Weird Experience With Monster MLS 1000 $100 Optic Cable

[EdwardGein]

In my never ending search for perfection, I bought a Monster MLS1000 Fiber Optics Cable listed for $100 for $78 including shipping new on Ebay. This is one of Monster's top of the line optic cables & had gotten a bunch of great reviews (obviously from people with different ears then me). As with my previous experience with Monster top of the line cables as opposed to their standard or mid cables, the sound was definately not too my liking again and obviously I'm beginning to see a pattern. When I played this cable for my CD's, comparing it back and forth with my cheaper $12 Ebay optic cable, on the same songs, there definately was a big difference, but unfortunately not to my liking, though maybe others would have preferred this. I played different tracks of the Beatles Rubber Soul & Revolver albums, and while the vocals were definately better with this monster cable the backing instrumentation sounded like they had the life sucked out of them, similar if you've ever experienced this, dolbying a non dolby cassette recording. I've had this experience every time I've tried a monster top tier cable- it makes the recordings lifeless & will only buy Monster standard & mid system cables in the future. I've listed this cable on Ebay at a $15 loss

[L.J.]

In my never ending search for perfection....

I've wasted way too much money on stuff like that. From now on, I'll be getting my cables at Ratshack, PE, Home Depot and so on.

[N. Abstentia]

So you 'hear' a difference in the way the light is transmitted through an optical cable? Mmmmkay.

So which sounds better to you? 60 watt bulbs or 75 watt bulbs?

[L.J.]

I think that cheeseburger number 3 is the brightest.

:confused: huh

[GMichael]

So you 'hear' a difference in the way the light is transmitted through an optical cable? Mmmmkay.

So which sounds better to you? 60 watt bulbs or 75 watt bulbs?

I think that cheeseburger number 3 is the brightest.

[JeffKnob]

So you 'hear' a difference in the way the light is transmitted through an optical cable? Mmmmkay.

So which sounds better to you? 60 watt bulbs or 75 watt bulbs?

I like 75watt bulbs.

With a cheap cable I get only 0's and 1's going through, with a mid priced cable there are some 2's and 3's mixed in, and the expensive ones go as high as 9's. The sound is a real trip when there are more than just the 0's and 1's. :D

[GMichael]

:confused: huh

Must I re-review the cottonwood tree thread?

[musicman1999]

ed


if you ar looking to improve cd sound,first look at speakers,then your source.what do you play your cds on.a stand alone cd player will usually be better than a dvd player if that is what you use.
and monster cable makes average to below average cables.
thanks
bill

[EdwardGein]

I never said my sound was bad at all. I love the sound of my speakers. I just thought I could improve on perfection with a super expensive optic cable instead of my cheaper one but obviously that isn't the case.

Again to rehash a dead horse, I tried a $550 Cambridge Audio CD player a year ago & Compared that to the sound of my Harmon Kardon 31 Player, and the Harmon Kardon 31 player when connected to my Denon by optic cable sounded better then the Cambridge by analogue cables (as well as optic). I did this in front of someone on this board & he didn't notice any real difference between the 2. The sound quality of the current DVD players listed at $150 or more is as good if not better then CD players.

In regards to optic cables, I feel like Christopher Columbus telling you people the world is not flat, you will still get better sound from different DVD players and it is not simple as they are not just 1's and 0's. The better your DAC, the better sound will be produced by optic cable.
In the case of Monster, I really like their entry and sometimes mid level product but find their highest tier stuff actually dulls the audio too much.

[L.J.]

ed


if you ar looking to improve cd sound,first look at speakers,then your source.what do you play your cds on.a stand alone cd player will usually be better than a dvd player if that is what you use.
and monster cable makes average to below average cables.
thanks
bill

I agree. Peep out some new speaks :)

[SlumpBuster]

I've wasted way too much money on stuff like that. From now on, I'll be getting my cables at Ratshack, PE, Home Depot and so on.

Sheeeet. I get all my cables and wires at Home Depot and Target. By the time you wire up 7 or 8 source components, the sub, a separate amp for mains, then biwired mains (just for ****s and giggles), a center, four surrounds and two presence spakers it can still be downright expensive. God help the guys running 7 channels of mono blocks.

Running esoteric cables on an integrated, CD player, and pair of bookshelves is one thing... but, on a full blown HT the cost of your cables will quickly outpace the cost of the equipment.

[SlumpBuster]

In regards to optic cables, I feel like Christopher Columbus telling you people the world is not flat

Flip it and reverse it. We are Columbus telling you the world is not flat. Columbus had science and astronomy on his side, like we have optics and binary code. Flatearthers base the belief on subjective observation, the world looks flat so it must be. You hear a difference and the only change is the cable, so it must be the cable.

BTW I won't dispute that you hear a difference. If you tell us you hear it, I have no reason to discount your perception. However, I do dispute that it is the optical cable, unless the cables are broken, defective, or do not meet quality control, they should be the same.

[EdwardGein]

I feel like the guy in those ads who is surrounded by a bunch of monkees!

[N. Abstentia]

In regards to optic cables, I feel like Christopher Columbus telling you people the world is not flat, you will still get better sound from different DVD players and it is not simple as they are not just 1's and 0's.

Actually, it is that simple. It's 1's and 0's. It's called 'binary'. There are two states..'on' and 'off'. There is no in-between.

Seriously, I think you should go to your nearest Techincal school and enroll in a data communications class. Don't take that the wrong way, I'm not calling you a moron..I just think you (hell most everybody actually) could learn a lot from a class like that. In the Cisco Networking Acadamy we went deep in to fiber optic cable and in the end it comes down to 1's and 0's.

You know how fiber runs are tested? If there is light at the end it's good. If there is no light it's bad. There is no magical middle ground. It's either on or off.

[GMichael]

I feel like the guy in those ads who is surrounded by a bunch of monkees!

I resemble that.

[SlumpBuster]

I feel like the guy in those ads who is surrounded by a bunch of monkees!


:D I know, I work with a bunch of jackasses. :D
You had to have seen the extended version during the Stupor Bowl.

[Resident Loser]

I feel like the guy in those ads who is surrounded by a bunch of monkees!

...Davey...Mike...Peter...where? where?

Oh, you mean the arboreal types...No, it's just probably the laughter from those surrounding you...

We make up custom length FO data cables...after you cut/mount/finish the connector you do one thing...connect one end to a calibrated light source and the other to a matching receiver unit...there are two choices: Pass or Fail...

jimHJJ(...there is no gray-area...just another in a series of 0s and 1s...)

[L.J.]

Sheeeet. I get all my cables and wires at Home Depot and Target. By the time you wire up 7 or 8 source components, the sub, a separate amp for mains, then biwired mains (just for ****s and giggles), a center, four surrounds and two presence spakers it can still be downright expensive. God help the guys running 7 channels of mono blocks.

Running esoteric cables on an integrated, CD player, and pair of bookshelves is one thing... but, on a full blown HT the cost of your cables will quickly outpace the cost of the equipment.

I'm finishing up my bedroom system and I went with Home Depot for most of my wires. Not too bad on the wallet, I must say. I do see the value in a well built cable, but monster is not gonna see much of my money, if any. I think Ratshack/Home Depot offers some decent cables for a great price.

[topspeed]

Why does this thread look so familiar?

Ohh...that's why! :mad:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=12017

[musicman1999]

ed

try this,take out your optical cable,buy yourself a good,well built,coax cable with heavy,solid connectors.if your cable run is short this is all you will ever need.
i use an ixos digital interconnect,$89.00 canadian.it goes on so tight you need two hands to pull it off and is well insulated.
try it
thanks
bill

[EdwardGein]

I admit I've never tried coax cable I heard, possibly wrong, they are not as good as optic. Out of curiosity, do you notice difference in audio quality with different coax cables? Do you notice a difference in sound quality between coax & optic cable?

[musicman1999]

ed
i have done one comparison,hooked both cables dvd to reciever,went back and forth many times and could not find a noticible difference.However i have a habit of moving wires around alot and optical cables with plastic ends were very easy to knock loose.i have heard that glass ends fasten better but i have not tried one.
to sum up in a basic system,such as yours,you will find no difference in cables.In more advanced systems cables can be used as a form of tone control.For instance i have Jm Labs speakers,which are known to be somewhat on the bright side,so i use a neutral sounding interconnect from my cd player(arcam cd73t) to my reciever.My dealer loaned me a Kimber silver streak i/c,which is a silver core cable($350.00 canadian per 1/2 meter)and is very bright sounding.Needless to say it was a terrible pairing and they went right back.
hope this helps
bill

[markw]

I admit I've never tried coax cable I heard, possibly wrong, they are not as good as optic. Well, at least the part where you say you heard wrong, anyway.

[EdwardGein]

I just checked out your system which looks real good & an obvious financial investment on your part. Here's the thing though and do take it to heart, You obviously make a good or at worst, decent living so if you have the money, which you obviously do, why not invest in relatively expensive cables instead of cheap cables? The worst case scenario is the expensive cables don't sound any better then the cheap cables but so what, you can afford it.
Best case scenario, the expensive cables improve your system. You wanna win, you gotta play. If your going to invest in first class equipment then you may as well do things all the way,http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/6.gif
:6: not half ass. Anyway, your system looks great but your cable situation is self suicide. It reminds me of players in the NBA with million dollar contracts who don't spend a buck on a Condum & wind up paying half their salary on child support. Which reminds me. Who is the father of our country? Shawn Kemp

[evil__betty]

the problem with optical cables is that if you were to crimp the cable (fold it back on its self), you run the possibility of cutting off the signal. When you use a higher quality cable, it will protect against any crimping to make sure that the signal will always pass through. I have an expensive Acoustic Research optical cable that can be double backed on itself and not crimp at all. Does it sound better than the cheap $20 cable that used to be in that input? Not at all. This is an honest question, and the guys on this board will be more than happy to point people in the right direction with their concerns. But when you repeatidly ask the same question and refuse to believe the answers, you will get smart ass remarks thrown back at you.

p.s. A DAC will have zero affect on how a digital signal sounds. Remember a DAC is a Digital to Analog Converter. There is no Analog signal passed through a digital optical cable - its just digital. Thats why when you buy a CD player with a very good DAC, you hook it up through RCA cables to your amp/receiver that also has a good DAC to get the best sound. IMO analog will always sound better than digital (listen to a hi-fi system through a kick ass turntable and then listen to the same album on CD and the CD will loose terribly).

[EdwardGein]

I wish you were in LA & in front of Paul PCI, if I played 2 Optic cables for you, the Monster one I mentioned & the one I have, I'd bet that you, as a professional musician, would notice a definate difference in sound quality on CD's. The original optic cable I have which is relatively inexpensive ($20 or so) gives a much pokier sound then the Monster cable which seems to take the balls out of the music but does somehow make the vocals more prominent. You would also notice a difference in sound quality between a glass fiber optic cable & a regular one. The glass fiber optic cable in this case gives a much more pokier sound then my regular cable & I use it for my TV sound but not my CD/DVD sound as it is too overbearing. For my particular unit, Harmon Kardon 31 player & Denon 3801 Receiver, the sound is actually better through the optic cable then analogue cables. If for nothing else, you might want to invest $25 for a glass optic cable, there is one person who sells these new on Ebay, for your TV sound. If you hooked this up with your unit, I think you would notice a difference in cable sound. As a musician you should know that just because on paper, say 4 musicians of a certain individual high talent play together, they won't necessarily sound better then 2 musicians of high talent & 2 good but not great musicians. I think the same thing is true with digital music. Different cables will produce differences in sound even if it is 1's and 0's. If 2 musicians like Jeff Beck & Eric Clapton play the same identical riff the same way, I bet you still could guess, who played what.

[markw]

I just checked out your system which looks real good & an obvious financial investment on your part. Here's the thing though and do take it to heart, You obviously make a good or at worst, decent living so if you have the money, which you obviously do, why not invest in relatively expensive cables instead of cheap cables? The worst case scenario is the expensive cables don't sound any better then the cheap cables but so what, you can afford it.Well, if they won't make a difference. and that has been my experience, why should I waste my money?



Best case scenario, the expensive cables improve your system. You wanna win, you gotta play. If your going to invest in first class equipment then you may as well do things all the way,http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/6.gif
:6: not half ass. Anyway, your system looks great but your cable situation is self suicide.Thank you. It is a great system, but suicide? I don't think so.. Many practicing musicians and vocalists have commented on its uncanny ability to recreate a live performance, particularly the choir mambers. Oh, as for source material, remember, many times we play discs made of their performances as well as commercial recordings.


It reminds me of players in the NBA with million dollar contracts who don't spend a buck on a Condum & wind up paying half their salary on child support.I'll remember that. When I want to get screwed I'll spend the money.

[L.J.]

(LJ opens door, sticks head in)




:out:



(LJ closes the door and walks away)

[N. Abstentia]

Different cables will produce differences in sound even if it is 1's and 0's. If 2 musicians like Jeff Beck & Eric Clapton play the same identical riff the same way, I bet you still could guess, who played what.

If you actually think that is an accurate analogy, I think we're beginning to see the root of the problem here.

Surely you've got better since than that...please tell me you were joking. Please?

Let me guess...I'll bet you think the internet looks better when you use a $100 network cable as opposed to the $4 cable that came with your router. Oh, and blue CAT5 cable lets more electrons through than does red CAT5. If you're using red, go get blue.

[EdwardGein]

If you have the money & have invested alot of money on your system, it's stupid to, out of principle, not invest in expensive cables for it & chose cheap cables instead. The worst case scenario is you've wasted the money but as you have money anyway, so what, who cares, you're none the worst for it. The best case scenario is they improve the sound & the money was well spent. Sorry I don't see a downside in spending the money if you have it. Doing things out of principle is self destructive.http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/16.gif
:16:

[L.J.]

Wasting money is not common sense.

[topspeed]

If you have the money & have invested alot of money on your system, it's stupid to, out of principle, not invest in expensive cables for it & chose cheap cables instead. The worst case scenario is you've wasted the money but as you have money anyway, so what, who cares, you're none the worst for it. The best case scenario is they improve the sound & the money was well spent. Sorry I don't see a downside in spending the money if you have it. Doing things out of principle is self destructive.http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/16.gif
:16:
This is why you have no money, Hershon. Go read the book The Millionaire Next Door as well as Rich Dad, Poor Dad. Both are best sellers and can be found at any Borders. They are quick, easy reads and you'll learn how warped your sensibilities about money are. One of my favorite quotes is when the author asks a millionaire what his favorite drinks are. His response is, "I have two: Beer and Free."

Understand the key to money is as much about keeping it as it is about making it.

[markw]

The worst case scenario is you've wasted the money but as you have money anyway, so what, who cares, you're none the worst for it.Actually, I am the worse for it. That's money I no longer have that was spent on something I neither wanted or needed. It could be making around 4.5% in a CD. ...maybe more next month.



Sorry I don't see a downside in spending the money if you have it.I do. If it's spent foolishly enough times, you won't have any more money to to spend AND you won't have anything worthwhile to show for it. That sure looks like at least one, possibly two, downsides to me.



Doing things out of principle is self destructive.Does that include the two principles you've just put forth here to which I've responded?

[N. Abstentia]

If you have the money & have invested alot of money on your system, it's stupid to, out of principle, not invest in expensive cables for it & chose cheap cables instead.


Wait...didn't you recently SELL all of the remotes that came with all your equipment so that you could justify paying for said equipment?

Didn't you recently buy something, then found out weeks later that it was like $40 cheaper so you actually returned it then bought it again just to save that $40? Am I remembering right?


You sure you should be handing out financial advice? :confused:

[musicman1999]

ed

just because cables are expensive does not make them better.I have on occasion tried expensive cables and equipment that made the system sound worse.You must remember that a good system can be changed by any piece of the chain and not even mentioning the way that the room can affect the sound.
bill

[Smokey]

If you have the money & have invested alot of money on your system, it's stupid to, out of principle, not invest in expensive cables for it & chose cheap cables instead.

Again, your statement is misleading. There is no argument that we should stay away from cheap cables, but investing in expensive cables is not the answer either.

The right approach [and statement] would be to invest in quality cables :)

[EdwardGein]

As usual you misquote me Nabsenta. That's the problen when English is a second language. I said simply that as I have a universal remote &s I intend to keep the equipment I have, there simply is no need for me to keep the remotes that came with my stuff like the Denon remote & I resold it for $50 as I had no use for it at all, NADA. My income is strictly middle class and my purchases are based upon the economics of what I have. I stretch my money out by buying excellent used equipment for 1/3 the price of new equipment, when possible, and haven't had any problems whatsoever. If I had twice my income, I'd buy new.

To reiterate, if you spend $1,000 on a suit, you don't buy a $40 pair of Payless shoes with your outfit, but unfortunately people here don't grasp the concept. If you have a $10,000 home theater system and you make say $85,000 a year, spend $500 or more on cables instead of $50 is not going to put a crimp in your lifestyle. Putting principle above common sense is not an admirable quality especially as your hypothesis is wrong to begin with. If expensive cables didn't perform better then inexpensive ones, there simply wouldn't be a market for this & they wouldn't exist, Again and you can quote me on this & it isn't directed to anyone specifically but if the shoe fits wear it, anyone with an expensive system who uses cheap cables & can afford otherwise, is a fool.

My whole point of this thread which seems to be lost is that I never said you can't get quality cables for affordable prices but if you have to spend some money on a better cable that produces better sound & you own an expensive system, you better do it. In the case of the Monster MLS1000 cable that sells for $100 I actually posted total dissatisfaction with the sound which came to me as a surprise because of the cost,

[N. Abstentia]

ed

just because cables are expensive does not make them better.I have on occasion tried expensive cables and equipment that made the system sound worse.You must remember that a good system can be changed by any piece of the chain and not even mentioning the way that the room can affect the sound.
bill


That's very true, but I just wanted to point out that we're talking about cables that carry a digital bitstream here and not interconnect cables. I just don't understand how a digital bitstream has sound, much less how it can sound different from another digital bitstream.

[musicman1999]

n.

true,I am mostly an analog kind of guy and sometimes i forget.

thanks
bill

[N. Abstentia]

In the case of the Monster MLS1000 cable that sells for $100 I actually posted total dissatisfaction with the sound which came to me as a surprise because of the cost,

So you're saying...the 1's and 0's sound different through that cable? The light sounds different?

[teledynepost]

Until you tell HOW two optical cables could sound different, I do not believe that you could hear a difference. It just doesn't make any sense.

[EdwardGein]

To begin with if the sound from all optic cables sounded identical, there is no way in the world that companys could sell optic cables that weren't similar in price. IE, the market though supply & demand would not allow a $100 optic cable to exist. So obviously there is a demand for optic cables at greater cost then others, so ifso facto, there must be a difference in sound.

On the technical end, Read the Following from Audioholics:

" Digital Cables
Digital cables, particularly coax, are not quite as critical as video since S/PDIF bandwidth is less than NTSC and the rise/fall times are not quite that stringent. The purpose of these cables is to pass a 44.1-48kHz sampled bitstream for PCM, DD /DTS. Should you choose to use coax type cables for your digital connections, I recommend using 75 ohm compatible shielded RCA cables, even good video cables will work just fine, to minimize coupling issues from adjacent cabling on long runs and/or potential RFI/EMI ingress, while also keeping losses to a minimum by proper impedance matching.

Toslink, or fiber optic cables, is another viable option with the advantage of not being disturbed by RFI/EMI, or ingress from adjacent cables carrying digital, analog, or power signals. The downsides are that some toslink cables may make a rather flimsy connection to the interface equipment which can be compromised when adjusting components in your rack or if the cable is weighed down by other cables in your system and for long runs compression and rarefractions can occur, especially if the cable excessively flexes or bends. I recommend selecting toslink cables that have a decent locking mechanism to avoid these mechanical issues.

What can make a difference in the sound of digital signal ?
There are two things which can cause differences between the sound of digital interfaces:

1. Jitter (clock phase noise)
This really only affects sound of the signal going directly to a DAC. Modern DACs in DVD/CD players typically have a small buffer and reclocking circuitry, so the jitter is not so big problem nowadays that it used to be.

2. Errors
This usually causes very significant changes in the sound, often loud popping noises but occasionally less offensive effects. Any data loss or errors in either are a sign of a very broken link which is probably intermittently dropping out altogether.

S/PDIF signals defined
The signal on the digital output of a CD/DVD player looks like almost perfect square-wave, with an amplitude of about 1Vpp and a frequency bandwidth of almost 3 MHz.
For each sample, two 32-bit words are transmitted, which results in a bit-rate of:

2.8224 Mbit/s (44.1 kHz sampling rate, CD, DAT)

3.072 Mbit/s (48 kHz sampling rate, DAT, DVD)

2.048 Mbit/s (32 kHz sampling rate, for satellite purposes)

The output impedance is standard 75 ohm, so ordinary coaxial cable designed for video applications can be used. The minimal input level of S/PDIF interface is 200 mVrms which allows some cable losses. There is no real need for special quality cable as long as the cable is made of 75 ohm coaxial cable (a good video accessory cable works also as good S/PDIF cable). Newer formats such as

DVD-Audio and SACD are now starting to come with proprietary digital outputs for passing the high resolution signals in the digital domain. We will come back to this application when hardware vendor support of these interfaces becomes more common place."

On my system, for which anyone here is welcome to come down to LA & place a bet & it can be witnessed by someone on this board with a good reputation, there clearly is a difference in sound in optic cables as my current optic cable produces a much more pokier sound then say the Monster MLS 1000 Digital Cable.

[evil__betty]

That big long post had almost nothing to do with an optical cable! Optical and digital coax use differenct means to transfer the same signal. Opitcal cables use light to transmit the signal. You will loose signal when the path is distorted, bent, crimped, whatever. That artical says that optical may not be the best simply because of the locking mechinism that it uses - it might loosen and not allow proper transfer of the signal. Digital coax states that the cable has to maintain a 75 ohm impedience to correctly transfer the signal.

Absolutly NOWHERE in that post does it say that by buying a more expensive optical cable will make your system sound different from the cheapo one that you bought on ebay. It does reccomend a higher quality cable to ensure that the cable stays put in the optical input/output and to prevent excessive bends in the connection.

Ed, you're fighting a loosing battle here, and making yourself look like a complete idiot while doing it. Keep up the good work! Maybe you'll get that reviewer job thats posted here (http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=15907)

[EdwardGein]

Thank you for the unintended compliment of you telling me I'm making an idiot of myself here because a bunch of closeminded people who are too afraid to take chances to better themselves when they are not even risking anything financially in proportion to what they have ,obviously are threatened by me because I don't want to live my life that way.
The thing I love about this board is how a bunch of people can make judgements on things they haven't heard over people who are describing actual scenarios they've experienced first hand. The bottom line is, if you get the same audio results from every fiber optic cable then companys could not create, market and sell optic cables that differ greatly in price. That is obviously not the case, Deal with ithttp://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/ciappa.gif
:ciappa:http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/16.gifhttp://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/ciappa.gif
:ciappa:http://forums.audioreview.com/images/smilies/17.gif
:17:
:16:

[teledynepost]

The whole thing you posted did not say how sound could differ from one cable to the other, just that some could become bent or not connected properly. From your very own post:
"There is no real need for special quality cable "
As long as the signal gets there; it's the same signal.
"Modern DACs in DVD/CD players typically have a small buffer and reclocking circuitry"

Right there, it collects the signal, then plays it at the proper sample rate. Any break in the signal would result in major errors, as stated in the thing you posted- pops, or gaps possibly.

As for why there are 'expensive' cables you could be paying for:
-more solid connectors (nothing to do with the sound, just less of a chance of it breaking)
-better refraction (for allowing longer cables)
-looks
-brand name
-marketing

Light is not susceptable to RFI/EMI, again as stated in your very own post, so I would think any sort of 'shielding' is purely a marketing ploy.

Edit: Oh and as for your $100 cable, retailers get them for about $25, and so it must cost Monster even less than that to manufacture.

[EdwardGein]

What was lost in my original post was that the $100 Monster Optics Cable sucked sound wise & I've gotten better results in comparison to the Monster one from alot cheaper priced cables. I do naturally expect to get superior sound from more expensive cables though. I seriously doubt that if people don't expect an improvement on sound quality they would pay 20X the cost of a regular cable for its cosmetic looks, etc., especially when its hidden in the back of your receiver & DVD player.

[markw]

Hey If I'm Making Myself an Idiot in Front of Idiots That's An HonorWell, you ARE making yourself an idiot, and an arrogantly stubborn one at that. Trust me on this; that's NOT an honor.

Ed, think about it. You're acting like a salmon. They spend their lives swimming against the current only to get screwed and die.

You DO know the difference between ignorance and stupidity, don't you?

Ignorance can be cured with education. Stupidity either refuses to be or is incapable of being educated.

People here are sincerely tyying to educate you.

So, which is it, hersh?

[N. Abstentia]

I do naturally expect to get superior sound from more expensive cables though.

...and there you go. There's the answer to your "well then why do they make $100 fiber cables?"

So fools will buy them.


However the problem lies with the fact that you think it sounded WORSE. The cable didn't sound any different. Whatever you did to your system when swapping cables is what made it sound worse.

And posting that article did not help your case any. It pretty much verified what we've been trying to tell you all this time. Did you even understand it?

1) Jitter is not a problem if you have a good DAC (maybe you don't?).

2) Errors will occur if the cable is broken. Well duh. I would call 'no sound' an error.

Digital is 1's and 0's. Off or on. Work or don't work. There is NO in between. NONE.