Better speaker/digital audio cables suggestions

[keviinmc]

hello, i was wondering if someone could give me some suggestions for some high end speaker and digital(coax) cables. we all know about monster cable, but i know there has to be better stuff out there, and i think i have found some, but i dont know anything about certain companies' reputations. so if anyone could help me out i would greatly appreciate it. i am currently running KEF speakers(k-160, K-120, Q95) from a HK avr-320 with a Acoustic Energy Sub if that helps at all in your suggestions. thanks

kevin

[wfontenot]

I have switched to Zu cables and really like them. I think you can still pick them up on ebay at about 1/3 the normal price during their promotion. Customer service is excellent.

[JohnMichael]

The speaker wire that I like the most in my system is Alpha Core MI1. I use it between my Cambridge Azur 640A and my NHT SuperOnes. It is a solid core ribbon cable. I tend to hear a lot of artifacts with stranded cables. The MI1 is a 13 guage wire and they do make heavier guage cables but some amps can react to the greater capacitance. Also another good brand is Audioquest and I have enjoyed some Nordost products. They all have good web sites with lots of information.

[markw]

Kevin,

I sent you a PM

Jason

I sent you a PMDon't we go through this at least once a year or so?

Are you a sponser here at least?

[FLZapped]

Kevin,

I sent you a PM

Jason

I sent you a PM

I see it's Shilly in here, too.

-Bruce

[FLZapped]

hello, i was wondering if someone could give me some suggestions for some high end speaker and digital(coax) cables. we all know about monster cable, but i know there has to be better stuff out there, and i think i have found some, but i dont know anything about certain companies' reputations. so if anyone could help me out i would greatly appreciate it. i am currently running KEF speakers(k-160, K-120, Q95) from a HK avr-320 with a Acoustic Energy Sub if that helps at all in your suggestions. thanks

kevin

What makes you think that Monster is good, beyond their marketing abilities?

-Bruce

[JBMAudio.com]

What makes you think that Monster is good, beyond their marketing abilities?

-Bruce

I would agree. Monster is highly over priced for the quality of cable that you receive. You do get a nice looking cable, but for what they charge, they quality should match the looks.

[Monstrous Mike]

hello, i was wondering if someone could give me some suggestions for ... digital(coax) cables.
If your cable run is normal length (eg. 3 to 6 feet) then you can't really go wrong with almost any digital coax cable. Remember that a composite video cable (yellow connectors) is the exact same as a digital coax cable (orange connectors). I use an Acoustic Research video cable that was $15. As long as you avoid no-name, dental floss type cables, you should be fine.

You'll hear a lot talk about jitter in a digital cable, among other fairly dubious arguements, which are used to encourage spending much more money on a "quality" digital audio cable. Keep in mind that the only real positive arguements for this are claims from people who have heard a difference while an engineering analysis of this situation concludes that given the short length of the cable and the capability of DACs to handle jitter, it simply isn't likely that home audio enthusiasts are hearing what they think they hear. It's also a common arguement that good components require good cables a good sports car needs good tires. But that is not a logical comparison.

[keviinmc]

What makes you think that Monster is good, beyond their marketing abilities?

-Bruce

I dont think monster is as good as i used to, and i completely agree that theyre overpriced. starting out i knew about a little about high end components and speakers, but i knew even less about cables, and now that ive started learning about whats good and whats not, i was hoping for some input as to how some high end cables stacked up to each other, thats all. i wasnt trying to imply that monster cable was good, but when you start building a system, and there arent any high end audio stores around you, sometimes one tends to go with what is convenient

[noddin0ff]

For my digital coax interconnects I use the crappiest interconnect I have after I put all the good ones into my analog connections. I think my current digital coax is an interconnect that came with a CD player I bought in 1988. It is cheap and thin, the plastic is discolored, and it works perfectly, because digital signals are very robust and the whole point of digital is to make the quality of the cables a non-issue. Save your money and put it into some good music instead.

[BrentMcGhee]

Don't get sucked into snake oil bussiness that i like to call cables. It is my firm beleif that as long as you dont use the cheapy unshielded interconnects that come with your equipment than cable is going to make the least amount of performance increase in your system. My order from most effective to least effective performance increases are as follows.

Most Influential
#1: Speakers
#2: Source

Influential
#4: Pre Processors

Least Influential
#5: Amps
Within in the same type of amps. Now changin from say tubes to SS to the new digital drive there are big differences but when in stayin in the same type with the same specs there is very minor differences between them. ex. dennon 75watts both channels driven 20hz-20khz with <0.03thd and 110db snr will be pretty much identical to say a rotel 75watts both channels driven 20hz-20khz with >0.03thd and 110snr.
#6: Interconnects
#7: Speaker wire


All of that being said i really like bluejeans cables becasue they are by no means expensive and they are very well built. They have a really good website that explains all of there cables. (i have no affiliation with bluejeans cables, in fact there are plenty of good cable companies out there that dont add all the cosmetic frills to there cables and sell them at a reasonable price i just own bluejeans cables and have been very pleased with them as well as the service i got from the company themselves.)

Now i know i will probably get flamed by all of the people out there that would put cables at the top of the list to be the most influential. That is fine for those that think that way. I am not saying that is wrong in anyway i am just saying what i beleive.

[snickelfritz]

Kimber makes good speaker cable and it's reasonably priced.

[PaleRider]

Looking for really superb speakercables? Thick solid core copper, I mean real thick, at least 10awg. And notice; one thick (ex.10awg) performs better than a number of thinner cores.
Want real 3D? keep +/- wires to tweeter far from eachother.

[mazdamanic]

Don't get sucked into snake oil bussiness that i like to call cables. It is my firm beleif that as long as you dont use the cheapy unshielded interconnects that come with your equipment than cable is going to make the least amount of performance increase in your system. My order from most effective to least effective performance increases are as follows.

Most Influential
#1: Speakers
#2: Source

Influential
#4: Pre Processors

Least Influential
#5: Amps
Within in the same type of amps. Now changin from say tubes to SS to the new digital drive there are big differences but when in stayin in the same type with the same specs there is very minor differences between them. ex. dennon 75watts both channels driven 20hz-20khz with <0.03thd and 110db snr will be pretty much identical to say a rotel 75watts both channels driven 20hz-20khz with >0.03thd and 110snr.
#6: Interconnects
#7: Speaker wire


All of that being said i really like bluejeans cables becasue they are by no means expensive and they are very well built. They have a really good website that explains all of there cables. (i have no affiliation with bluejeans cables, in fact there are plenty of good cable companies out there that dont add all the cosmetic frills to there cables and sell them at a reasonable price i just own bluejeans cables and have been very pleased with them as well as the service i got from the company themselves.)

Now i know i will probably get flamed by all of the people out there that would put cables at the top of the list to be the most influential. That is fine for those that think that way. I am not saying that is wrong in anyway i am just saying what i beleive.

Item # 5 is completely false! Amps with identical specs more often than not sound VERYdifferent because the sound quality depends on lots of variables like quality and type of transistors used as well as other components. Circuit design also has a lot to do with it. For example, a MOSFET amp has a distinct sonic signature not found in others. There is a reason why a 75w Classe amp will sound significantly better than your 75w Denon. The difference is anything but minor.

I would also rate preamps higher than sources of the same type in terms of how they influence sound.

[RobotCzar]

Item # 5 is completely false! Amps with identical specs more often than not sound VERYdifferent because the sound quality depends on lots of variables like quality and type of transistors used as well as other components. Circuit design also has a lot to do with it. For example, a MOSFET amp has a distinct sonic signature not found in others. There is a reason why a 75w Classe amp will sound significantly better than your 75w Denon. The difference is anything but minor.

I would also rate preamps higher than sources of the same type in terms of how they influence sound.

Let me just point out that I am not aware of any evidence or even theoretical suppport that things like the type of transistors, circuit design, etc have anything to do with "sound quality" other that what can be mearsured in differences in electrical performance.. (Note: amplifiers do not make sounds, if you are lucky.). The electriical characterisitics of an amp's output can be completely electronically characterized with measurements of electric signal parameters. These measurements can be compared to the input to see how accurate the output is or can be compared to the output of any other amp. These electircal characteristics will determine how speakers sound when connected to the amp (the sound will vary with the speaker but be identical if the electrical signals of the amps are identical or very similar (within the resolution of human hearing). It does seem a bit logical (and basic) to assume that identical speakers being driven with idential electrical signals will sound this same, doesn't it.

It is highly illogical to assme that two different types of transistors that measure the same in every electrical parameter could some how perform differently--beause performance is defined by the electrical parmeters, there isn't anything else--no magic qualities.

Some audio buffs SAY amps that measure the same sound differently, but they never demonstrate it. To be charitable, we can speculate that this audio urban legend grew from the fact that looking at only a few incomplete electrical characteristics (often reported in poor reviews) resulted in amps with similar specs sounding different. Of course, because there is no empirical evidence that even amps that measure differently "sound" different (if the amps have reasonable electrical performance) we can't even be charitable about the comments above.

[mazdamanic]

Let me just point out that I am not aware of any evidence or even theoretical suppport that things like the type of transistors, circuit design, etc have anything to do with "sound quality" other that what can be mearsured in differences in electrical performance.. (Note: amplifiers do not make sounds, if you are lucky.). The electriical characterisitics of an amp's output can be completely electronically characterized with measurements of electric signal parameters. These measurements can be compared to the input to see how accurate the output is or can be compared to the output of any other amp. These electircal characteristics will determine how speakers sound when connected to the amp (the sound will vary with the speaker but be identical if the electrical signals of the amps are identical or very similar (within the resolution of human hearing). It does seem a bit logical (and basic) to assume that identical speakers being driven with idential electrical signals will sound this same, doesn't it.

It is highly illogical to assme that two different types of transistors that measure the same in every electrical parameter could some how perform differently--beause performance is defined by the electrical parmeters, there isn't anything else--no magic qualities.

Some audio buffs SAY amps that measure the same sound differently, but they never demonstrate it. To be charitable, we can speculate that this audio urban legend grew from the fact that looking at only a few incomplete electrical characteristics (often reported in poor reviews) resulted in amps with similar specs sounding different. Of course, because there is no empirical evidence that even amps that measure differently "sound" different (if the amps have reasonable electrical performance) we can't even be charitable about the comments above.

So from what I can tell you have never compared really compared a Krell (or comparable) to something from the mass market bunch. Are you telling people the quality of components such as resistors and caps have no bearing on sound quality?

[RobotCzar]

So from what I can tell you have never compared really compared a Krell (or comparable) to something from the mass market bunch. Are you telling people the quality of components such as resistors and caps have no bearing on sound quality?

Actually, I have never personally heard any differences in properly performing (i.e., meaured within reasonble specs) home audio amplifiers. That is, of course, entirely beside the point, because what I said is that there is no valid evidence nor rational reason that anybody else has. There is however, tons of evidence that claims of audiophiles are highly unreliable.

[Pyrrho]

Actually, I have never personally heard any differences in properly performing (i.e., meaured within reasonble specs) home audio amplifiers. That is, of course, entirely beside the point, because what I said is that there is no valid evidence nor rational reason that anybody else has. There is however, tons of evidence that claims of audiophiles are highly unreliable.[red emphasis added]

My favorite example of this sort of thing is, during a listening session, when the tester claims to make a change "for the better", but really doesn't change anything, and the audiofools believe it then sounds so much better! (This type of thing, by the way, is the reason for my "signature" below.)

[mazdamanic]

Actually, I have never personally heard any differences in properly performing (i.e., meaured within reasonble specs) home audio amplifiers. That is, of course, entirely beside the point, because what I said is that there is no valid evidence nor rational reason that anybody else has. There is however, tons of evidence that claims of audiophiles are highly unreliable.

I had a similar problem with cheaper lowfi amps and preamps. It did not matter what brand I tried, yamaha, denon, sansui etc, I always had grainy highs and midrange congestion and no depth in sound. Not really an issue when I was listening to rock as most recordings sound bright and compressed anyway but immediately apparent when listening to classical, strings in particular or jazz. But if you are unable to distinguish between Levinson and a Yamaha, you might need a speaker upgrade first. BTW, any component that has some resistance or capacitance will alter the audio signal to some degree, add a resistor at the amp output to attenuate the signal and it WILL alter the sound to some extent, I tried it. So to say that 2 different circuits will still produce identical sound is plain ridiculous. Could it be that you are just not capable of hearing these differences?


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise"

[RobotCzar]

t. So to say that 2 different circuits will still produce identical sound is plain ridiculous. Could it be that you are just not capable of hearing these differences?

What is ridiculous is to call something ridiculous which you know so little about. (And, of couse, I said to different circuits that MEASURED THE SAME would "sound" the same.)

The point is that it doesn't matter what I say I hear, or wha you say you hear. There is no evidence that properly performing amps sound different. Nor is there any reason to think they can. I already said that there is plenty of evidence that claims like yours cannot be substantiated, so why should I believe you? I'm not taking your word on what you hear any more than you are willing to take mine.

Your claims also have no logical-theoretical basis. For example, when you claim to hear a difference in "depth". Spatial perception is due to differences between the two (or more) channels, not to some imagined "quality" factor. And,the quality of the electrical signals produced by amps can be measured (as standard parameters of an electrical signal). The differences in output signals of amps with low enough distortion cannot result in differences at the speaker that can be heard. The "proof" is that no one has demonstrated what you are claiming to do.

Additionally, speakers and rooms (and speaker placement in rooms) so much affect sound quality (and depth) as to completely mask any tiny differences in electrical signals.

Name dropping is not going to cut it. There is no reason to believe you can hear any differences in properly performing ams (this excludes many tube amps) because you have not eliminated factors that might be causing you to hear differences OTHER THAN the amps. You are simply caught up in the hype and lies--and the exclusivity of the high end.

Let me make a couple more points for anybody reading this who is new to home audio.

1) Do not trust any listening tests done in audio stores (especially high end ones).
2) Amps do "sound different" in terms of how loud they can get (i.e., power output) without audible distortion.

[hifitommy]

you havent listed your system! which electrophonic receiver do you have? it probably measures as good as the yorx.

the chihuahuas are still here i guess.

[E-Stat]

Actually, I have never personally heard any differences in properly performing (i.e., meaured within reasonble specs) home audio amplifiers.
Sorry to hear that.

rw

[mazdamanic]

What is ridiculous is to call something ridiculous which you know so little about. (And, of couse, I said to different circuits that MEASURED THE SAME would "sound" the same.)

The point is that it doesn't matter what I say I hear, or wha you say you hear. There is no evidence that properly performing amps sound different. Nor is there any reason to think they can. I already said that there is plenty of evidence that claims like yours cannot be substantiated, so why should I believe you? I'm not taking your word on what you hear any more than you are willing to take mine.

Your claims also have no logical-theoretical basis. For example, when you claim to hear a difference in "depth". Spatial perception is due to differences between the two (or more) channels, not to some imagined "quality" factor. And,the quality of the electrical signals produced by amps can be measured (as standard parameters of an electrical signal). The differences in output signals of amps with low enough distortion cannot result in differences at the speaker that can be heard. The "proof" is that no one has demonstrated what you are claiming to do.

Additionally, speakers and rooms (and speaker placement in rooms) so much affect sound quality (and depth) as to completely mask any tiny differences in electrical signals.

Name dropping is not going to cut it. There is no reason to believe you can hear any differences in properly performing ams (this excludes many tube amps) because you have not eliminated factors that might be causing you to hear differences OTHER THAN the amps. You are simply caught up in the hype and lies--and the exclusivity of the high end.

Let me make a couple more points for anybody reading this who is new to home audio.

1) Do not trust any listening tests done in audio stores (especially high end ones).
2) Amps do "sound different" in terms of how loud they can get (i.e., power output) without audible distortion.

So what amps have you compared to conclude they sounded identical?

[gonefishin]

arf...arf.



wait...this place actually used to be fun.


:eek: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[hifitommy]

there IS no spoon!

[gonefishin]

lol :p

[RobotCzar]

So what amps have you compared to conclude they sounded identical?

I think you have problems reading in addition to hearing. Or perhaps this is a sign of the inflexibility of beliefs. I already said that what one person (or a hundred) CLAIM to hear (or not hear) is irrelevant. What possible light could one person's uncontolled claim make on this issue?

I know of no test that demonstrated anybody can hear differences in any properly performning amp. In short, nobody has demonstrated in a controlled test they can hear amp differences (e.g. between a cheap mass-market reciever and the latest high end favorite). In every controlled test I have ever read, people claimed to hear differences and failed to demonstrate it. It doesn't matter what the amps were, the participants in the test said they could, and couldn't. Therefore claims are proven unreliable. Stop SAYING you can do it and demonstrate it in a formal, published test.

I also said that there is absoulutely no rational reason to think that people can distinguish properly performing amps, as amplifier distortion (including "phase" distortion or "time domain" errors or whatever you want to call dynamic distortion) and frequency response errors are too low for humans to distinguish. I also said speaker and room sonic response "errors" would mask any small differences electrical signals.

I only said I have never heard differences to demean the reports of individuals as having any validity. In fact, I have thought I heard differences, but on closer listening and testing I came to understand that my perception (what I thought I heard) and what I really could hear were quite different. Unless you do a level matched, double blind test your personal claim is useless. It probably is useless anyway as a sample of one is too small to draw conclusions from.

[E-Stat]

I know of no test that demonstrated anybody can hear differences in any properly performning amp. In short, nobody has demonstrated in a controlled test they can hear amp differences (e.g. between a cheap mass-market reciever and the latest high end favorite).
Actually, that was first done in the Carter era.

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_data.htm

rw

[mazdamanic]

I think you have problems reading in addition to hearing. Or perhaps this is a sign of the inflexibility of beliefs. I already said that what one person (or a hundred) CLAIM to hear (or not hear) is irrelevant. What possible light could one person's uncontolled claim make on this issue?

I know of no test that demonstrated anybody can hear differences in any properly performning amp. In short, nobody has demonstrated in a controlled test they can hear amp differences (e.g. between a cheap mass-market reciever and the latest high end favorite). In every controlled test I have ever read, people claimed to hear differences and failed to demonstrate it. It doesn't matter what the amps were, the participants in the test said they could, and couldn't. Therefore claims are proven unreliable. Stop SAYING you can do it and demonstrate it in a formal, published test.

I also said that there is absoulutely no rational reason to think that people can distinguish properly performing amps, as amplifier distortion (including "phase" distortion or "time domain" errors or whatever you want to call dynamic distortion) and frequency response errors are too low for humans to distinguish. I also said speaker and room sonic response "errors" would mask any small differences electrical signals.

I only said I have never heard differences to demean the reports of individuals as having any validity. In fact, I have thought I heard differences, but on closer listening and testing I came to understand that my perception (what I thought I heard) and what I really could hear were quite different. Unless you do a level matched, double blind test your personal claim is useless. It probably is useless anyway as a sample of one is too small to draw conclusions from.

So you are going on and on about this and you have never really bothered to compare amps yourself. Hmm....sounds like you bought some cheapo amp and have convinced yourself that it won't get any better than that. No point arguing any further, I see where you are coming from.

[RobotCzar]

Actually, that was first done in the Carter era.

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_data.htm

rw

In case anybody other that E-stat has difficulty understanding these tests (which E-stat rejects, by the way), note that people can tell some tube amps from solid state amps. This is not a surprising finding as tube amps DO MEASURE significantly different from solid state amps. In fact, many tube amps, including those in the test have measurements that are not good enough in terms of frequency response and distortion to be electronically transparent to human perception. They can be distinguished. As I have said in my previous comments, such tube amps do not meet my criterion of "properly performing". And, what a surprise, they sound just like they measure.

[E-Stat]

In case anybody other that E-stat has difficulty understanding these tests (which E-stat rejects, by the way)
I understand Arny's tests completely. I also understand their practical limitations as to discerning anything other than gross differences recognizable only in split second comparisons.

rw

[musicoverall]

I understand Arny's tests completely. I also understand their practical limitations as to discerning anything other than gross differences recognizable only in split second comparisons.

rw

I've been away for awhile. Interesting to note that the argument carries on! With one obvious twist... we're now discussing amps in the cable forum! :D

[E-Stat]

I've been away for awhile. Interesting to note that the argument carries on! With one obvious twist... we're now discussing amps in the cable forum! :D
I remain amazed at the amount of time expended by those who think that there are no audible differences among any number of components.

As for me, I exert zero time debating that which I believe does not exist. Or that which is outside my experience. To each his own. ;)

rw

[musicoverall]

I remain amazed at the amount of time expended by those who think that there are no audible differences among any number of components.

As for me, I exert zero time debating that which I believe does not exist. Or that which is outside my experience. To each his own. ;)

rw

Same here! I would only add that I also spend little to no time arguing against someone else's personal experiences. I may as well say that "No, E-Stat, you really DON'T like electrostatic speakers - you're only fooling yourself".

Speaking of speakers, how are your new ones working out? And you may have posted this but I've forgotten - with what speaker wire are they hooked up? I"m really happy with my Cardas Neutral Reference. I've heard that Cardas tends to be a little on the dark side but I've not noticed it in my system.

[E-Stat]

Speaking of speakers, how are your new ones working out? And you may have posted this but I've forgotten - with what speaker wire are they hooked up? I"m really happy with my Cardas Neutral Reference. I've heard that Cardas tends to be a little on the dark side but I've not noticed it in my system.
Aside from some cosmetic damage done to one speaker by the truckers, they are performing wonderfully. The clowns lifted one crate with a forklift by slicing through and destroying the bottom thus scratching the frame.

I think my wife's commentary says it all. After hearing a couple of her favorites, her response was "they aren't there". Sonically, they disappear. There is a purity to them that I have not experienced elsewhere. My friend JWC came over to hear them and brought his Kimber Palladian power cords to compare with mine. They rendered more detail and better articulation. Subsequently, I ended up moving the JPS Labs Power AC+ cords from my tube amps to my vintage and HT systems and replaced them with Harmonic Technology Magics. With them, I am enjoying an even greater level of detail and openness. I took them over to John's Avalon based system and he found them a bit better than the Palladians. I run JPS Labs Ultra Conductor+ speaker cables.

As for your "dark" comment, I would characterize my cables similarly with that same compliment. It has been my experience that the better cables initially sound dark because they are free of any HF haze caused by RF, despite any measurable rolloff at the top. Upon further listening, all of the highs are there and better rendered. I liken this to a similar result I've experienced using bass traps in my room. At first blush, there is reduced bass output. What is really missing is peaky upper bass that clouds the true response.

As of late, I've been listening a good bit to my vintage garage system. It consists of a Pioneer Elite PD-54 CDP (with shielded power cord, digital output shunt, and internal damping), a Threshold Stasis 3 using the JPS Power AC+ cord, and Double New Advents (crossover caps replaced with Solens) wired with JPS Labs Ultraconductor+ and Esoteric Audio ICs and DH Labs T-14 speaker cables. With the new power cord to the amp, there is an improved top-to-bottom clarity, especially at low levels, that was not present before.

I really wish that the non-experiential theorists could spend some extended listening to a system with cables beyond basic zip cord and Blue Jeans interconnects. They really have no idea what they are missing.

rw

[musicoverall]

I have yet to try a different power cord. When and if I do, I'm hopeful that I only need one from my power conditioner to the wall. :) I'm very happy with my system at present and, to be honest, I'm not in much of a component auditioning mood. I'm too busy enjoying the music! This will probably sound weird but that's ok. I just went through my collection of recordings and made a subjective call based on memory (oh, horrors!) of the 50 discs that gave me the biggest "wow factor" upon first hearing. I just finished those and was marveling at the fact that they can still startle after multiple listenings over the years. My current system really brings that to the fore and I'm loathe to play around with anything right now.

>I really wish that the non-experiential theorists could spend some extended listening to a system with cables beyond basic zip cord and Blue Jeans interconnects. They really have no idea what they are missing.<

Sure you do! And they wish you would stop fooling yourself and perform DBT's. I would speculate that both events will occur at the same time. :D

Congrats on your new speakers!

[Kaboom]

mkay i'll bite. As long as you THINK you hearing a difference, you basically ARE hearing a difference.
Simplified, you're just paying to convince yourself. That's as good as anything else. If you believe you're enjoying the music more, then you WILL enjoy your music more. Certainly this is besides the point of whether cables make an audible difference or not, but i think its the important bit about it.
Everyone here, including those of us with mid or low fi systems are spending/have spent insane amounts of money on equipment for MARGINAL gains, whether they be real or imaginary. I dare someone to tell me that your 1000$ low-midfi equipment plays music 10 times better than your ordinary 100$ boombox. Sure there are the obvious difference like clarity, but TEN TIMES???
Even the most modests collections here have more than 200 CDs. mmmm at 12-15$ a CD (at best) we're still talking about several thousand dollars.
There is very little sanity in audio pricing, because the law of diminishing returns here is HUGE.
Basically my point here is that those who buy very, VERY expensive cabling ARE hearing a difference, even if its not there, and that's what counts. Its paying that much money that convinces them (and possible, me too someday) that they are hearing things they didnt before. If listening to music makes you happy, and spending that money enhances ur happinness, then i think that a pair of 10k$ per meter interconnects are a great deal (if you can afford them).

[E-Stat]

mkay i'll bite. As long as you THINK you hearing a difference, you basically ARE hearing a difference.
Simplified, you're just paying to convince yourself. That's as good as anything else. If you believe you're enjoying the music more, then you WILL enjoy your music more. Certainly this is besides the point of whether cables make an audible difference or not, but i think its the important bit about it.
You really have idea that which has shaped my learning experiences or to what gear I have been exposed. I will quickly agree that there are some guys who buy solely on name or price. I remember one guy I met while working at a hi-fi shop in the 70's in college. We called him Al Gear. Had a total of twenty records. Never attended any concerts.

I have no intention of trying to convince you that your speculations are unfounded. Believe as you will. But, some day you really should hear a system as good as HP's. It will <i>completely</i> recalibrate one's perspective on what can be achieved. I will never forget the first time I heard the Alon Grand Exoticas driven by VTL Wotans, Krell KMA-160s on the woofers using Nordost Valhalla cabling throughout sourced by a Burmester 969/970 transport/dac and a C-J ART II. Cables do matter.


Everyone here, including those of us with mid or low fi systems are spending/have spent insane amounts of money on equipment for MARGINAL gains, whether they be real or imaginary. I dare someone to tell me that your 1000$ low-midfi equipment plays music 10 times better than your ordinary 100$ boombox. Sure there are the obvious difference like clarity, but TEN TIMES???
You won't find any disagreement here. Such is all relative from many perspectives. As for me, I have sufffered from a severe case of chronic music dependence from the age of 12. I require daily fixes. From a "satisfying my daily musical needs" standpoint, does my $50k system provide 500 times the enjoyment I experience from my Sony Walkman CD? Certainly not. On the other hand, however, the Sony never fools me into thinking I'm hearing the live event like my main system can. Or my capable vintage garage system.



Basically my point here is that those who buy very, VERY expensive cabling ARE hearing a difference, even if its not there, and that's what counts.
I truly wish that every music fancier could experience the systems I have. Tell me the same afterwards.

rw

[musicoverall]

mkay i'll bite. As long as you THINK you hearing a difference, you basically ARE hearing a difference.
Simplified, you're just paying to convince yourself. That's as good as anything else. If you believe you're enjoying the music more, then you WILL enjoy your music more. Certainly this is besides the point of whether cables make an audible difference or not, but i think its the important bit about it.
Everyone here, including those of us with mid or low fi systems are spending/have spent insane amounts of money on equipment for MARGINAL gains, whether they be real or imaginary. I dare someone to tell me that your 1000$ low-midfi equipment plays music 10 times better than your ordinary 100$ boombox. Sure there are the obvious difference like clarity, but TEN TIMES???
Even the most modests collections here have more than 200 CDs. mmmm at 12-15$ a CD (at best) we're still talking about several thousand dollars.
There is very little sanity in audio pricing, because the law of diminishing returns here is HUGE.
Basically my point here is that those who buy very, VERY expensive cabling ARE hearing a difference, even if its not there, and that's what counts. Its paying that much money that convinces them (and possible, me too someday) that they are hearing things they didnt before. If listening to music makes you happy, and spending that money enhances ur happinness, then i think that a pair of 10k$ per meter interconnects are a great deal (if you can afford them).

Certainly people can convince themselves that differences exist when they don't. I guess spending the kind of money you mentioned would force the same on me. Happily, I bought neither the most expensive nor the cheapest cable, certainly not the fattest or the prettiest, not the one with the most positive reviews, or the up and coming "dark horse". I simply bought the ones that made my system sound its best. It's not my imagination, for if it were, I would have meditated harder on the zip cord coming out on top. I like to go as cheap as I can... but no cheaper.