Cables - expensive ones better?

[patrickt]

Are expensive interconnects and speaker cables any better than cheap, but well made ones? What are your thoughts as I've read a lot and cannot find consensus. :confused: I did think this site was esp. good though

http://sound.westhost.com/cables.htm

[JamesB]

I found the site interesting too, thanks for that link.

I concur with the assertion in the "interconnects" page to use home made ones. It is easy to buy appropriate and high quality materials off the 'net to allow you to do this. I have had a lot of success with 30AWG silver wire brought from www.homegrownaudio.com, and high quality (top of the line WBT and Cardas) RCA plugs from www.welbornelabs.com.

To cut a long story short: I'm using the interconnects I have made myself in leiu of $500 - $1000NZ commercial cables. In my system I prefer my cables to Magnan Type VI, Nordost Blue Heaven, and Stealth PGS (all of which I own). I do not doubt that the really expensive cables (Nordost Valhalla, Siltech Compass Lake) are awesome however below that price point I think you can do as well as or perhaps better then most commercial cables - but at a fraction of the cost.

My advise if buying commercial speaker cables or interconnects is to buy off audiogon (www.audiogon.com). I have brought a number of cables here with at least 50% discount from the new price. A thing to remember though is that customs will add GST to the price (including postage) when they get posted into the country.

[Michael Jones]

I would redine your question as: Do cables sound different?

In my experience, the answer is yes. I've been happy to spend money on "audiophile" interconnects and speaker cables because I heard an improvement in the reproduction of my music.

As you may have found, cables are still a controversial topic, some two decades after "cable sound" was first debated.

I find it instructive that in the cable "debates" you'll find in newsgroups, the vitriolic, insulting and nasty comments inevitably come from those who believe that cables do not sound different - or at least should not. The people who listen to the differences between cables are usually quite happy to go with what their ears tell them. The people who insists that cables sound them same aren't happy with their own views; instead they insist that everyone else must share those views as well.

I'm quite happy with the cables I bought. I'm also quite happy if people hear no difference between cables, or even if they believe that cables cannot make a difference to the sound - even if they've never tested their beliefs. Contrast this with the anti-cable brigade, who see such a "live and let live" attitude as a sign of the devil at work!

Many hi-fi specialist retailers are quite happy to loan out cables so you can try them out in your own system. If you like the difference, then you have the choice of purchasing them. If you don't hear any difference, then you're out nothing.

[Craig F]

I'm a cable believer but I don't thing that you have to spend a lot or look to far from your own backyard to find something very good. Slinkylinks do the job for me and I'd suggest that if you decide to buy cables rather than make your own these are worth a go. I replaced some very expensive Audioquest cables as after I heard the slinkylinks the AQ's just didn't hack it. If you do get around to trying cables, please don't put yourself through the tedious a/b comparisons time and time again. Let whatever cable you're trying sit in the system for as long as possible, then change back. A/B tests with cables will drive you nuts.

Cheers,

Craig.

[patrickt]

Thanks guys for all your responses, links and thoughts on this seemingly controversial topic

I think I'll look at all the options; trying some out from shops and also looking into homemade, and then see what happens.
I'll get back to you later on with my results, if I end up with the anti-cable brigade, I promise not to lynch pro-cablers :D

One more question, which I hope is more clear-cut...What’s better, banana plugs, spades or bare wire?
Ok two questions, why were DIN cables/inputs etc. dropped?

[Michael Jones]

Originally posted by patrickt
One more question, which I hope is more clear-cut...What’s better, banana plugs, spades or bare wire?
Ok two questions, why were DIN cables/inputs etc. dropped?

Bare wire can oxidise, so don't go for that. You can use either bananas or spades, which ever you prefer. You should solder the cables to the connectors, or heavily crimp the cable to a spade connector.

DIN was (and probably still is) a European standard for connecting, much like scart is for European TVs. I don't know that the standard was dropped (Naim still use DIN connectors). More likely that DIN was overwhelmed in the marketplace by RCA connections.

[SeanF]

Some people do not notice any difference with A/B cable comparisons.

My opinion is it comes down to 2 major factors.

1) Your hearing
2) Your system I.e. How revealing it is

I have spent 10 years experimenting with different interconnect cable brands. 8 years ago I decided to do some cable research and soon after started making my own.
I spent a great deal of time trying different designs and materials.
The end result is I always use my own cables over commercial ones. The reason: They are 'tuned' to MY system and I know the type of sound I prefer.

With all my research and trial and error listening sessions I ended up with one distinct conclusion-> One cable is not necessarily better than another.

Let me quantify this statement a little.

An interconnect is a component. As such it will ‘change’ the original signal that is passed to it. Think of it as a filter. All sorts of changes happen to the audio signal as it passes through the different material layers. I.e. the plugs, solder and interaction with the insulation. (The most critical element is material boundaries like solder joints or contacts of dissimilar material).

(Lab tests will not quantify this to any great degree, heck I was once told by an electrical engineer that lighting cable is just as good for speaker cables as expensive ‘name brand’ offerings.)

It is true some people simply cannot tell the difference in listening tests. But for me, changing an interconnect or speaker cable on my system is like changing the system itself-->A very tangible and audible difference.

I believe a cable needs to match a system. E.g. If you have a rather bright sounding system, a set of pure silver interconnects is going to make it appear brighter. Unless you have some serious high frequency hearing loss, you would be better off with a cooper solution. (simplist example)

Anyway I am not here to preach, just enlighten you on some of my experiences.
At the end of the day, let your ears influence your decisions, not marketing or hype.

Regs,

-Sean.

[Craig F]

Interesting stuff Sean. I have enough technical knowledge, ability and inclination to be able to use the yellow pages to get somebody in to fix or make or sell me anything I require. I wouldn't even consider making cables for myself, no matter how many people tell me how easy it is to do and how good the results are. I tend to agree that a lot of cables are different rather than being better, but doesn't this hold for quite a lot of products in hi-fi?

The only thing that I have possibly had a different experience to you is in the silver cables. I've found mine to have very little tonal signature at all but they just let more of the music through. A lot of people suggest that silver cables are bright and thin sounding, but perhaps it's like a lot of things - you can impliment well or badly.

Cheers,

Craig.

P.S. Have you tried the Eichmann plug for your cables? Damn near all plastic which apparently is a good thing.

[jmarshall]

Firstly, I am not here to judge anyone, and if you hear a difference between various different cables, then good for you. Incidently, I too can hear the difference between cable - but it is comparing a short 12 gauge speaker cable with a very long one made of bell wire - there was a clear difference :)

The main problem I have with cable companies is that NONE of them (to my knowledge) make anything else in Hi-Fi other than cables, and the vast majority of them don't even make (or design) the cables they are selling. There are only a few real cable design companies in the world, everyone else sources components from these few companies, and adds some fancy looking jackets, connectors and marketing.

Surely if a cable company can drastically improve (or even subtlely improve) such an innocuous component as a piece of wire, imagine what they could do to improve the design of an amplifier! Why don't they do this? It makes you wonder, doesn't it??

Interconnects are only there to transfer a voltage reference from one piece of equipment to the other. This is a low-level signal that travels down a copper PCB trace, and through a multitude of components in either piece of your equipment. It is extraordinary the way the interconnect can claim to influence the sound! Surely these people should be designing better resistors, capacitors, PCB layouts etc.

If you can hear (or even if you just think you hear) the difference between two different interconnects, then good for you - it was a worthy investment. Just PLEASE don't go overboard!

Cheers,
Jonathan

PS: I am more than happy to build good quality interconnects for people if they want them. I'll only charge cost on the parts, and say $50 an hour for labour. The average interconnect takes less than 30 minutes for me to build, so it won't cost you too much!

[Craig F]

I know that cables are a contentious subject with strong proponents on either side of the argument. My way of looking at most anything in hi-fi is that if a given product or tweak or whatever brings more enjoyment to the listener then that's the main thing. If that involves spending more than the value of my car on cables then so be it. Equally if it involves spending $30 making your own cables then so be it. I hear differences and improvements so I'm happy buying what I consider to be good cable. I can't presume to speak for what other people hear so each to their own.

With regards to cable manufacturers not moving into amps etc, I think you'll find that quite a few quietly rewire existing products and that George Cardas especially has his wire used in a number of speakers, amps etc. Amp manufacturers with their apparent great understanding of electronics don't tend to make their own caps, resistors etc, they do what they do best.

But again, whatever brings the listener more enjoyment from the music can't be a bad thing.

Cheers,

Craig.

[jmarshall]

But again, whatever brings the listener more enjoyment from the music can't be a bad thing.

The only bad thing is that some people are knowingly scamming people. Unfortunately that is a consequence of supply and demand. If there exists people with money to burn, they will do so!

As for the cable companies being involved in modifying equipment, surely it must be said: If they know enough to modify it to make it better, surely they could design a better product from the outset!! I'm not disputing that various improvements can be made to equipment, however one must look at the worthiness of the endeavour in comparison to genuinely designing a better product. It is amusing that the main proponents of the cable debunking crowd are the very people with the knowledge to make these decisions - the Electrical Engineers and Physicists. But, as per usual in life, people far prefer blind faith to hard fact. (Why otherwise would we have casinos? These are designed based on 2 things: 1. The FACT of probability theory, 2. The FACT that people would rather BELIEVE that they are luckier than everyone else. Note that the person sitting next to them is also thinking this same thought.)

Once again, I guess it comes down to supply and demand. The demand ofcourse is fueled by the press and it's unceasing praise of the most expensive product and tweaks available. How can the system that I currently have be any good when there are all these other products that cost 100 times as much receiving such accolades?? Quotes like "and so it should at this price point" are my personal favourites. It is IMPOSSIBLE to present a fair, unbiased opinion when comments such as this are included.

[Michael Jones]

Originally posted by jmarshall
The only bad thing is that some people are knowingly scamming people.

Who is being scammed? Audio retailers loan out cables so that people can see if they hear a difference in their own system. Isn't this the ultimate test? Is this the ultimate defence against being scammed?


Originally posted by jmarshall
As for the cable companies being involved in modifying equipment, surely it must be said: If they know enough to modify it to make it better, surely they could design a better product from the outset!!

I'm not sure why you're talking about cable manufacturers modifying equipment, as I don't know of any that do. They do supply cables to manufactuers of amplifiers and speakers, who choose to use these cables. Perhaps you also believe that amplifier and speaker manufacturers are stupid, or are being scammed?



Originally posted by jmarshall
It is amusing that the main proponents of the cable debunking crowd are the very people with the knowledge to make these decisions - the Electrical Engineers and Physicists.

My experience is different. The main proponent of cable debunking is one Arny Kruger who has no such qualifications. Some (note the qualification) electrical engineers are anti-cable, others are not. Some have even propsed measurement techniques that point towards measurements that explain what people are hearing.


Originally posted by jmarshall
Once again, I guess it comes down to supply and demand. The demand ofcourse is fueled by the press and it's unceasing praise of the most expensive product and tweaks available.

This is nonsense. Most of the hi-fi press that I've read (which is a pretty good cross-section of hi-fi magazines in the English language) celebrate finding great sound components at low prices, as these components help give more musical enjoyment to the maximum number of people.

[jmarshall]

Who is being scammed? Audio retailers loan out cables so that people can see if they hear a difference in their own system. Isn't this the ultimate test? Is this the ultimate defence against being scammed?

Agreed. Although one needs to also make sure one can justify the costs involved in the differences (if any) heard.


I'm not sure why you're talking about cable manufacturers modifying equipment, as I don't know of any that do. They do supply cables to manufactuers of amplifiers and speakers, who choose to use these cables. Perhaps you also believe that amplifier and speaker manufacturers are stupid, or are being scammed?

This was in response to Craig F's post above. As for manufacturers using these supplied cables, I have no problem with that. I ofcourse presume that these manufacturers are not actually paying the RRP for these cables...


Some (note the qualification) electrical engineers are anti-cable, others are not. Some have even propsed measurement techniques that point towards measurements that explain what people are hearing.

Agreed. This was somewhat of an unnecessary generalisation on my part. I would also propose a test that can be quite interesting. If you have an equalizer, how about setting it to create a big hole somewhere in the say 3-5kHz area. Allow yourself to become accustomed to the new sound by listening to some music in the background whilst doing something else for a few hours, and then have a good listen before putting the EQ back where it was. You'll find you feel it's over emphasied in the 3-5kHz area, and will likely prefer it at a midway point. It's an interesting experiment in physchoacoustics.


This is nonsense. Most of the hi-fi press that I've read (which is a pretty good cross-section of hi-fi magazines in the English language) celebrate finding great sound components at low prices, as these components help give more musical enjoyment to the maximum number of people.

I was not inferring that the press ONLY glorifies the more expensive end of the market, rather that they very rarely give a non-glowing review of expensive gear. Usually most lower priced performers DO get praised if they deserve it which is great. Ofcourse, the qualifier "In this price bracket" is usually added, which does somewhat annoy me. I wish the reveiwers could be given the equipment to review WITHOUT knowing the price. They could then be informed of this after they have submitted their review for publication. Ofcourse this is impossible in today's internet age, but I think it's important in an industry where the price to performance ratio is at best logarithmic, to isolate the price factor as much as possible.

[Craig F]

This discussion has an all too familiar ring to it and I think this will be my last post on this thread. The big bad magazines and reviewers, all of whom are on the payroll of every hi-fi manufacturer on the planet, (God you must have some money in the bank Michael!!!) get together and conspire to force the poor, unknowing audiophool to part with large amounts of money on items that sound exactly the same. Then all the reviewers and manufacturers get together over a beer and laugh themselves silly at the results of their deception.

Perhaps I'm a simple, overtrusting fellow (anybody who knows me is now laughing hysterically) but I actually believe that the esteemed AudioEnz Editor, Wes Phillips, Mikey Fremer etc don't tell lies, they just say what they hear. If, in their experience they find a product performs well in it's price range they say so.

As for people getting scammed when did personal responsibility go out the window? If somebody chooses to buy something on the strength of a review then they take a chance. If however they try something in their own system and find it makes a positive difference then guess what, nobody has been scammed. As for the term expensive, that is for the buyer to define as well. If your system is worth $1000 then a $500 cable possibly seems very costly. If however your system is worth $80000 then $500 is nothing. Expensive is a relative term.

Why can't we just accept that some people believe that cables make a difference, some don't , and both camps can be perfectly happy either way without having to develop conspiracy theories. Lifes too short and music is too much fun to allow this sort of stuff to get in the way.

Cheers,

Craig.

[Dave Bullet]

A lot of the focus is on how well the cable transfers electricity from one component to another.

What about RF interference? It seems to me - this is where more expensive cables excel - not just the material for the signal wire - but the quality of the insulation / shielding to reject interference (EM or RF).

Is the above correct? Has anyone measured this (apart from your ears :-)

On another note - it seems to me the most objective way to compare cables is as we do with speakers - frequency response graphs, phase curves, impedance curves etc.... Ok - it still comes down to personal preference but these measures allow some base comparison. Is there such a "standard" for cable comparison?

Dave.

[jmarshall]

First of all, sorry for lowering the tone of this discussion in such a way as to cause the word conspiracy to be stated.

I don't believe there is a great conspiracy involving the media and manufacturers, although there IS the obvious consideration of advertising to be taken in to account. I would hope, however, that the vast majority of publications do not stoop to praising a piece of kit just to guarantee advertising revenue. I'm sure also, that many of the reviewers and editors out there are NOT making huge amounts of money. I'm sure Michael et al would agree with this statement. I think therefore, that the influence, if any, of advertising on reviews is minimal and/or non-existent.

All I am trying to do is work out for myself why someone can get away with selling a piece of wire or two with a couple of connectors for $1000 a metre. This is a ridiculous amount of money to be able to justify, whether one can afford it or not. Surely the actual costs of producing the cable (including any research that has been done) is no where near the final asking price.

I thus conclude that the only reason we see cable selling for such huge sums is because there is a demand for it. Why this demand exists, I have no idea, and I am forced to consider the various things that may make a contribution to this. The first thing to consider is the way that we tend to equate price with quality. In most arenas, there is a fairly simple relationship that we all understand: Higher price usually means better quality. How good then is a $1000 interconnect, when one can buy perfectly good cable with nice gold plated terminations etc. for as little as $10? Obviously it is not 100 times better. I would guess that it would be struggling to be even twice as good.

In fact, I have been unable to tell the difference under an A/B test. Note that when I did this test, I was sure that I'd be able to tell a difference. I COULD tell a difference when switching between the cables myself. (They were hooked up to 2 different inputs on my receiver, via a y-splitter out of a CD player. I could switch them around by changing the input modes.) I was certain that the more expensive cable was better. (It had to be - It cost sooo much!) However, when I allowed a mate of mine to do the switching without my knowledge of which one was in, I could not tell the difference. I tried with music, and with various test signals. Needless to say, I was a bit brassed off, seeing as I'd paid aorund $250 for the more expensive cable. (The other cable was the budget one that came with the player).

I have since been quite interested in psychoacoustics, and have performed many tests, and have come to the conclusion that my brain has much more control over what I hear than I would like. I have found that if I go in to a test with an opinion that is biased one way (ie. I will not hear a difference, or I will definitely hear a difference) I generally tend to agree with whatever opinion I take in. However, when performed blind, I find I've reached the wrong conclusion. I am now very careful not to give too much creedence to conclusions when auditioning equipment - especially when those conclusions agree with my thoughts before the audition. I am NOT advocating double blind tests whenever you want to upgrade - that involves far too much effort. I would however suggest you participate in one at some time if at all possible.

Some things do matter far more than cable, and one can clearly hear the difference. In my experience this is the speakers and the room in which they are in. Nothing more effects the sound in such a profound way.

Next time you upgrade anything in your system, do a frequency response measurement using an MLS signal or similar placing the Mic at your usual listening position. I'm sure that you will find a very sobering report on the accurateness of your system! This will be due primarily to your room and your speakers.

As for frequency response measurements of wire, I have done some tests, and have never found any difference between any wire, unless one was particularly long and thin and carrying a high level signal. Whether or not this is a problem with my measuring equipment, I don't know.

As for shielding, if one purchases cable from Belden or Canare, one gets the actual specifications of the shielding. This is NOT expensive cable. Jaycar has RG59/U Belden cable with quad shielding (2 foil + 2 braid) for less than $2 a metre. This cable can quite happily handle up to 100MHz or so with very little loss (less than a dB over a 10m length).

I repeat again what I said above. There are not all that many manufacturers of cable in the world. Most high-end cable companies obtain their wire from one of these few manufacturers. Belden and Canare are recognised as producing some good cable. They supply full specifications of the cable they make. Note that their cable is NOT expensive!

In the end, if your ears and brain tell you that the expensive cable you bought is worth it - great, enjoy it. I'm enjoying my DIY cables as I type.

Cheers,
Jonathan

BTW: The cable offer above is still on if anyone wants it :)

[Michael Jones]

Originally posted by jmarshall
I'm sure also, that many of the reviewers and editors out there are NOT making huge amounts of money. I'm sure Michael et al would agree with this statement.

You're not wrong!

[Max Christoffersen]

"Some people do not notice any difference with A/B cable comparisons.My opinion is it comes down to 2 major factors.

1) Your hearing
2) Your system I.e. How revealing it is"



I think it comes down to one other major factor: Human software and its subjectability to change.

*We* are the biggest variant in any test of cable assessment; perperspectives alter perceptions.

Secondly if you want to eliminate RF interference: twist your cable (ala Kimber cable).

It's *that* simple.


Max Christoffersen

[Dave Bullet]

Secondly if you want to eliminate RF interference: twist your cable (ala Kimber cable).

Shhhh Max - don't let the cat out of the bag. You just spoiled Kimber's next upgrade path for consumers :-)

Dave.

[jmarshall]

I think it comes down to one other major factor: Human software and its subjectability to change. *We* are the biggest variant in any test of cable assessment; perperspectives alter perceptions.

Good call, Max.


Secondly if you want to eliminate RF interference: twist your cable (ala Kimber cable).

Yep. Means any interference is common on both the signal and ground leads, thus being eliminated in the first stage of the amp. Ofcourse, if one is dealing with high frequency signals (Video, or digital audio) fully shielded coax is the only way to go.

[Quilts]

As you will hear, they do sound quite different. Expensive ones are not always better (Emperors new Clothes rules apply) - so do listen in your own system.
FYI the designer of Wireworld cables www.wireworldaudio.com
david Salz has spent years trying his cables against a reference. this reference is a short 1 inch piece of the highest purity copper. he makes a cable comparator that lets you compare any cable against this "shortest link" - the results have been really interesting, and certainly bear out the words of others that a lot of the marketing hype is overinflated bull.
See if you can get a set of Wireworlds to try out.
Cheers
Quilts

[marantz]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! If you are happy to fork out lots for expensive cable and you are happy, then good on you. on the other hand if you are happy with the supplied cables from the box, then good on you.

This area is so subjective, we must realise that what we listen to and what we watch comes down to personal taste.
Of course if you've forked out loads of cash on an expensive setup, you want to know that you have made the best decision possible for the money you have spent.
It comes down to pride and we as humans all want to know that we are capable of making good decisions and have spent our money wisely.

If you've paid $1000 for a pair of cables of course you are going to say they sound fantastic and much better than the others.
I myself have spend good money on cables and are very pleased with what I have, but I don't feel that the money I spent equates to the quality, but rather personal satisfaction and gratification.

Once again, beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

[Quilts]

Max brings out a valid point, we are a big variable in the listening chain. I have found that my perceptions of changes (improvements) alter depending on the time of day, how many & what quality wines I am enjoying whilst listening, and what mood I am in. I've also noticed a big improvement on occassions when I have had my earsa syringed - somthing that I get done annualy.
One other important factor is that we "learn" how to listen, and become more preceptive of subtleties with experience. When I was a teenager my hearing was no doubt of a wider bandwidth than it is now, but I did not know the difference in tone between a cello and a double bass (or hardly any other instruments for that matter). Now after years of going to live classical performances and listening to instruments in my own and friends homes, I have a far better, ie; more experienced set of ears.
Happy Listening
Quilts

[Yamahaluver]

Originally posted by AudioEnz
I would redine your question as: Do cables sound different?

In my experience, the answer is yes. I've been happy to spend money on "audiophile" interconnects and speaker cables because I heard an improvement in the reproduction of my music.

As you may have found, cables are still a controversial topic, some two decades after "cable sound" was first debated.

I find it instructive that in the cable "debates" you'll find in newsgroups, the vitriolic, insulting and nasty comments inevitably come from those who believe that cables do not sound different - or at least should not. The people who listen to the differences between cables are usually quite happy to go with what their ears tell them. The people who insists that cables sound them same aren't happy with their own views; instead they insist that everyone else must share those views as well.

I'm quite happy with the cables I bought. I'm also quite happy if people hear no difference between cables, or even if they believe that cables cannot make a difference to the sound - even if they've never tested their beliefs. Contrast this with the anti-cable brigade, who see such a "live and let live" attitude as a sign of the devil at work!

Many hi-fi specialist retailers are quite happy to loan out cables so you can try them out in your own system. If you like the difference, then you have the choice of purchasing them. If you don't hear any difference, then you're out nothing.

I fully agree, I have a mix of mostly Monster interconnects and speaker calbes with a mix of VDH and Radio Shack gold series and can hardly hear any percieved difference. Maybe I don't have the finnesse to hear those subtle nuances that others do.

[PartTimer]

This thread has been inactive for a few months, but is a topic I still ponder....

The article "Component Video cable definitive guide" is excellent, and has made me think that there is in fact a lot of marketing-horse-leftovers involved with mid-price cables.....
Heres a link, for those that havent already read it. (I think I have the link correct...?)
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/interconnects/cable_budget.php

PS. beware of trying to learn too much about cable physics. I read an archived forum, on the audioholics site, that had a Professor of Electrical Engineering, stating, almost, that a speaker cable is a speaker cable is a speaker cable....!

Either way, what fun would this hobby be if all the answers were known by everyone?

[Lech]

I must say, I've been finding this thread very interesting, and although I'd hate to spoil the fun it seems that there's been a glaring lack of technical justification for most of the claims people make about cables (both high power, and low-level).

I've heard people say that some cables sound clearer and brighter than others...More bass, less bass...a revealing tonal quality...subtle textures...I need not go on.

There's been the occasional passing mention of specifics like shielding, skin effect, and how silver is so much better than copper - where do I start? Someone has to set the record straight:

Silver versus copper: both excellent conductors, a small fractional difference between them in terms of conductivity (eg: 0.02ohm v 0.021ohm over several metres). More importantly: they tarnish in different colours.

Skin-effect: best left to designers of switched-mode power supplies and computer motherboards. Starts to kick in at about 0.5MHz - well beyond the hearing range of many of the audiophiles here ;) . It's more of a good thing than bad in hifi: audio equipment can often be adversely affected if radio-frequency signals are not sufficiently attenuated - where skin-effect does the job admirably. A small capacitance is also useful in this regard.

Shielding: one really important aspect of "interconnect" cables. Because it's generally a closed metal tube around the signal wire(s) (coaxial), it blocks out lots of interference and the cables radiate much less. It's amazingly useful although I doubt that much could be gained by using it on speaker wire. If there is any improvement by shielding speaker cables, to me that smells of a weakness in the amplifier design.

There's also the tiny issue of tiny voltage offsets at junctions between different materials in connection equipment. Eg: copper and nickel at the ends of a cable - and hundreds of other such junctions inside c.d. players and power amplifiers....

BTW just to make a final point, I think some purchasing priorities are in order: I was flabbergasted the first time I heard that some people were spending 1/5 for the amp, 1/5 for the preamp, and the rest in equal proportions for cables, speakers, and c.d. player. :rolleyes: At the cost of sounding stupid to some people - my system comprises of: an AMC cd, Rotel 6ch amp, diy Thiel & Partner (aka Accuton) sealed 2-way speakers made with solid bubinga wood, plus subwoofer. Having already saved many thousands of dollars by going DIY with the speakers and sub, I was on a roll: instead of paying hundreds more on a pre-amp, I bought a dual potentiometer (pre-amp less the metal box) for about $5. After all this money-saving, I have to admit I indulged and bought three sets of premium quality RCA interconnect cables for the whopping mortgage of $8.95 a pop. As for the sound, although I'm sure the speakers are still the weakest link, I haven't heard the likes of it in any shop I've been to, even where just the cables are priced more than my total system cost. :cool:

[Ayn Marx]

Originally posted by patrickt snip<.....What’s better, banana plugs, spades or bare wire?
Ok two questions, why were DIN cables/inputs etc. dropped? [/B]

How long's a piece of string pet?
Depending on the quality of implementation each method can work well. Banana plugs should have very tight spring-loading(this can loosen with time)
The best bananas have an integral screw-down mechanism that tightens the connection and prevents accidental removal. Spade lugs work well if the design of the terminal allows you to screw down the lug tighly and that tightness does not gradually decrease over time.
Some neurotic audiophools feel the need to tighten their spade lugs before each listening session. Bare wire works best if clamped down hard and has all the exposed bare metal coated with nail polish or some-such to prevent oxidization. Some ultra expensive audio jewellery contains such a irrational weight of gold plated brass/brass plated silver/rodium plated god knows what that this actual mass of metal reacts in unpedictable ways with the signal.
I have never been able to hear any difference between any of these methods when properly applied. I don't know why DIN connectors were dropped, but I'm glad, They were a pain to solder and were often fragile.

[Ayn Marx]

Originally posted by Craig F
snip<.....the big bad magazines and reviewers, all of whom are on the payroll of every hi-fi manufacturer on the planet, (God you must have some money in the bank Michael!!!) get together and conspire to force the poor, unknowing audiophool to part with large amounts of money on items that sound exactly the same. Then all the reviewers and manufacturers get together over a beer and laugh themselves silly at the results of their deception.

Snip<.........Why can't we just accept that some people believe that cables make a difference, some don't , and both camps can be perfectly happy either way without having to develop conspiracy theories.Snip<........
Craig.

On the surface I can only agree with your take in this issue Graig.However, some individuals become moraly rightious to an hysterical degree about innocent buyers being ripped-off for huge amounts of money.The consequent widely held belief that those involved in this 'hobby' are mad has some justification. Others critics of snake-oil cable theories get very hot under the collar at the promulgation of bizarre pseudo-theories as marketing tools. This is essentially an issue for moral philosophy & philosophy of science .I often find myself wishing this aspect of the discussion could be pushed over to news groups devoted to issues of scientific logic etc as I get bored silly with the hysteria that has clogged audio news/discussion groups on this issue.
My personal take on cables is very much a suck it and see one. If something sounds better I use it but if I'm asked to pay silly money for an over-hyped treble filter posing as a new break through in cable 'technology' then I become very suspicious. Several years ago I had the joy of being able to pull apart a pair of expensive Ear Science speaker cables only to discover runs of Burtons Solid Core House Wire connected to zobel networks at either end, all this covered with vinyl hose then decorated with black stretch fabric dressed up with Lurex.
It all boils down to buyer beware I suppose except for this weird tendancy audiophools have of swallowing strange pseudo-theories that border on the occult.....end of rave....
As for your comments about reviewers lining their pockets -yes it does indeed happen overseas, and although reviewers in Oz & NZ do get offered the odd bribe it's more a case of "If you don't behave you wont be getting any-more product to review" I doub't very much that Michael has a fat bank account as the result of manufacturer's bribes. You were only joking, weren't you pet?

[Michael Jones]

Originally posted by Ayn Marx
On the surface I can only agree with your take in this issue Graig.However, some individuals become moraly rightious to an hysterical degree about innocent buyers being ripped-off for huge amounts of money.

Like you, Ayn, I am amazed at the hysterical venom from people who don't like the ideas of audio cables sounding different. I see it as very simple: if you don't hear any improvement (or don't want to hear any improvement) then don't buy any audiophile cables. If you do hear an improvement, then you have the choice whether to spend your money.

Here in New Zealand many dealers will loan out cables overnight for for a period of a few days. The punter gets the opportunity to try the cable in his or her own hi-fi system, unpressured. They can buy or return the cables.

(I've seen it sugested that some people would feel too embarrased to return the cables, as it would mean their admitting that they couldn't hear the difference. I've never come across anyone like this, which doesn't surprise me - any such people would have a hard time surviving in the modern world!)


I often find myself wishing this aspect of the discussion could be pushed over to news groups devoted to issues of scientific logic etc as I get bored silly with the hysteria that has clogged audio news/discussion groups on this issue.

One reason I set up a DBT section on this forums was because I've seen newdgroups and forums where a group of people want to turn any audio discussion into a debate/rant about DBT. These people end up stifling audio debate, as most people decide that they have better things to do with their time than to feed the obsessives.


My personal take on cables is very much a suck it and see one. If something sounds better I use it

A similar philosophy here, Ayn. I use Kimber cables, as they work well, in my experience. I'm not interested in trying out new cables each week, but I definately have no interest in returning to the cheap and nasty cables that many anti-cable zealots promote.


As for your comments about reviewers lining their pockets -yes it does indeed happen overseas, and although reviewers in Oz & NZ do get offered the odd bribe it's more a case of "If you don't behave you wont be getting any-more product to review" I doub't very much that Michael has a fat bank account as the result of manufacturer's bribes.

This writer has never been offered a bribe, odd or otherwise.

[Ayn Marx]

Originally posted by AudioEnz

Snip<.....................

A similar philosophy here, Ayn. I use Kimber cables, as they work well, in my experience. I'm not interested in trying out new cables each week, but I definately have no interest in returning to the cheap and nasty cables that many anti-cable zealots promote.
Snip<..............................


Me neither, but not all cheap cable is nasty!

I used Kimber 4TC & 8TC for many years until a slowely increasing doubt had me by the horns. My tech' mate, Tony McKay, suggested (with a wink & a refusal to say why) I should have a look under the insulation. Lo & Behold ! Kimber slowley oxidises UNDER the insulation. Debates occur as to what the effect of copper oxide is in such a situation but replacing my old kimber with a borrowed new run of the same type & length restored things to 'as new'. Iv'e given up Kimber as a result of this experience, although other audiophools tell me they have now solved this problem.

PS Hope I'm getting this quote thing right. :confused:

[Lech]

[i]Originally posted by AudioEnz ...I definately have no interest in returning to the cheap and nasty cables that many anti-cable zealots promote....
[/B]

Why not? Oh, and I do hope that compliment was aimed at people like me :) . Although I'd hardly call myself an anti-cable zealot, it was much appreciated! On second thoughts, there must a ring of truth there because I can't claim to be the most open-minded of all people. If I was, I'd be asking "why should audio cables costing hundreds of dollars be any better than Dick Smith or Jaycar ones?"

But rather than hearing a reply, I encourage fellow sceptics to adopt a new strategy called: "point-'n'-smirk". Like thus it works: instead of getting all worked up about other people spending lots of money on cables and other such perepherals, simply sit back, relax, point, and smirk - preferably with a good dose of neo-sadistic satisfaction that the extra $1000 or so could have gone towards a more expensive amp. or better speakers, but didn't.

What good is it to make the strongest link in a chain, even stronger?

[Ayn Marx]

Originally posted by Lech
Why not? Oh, and I do hope that compliment was aimed at people like me :) . Snip...... I encourage fellow sceptics to adopt a new strategy called: "point-'n'-smirk".Snip<.....simply sit back, relax, point, and smirk - Snip<....


Sorry to be thick about the above but I just can't figure out if you are being serious or sarcastic. Which is it pet?

[Lech]

...Not really, sarcasm's just mean...Perhaps just think of it as an "off-hand", or lighthearted way of not judging or unfairly treating people with whom you might disagree - without needing to work hard at it.

Translation: bit of a joke, but you get my drift. :)

[Coops]

IMHO if you consider yourself any sort of audiophile, hi-fi buff....whatever.....and you can't tell the difference between cables, well sir....you've taken up the wrong hobby :(

[Craig F]

Originally posted by Coops
IMHO if you consider yourself any sort of audiophile, hi-fi buff....whatever.....and you can't tell the difference between cables, well sir....you've taken up the wrong hobby :(

I don't agree Coops. From what he's written it would appear that Lech has a system that gives him a lot of pleasure and helps him enjoy music. Isn't that what the hobby is all about? I'd much sooner not hear differences in cables and enjoy my system, as opposed to the many audiophiles who hear differences and are never happy with what they have. Isn't this quest supposed to have a happy ending somewhere?

Cheers,

Craig.

[Michael Wong]

What about those who can tell the difference and are happy with what they have ?

:D

[Craig F]

Count me in amongst that group Michael, but I just don't believe that being able to hear differences between cables is a pre-requisite to enjoying hi-fi as a hobby.

Cheers,

Craig.

[Michael Wong]

Ditto.

Music is my main motivation.

cheers


PS ....any takers for your MF gear ?

[Craig F]

No, but I don't really want to sell it either, hence I only put the message out on aus.hi-fi as I knew that it would have little chance of finding a buyer. The biggest pain in the butt at the moment is waiting for a laser for the Meridian. It's been about five weeks now and I'm going spare without it.

Cheers,

Craig.

[Coops]

I suppose your right Craig. You can be a rugby fan without appreciating the different skills of Byron Kelleher or Justin Marshall & you can follow cricket without knowing the difference between an off spinner & a leg spinner or having any idea what Shane Warne is doing when he bowls his 'flipper'.

[Craig F]

I don't think that Justin Marshall has got any skills, and not many batsman have any idea what Warne does with the flipper! :D Since it was brought up (kinda) and way off topic, what chance the blacks for the world cup? I'm a bit concerned that the poms won't give us enough turnovers to unleash our wheels out wide. Still, we've got to get past the Aussies yet and the squad they've selected is potentially much better in the backs. They're going to miss Kefu but at home it'll be a tough game.

Cheers,

Craig.

[Coops]

Just like every WC ,if & its a BIG if, the AB's play to their potential then they will be hard to beat. The Aussies are confidence players & their confidence will have taken a small knock from the bledisloe & tri-nations performances but you'd never write off any OZ team & at home like you said will make them tougher to beat.

As unpatriotic as this sounds, if I was a betting man I'd have my money on England. They are machine like in their approach (like the Crusaders of a coupla years ago) & they simply know how to contain sides & stick to a game plan & they have that winning habit where sometimes they haven't played that well or nescessarily deserved to win but do. That kicker of theirs never misses either, unlike ours, which can be good for at least 9-15 points every game, which can be the difference in a close match when our side might only land 2 from 5.

[Craig F]

I tend to agree on the England pick Coops. The only thing that I can see being against them is that they are an older squad and the heat and hard grounds in Aus may test them. Other than that I really don't see how the AB's, even playing to their full potential, will find a way through the defence of England. We haven't scored very many points from set plays and we won't get as many turnovers from those big boys in white. Despite thining that England may win it, I really don't care who holds the cup as long as it's not the Poms.

Cheers,

Craig.

[Michael Jones]

Originally posted by Craig F
Despite thining that England may win it, I really don't care who holds the cup as long as it's not the Poms.

Reminds me of a teeshirt I once saw, which said:

I support two teams; New Zealand and anyone playing Australia.

:eek:

[Jonas]

My system is very, very cheap by Hifi standards, Denon Seperates and Quad 11L speakers.

But I noticed a large difference in sound when getting Van Den Hul 102 interconnects and QED Anniversary speaker wire.
Everything became clearer and the sound less distorted.

I imagine that in a high end system the differences would be massively apparent. I could not tell you whether interconnects or speaker cable made the difference because they were changed at the same time.

It seems to me that there are many technical types attracted to audio who are obssessed with theory. Thats all it is - theory.

The theory says that all the cables should sound the same, but they don't, so instead of admitting that they do not know everything they cling to their precious ego and outdated science learned at school back in 1968.

Like AudioENZ says, the shops lend customers the cables, if there was no difference, they would not buy them.

I think to get value for money cables you have to buy from the internet only vendors. They do not pay the high advertising costs and mostly let you trial their cables.

someone mentioned www.homegrownaudio.com
These are some sites i have found on the net

www.hificables.co.uk do their own silver inhouse cable.
www.the-music-cable.com
www.rarefaction.com.au/stealth.html
www.audio-magic.com

[Coops]

"and mostly let you trial their cables."


The internet companies let you borrow their cables ??

Which ones ??