Has Anyone Found Night and Day Difference in Analog Audio Cables?

[EdwardGein]

My own personal experience with Analog Cables is that More Expensive Cables for my Jolida JD100A CD player didn't improve sound at all and in fact often made audio worse and I got the best results with cheap Acoustic Research Performance Series Audio cables that one can get at Best Buy. Maybe there's also "a rule" that if your speakers and sub cost $800 and one has a 10 year old Denon Receiver (AVR 3801) spending a lot of money on cables is a mistake. Has anyone here ever found a night and day difference in sound from a pair of cables? When I read reviews on Audio Review and in other places, I'm practically drooling over these expensive cables but when I try them out I'm utterly disappointed as they seem to take the guts and life out of the sound. I'm posting this because I'm going to buy analog cables when I get Blu-Ray and maybe someone really has gotten startling sound with their cables.

[Kevio]

No. But I'm a skeptic so the magic has never worked on me.

[Worf101]

I DID notice a VAST improvement when I switched from the hardware provided "spaghetti" cables to moderately priced (50 to 80 dollar) boutique cables. But that was my price limit. Most of these cables have proven to be quite adequate. I've no reason to spend more.

Da Worfster

[jaytrezza]

i do not know what what types of systems everyone is running. i am assuming that you do not have coax or optical connections. high priced analog cables are good for very high-end systems when you are trying to squeeze every last drop of performance out of them, otherwise moderate to cheap cables work just fine. As for using the analog cables on your blu-ray, i just wouldn't do it. you will never get the true performance you would hope for. it would be an injustice(in my humble opinion) i would stick with dvd's or upgrade my receiver. the difference between analog and digital,now that's night and day!

jayt

[02audionoob]

As for using the analog cables on your blu-ray, i just wouldn't do it. you will never get the true performance you would hope for. it would be an injustice(in my humble opinion) i would stick with dvd's or upgrade my receiver. the difference between analog and digital,now that's night and day!

jayt

The signal has to change to analog somewhere. Using the analog outputs on your Blu-ray player simply allows the digital-to-analog conversion to occur in the player rather than the receiver. The player might have better converters and would be capable of decoding TrueHD, which an older but perfectly good receiver might not be able to do.

[pixelthis]

I DID notice a VAST improvement when I switched from the hardware provided "spaghetti" cables to moderately priced (50 to 80 dollar) boutique cables. But that was my price limit. Most of these cables have proven to be quite adequate. I've no reason to spend more.

Da Worfster

Same here.
Once you get into a certain price point the differences are slight.
The biggest improvement comes in the jump from el-cheapo cables to stuff in the monster
price range.:1:

[zepman1]

As for using the analog cables on your blu-ray, i just wouldn't do it. you will never get the true performance you would hope for. it would be an injustice(in my humble opinion) i would stick with dvd's or upgrade my receiver. the difference between analog and digital,now that's night and day!

jayt

This is just not true at all. There are many instances when using an analog connection will yield FAR superior results to a digital one. If you were to connect a high end CD player to your AVR (Marantz, Cambridge etc) the CD player will do a much better D/A conversion and to connect it via optical or dig. coax would be wasting such a great player to let your AVR do the conversion.

In my case I have connected my Bluray to my AVR via analog cables and the sound is superior to digital. Why? Because my AVR can't decode TrueHD and DTS Master formats, but the bluray can. When using a digital connection I have to listen to inferior audio formats.

It all comes down to which component you want doing the digital to analog conversion. As far as quality goes, I notice a difference stepping up from cheap analog cables (the ones included in the box!) to nicer ones from AR, Monster, Monoprice. Using more expensive cables than these (not very expensive) is only justified to me for a fairly expensive setup.

[markw]

In my case I have connected my Bluray to my AVR via analog cables and the sound is superior to digital. Why? Because my AVR can't decode TrueHD and DTS Master formats, but the bluray can. When using a digital connection I have to listen to inferior audio formats.There's no way to pass TrueHD and DTS Master through any cable other than HDMI. They won't go through coax or Toslink.

So, it's either HDMI if your receiver can decode these, or the mess of analog cables if you wanna run with the big dogs.

...although just how "inferior" these other digital formats are is debatable.

[Mr Peabody]

The first time I tried better cables was when I got my first Krell integrated, I don't know if the Transparent cables I upgraded to would be considered night and day but it was as significant as a component upgrade. The improvement I would say was dramatic. I agree the cables usually should be in line with the range of gear. It will take a component capable of revealing higher resolution to show differences in cables.

I wouldn't say the improvement between Blu-ray Toslink Dolby Digital/DTS and Dolby Tru-HD/DTS-MA or uncompressed PCM is debateable. Myself aside, every one on this board who has a Blu-ray player unanimously agree the improvement in sound is significant. Maybe whether some one really cares could be a question but the improvement the HD audio formats offer can't be denied.

Ed, I would have thought a better analog cable would have given some improvement. Which higher end cables did you try? What effect did they have? I have found that cables have to have synergy with your system. For instance, the Transparent worked well with my Krell and most other solid state amps but I didn't care for it as much with my Conrad Johnson gear. The Siltech worked beautifully with the CJ gear. Now, there, was a night and day difference, I needed a long cable, 2 meter, to go between my preamp and power amp, I used an entry level Monster that I had laying around until the Siltech arrived. When I put the Siltech in place the improvement was incredible, like the entire system went up a notch. There could be aspects of a cheaper cable that you like in your presentation, maybe more bloom in the bass or masking defects in certain bad recordings and when this is gone you get a perception of being worse. If you prefer the less expensive cables there's nothing wrong with that. But are you listening to all the response? Is the bass any tighter, vocals easier to understand etc. Sometimes even if these improvements happen you may not be willing to make the sacrafice of the other things you lose.

[jaytrezza]

This is just not true at all. There are many instances when using an analog connection will yield FAR superior results to a digital one. If you were to connect a high end CD player to your AVR (Marantz, Cambridge etc) the CD player will do a much better D/A conversion and to connect it via optical or dig. coax would be wasting such a great player to let your AVR do the conversion.

In my case I have connected my Bluray to my AVR via analog cables and the sound is superior to digital. Why? Because my AVR can't decode TrueHD and DTS Master formats, but the bluray can. When using a digital connection I have to listen to inferior audio formats.

It all comes down to which component you want doing the digital to analog conversion. As far as quality goes, I notice a difference stepping up from cheap analog cables (the ones included in the box!) to nicer ones from AR, Monster, Monoprice. Using more expensive cables than these (not very expensive) is only justified to me for a fairly expensive setup.


my pioneer vsx-818v does not decode lossless audio and i want to upgrade to a panasonic dmp bd-55 blue-ray player with analog multi-in.so, i can still get the lossless audio through my multi channel connections and get the full effect from my surround system ??

[Mr Peabody]

Yes sir. The dmp-55 has on board decoding of Tru-HD & DTS-MA so using multi-channel 7.1 analog you will get the full benefit of these audio formats. One thing to check before buying the dmp-55 is if it will allow you to do speaker set up and bass management. You'll have to set up the dmp-55 just like you would a receiver in regard to the audio (speaker) set up. Using analog inputs the receiver typically cannot do any further processing to the signal received.

Another way this might work, check with Pioneer to see if your receiver will accept a decoded PCM signal via HDMI. If so, you can still use the dmp-55's on board decoders and send the PCM to your receiver using a HDMI cable, this eliminates all the analog connections and worries about bass management. Of course, if the receiver has no HDMI connections, then obviously, disregard this.


my pioneer vsx-818v does not decode lossless audio and i want to upgrade to a panasonic dmp bd-55 blue-ray player with analog multi-in.so, i can still get the lossless audio through my multi channel connections and get the full effect from my surround system ??

[EdwardGein]

About 90% of the people who've given me advice as well as Panasonic said that you don't need HDMI on your receiver if you have analog outputs on your Blu-Ray like the Panason BD 55. You will still get true audio but through Blu-Ray.

In regards to the cables I mentioned with my Jolida JD-100A and my Musical Fidelity Tube Buffer X-10 V3, Denon AVR 3801 receiver & Orb Mod 1 Speakers & Sub, I noticed that the more expensive cables I used (up to a $200 set) seemed to take the life and juice out of the sound and my cheap neutral acoustic research directional performance cables sounded the best. I play main 60/70's rock and blues CDs.

[Mr Peabody]

Ed, do you use the Buffer with your Jolida? Since the Jolida is tubed the Buffer shouldn't be necessary. If you use both, when trying the "better" cables did you use a set between each component? From CD player to Buffer to receiver.

Could be that the AR's just have that synergy with your system.

[StevenSurprenant]

My own personal experience with Analog Cables is that More Expensive Cables for my Jolida JD100A CD player didn't improve sound at all and in fact often made audio worse and I got the best results with cheap Acoustic Research Performance Series Audio cables that one can get at Best Buy. Maybe there's also "a rule" that if your speakers and sub cost $800 and one has a 10 year old Denon Receiver (AVR 3801) spending a lot of money on cables is a mistake. Has anyone here ever found a night and day difference in sound from a pair of cables? When I read reviews on Audio Review and in other places, I'm practically drooling over these expensive cables but when I try them out I'm utterly disappointed as they seem to take the guts and life out of the sound. I'm posting this because I'm going to buy analog cables when I get Blu-Ray and maybe someone really has gotten startling sound with their cables.

Every cable I've tried sounds different and the price of the cable had very little to do with whether it was an improvement. It's always a matter of synergy with your equipment.

Many years ago I didn't believe that wire made a difference until a dealer told me to take a speaker cable home and just try it. I did and it made a huge difference in the wrong direction, but it showed me that wire does change the sound.

My goal in my system is transparency.

I have tried many different wires up to about $500 and while most of them were better than zip cord, my favorite and what I use now is 24 gauge solid core silver plated Teflon coated wire. Keep in mind that I am bi-amping with two Trends 10.1 T-amps at about 5 watts of clean power so I don't need thick wires to carry a huge current. Total cost for two sets of 12 foot wires is $20. Of course the cost will go up a little after I put them in a sleeve and terminate them with banana plugs. I figure that the final cost for these wire will be about $40.

I also made two sets (4 cables) of interconnects from the same wire for about $10 which includes the sleeves and RCA terminations. These wires go between my electronic crossover to my multichannel preamp. I still have two more sets to make between the preamp and amps, but I am already using pretty good cables there (DH Labs Revelation at about $800 for both sets).

I told a friend of mine about this wire and so he tried it too. He told me that he preferred the lamp cord he has been using for years (I haven't heard the 24 gauge wire in his system yet). Years ago I sent him a very nice thick gauge Zip cord and he also preferred his lamp cord. I heard both of these (zip and lamp) in his system and I agree with him that the lamp cord was better.

I've had Nordost, Audioquest, MIT, ZIP cord, Cat 5 and several others (including different models of each) in my system. There are so many different companies to choose from.

I've also heard some of this wire in systems where I couldn't hear any differences. The cost of the system was a non issue in this case. I changed the wire on a shelf system (cheap) and the change was huge, but when I tried this on my brothers and my cousins systems, I heard no difference.

Oh, a long time ago I made a pair of interconnects out of Cat 5 cable and it sounded pretty good on my system, but on my friends system it sounded terrible.

The point is, don't drool over expensive cables, they may not be synergistic with your system.

As for whether wire can make a huge difference, I would say "yes" depending on your system.

For me, 24 gauge solid core is the best I've ever had and it is also very cheap to buy.

BTW, many years ago I bought a Nordost Moonglo Digital Interconnect for $200. I thought it was pretty good, but looking back at it, it looks like the same construction as my DIY cables I am now using, but at a huge price increase. The gauge may be different and the termination is different, but basically the construction is the same.

If you try the expensive stuff, make sure you can return it.

Morrow Audio has a return policy. I haven't tried this cable, but he is into small gauge solid core which seems to work well in my system. Below is the email he sent to me last...
__________________________________________________ ________________
Dear customers,

By demand, or Super Cable Sale has been extended till Sunday the 28th, midnight. Don't miss out!

Save 30% more off the already low posted sale prices, including length and termination upgrades.

Your coupon code is "sound". Type this code in the "coupon code" area of the shopping cart to receive your discount.

Remember, you have 60 days to try our cables, money back if returned.

To see our cables, go to this link:
http://www.morrowaudio.com/cables.htm

[EdwardGein]

Just because the Jolida is a tube player doesn't mean using a tube buffer won't improve the sound. It actually improves the sound to apnight and day difference. I use the cables as you said from 2 going from CD player to Tube Buffer and 2 going from tube buffer to receiver. I use 4 identical Acoustic Performance Directional cables.

[StevenSurprenant]

Just because the Jolida is a tube player doesn't mean using a tube buffer won't improve the sound. It actually improves the sound to apnight and day difference. I use the cables as you said from 2 going from CD player to Tube Buffer and 2 going from tube buffer to receiver. I use 4 identical Acoustic Performance Directional cables.

I'm curious...

Could, Would you describe the improvements with your tube buffer?

Thanks