeak drivers. It seems to me that many people base thier belief in wires more on audiophile faith than in a hard-headed look at what could actually be going on. Do some DBTs and then tell me what you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prana-Bindu Posted September 13, 2001 Share Posted September 13, 2001 It seems rather funny to me that the absence of an explanation for a perceived difference in a particular vocabulary (that of electronics or physics, e.g.) leads to the assumption of equality. What then, is the math and measurement that leads to the conclusion that there is no difference? If we're going to be strict about our demand for the vocabulary of cause and effect, we cannot resolve the issue speaking of people's perceptions (including double-blind tests or any other hopeless attempt to quantify the judgments of taste). After all, depending on what I ate 30 minutes ago, she loves me... she loves me not... she loves me... . Nevertheless, if no explanation in such vocabulary is available, it is reasonable to conjecture that there is absolutely no difference? That's like believing the core of the earth is made of nougat because you've never been there. Equality is an idea that helps us organize the dirt in which we live. It's impossible to make a point.... I've found that the more audio vocabulary I learned in the past year or so, the better able I was at noticing differences in components, placement, recordings, etc. If you put me in front of my RF-3's next to a pair of Aerial Acoustics 6's a year ago, all I would be able to tell you after 1 hour of listening is that the Aerial's sound clearer and with more bass. Put me in front of the same speakers today for 15 minutes, and I can tell you that the Aerials are better balanced, are more laid-back, reproduce more detail, have tighter and more bass, project a wider and deeper soundstage, are more dynamic, less bright, have a much darker background, etc. Have me compare Kimber 8tc and the wee-thin compact stereo wire, and the available vocabulary diminishes quite a bit. Darker background, more detail, and approaches faster dynamics. Put me in front of those cables a year ago, and I'd be lucky to notice the darker background. Maybe some o' y'all just can't walk the talk.... We need to determine exhaustively what aspects of the electrical signal are relevant to the stereo system's reproduction of music, before we start quoting identical measurements between Nordost Valhalla cable and grandpa's barbed wire fence. Otherwise, you might as well tell me that there's no difference because you measured the lengths of the cables and they were identical. After that gargantuan task is accomplished, we can ask ourselves how the various characteristics of cable affect such relevant aspects of the electrical signal. Otherwise, it's just he said, she said, he said with his eyes closed, she said with her eyes closed twice. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discorules Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 quote: Originally posted by Prana-Bindu: It seems rather funny to me that the absence of an explanation for a perceived difference in a particular vocabulary (that of electronics or physics, e.g.) leads to the assumption of equality. What then, is the math and measurement that leads to the conclusion that there is no difference? If we're going to be strict about our demand for the vocabulary of cause and effect, we cannot resolve the issue speaking of people's perceptions (including double-blind tests or any other hopeless attempt to quantify the judgments of taste). After all, depending on what I ate 30 minutes ago, she loves me... she loves me not... she loves me... . Nevertheless, if no explanation in such vocabulary is available, it is reasonable to conjecture that there is absolutely no difference? That's like believing the core of the earth is made of nougat because you've never been there. Equality is an idea that helps us organize the dirt in which we live. It's impossible to make a point.... I've found that the more audio vocabulary I learned in the past year or so, the better able I was at noticing differences in components, placement, recordings, etc. If you put me in front of my RF-3's next to a pair of Aerial Acoustics 6's a year ago, all I would be able to tell you after 1 hour of listening is that the Aerial's sound clearer and with more bass. Put me in front of the same speakers today for 15 minutes, and I can tell you that the Aerials are better balanced, are more laid-back, reproduce more detail, have tighter and more bass, project a wider and deeper soundstage, are more dynamic, less bright, have a much darker background, etc. Have me compare Kimber 8tc and the wee-thin compact stereo wire, and the available vocabulary diminishes quite a bit. Darker background, more detail, and approaches faster dynamics. Put me in front of those cables a year ago, and I'd be lucky to notice the darker background. Maybe some o' y'all just can't walk the talk.... We need to determine exhaustively what aspects of the electrical signal are relevant to the stereo system's reproduction of music, before we start quoting identical measurements between Nordost Valhalla cable and grandpa's barbed wire fence. Otherwise, you might as well tell me that there's no difference because you measured the lengths of the cables and they were identical. After that gargantuan task is accomplished, we can ask ourselves how the various characteristics of cable affect such relevant aspects of the electrical signal. Otherwise, it's just he said, she said, he said with his eyes closed, she said with her eyes closed twice. Whoa! Lots a words there Prana! To put it more simply, you seem to be putting the cart before the horse. Basically if you or any other group of people can tell the difference between exotic cables and Home Depot 12 gauge specials using double blind test then yea, go ahead and do research for the scientific reasons. However to do research on unfounded claims or based on less than objective sources when they are readily available is fool hardy and not worth investigating. If the cables make a difference folks believe they hear perceived differences then no amount science will make a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forresthump Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 discosucks, you're going too far with the quote thing. makes me question anything you say. We do have the capacity to read previous posts. ------------------ go forth & hump the world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2K Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 P-B, they can't HEAR you! Keith This message has been edited by talktoKeith on 09-14-2001 at 01:42 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 Prana---DBTs don't only test for preference, they also test for difference. Do you hear a difference or not is the question, simple. If you can't hear a difference when you don't know which wire is being used and don't even know if the wires have actually even been switched then there's no difference. John Dunlavey, a serious scientific guy who makes speakers I don't like, has some amusing stories about listening tests and wires, he tells people he's switching wires when he isn't and some people still hear an "improvement". You must establish the reality of the difference before preference can be taken seriously. Your newfound audiophile vocabulary is beside the point but you can use it to read back issues of Absolute Sound. People's perceptions aren't much help if we're trying to arrive at hard physical fact, Bernadette perceived that she saw The Virgin but I don't expect most people to put any faith in that (though her uncorrupted body gives pause). And madmen perceive many things, Son of Sam perceived that a dog talked to him, he would have made a good wire salesman. I suppose some audiophiles would argue that if Son of Sam enjoyed being talked to by the dog that's all that matters. You do some DBTs Prana, put your beliefs on the line, prove them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 Keith--I hear Prana, I don't agree with him though, not agreeing and not hearing are not the same thing. Interesting that you choose to be symbolized by a big empty mouth. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warren Posted September 14, 2001 Author Share Posted September 14, 2001 Ray-I appreciate that you took the time to try educate a "fool" but I no longer visit hifi stores. They make me ill. I buy used gear and, if I can't buy it, I make it. In all honesty-I have no patience for "subtlety (sp?)". I attend symphonies, I've listened to the biggest pipe organs in the world, both here in USA and abroad. I know EXACTLY what makes musical reproduction fun for me and it definetly IS NOT fancy cables or hot-rodded crossover networks. Like aircraft engines, it comes down to moving air and for me, the more the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prana-Bindu Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 I doubt that any of us dispute the fact that paying $5000 for two 8ft runs of space-age, Ron-Popeil-certified God-wire goes a long way to convincing people that they hear a difference. It goes just as far as double blind tests go to convincing someone that his/her perceptions are unfettered by bias or any other expectations. DBT's may add the bias that one's senses are free of error. My point about the vocabulary of them fancy-lad magazines is that the differences of which we speak are so subtle/obscure/minute that they tend to remain unnoticed until we look for them specifically. If you show me two aerial photos of a section of a stadium filled with Nebraska football fans (even in a double blind format) and you ask me if I notice any differences between the two photos (especially if the photos were taken very far away -- as if with a cheap clock radio), I'll only be able (at best) to notice if one photo includes a big "Notre Dame Sucks" banner and the other doesn't. Even if the photos were taken with the best camera out there (such as those fancy-lad Mark Levinson cameras with the neat round platic buttons), the differences identified would be relatively huge: the pejorative banner, that there are more people wearing red on the right upper corner in one of the photos, etc. If, instead, the question to the viewer is "Do you notice a difference in the number of white people between the two photos?", that difference, if any, will be identified. Without that question, most people wouldn't ever bring it up -- unless it was obvious. None of the differences I've ever noticed between wires would be obvious, to the uninitiated (I love that word). Double blind tests don't prove that there is no difference in the sound of cables; they only prove that the particular listener did or didn't identify any. To lack mathematic proof that different cables carry a signal differently with sonically relevant results and thereby conjecture that all cables produce equal sound is the same mistake one makes when one conjectures that cables do color the sound differently from that same lack. Otherwise, we can stay away from scientific vocabulary and start talkin' in terms of sense perception, and no amount of blinding our prejudices will make our own hearing uniform or free from all bias. After all, if you participate in the DBT already believing or suspecting that cables don't make a difference, how free from bias are you? It's very easy to ignore the minutiae that make this nightmarish hobby such a joy. If electrical signals are so simple to understand, what characteristics of the electrical signal going through the cables are relevant to the system's ability to reproduce music? Does it's smell matter? Does the amount of energy required to break the valence bonds matter? What about the color of the shielding? If we're not gonna use the vocabulary of electricity to answer these questions, we're just conjecturing. I suspect we don't yet have an exhaustive list of electrical phenomena that are relevant to the reproduction of music, but I'm sure NASA is on it. ------------------ May the bridges we burn light our way.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2K Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 TBrennen, you are correct sir! The mouth is empty because I learned long ago not to waste my time arguing with fools such as yourself! You seem to like personal attacks,so there you go. Keith ------------------ KSP-300 FL/R KSP-C6 CENTER SW8II C/SUB KSP-S6 SURR KSP300 SB SW12II SONY KP53XBR35 RP DENON 3801 DENON DVD3300 DVD-AUDIO SONY MDP455 LDP ACURUS 125X5 ACURUS 100X3 MONDIAL M.A.G.I.C. BOX PANAMAX MAX 1000 PANAMAX COAXMAX (2) AQ SLATE AQ COPPERHEAD AQ SIDEWINDER AQ VSD TRIBUTARIES S-VIDEO MONSTER INT.400MKIII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 John, ??? Not sure what I posted that you were responding to... particularly the part about educating fools... hope that's not the way anything I wrote came across, and if it is, I really apologise, didn't mean that at all. I agree with you about used equipment. My whole system, with the exception of the DVD Player, the Musical Fidelity X-10D tube buffer that I use to make the DVD player quasi-listenable, and Al's crossovers, is built from cool stuff I found on EBay or on used equipment shelves at my local dealer. 1974 version La Scalas, Rotel integrated amp from 1985, Thorens TD320 turntable, etc. ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discorules Posted September 14, 2001 Share Posted September 14, 2001 quote: Originally posted by forresthump: discosucks, you're going too far with the quote thing. makes me question anything you say. We do have the capacity to read previous posts. Since your name implies an IQ smaller than small feet, I include quotes to allow you to follow. Perhaps even long quotes is more than you can handle. 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.