HiFi/Highend/Audio Gear

I personally can't hear any difference using different reasonable quality connectors/speaker cables/power leads/digital cables. OTOH some studios hard solder all interconnects but that might actually come down to connection reliability more than sound quality.

 

The difference is there between interconnects and speaker cables. Sometimes I think it's a matter of getting to hear good vs bad as opposed to bad vs bad. We also live in a world where some people think all amps sound the same, so naturally there's no hope for cables.

 

What's crazy is there are some interconnects that are directional meaning it's preferred to connect one end to the input and the other to the output (you see an arrow on the cable pointing in that direction).

 

I haven't A/B'd the difference myself but some claim they can hear the difference even if it's not an intentional A/B.

 

A lot of this cable thing may be psychological. If you want to absolutely hear a difference with cables then try putting the speakers out of phase (simply switch the cable connection at your speaker terminals assuming it is right to begin with )

 

The difference is dramatic. One sounds normal, the other out of focus and strange. I would say most people could tell the difference if you A/B'd it for them.

Spent 25+ years around construction equipment and I'm lucky I can hear a police siren

 

Did OSHA crack down on hearing protection on job sites back then?

 

Those exposure limits they publish are pretty accurate I would imagine.

I personally can't hear any difference using different reasonable quality connectors/speaker cables/power leads/digital cables. OTOH some studios hard solder all interconnects but that might actually come down to connection reliability more than sound quality.

 

I don't either, or even if I do or would, it's not really one of my top priorities in life to "listen to different cables".

 

I just wanted custom cables with enough quality to them, minimum possible length, that look like my old cables (cause the are mixed with them because of needed lengths).

And ViaBlue was able to do it for not so much money to the finest detail I wanted.

 

I am sure hard soldering is very good option if installs are final and solid.

Not a good solution in normal home environment.

 

 

Spent 25+ years around construction equipment and I'm lucky I can hear a police siren

Spent 13 years visiting construction sites and spent even longer dj:ng. I'm just lucky to hear something.

 

My father spent his whole career next to construction equip and he's hearing isn't good at all anymore, always thinking how I'm going to hear when I get older, just because being at rave parties and playing music loud has been what I have done.

 

/offtopic

A lot of this cable thing may be psychological.

 

Make that: 'A lot of this HiFi/Highend/Audio Gear' stuff most definitely is psychological

 

If you want to absolutely hear a difference with cables then try putting the speakers out of phase (simply switch the cable connection at your speaker terminals assuming it is right to begin with )

 

The difference is dramatic. One sounds normal, the other out of focus and strange. I would say most people could tell the difference if you A/B'd it for them.

 

Yes, out of phase speakers will not sound correct, but that has nothing to do with the cables.

 

The difference is there between interconnects and speaker cables. Sometimes I think it's a matter of getting to hear good vs bad as opposed to bad vs bad. We also live in a world where some people think all amps sound the same, so naturally there's no hope for cables.

 

What's crazy is there are some interconnects that are directional meaning it's preferred to connect one end to the input and the other to the output (you see an arrow on the cable pointing in that direction).

 

I haven't A/B'd the difference myself but some claim they can hear the difference even if it's not an intentional A/B.

 

A lot of this cable thing may be psychological.

 

I have heard bad cables. They were either too long non-balanced signal lead, not the correct gauge speaker lead for the job or had bad shielding. If you look at cabling used in studios you will notice it's really nothing special eg. there are single leads that contain 8 analogue channels (DB25 or D-Sub connector) which are used on some high end audio interfaces. Another thing to look at is inside an amplifier and trace the amp outputs as they come off the transistors and how they are connected to the rear panel, and how the inputs are treated. Again, nothing special.

 

Cable can only be broken down to is resistance/impedance, inductance and capacitance values, they don't have different values depending on which direction they were measured. Directional interconnects: complete marketing bs.

 

No doubt expensive cables look good and can make installations easier and nicer to use but I havn't seen any tests done with real data to show that high end audio cables sound better than just normal quality leads. If a difference exists it will show up as some type of signal distortion, or a source/amp/speaker combo will behave differently.

Directional interconnects actually aren't marketing bs. While it's true that the conductors carry the same signal in either direction, directional cables have the shielding grounded at only one end. The idea is that grounding the shielding to the source will result in less noise getting through. I suspect the difference probably isn't audible unless you're in an area with a lot of RF interference, but the cables are built and marked that way for a reason.

Did OSHA crack down on hearing protection on job sites back then?

 

Those exposure limits they publish are pretty accurate I would imagine.

BACK THEN?!

Directional interconnects actually aren't marketing bs. While it's true that the conductors carry the same signal in either direction, directional cables have the shielding grounded at only one end. The idea is that grounding the shielding to the source will result in less noise getting through. I suspect the difference probably isn't audible unless you're in an area with a lot of RF interference, but the cables are built and marked that way for a reason.

 

Cheers, for a minute I thought someone was marketing directional cables in another way!

 

Interconnects with the shield only connected at one end can get rid of a ground loop or hum if there is an issue.

Directional interconnects actually aren't marketing bs. While it's true that the conductors carry the same signal in either direction, directional cables have the shielding grounded at only one end. The idea is that grounding the shielding to the source will result in less noise getting through. I suspect the difference probably isn't audible unless you're in an area with a lot of RF interference, but the cables are built and marked that way for a reason.

 

 

Interconnects with the shield only connected at one end can get rid of a ground loop or hum if there is an issue.

 

And that's where "star grounding" comes in as well.

 

There are huge differences in cables but charging high-4 to 5-figures for them is ludicrous, let alone paying for them. Ultimately, it's all matching. One does not need to drop $$$ to get seriuously good sound. in fact, one of the best sounding cable is available at your local Rado Shack store. Generally speaking, copper cable offers "warmer. slower sound" while silver cable offers "brighter and faster sound". Connectors also makes a difference but again it is not a mythical and mystical as some marketing guru claims. In a very crude way, it's like motor oil. Techinically, it's just lubricant but there is an abudance of science behind it and there are plenty of differences between grades.

I have heard bad cables. They were either too long non-balanced signal lead, not the correct gauge speaker lead for the job or had bad shielding. If you look at cabling used in studios you will notice it's really nothing special eg. there are single leads that contain 8 analogue channels (DB25 or D-Sub connector) which are used on some high end audio interfaces. Another thing to look at is inside an amplifier and trace the amp outputs as they come off the transistors and how they are connected to the rear panel, and how the inputs are treated. Again, nothing special.

 

Cable can only be broken down to is resistance/impedance, inductance and capacitance values, they don't have different values depending on which direction they were measured. Directional interconnects: complete marketing bs.

 

No doubt expensive cables look good and can make installations easier and nicer to use but I havn't seen any tests done with real data to show that high end audio cables sound better than just normal quality leads. If a difference exists it will show up as some type of signal distortion, or a source/amp/speaker combo will behave differently.

 

Sounds much too logical for this thread!

 

Hearing is subjective - measurements are not.

 

Show me the data!

 

(In particular I'd like to see data that shows the difference between 'fast' and 'slow' sound as a result of cable choice !

My apartment is reasonably small so I have no real need for a surround sound AV system. That said, I would like a high quality source for listening to music. Currently considering this, which seems to check a lot of boxes http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/us/Collections...attanCollection

One thing I will say is that the price seems a bit hard to justify (think ~$7.5k)

 

Thoughts?

If the measurements are all that matter, why have a Lambo instead of a ZR1 or GTR? When it comes to hobbies, the subjective things are important. Nobody needs a high end stereo to live, so if something that's purely subjective increases your enjoyment enough to justify the cost, any arguments about measurements or double blind tests seem pretty irrelevant to me.

 

For what it's worth, the "fast" cables I've heard had both a very low dielectric constant and a very high signal propagation velocity. The cables sound very lively and dynamic, as if there is less smearing or blurring of the initial attack of a note. Of course, I don't have any scientific data to back that up, since I bought my stereo to listen to music on, not to measure.

 

 

If the measurements are all that matter, why have a Lambo instead of a ZR1 or GTR? When it comes to hobbies, the subjective things are important. Nobody needs a high end stereo to live, so if something that's purely subjective increases your enjoyment enough to justify the cost, any arguments about measurements or double blind tests seem pretty irrelevant to me.

 

For what it's worth, the "fast" cables I've heard had both a very low dielectric constant and a very high signal propagation velocity. The cables sound very lively and dynamic, as if there is less smearing or blurring of the initial attack of a note. Of course, I don't have any scientific data to back that up, since I bought my stereo to listen to music on, not to measure.

 

 

You buy equipment to listen to music right? You can't feel the music like you can feel the way a car drives and it would be a bit strange to buy a nice amplifier or cable to just look at it every now and then.

 

Typical marketing I've seen brings up factors that effect radio frequencies, not audio. No need to measure anything yourself, if anything is worth measuring someone else out there on the net will have already done it. At least in my experience it helps to know the measurable reasons behind what improves the sound and I don't like getting sold something that does nothing for a problem that doesn't exist.

Make that: 'A lot of this HiFi/Highend/Audio Gear' stuff most definitely is psychological

 

 

 

Yes, out of phase speakers will not sound correct, but that has nothing to do with the cables.

 

Of course...

 

But I wanted to rattle people a bit.

You buy equipment to listen to music right? You can't feel the music like you can feel the way a car drives and it would be a bit strange to buy a nice amplifier or cable to just look at it every now and then.

 

Typical marketing I've seen brings up factors that effect radio frequencies, not audio. No need to measure anything yourself, if anything is worth measuring someone else out there on the net will have already done it. At least in my experience it helps to know the measurable reasons behind what improves the sound and I don't like getting sold something that does nothing for a problem that doesn't exist.

 

Joe, you have the right intent but audio is one of those areas that defies science to a degree and becomes as much an art as anything else.

 

The simple explanation to why that is, is that if it was really all about science and engineering, every speaker/amplifier/audio manufacturer would all have the same high end sound.

 

What's supposedly "correct" by an EE is often not the best sounding. I'm almost certain Western Electric and Audio Note amps have more distortion than a typical Audioquest amp, and guess what?

 

You can keep the Audioquest amp all day, thank you very much.

 

I apologize if I come off harsh here, but it's taxing to continuously hear the "numbers are more important than the sound" debate.

 

The world would be completely digital and solid state. Analog and tube amps would have died and never come back.

 

BTW, as some of you probably know I have a degree in EE and am licensed in it too. I should in principle be the biggest advocate of the science, but not in this scenario. I've heard too many good things that don't "measure well" to be convinced otherwise.

 

I propose that the science has yet to explain why distortion is pleasing to the ears or how come digital despite a theoretical 30-40 dB advantage in dynamic range rarely ever seems that way over analog (usually less dynamic, lol). I have my ideas, but won't bore anyone with them.

 

The reality is that it is very intimidating and a powerless feeling to not being able to logically decipher through this stuff just based on specs and engineering alone. It is essentially the only "technology" I can think of that is like that. High end televisions might be like that, but not sure.

 

So naturally people are going to want to dismiss the idea of hearing is more important than the science. And with a trillion products out there, it's difficult for most to hear everything.

 

The closest thing I can think of that people on here could relate to is why a Lamborghini or Ferrari is more "special" than a car with comparable performance. What equation do you use to dial in the exhaust sound of a 670 SV or a 599 GTO? Or the chassis feel of a Carrera GT?

 

And also, how no matter how powerful you make a Ferrari or Lambo they rarely ever have that gut pulling feel of torque like a big block POS or Viper. But the 1/4 mile times are slower?!

Here's a little science that shouldn't make sense.....but does after some thought:

 

A certain reel to reel tape deck has a top end response of 17 kHz, but sounds better than one that tops out closer to 19-20 kHz.

 

The typical marketing suggests we need to hear from negative 10 hz to 300 mhz...lol...even when it's shown that only young teens can hear past 17khz with any level of consistency, and mostly middle age and older people can really hear/feel low frequencies (sub 30 hz) better than young people.

 

What is typically the case is that you don't need much above 15-16khz as those harmonics usually are harsher sounding anyways.

 

Also by losing top end you in effect "add midrange", which is desirable.

 

Now obviously I'm not making a blanket statement about all gear that rolls off at 17k sounds better than those that do at 20, but if I was say comparing two headphones sight unseen (unheard) of the same brand/model range and had to take a leap of faith, I would get the 17k model.

Fellippe, there is no point advocating. People will believe what they want and disbelieve otherwise. It's just another one of those chapters in the hi-fi world where each side can argue until Judgement Day and there still won't be a definitive answer.

 

At the end of the day, it's the music that matters. If someone find it satisfactory to the sound quality of his boom box, great and congrats. We are, on the other hand, a bit more discern with the accuracy of our music.

 

If anyone needs science, there are plenty to support: micro-phonics, conductivity, metallurgy, impedance, inductance, RF interference, electrical and mechanical grounding etc... I admit that some looks and seem pretty wacky but there are physics to support it. On the other hand, better measurements does not translate to better-sounding music. The human brain is an intriguing organ. Remember 30years ago when the Compact Disc came out and it was suppose to be THE perfect thing to sound, i.e. we only need 16bit (max) processing at 44.1kHz, if it was perfect, then why all the new media and sampling frequencies/rates that followed and continued to be developed? And one does not need to be an audiophile to notice that a good and properly setup turntable still sounds better a CD. With all the wows and flutter, vinyl imperfections, analog signals vs. almost zero wows and flutter, optical digital signal etc..., how's that even possible? And yet, vinyl is still clearly superior. (Note: superior in terms of sound quality, I did not say convenience, maintenance, availability etc...)

I still have a passion for music and wished to join the conversation.

 

I say that as long as the stereo system replicates sounds/ emulates a real musical instrument ....you have won.

 

That would include the natural volume level an instument...including of a drum set to a tambourine.

 

Seems to me eliminating vibrations is one of the major goals. Not only on the speaker cabinets, but on any room furnishings.

 

Lastly, if you like rock and roll, back in the 50, 60 and 70 guitar (etc) amplifiers had a "hum" when on. It can be proper on playback that the hum is present.

 

(One of the "fun" things I used to do was to always listen for Ringo and Bonham's squeaky bass drum pedal).

 

Anyway thanks for memories of this hobby.

so if something that's purely subjective increases your enjoyment enough to justify the cost, any arguments about measurements or double blind tests seem pretty irrelevant to me.

 

That's great news! ( I have some extremely high-end audio gear for sale. Take my word for it, it sounds amazing and costs a fortune!!! PM me for details!)

 

For what it's worth, the "fast" cables I've heard had both a very low dielectric constant and a very high signal propagation velocity. The cables sound very lively and dynamic, as if there is less smearing or blurring of the initial attack of a note. Of course, I don't have any scientific data to back that up,

 

Of course.......

 

 

 

 

The simple explanation to why that is, is that if it was really all about science and engineering, every speaker/amplifier/audio manufacturer would all have the same high end sound.

 

 

Yes, but there is no money in that....

 

 

Here's a little science that shouldn't make sense.....but does after some thought:

 

A certain reel to reel tape deck has a top end response of 17 kHz, but sounds better than one that tops out closer to 19-20 kHz.

 

Sounds better? Sounds better according to who? According to what criteria? What was the source material? You see where I'm coming from? 'Better' is just as ambiguous as 'faster'; 'slower'...

 

 

 

And yet, vinyl is still clearly superior.

 

Whoaaa!!! You just said that out loud

 

Should we try to keep this thread on more positive note.

As we have every other hifi audio site for this typical fighting about cables etc.

But LP has been always about good spirits.

Should we try to keep this thread on more positive note.

As we have every other hifi audio site for this typical fighting about cables etc.

But LP has been always about good spirits.

 

 

Those of us who enjoy high end audio have already heard all the arguments anyway, and have decided to trust our own senses.

Sounds better? Sounds better according to who? According to what criteria? What was the source material? You see where I'm coming from? 'Better' is just as ambiguous as 'faster'; 'slower'...

 

I hate to ruffle feathers, but you know the same kind of "taste" that says a Porsche Carrera GT is a better driving car (more pure) than a Nissan GTR, lap times be damned?

 

Well, in audio there is pretty much a "correct" sound and an "incorrect" sound.

 

A strong midrange presence, and smooth top end roll off is correct.

 

A bright top end with the midrange/midbass sucked out and too much subbass is incorrect, or shall I say "sucks".

 

Somewhere treble got associated with detail.....I don't know why, but it seems to be that way in many circles. To a novice listener it usually is more impressive, but not to one with more experience. Just listening to the two systems back to back, one causes listening fatigue, the other doesn't. It's shocking what I used to like 10 years ago, let alone 5.

 

Within what I consider good sound, there's variance and acceptable preference. A little more weight vs. a little more openness....a little less treble or a little more treble. A bit of a midbass hump vs. a flatter bass response. This stuff is fine. Nobody is suggesting there is a definitive pecking order of all gear that is out there or one sound that is absolutely correct.

 

But there is a context of good vs. bad, ESPECIALLY when dealing with huge price variances. An F12 vs. Aventador for comparable prices is one thing....but imagine buying an Aventador for $80k vs. a Nissan GTR for $400k???

 

That is the audio world in a nutshell. You can buy a brand new 911 for $25k or a new Accord for $80k. See it all the damn time. Go to CES or any audio show and it's there.

 

Usually what happens is the big brand names cater more to style conscious, savvy people who read the Stereophiles, Absolute Sounds, etc. They put a lot of fancy engineering concepts and terms in their marketing literature, and in order to pay for the advertising (only way to get real reviews) they have to mark up the gear a lot more than the boutique manufacturers...

 

The idea that taste is subjective is correct but it's also not living in reality. Watches, scotch, wine, cigars all carry their high levels of elitism and to a good extent those who really know will tend to agree with what is better. The market for very expensive vintage cars is for the most part "correct".

 

I don't know a ton about watches like others, but do know that Rolex is seen as high end to the masses, whereas AP, Patek, is seen as high end to those in the know. And usually they cost way more and are "less impressive" to the masses because they're usually not as flashy. Most people don't tend to get watches from what I hear.

 

So that's where I'm coming from.

 

I've spent lots of money on junk, so I speak from experience. I am extremely fortunate to be under very good guidance and exposure, leveraging a few people's talents. I only speak passionately because I love this stuff and want others to love it too.

 

We're all open to our opinions and you're welcome to disagree with me. I just ask that you (people in general) at least listen to the gear when making comparisons instead of just analyzing it on paper.

 

 

 

Joe, you have the right intent but audio is one of those areas that defies science to a degree and becomes as much an art as anything else.

 

The simple explanation to why that is, is that if it was really all about science and engineering, every speaker/amplifier/audio manufacturer would all have the same high end sound.

 

I'm saying, probably not very concisely, that if there is an actual real difference in sound quality in whatever shape or form, it is measurable and the cause of the difference is also real. I'm not saying there is a "perfect" sound quality, but if you know what you like, knowing what makes that type of sound helps.

 

Different amps, different speakers, and different mediums all have very real measured differences, no argument there. Your amplifier analogy, well, tube amps add even order harmonic distortion with most of it at half the frequency of the fundamental, which makes sound richer and warmer, like playing 2 notes on a piano an octave apart with the lower note much softer but present. Solid state adds odd order harmonics (at a much much lower level) but odd order harmonics always sound harsh, like playing 2 or more notes together out of key. The vinyl sound is mostly eq but with some types of added distortions, tape as well, 16bit 44.1k has high freq limitations without a soft roll off ect etc I can go on about all sorts of things that are real. There is always a cause of the difference in sound quality and it is measurable.

 

Should we try to keep this thread on more positive note.

As we have every other hifi audio site for this typical fighting about cables etc.

But LP has been always about good spirits.

 

It's all in good nature. When I get around to it I'll do some more listening tests and see if I can hear any differences