Expensive Cables? I must resist!

[JSE]

I know from experience that expensive cables are a waste, but I am getting tempted to buy some nicer ones for my new Yamaha RX-X1400 receiver that I am finally hooking up tomorrow. I have to get some new ones to take advantage of my DVD player that plays DVD-A. I know I will get the cheaper Radio Shack Gold Series but the temptation is there. Why? I have tried Monster cables in the past and I have never been able to hear any difference at all except for the draining sound of my bank account. Took them back ASAP. I guess I can understand how people get suckered. They want to best for their new toy. I guess people get caught up in the excitement of hooking up a new component. They just don’t understand the best is not always more expensive.

Sorry to rant, but I thought I would just relay my thoughts/temptations just prior to hooking up. And again, I don’t believe the cable hype out there. I just find it funny that I am getting tempted to waste money. Radio Shack, here I come. I must be strong.

JSE

[mtrycraft]

I just find it funny that I am getting tempted to waste money. Radio Shack, here I come. I must be strong.

JSE


Human nature and many decades of marketing conditioning to part you from your $$$. :)

[E-Stat]

I am getting tempted to buy some nicer ones for my new Yamaha RX-X1400 receiver that I am finally hooking up tomorrow.

No need for anything better than the RS cables with your system.

rw

[FLZapped]

No need for anything better than the RS cables with your system.

rw


Typical audiopile(spelling deliberate) elitist attitude comment with no basis for such indignance, save for dollars spent.

-Bruce

[E-Stat]

...with no basis for such indignance, save for dollars spent.

Knee jerking again?

Scorn and contempt are absent with honesty. My opinion holds just as true with a similar system of mine as well.

rw

[Tony_Montana]

No need for anything better than the RS cables with your system.

Sorry, but that is going by the assumption that higher priced systems need fancier [more expensive] cable which is flawed theory in concept. Quality cables don't need to cost arm and a leg to satisfy its specifications as a cable (quality shielding, low capacitance/resistance and quality connectors). If you believe other wise...(as Spock used to say).....it is not logical :D

[JSE]

Rat Shack did not have Squat. So, I went to ACE Harward to get some paint brushes and what did I find? Some mighty nice cables under the Ace brand. They seem to be really well built (my only criteria) and just about all were under $9 or $10 for 12ft runs. I forgot they had this stuff. It's your local hardware/audio store! I even got some free popcorn on my way out. Got my cables and a snack! E-stat, did your cables come with popcorn? HMMMM? :D

Later,

JSE

[trollgirl]

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I tried a few of the better cables, but then a local dealer told me that the cheap RS cables were just fine, and that one friend of his who had exotic components used nothing else. So, I went to RS and bought a few only to find that there were intermittent opens in the connection. I took them back - probably a bad lot. Later, I found that one of my better cables - brand unknown - just did not sound right in a certain application, so I used another pair, and they sounded fine. That is the only time I noticed a patch cord making a difference. Other than that, the expensive cables are a pleasure to plug and unplug, and they offer better resistance to corrosion. How about cheap cables and a tube of contact enhancer?

Laz

[E-Stat]

Sorry, but that is going by the assumption that higher priced systems need fancier [more expensive] cable which is flawed theory in concept.

I never said that high rez systems need high rez cables. They can, however, benefit from them to squeeze out that last bit of harmonic detail. I'm really not part of the "the difference is like night and day, man" crowd.


If you believe other wise...(as Spock used to say).....it is not logical :D

Spock wasn't always logical himself. When he was calculating the path around the Sun in the Klingon Warbird to go back in time, he simply "guessed" as to the coordinates.

rw

[skeptic]

Children want to believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, and the easter bunny. Audiophiles want to believe in nice looking cables. That makes the job of marketing them so much easier. Packaging is sometimes everything. Detroit used to repackage the same crappy old cars every year with a slightly different body style and the suckers just kept coming back again and again and again year after year until the Japanese offered them a quality product that didn't change and didn't fall apart after 50,000 miles either. It takes time for some people to wake up and then again, some never do.

The myth that only "high resolution" sound systems can reveal the difference between cables is one of Jon Risch's favorite arguements. Now that he doesn't post here much anymore, it's nice to see that someone else has taken up that cause. Of course nobody here would ever want to admit that he doesn't own a high resolution system whatever that means. Or that his hearing has deteriorated from age or from being exposed to loud sounds so long that a better investment would be a hearing aid. Do you need a hearing aid when you can hear things that don't exist? Maybe a straight jacket and a rubber room would be more appropriate.

Even expensive cables can fail in service. Several years ago, MikE reported that the pins on his expensive speaker cables broke off and the manufacturer (who was his friend) repaired them for free. (He was trying to tell us how wonderful they were to give this level of customer service but was a little horrified when I thanked him for letting us know which brand was so unreliable. Apparantly his friends told him not to mention their name on this board again. Hehehe.)

[E-Stat]

Detroit used to repackage the same crappy old cars every year with a slightly different body style...

Used to? Aside from trucks, they have relinquished the rest of the market to the Japanese and the Germans. I've driven Honda vehicles, both two and four wheeled, exclusively for over twenty years.


The myth that only "high resolution" sound systems can reveal the difference between cables is one of Jon Risch's favorite arguements.

Everyone has a point of reference of as to the best system they have heard. By comments you made in an earlier thread where you told us about your million dollar+ house, you stated that you could afford anything you wanted. Ok. Does your system represent the very best that you have heard?

rw

[FLZapped]

Knee jerking again?

Scorn and contempt are absent with honesty. My opinion holds just as true with a similar system of mine as well.

rw


The only knee jerk reply was your unjustifiable elitest attitude. Your remarks were punitive, not honest, an apology is owed.

-Bruce

[FLZapped]

I never said that high rez systems need high rez cables. They can, however, benefit from them to squeeze out that last bit of harmonic detail. I'm really not part of the "the difference is like night and day, man" crowd.

rw

Of course, no one really knows what a "hi-rez" system is. Just another marketing term as far as I can tell.

Regardsless, your comments were out of line and punitive, whether or not you intended them s such.

-Bruce

[Tony_Montana]

Spock wasn't always logical himself. When he was calculating the path around the Sun in the Klingon Warbird to go back in time, he simply "guessed" as to the coordinates.


But he did guess right :D By the way, that was best of part of that movie (including the arrival of the probe).

You said that you're really not part of the "the difference is like night and day, man" crowd, but your following sentence.......

"I never said that high rez systems need high rez cables. They can, however, benefit from them to squeeze out that last bit of harmonic detail".

...............slightly contradict that view.

Harmonics issue is directly related to bandwidth/capacitance of a cable, and quality cables [such as RadioShack's Golden/Fusion series, AR or Belden 1505F sold @ Bluejeancables.com] does address bandwidth issue very well :)

[E-Stat]

But he did guess right :D

As do I.


... but your following sentence.......

They can, however, benefit from them to squeeze out that last bit of harmonic detail".

...............slightly contradict that view.

Evidently, I need to elaborate on what I consider "last bit". As I have stated previously, I am a detail junkie. I love hearing aspects of my favorite recordings that I have never heard before. What kind of music do you listen to? Pop, jazz, classical? The best classical recording are rife with such content. Perhaps pop. Both of Dido's recordings have some very tasty detail-laden cuts. If you're interested, I'll provide exact timing marks of what I refer to in various recordings. There is a small world of musical subtleties that is lost with zip cord and basic ICs. To most folks who do not have music running through their head daily as I do, such information is insignificant or undetectable. Such differences are easily lost with typical cowboy comparisons. They are not, however, lost when you listen to HP's system.

rw

[E-Stat]

Your remarks were punitive, not honest, an apology is owed.

What I find mildly amusing about your comments is that the common refrain from the peanut gallery here would be essentially the same.

Would you instead suggest to this individual any models from Nordost, Cardas, Kimber, JPS Labs, etc.?

rw

[skeptic]

Does your system represent the very best that you have heard?
rw

I'd have to say in some ways yes, in some ways no. My system incorporates both a conventional 2 channel sound system and what can loosely be termed a surround system of my own invention. I stopped seriously shopping for audio equipment many years ago when I came to some startling conclusions among which was that the then current (and still prevalent) paradymes for high end audio systems would soon be fully exploited and had far more than reached the point of diminishing returns and approached the absolute maximum which it could deliver. Depending on what your particular goals and expectations are this may be entirely satisfactory or unsatisfactory. My current best sound system as a two channel setup can fairly accurately reproduce the musical timbre of insturments on most well made recordings most of the time. As far as I am concerned, this is the most a two channel audio system can strive for. As people who have read my opinions know, I am mostly focused on classical music which I consider the only music which is sufficiently compelling to justify the cost and effort of the best technology has to offer. But they also know that I am well aware from both my personal experience and from reading expert opinions of the worlds best acousticians such as Leo Baranek and Cyril Harris (not to mention the published measurements of Amar Bose) that acoustics of concert halls play a crucial role in what is heard at a live performance contributing 80 percent or more of the total sound yet modern technology has no way to record or resynthesize this sound. I solved the physics, mathematics, and electrical engineering aspects of this problem 30 years ago this March and incorporated all of this knowledge into a patent which ran out several years ago. The second prototype version I experimented with produced a more convincing illusion than the current one but was very complicated to operate and difficult to adjust and maintain. After 11 years of on and off use and experimentation, it was dismantled 19 year ago never to see the light of day again. The current one is less satisfactory but has only been in existance about 2 years and will undergo further development. In short, there is NO equipment anyone could conceivably offer at any price which in any way resembles what is currently offered that would satisfy me any more than what I currently own. As for cables, considering the gap between what the techonlogy can produce and what I want and expect, it's just a kind of joke.

[E-Stat]

Thank you for the thoughtful comments.


I am mostly focused on classical music which I consider the only music which is sufficiently compelling to justify the cost and effort of the best technology has to offer.

Agreed. I particularly like minimally miked recordings, both old and new. Some of the three miked Mercury recordings from the 50s still hold their own in realism to me.


In short, there is NO equipment anyone could conceivably offer at any price which in any way resembles what is currently offered that would satisfy me any more than what I currently own.

While I won't debate satisfaction, you may be surprised at what is available today. My point of reference got completely recalibrated a couple of years ago when I first heard one particular system. It is so startlingly better than anything else I've ever heard. The problem is that you really cannot go to any dealer and hear such. Nor are shows particularly good sonic environments. While those experiences haven't lessened the enjoyment I get from listening to music with my gear, they have opened my eyes (er, ears) at what is possible.

rw

[FLZapped]

What I find mildly amusing about your comments is that the common refrain from the peanut gallery here would be essentially the same.

Would you instead suggest to this individual any models from Nordost, Cardas, Kimber, JPS Labs, etc.?

rw


Why are you squirming? Has nothing to do with any recommendation, rather your punitive comments made. -Bruce

[bturk667]

Have you ever tried some expensive cables in your system?

[bturk667]

.....
Typical audiopile(spelling deliberate) elitist attitude comment with no basis for such indignance, save for dollars spent.

-Bruce

[Rockwell]

Wow, me with an elitist attitude, COOL!!!


Pssst! ...It's not a good thing.

[JSE]

Bturk,


Have you ever tried some expensive cables in your system?

Are you asking me? If so, then yes. I have tried Monster cables although some would not think of them as expensive. I just know that I heard no difference at all. I hear no difference between them and $10 Rat Shack brand. My best friend uses Kimber (?) cables and we have heard no difference with those as well. They look cool, but no difference in sound. Of course he just has a Marantz receiver, nothing High-Rez, so maybe it does not make a difference with such equipment. :p

I think it come down to priorities. Cables don't do it for me. I have not been able to tell a difference and I am not going to spend huge amounts of money for subtle improvements at best. If they even exist.

E-stat,

No offense taken. You spend a lot of money on Audio equipment. I don't compared to many. I've got about $3500 in it? Sounds great to me. I spend LOTS of money on photography equipment. I have more invested in lenses, bodies and lighting equipment than MOST people would ever think about spending on Audio or on a vehicle for that matter. That's just me. I choose to spend my money differently. I do however make money with it and I CAN see a difference between my Nikon 300mm 2.8 AFS lens and a cheap consumer lens. The differences are easily measurable and viewable. It's not opinion. Can you say that about cables? :eek:

JSE

[FLZapped]

.....


Wasn't replying to you. -Bruce

[bturk667]

Wasn't replying to you. -Bruce So, I am not a typical audipile? That's cool! I try, if nothing else, to not be typical!

[bturk667]

Try to use the hybrid option to view responses, it makes it easier to see who is responding to whom. One suggestion, see if you can do a home demo of the Nordost Blue Heavens, I think you might change your tune!

[bturk667]

Pssst! ...It's not a good thing......

[JSE]

"Try to use the hybrid option to view responses"

Ah, much better.

I'm listening to the Blue Man Group DVD-A as I type this. Pretty impressive on those Rat Shack specials with some RCA brand cables and my new ACE hardware cables mixed in there. :D

JSE

[E-Stat]

E-stat,

No offense taken.

Good. None was intended. I offered my honest opinion. Folks can take it or leave it. Or complain about it.


...I CAN see a difference between my Nikon 300mm 2.8 AFS lens and a cheap consumer lens... The differences are easily measurable and viewable...Can you say that about cables? :eek:

Such differences are audible on audio gear that is equivalent to your fine Nikkor optics. Unlike still photography, the dynamic nature of music as yet precludes easily quantifiable measurements for cables which are based entirely upon static criteria. The closest photographic analogy I can think of is comparing a 90 foot per minute 35 mm movie to that of a 337 foot per minute vertically oriented 15 perforation 70 mm IMAX film. How do you quantify the subjective difference in flicker rate? Not to mention the phenomenal color saturation.

rw

[bturk667]

"Try to use the hybrid option to view responses"

Ah, much better.

I'm listening to the Blue Man Group DVD-A as I type this. Pretty impressive on those Rat Shack specials with some RCA brand cables and my new ACE hardware cables mixed in there. :D

JSE As long as your happy, well, isn't that all that matters! If you get the chance however, I highly recommend the Nordost Blue Heavens.

[E-Stat]

Wasn't replying to you. -Bruce

He was referring to me, Mr. Audio Elitist . How dare I suggest that a $600 receiver does not represent the current state-of-the-art?

;)

rw

[E-Stat]

I highly recommend the Nordost Blue Heavens.

Uh oh, you better watch out. Nordost is the devil incarnate with their $3300 / meter Valhalla ICs. Not to mention if you've ever waltzed with the devil as I have over at HP's. But then I am the scourge of the earth, Mr. Audio Elitist.

:)

rw

[happy ears]

Just like audio saying something is expensive is very subjective. My brother would think that Rat Shack cables are exspensive but has no problem spending money fixing up his old car, which is a hobby for him. My sister would say a stereo needs interconnects and speaker wires, I just plug it in and turn it on. Her only requirement is that the local station she listen too comes in clear without unwanted noise. Off course there are those that would never be caught shopping in a Radio Shack store.

So when it comes to our hobbies and if I rememeber correctly hobbies cost money. If we are to profit from this so called hobby I would call it a business. For those that spend more time behind their equipment instead of listening they are missing many hours that they can be enjoying the music.

As well some of the people can enjoy the music listening on the most basic equipment and have no desire for anything better. Have seen some wealthy people with some very expensive and exotic stereo, looked pretty nice sitting there but never heard what it sounded like. So being human we all have different beliefs and requirements and I do not believe that I should be telling someone else where and what they should spend thier money on. If they ask and give a dollar value and if I am familiar with the equipment they are looking at I will give my two sense. However the best advise I can give is take it home, try it out and if you do not like it bring it back. If it costs more and you do not hear a difference bring it back as well, why spend money on something that makes no difference.

Finally I will agree with those that say it is better to spend money on equipment such as better speakers or source be it a CD player, record player or tape deck than on exotic cables. But if this is all that they want to get so be it, as I have heard differences at time on cables, some better some worse. But this is only my opinion, just like the people that tell me there are no different on any equipment. Specifications are only a guide not the final answer, for that we must us our ears.

Have A Great Day and enjoy the music