I found a very interesting article on expensive cables.... [Archive]

OzzieAudiophile

04-27-2009, 09:09 PM

I have been advised by many "experts", and even those on this forum that you should
spend about 10% of your total budget (of your hifi), on cables.

I.e. if your total cost for your system is $10,000 , then $1,000 should go to cabling.

If this is not true, then why would you spend $20 on cables to pipe through your
audio/video signal from $9,000 worth of equipment ?

Even the most skeptical person must agree that a really exceptional $20 cable would not
out perform a majority of $1,000 cables ? for example.

If one really believes that there is no loss of signal, or what eventually comes out of
your speakers by using the cheapest cable possible, then that is your choice, but
it would not be a bad idea to audition the more expensive brands to at least compare.
Tests, and your own ears should be able to tell you surely.

I'm not saying all expensive cables are cost-effective, there are some which are not
worth the money, but at the same time I wouldn't neglect the higher quality/priced
ones without at least auditioning them first and compare those to the monster cables
I have currently in my system.

RoadRunner6

04-27-2009, 11:37 PM

If this is not true, then why would you spend $20 on cables to pipe through your audio/video signal from $9,000 worth of equipment ? Even the most skeptical person must agree that a really exceptional $20 cable would not
out perform a majority of $1,000 cables ? for example.

You would spend $20 because then you would be able to pipe it through $9980 worth of equipment at the same total cost without any change in sound whatsoever. I am about as skeptical as one can get and for good reason. I am also very objective and only buy more expensive connectors when I can hear or see the difference in a blind test. That is one reason I buy quality cable leads to my TV, I can see the difference. Speaker wire is speaker wire if using heavy enough gauge (zip cord is fine unless you need thin flat wire). Well constructed audio cables all sound the same. Don't listen to anyone but yourself in a blind test. It is very simple to do with help from a friend or your wife.

That is the reason I continue to buy Monoprice cable unless I need very pliable cable. Expensive power cables and power conditioners are in the same category, snake oil. It has nothing to do with who has the most descriminating ears and the most expensive equipment. It has to do with who is most gullible. Audio/Home Theater accessories are a multi-billion dollar industry (you can fool most of the people most of the time).

RR6

markw

04-28-2009, 04:24 AM

I have been advised by many "experts", and even those on this forum that you should
spend about 10% of your total budget (of your hifi), on cables.

I.e. if your total cost for your system is $10,000 , then $1,000 should go to cabling.

If this is not true, then why would you spend $20 on cables to pipe through your
audio/video signal from $9,000 worth of equipment ?Funny, I drive a lowly Hyundai and fill up at the same gas stations as Mercedes, BMW, Corvettes, and the occasional Italian super cars. Owing to the price differences involved, and excluding that they might use high octane, shouldn't they need a more expensive gasoline?

To put it another way: If I pay $2.00/gallon to fill my $14,000 Elantra, shouldn't a BMW that cost $70,000 need gas that costs $10.00/gallon?

Hyfi

04-28-2009, 06:33 AM

It just keeps coming back to diminishing returns. My $1200 Synergistic speaker cables do sound better than my $300 Tara Labs but I would not say 4X better. Same goes with ICs, $350 Synergistic cables do sound better than $90 Tara "S" cables but not 4X better.

No difference with gear either, My $6500 VAC pre sounds way better than my $550 Sound Valves pre, but not 10X better.

Your best bet is to go with the very good suggestions here and try ICs between $50 and $100. When you get the opportunity to try better cables (ie: more expensive) for a reasonable price, or trial, give it a shot. There are differences. Whether they sound better or worse in your system is gonna be up to you.

I believe the Cable Company allows trials and also sells plenty of used cables. Unless very porrly treated, there is not much to go wrong, they don't wear out.

OzzieAudiophile

04-28-2009, 08:15 AM

I already advised to "audition" them, you can be blind or not blind, deaf or not deaf, who
cares ? it is really your money. If one should buy the cheapest possible, might as well
get fishing lines for cables.

Besides it's your equipment the cables must perform on, so audition what you can, and
as many as you can. If you cannot hear the difference in any brand, then there's no
need to change.

The fact one would pay even as little as $20 for a cable RoadRunner6, means that's $18
worth more than the cable that came with a component. That means a $2 one cannot be
satisfactory otherwise why change it ? I am willing to bet you didn't double blind your $2
cable with the $20 one you got. By implying that the $2 is not up to the job, but a $20 one
is implies you have double-standards.

If you took time to actually read what I said instead of misquoting me, I said that

I have been advised by many "experts"

Meaning I am not saying... I have been told, big difference.

Then there's no need to upgrade any cabling at all, we'd all be using $2 composite cable.
Let's take it one step further and say, why bother with balanced cabling, optical, HDMI for
sound ? no need to spend anything beyond $20.

That also implies that you would never upgrade your cables RoadRunner6 because
you see no value in anything that would cost more. It's funny how many out there
have invested a little more than $20 towards their cables. So they also must all be
wrong also.

If $20 for an audio cable will do a job just as good if not better than anything than money
can buy RoadRunner6, then you're basically implying it's irrelevant on the material
being used to make the cable. That also implies that sheilding, what the connectors or
terminators are made out of, will also make absolutely no difference either.

You can try your "double-blind", "double-deaf" or whatever tests you wish, your point only
holds out if you add as many elements to cause electrical, and magnetic interference,
within the listening environment, having your $20 cables, or any other cable, and you
will "never" notice any difference.

Perhaps RoadRunner6 you may go even as far as for anyone who's ever purchased
more expensive cables and found any improvement in the sound, or a reduction of
interference, must all also be wrong.

I'm not having a go at you RoadRunner6 personally, I am hoping that I would not need to
upgrade my cables, because DURRR.... I'd be saving money. You wouldn't learn anything
beyond reading this forum if you didn't go out that and find out for yourself. Whether it's
auditioning for cables, amps or speakers. You gotta know what you like, and it helps to
go out there and audition what you can. At least you know what components or brands
to stay away from. Say if 100 people tell you not to buy this brand, but if you like it, then
that's all that matters.

Do you believe the majority of millionaires that visit these hi-end hifi stores would be
looking to buy $100 all in one hifi systems ? Those shops would sell cable that's
even more expensive than that.

The analogy with the fuel is different in the sense that the vehicles have a "recommended"
type in the manual, and it is your choice if you wish to put in a higher grade. However
the fuel may run too hot for a specific engine, but then again it is your choice, put in
any fuel you want. The most expensive vehicle owners on average pay more for servicing,
parts, insurance as it is. However it's a personal preference on how much money and time
one wants to spend maintaining their car, it can be as costly if not more than you can
imagine. The analogy works more often in practice with insurance than fuel.

markw

04-28-2009, 09:23 AM

The analogy with the fuel is different in the sense that the vehicles have a "recommended"
type in the manual, and it is your choice if you wish to put in a higher grade. However
the fuel may run too hot for a specific engine, but then again it is your choice, put in
any fuel you want. The most expensive vehicle owners on average pay more for servicing,
parts, insurance as it is. However it's a personal preference on how much money and time
one wants to spend maintaining their car, it can be as costly if not more than you can
imagine. The analogy works more often in practice with insurance than fuel....that any claims of superiority could be put to rest by scientific testing and accurate measurments? Oh wait, that same rules apply to cables as well but some claim to have better hearing than the most sensitive measuring devices.

E-Stat

04-28-2009, 06:35 PM

...that any claims of superiority could be put to rest by scientific testing and accurate measurments? Oh wait, that same rules apply to cables as well but some claim to have better hearing than the most sensitive measuring devices.
If cables were products that were used by themselves then I would agree with you. Unfortunately, they are measured in a vacuum as though they were. In the real world, however, they become part of the a complex system with numerous interactions that three sets of numbers are incapable of quantifying. The sound of source components, amplifiers and speakers can vary depending upon the load presented by the cables used.

rw

RoadRunner6

04-28-2009, 07:52 PM

Gee OzzieAudiophile, I didn't realize your comment about $20 cables was so deep with multiple meanings. I'll be sure and read your posts much more carefully in the future.

I mistakingly thought you were saying why waste money on a cable that only costs $20 and I was simply responding that fine quality cables are available for $20. Not all products come with included cables you know. For example, my Emotiva amp did not come with RCA or balanced cables. I purchased 6' RCA cables from Monoprice, 3 pair for a total of $8.94. I guess I saved myself $11.06 under the $20.00. When my Emotiva XMC-1 pre/pro arrives later this year I will buy XLR cables for the combo at $7.65 each. Many members of multiple forums here in the States buy from Monoprice and are very happy with the quality and "sound" if you will.

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10218&cs_id=1021803&p_id=2864&seq=1&format=2

There is difference between being advised and told? Wow OzzieAudiophile. Now we are rally getting deep into semantics.

Oh yes Ozzie, to quote you," If you took time to actually read what I said instead of misquoting me, I said that" "only buy more expensive connectors when I can hear or see the difference in a blind test. That is one reason I buy quality cable leads to my TV, I can see the difference." (due to interference) BTW, quality doesn't mean $300/meter!

Yes, I'm very aware Ozzie that many spend lots on conncectors. I only pass on my opinion that there is another side to this and many people including many pros feel there is no audible difference. I don't waste my money on snake oil. Sorry if you don't like it when someone offers an opinion different from yours.

RR6 :ciappa:

Mr Peabody

04-28-2009, 09:05 PM

The fuel analogy is not even an analogy that can apply to cables. Cables are more like the tweaks those higher end cars use under the hood to gain performance. Or, maybe the tires. Some might buy $40.00 tires, where some might buy $400.00. Same job, just some do it better, same can be said for cables. If one had a Porsche it could benefit from Perelli's or Michelen where that might be considered overkill on a Hyundi. Same with hi fi a Krell Levinson or whatever would benefit or be able to reveal the benefit of a better cable where a $300.00 cable is a bit overkill for a HT receiver.

RR6, it would stand to reason that if you can see a difference in cables effect on a video display that there is at least, a difference in cables. So if there is a difference for video, how can you believe audio would be that much different? I also believe there are posts here where you have recommended people to buy Blue Jeans. Although those are comparatively budget they are a far cry from monoprice. Monoprice is on par with what is given by manufacturer's for free.

The thing is any one can try most any cable with no risk but some would rather sit back and cast doubts based on basically nothing except their imagination.

OzzieAudiophile

04-29-2009, 02:06 AM

Hi RR6. That's cool.

I have no particular problem with Blue Jeans cable, Monoprice, or any other particular
brand cable.

I value the importance of trying out various brands of anything, and being able to make
an informed decision, also letting one's own ears decide.

I'd rather not spend any more money than I need to for future upgrades, but I value
my listening experience above most of my other interests. So upgrading some parts
is something I will keep on doing. Technology improves.

RoadRunner6

04-29-2009, 03:24 AM

Mr. Peabody, I have indeed recommended Blue Jeans cables especially since they are a local Seattle company. I recommended Monoprice after I became aware of them and tried them out. They are extremely well built. If I have only one complaint, it is that they tend to be a little on the stiff side.

I do in fact own more expensive cables. I own a 25' Monster sub cable. I bought it because of the perfect color match to my wall paint and the fact that it is very pliable and it needed to twist and squeeze into some tight places in its run to the sub (I did get it for 50% off online). I have other even more expensive cables, but not for reasons I can see or hear.

Have you ever bought Monpirce cables, probably not? Since they are so low priced why not give them a try just once and check them out. I think you will be surprised and not make the "far cry" comment which I presume you are obviously basing only on price. The price is simply amazing, sort of like Emotiva. After awhile many buyers, with some knowledge in product distribution, realize it is more to do with profit stucture than quality difference, either physical or performance wise. I try to let others know about them because they are such an amazing value. If others were aware of the different profit structure by a dealer on components versus accessories perhaps they would understand the emphasis and introduction of new profit centers cleverly diguised as performance inhancers.

Your presumptions about exterior interference on video antenna cable don't logically lead to your conclusions about all video and audio cables.

We both know this is a never ending discussion about connections including speaker wire and whether anyone can detect any difference. I obviously am on the objective side and can quote all day long from people with many years in the business who disagree with your side. You can also give lots of arguments for your side.

Whenever this comes up I try if I have time to let others know that there are cheaper cable choices that are just as good quality wise with no difference in performance IMO. I am glad others turned me on to Monprice as they have with Emotiva. I in turn pass on the word to others. There is a lot of smoke and mirrors in our hobby and I don't buy a bit of it unless I see objective proof.

You will, I'm sure, continue to give your side of this controversy with your own experiences in having heard and seen differences.

My motivation is simply to help other out who like me are on limited budgets and want the best bang for the buck.

RR6 :biggrin5:

Mr Peabody

04-29-2009, 05:26 AM

RR6, your original post did not say anything about "antenna" cable.

High profit margin has nothing to do at all whether a product can perform or not. Have you seen the astronomical profit on phono cartridges? Are you going to say there's no difference between them as well?

It is true we should agree to disagree but it should be on the fact that you say you haven't heard or saw difference and I certainly have. As I state over and over, no one has to take my word for it but they should at least try for themselves, both cheap like monoprice and more expensive quality cables. Only one can determine truly for themselves. And, as you state your skepticism I must state I have benefited from better cables in case the next person may be able to as well.

IBSTORMIN

05-01-2009, 06:54 PM

As I state over and over, no one has to take my word for it but they should at least try for themselves, both cheap like monoprice and more expensive quality cables. Only one can determine truly for themselves. And, as you state your skepticism I must state I have benefited from better cables in case the next person may be able to as well.

AMEN!

RoadRunner6

05-01-2009, 07:44 PM

That is one reason I buy quality cable leads to my TV, I can see the difference. ("cable leads" here refers to the signal from my cable wall outlet to the TV cable input)

Peabody said in the above post: "RR6, your original post did not say anything about "antenna" cable."

Perhaps you didn't understand I was using cable leads and antenna cable to be the same thing.

Mr. Peabody you continue to misquote and misconstrue my comments. I didn't say high profit margins affect performance. I implied that it is a reason that dealers push the sales of these items so hard and make outrageous claims for them.

No I didn't in any way say there were no differences in phone cartridges. You like to put words in the mouths of others.

You seem to imply that others should try for themselves to see if they can hear any differences. However, your commenbts only seem to apply to expensive cables. I have not seen you encourage anyone to try Monoprice cables or even Emotiva amps for that matter. Isn't it interesting that you apparently have not even tried them for yourself. I would think most people would prefer to start at the bottom, price wise, and work up.

Mr Peabody

05-01-2009, 10:04 PM

RR6, you assume to much. Of course, I started at the bottom and worked my way up. I am not one who could afford to walk in and buy the type of gear I have now to start with. I have had something that played music since I was old enough to turn the knob. I started in grade school with a fold up turntable and bought records from yard sales. Going to all-in-one stereos to eventually my dad bought me my first receiver when I graduated high school. I will spare you the middle, I know how much better my gear and accessories are now. If there weren't any benefit I wouldn't be using them. I do not recommend Emotiva because I have not heard one. I do not recommend Monoprice because I do not recommend crap. I would recommend Monoprice for any one who needed the absolute cheapest cable on the market. If anyone pays attention to my posts I stick to what I have had experience with and when not I will preface my statement with "I heard" or "I read" etc.

You know the same can be said about you and Emotiva, because you spent what you did and it's so heavy you were placeboed to think it sounds good. I mean, aside from everything else the first thing you hear is, "it's heavy, a back breaker", so an amp that heavy has to sound good, right? It's built like a tank!

It's actually some of the reviews that makes me so skeptical of Emotiva. The claims are too wild. As good as my Threshold, replacing my Mac, etc. That guy could sell that Threshold replace it with a two channel Emotiva and come out with a profit but I didn't read that in the review or no hint of replacing the Threshold. Look, the Adcom 5500 sold for around $1k and I know what it can do. So if Emotiva can find cheap labor, cut out middle men and distribution, have true intentions and sell an amp at $800.00, there is certainly possibility of it being a great performer for the money. Maybe even a "giant killer" but let's keep, some, perspective.

One other quick point, whether lead, cable, wire, or what ever you want to call it next, you still said you saw a difference. So if you can see a difference in just that wire, there, by reason could be differences in other wire products. If you are going from cable wall outlet to TV I don't see much you can upgrade there. It's all RF and as long as using RG59 you should be good. So if you saw a difference there you should be excited to try cables in other areas of your system where there is plentiful variety of prices and quality

RoadRunner6

05-02-2009, 05:47 AM

Mr. Peabody, how do you know Monprice is "crap." Because it is cheap? You like to recommend that people try different cables and "listen" to them. You keep harping on the fact that why would so many people buy expensive cables if they didn't sound so good. Isn't the same true of Monprice. We are talking about people with high quality equipment that I first heard about Monoprice from.

Mr. Peabody said: "So if Emotiva can find cheap labor, cut out middle men and distribution, have true intentions and sell an amp at $800.00, there is certainly possibility of it being a great performer for the money. Maybe even a "giant killer" (Maybe you are starting to see the light Mr. Peabody, except it is a great performer for 1/3 the money). BTW, weight is just one indication of quality in AB amps. All other specs being equal I'll take the amp that wieghs 70 lbs over the one that weighs 40 lbs every time. If you can't figure that out you need to go back and start over with audio/HT 101.

"It's all RF and as long as using RG59 you should be good." (bingo! you are starting to catch on)

"If anyone pays attention to my posts I stick to what I have had experience with and when not I will preface my statement with "I heard" or "I read" etc" (doesn't sound like that's the case with Monprice or Emotiva)

"It's actually some of the reviews that makes me so skeptical of Emotiva. The claims are too wild." (Oh, what reviews from what sources do you pay attention to then, can you name some of them?)

"I do not recommend Emotiva because I have not heard one." (so why then do you trash talk about Emotiva and those who have bought and heard them)

I just pass on what I feel are amazing values on products that I have purchased. Since I have been in a fairly tight financial condition over the past few decades this has precluded me from being able to afford separates for many years. Finding out about Emotiva gave me the opportunity to get back into separates. I would not have pulled the trigger unless I felt they were top quality products. By the end of 2009, I will have in one year's time, bought a very powerful and fine 5 channel amp (Emo XPA-5), a state of the art pre/pro with phono (Emo XMC-1) and a state of the art Blu-Ray/Universal DVD player (Oppo DMP-83) all shipped to my house for under $2250. I think that is an amazing price/performance deal in this hobby. I am pleased to pass on this information to others who might come to this forum looking for recommendations.

I don't understand your insistance on badmouthing these products when you seem to know absolutely nothing about them except their relatively very low price.

Mr Peabody

05-02-2009, 03:23 PM

Mr. Peabody, how do you know Monprice is "crap." Because it is cheap? You like to recommend that people try different cables and "listen" to them. You keep harping on the fact that why would so many people buy expensive cables if they didn't sound so good. Isn't the same true of Monprice. We are talking about people with high quality equipment that I first heard about Monoprice from.

* I've had some experience with their product..

Mr. Peabody said: "So if Emotiva can find cheap labor, cut out middle men and distribution, have true intentions and sell an amp at $800.00, there is certainly possibility of it being a great performer for the money. Maybe even a "giant killer" (Maybe you are starting to see the light Mr. Peabody, except it is a great performer for 1/3 the money). BTW, weight is just one indication of quality in AB amps. All other specs being equal I'll take the amp that wieghs 70 lbs over the one that weighs 40 lbs every time. If you can't figure that out you need to go back and start over with audio/HT 101.

* Buying audio by weight now, that gave me a good chuckle. Especially as my 5 channel amp weighs a whopping 11 lbs.

"It's all RF and as long as using RG59 you should be good." (bingo! you are starting to catch on)

* I don't know what you are so happy about you are the one who said he saw a difference. RG-59 would be the least important cable to my system. If you can tell a difference in just that, then there's hope for you as well.

"If anyone pays attention to my posts I stick to what I have had experience with and when not I will preface my statement with "I heard" or "I read" etc" (doesn't sound like that's the case with Monprice or Emotiva)

Have I said anything negative about Emotiva? I believe I just pointed out obvious issues and areas of personal pause for thought.

"It's actually some of the reviews that makes me so skeptical of Emotiva. The claims are too wild." (Oh, what reviews from what sources do you pay attention to then, can you name some of them?)

* If you want to know to which reviews I made my comments from, you should read what you splatter all over the board. If you want to know what reviews I read personally, I normally do not.

"I do not recommend Emotiva because I have not heard one." (so why then do you trash talk about Emotiva and those who have bought and heard them)

* I don't trash talk Emotiva. I also do not trash talk those who buy them, just you. And, I really wouldn't call that trash talking. I thought we were merely having a bit of a debate.

I just pass on what I feel are amazing values on products that I have purchased. Since I have been in a fairly tight financial condition over the past few decades this has precluded me from being able to afford separates for many years. Finding out about Emotiva gave me the opportunity to get back into separates. I would not have pulled the trigger unless I felt they were top quality products. By the end of 2009, I will have in one year's time, bought a very powerful and fine 5 channel amp (Emo XPA-5), a state of the art pre/pro with phono (Emo XMC-1) and a state of the art Blu-Ray/Universal DVD player (Oppo DMP-83) all shipped to my house for under $2250. I think that is an amazing price/performance deal in this hobby. I am pleased to pass on this information to others who might come to this forum looking for recommendations.

I don't understand your insistance on badmouthing these products when you seem to know absolutely nothing about them except their relatively very low price.

* You really seem to miss the point of what I say. Is that a comprehension issue or preconceived ideas before you even complete my post? You also continue to make assumptions based on nothing.

IBSTORMIN

05-02-2009, 07:03 PM

RR6

I have said many times that if you can't hear a difference, you shouldn't spend the extra money. In trying to listen to myself, I am going to buy some Monoprice cables and try them out. You have me interested and I'm all about saving money if I can. I will be able to compare them to IXOS, Radio Shack's Gold, Radio Shack's old top of the line Fusion which was better than their Monster line they now have, Blue Jean Cable's LC-1 and a pair of Transparent that were about $75 a few years ago. I'll get back with you.

RoadRunner6

05-02-2009, 08:47 PM

IBSTORMIN, I find the Monoprice site a little confusing to browse. You have to dig a little to find some of their cables. Be sure to try only their premium cables. They have blow up photos that give you a good picture of the ends. There service is very fast and shipping is cheap.

Blue-Jeans are definitely more attractive but I think the difference ends there. You might also be interested in Tartan Cable which is Blue Jeans cheaper brand. Lots of good reports on Tartan cables.

http://www.tartancable.com/stereo-cables/index.htm

Emotiva will have their line of cables out in several months. Photos look very nice, but no price info yet.

RR6

RoadRunner6

05-02-2009, 09:49 PM

RR6 wrote:

"..........BTW, weight is just one indication of quality in AB amps. All other specs being equal I'll take the amp that wieghs 70 lbs over the one that weighs 40 lbs every time..........."

Mr. Peabody responded:

"..........Buying audio by weight now, that gave me a good chuckle. Especially as my 5 channel amp weighs a whopping 11 lbs..........."

Mr. Peabody can't seem to read that I was refering to AB amps. His Linn is a lightweight switching amplifier. He doesn't seem to know the difference or perhaps he just can't read my post.

How can one cary on a reasonably intelligent and logical discussion with someone who's mind can't seem to focus on the simplest of statements.

I give up! Perhaps you might try some of this Mr. Peabody.

http://www.focusfactor.com/Default.aspx

Good night, Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.

RR6 :biggrin5:

RoadRunner6

05-04-2009, 07:35 PM

Not to beat a dead horse here but I did run across an interesting comment by a poster over at the AVS Forum (Stevec325).

I just received an e-mail from Oppo, since I was on their EAP list, allowing me to advance order a BDP-83. I was at the AVS Forum reading up on some of the info on the BDP-83, when I saw the following comment:

".......... They are the same stock as those from Monoprice. Either they are getting them there, or from the same source. In any case, they are the exact same stock
__________________
-steve
Oppo BDP-83 EAP-2 Tester.........."

The comment here referred to the HDMI cables from Monoprice and those included with Oppo players and sold separately by Oppo. Looking at Steve's equipmet list shows that he owns Oppo gear and also Monoprice cables.

So it would seem to indicate that Oppo considers the Monprice cables not to detract from the highly acclaimed performance of their components.

RR6

Mr Peabody

05-04-2009, 08:08 PM

Either that or they are the cheapest they could find for a freeby. Using your logic means the cheezy cables we get for free with other such products are satisfactory as well. I don't think so. Does it get the job done, yes, can it be improved on, definitely. That's even if this guy's guess is correct.

RoadRunner6

05-05-2009, 01:09 AM

I imagine if he had both of the cables sitting right in front of him it was more than a guess.

audio amateur

05-05-2009, 04:54 AM

I tried to make the most direct comparison between a pair of 1.5 foot Merlin Cables 'Chopin' (approx 150 bucks) and a 2 foot pair of Radioshack Gold and as hard as I tried I wasn't hearing any difference. This wasn't a usual test in that I played a mono source, had one cable going in to different inputs on the amp, and stacked my two B&Ws. I could then make a direct switch between the two speakers, same source material, different cable. Obviously this was mono playback, and the two speakers weren't EXACTLY in the same spot as one was on top of the other. Still, im sure it gave me a good idea of revealing the differences, which were either minute, or non-existing.
I returned the Chopin (1 month trial) as 1. I couldn't hear any difference, and 2. I needed the money back. The locking connectors were a nice touch though, that's one thing I miss about the cable, and the very stocky looks.

I'd like to try Blue Jean Cables and even perhaps monoprice but as I'm not living in the US at the moment it's not really a possibility.

Poultrygeist

05-05-2009, 08:00 AM

If you think it sounds better then it does - the placebo effect is alive and well and highly profitable.

Hyfi

05-05-2009, 09:56 AM

I recently started using Synergistic Research Signature1 Speaker cables I got with a complete system I bought in a garage sale. They are 14' in length. When I contacted Synergistic about the possibility of cutting them in half to make two pairs, they replied that their cables are "Components" and "would you cut an amplifier in half to make two". They did say that they would shorten them only for $300 but not make two pairs.

I was not happy with the answer but I'm not about to screw up the value, resale value, and possible positive snake oil included in their construction.

I said it a ways back in this thread. A pair of ICs costing $500 in no way "sound" 5X better than those costing $100.

I can tell you that in my experience, the Synergistc speaker cables worth $1200 do sound better than my $200 Tara Labs Prism cables but not 6X better.

The other thing to consider, just like matching amps to speakers is that a single set of ICs will appear to sound different between different Amp and Pre.

The bottom line is what your expendable budget is, how much you believe in cable differences, and mostly which cables sound better coupled with YOUR gear no matter what the cost is.

If you believe with all your heart and the info you have read that there are no differences, then just use the Black & Reds that came with your gear and move on.

audio amateur

05-05-2009, 09:59 AM

If you think it sounds better then it does - the placebo effect is alive and well and highly profitable.
haha :lol:

audio amateur

05-05-2009, 10:00 AM

Kevio

05-05-2009, 04:37 PM

That's a shockingly bad answer
Not a bad answer from the perspective of making money though.

markw

05-05-2009, 04:46 PM

IBSTORMIN

05-05-2009, 06:59 PM

audio amateur

05-06-2009, 02:48 AM

Thos cables are DIRT cheap. It'd be nice to have some pics too when you get them

IBSTORMIN

05-06-2009, 05:25 AM

Thos cables are DIRT cheap. I'd be nice have some pics too when you get them

From what I figure, they should be in today. I'll post pics with my comments after I listen to them.

RoadRunner6

05-06-2009, 06:36 AM

IBSTORMIN, those all look like the premium cables except for the #2743 which appears to be the regular version of the premium #2681.

AA, for some nice close up photos, go to http://www.monoprice.com/home/index.asp and enter the part numbers on the left side of his invoice into the Monoprice search window. Click on the description and then on "click for larger image" to view closups of the cables and connectors or any other of their products. Customer feedback on all products under "customer review."

Check here for products listed by category: http://www.monoprice.com/products/index.html

zepman1

05-06-2009, 07:04 AM

I'll chime in since I have used the Monoprice cables a number of times. Generally speaking their cables and interconnects are of very good quality and build. Unbelievable for the price really. But when you break it down, what it costs Blue Jeans to build a 3' interconnect, the profit margins are pretty large so it is easy to see how Monoprice can be priced so low and still have a similar product.

I have compared them directly with Blue Jeans cable and Monster and think they are all about the same with some differences (not in sound though, only build). Monoprice uses RG-59 and RG-6 for all interconnects, just like Belden (used by Blue Jeans). Monoprice cables seem to be very stiff, which makes them hard to work with in some cases, but not excessively so. Monster cables are always nice and supple which is nice. Blue Jeans Canare connectors are a bit nicer than what is used on the monoprice. The monoprice (premium cables only) still use a nice connector though, its just not Canare quality. In all cases I have heard no difference between any of these cables (on my modest mid-fi equipment anyhow, Onkyo, Marantz, Monitor Audio etc.).

Monoprice HDMI cables are the same as the lower priced Blue Jeans cables, and priced similarly. I do not see why you would need anything more when they are selling HDMI v1.3a Catergory 2 certified cables. I would only buy the more expensive Blue Jeans if I needed a really long cable 50', because the cheaper ones are only certified to 35-40' I think.

Just my 2 cents. If you have a mid priced system, I think monoprice is a great way to go, and definitely sounds no different than Blue Jeans or Monster. If you have a high end setup, I would at least try something nicer for comparisons sake. If you need eye candy, then monoprice is not that either.

audio amateur

05-06-2009, 08:28 AM

Tanks RR6

audio amateur

05-06-2009, 08:34 AM

Not a bad answer from the perspective of making money though.
Not if you loose customers doing so...

Hyfi

05-06-2009, 09:05 AM

Not what you posted, but their response.

Are they implying that cutting the cables in half and terminating both ends will hurt the sound in the two cable pairs, but only terminating one pair so you only wind up with one pair won't? What happens to the surplus wire?

...and who is trying to tell me that greed and gullibility aren't the two main driving factors in this industry?

I was floored also after several emails to Synergistic. They told me that in order to cut and properly re-terminate the cable that it would interfere with production of new cables. Also, I would have had to be the original owner with papers to prove it which I am not.

I don't know if there is any proprietary termination techniques used that I would screw up if I did it myself. I could not find anyone willing to do it for a fee except some guy in Canada. I was also advised that if I cut and re-terminated them that they could no longer be resold as true Synergistic cables.

I am a little apprehensive to touch these cables since they cost $1200 when the guy I got them from bought them.

All in all I did not like their responses and posted about it on another board and someone from Synergistic chimed in to call me a liar and then I posted the full email from his co-worker that he must have been unaware of and the thread ended there.

E-Stat

05-06-2009, 12:07 PM

Not a bad answer from the perspective of making money though.
Re-terminating sealed cables is labor intensive. Similarly, Shure doesn't *repair* their earbuds. They offer a flat replacement charge and throw away your core.

rw

markw

05-06-2009, 12:23 PM

Re-terminating sealed cables is labor intensive. Similarly, Shure doesn't *repair* their earbuds. They offer a flat replacement charge and throw away your core.

rwEarbuds area a bit different due to their size and complexity. We're talking cable ends here.

It costs $300 to put on four terminations? That's $75/each. Heck, send 'em to me!

If that's the case they should have offered to charge him $600 for the eight, no?

Sorry, but in that, or any, boutique business, accommodating the customers needs should be item one on the agenda. After all, customer satisfaction is directly tied in with the customer's perception of quality.

IBSTORMIN

05-06-2009, 02:08 PM

IBSTORMIN, those all look like the premium cables except for the #2743 which appears to be the regular version of the premium #2681.

I needed two so, for the price, I bought both regular and premium to see if there is any difference.

Kevio

05-06-2009, 04:41 PM

Re-terminating sealed cables is labor intensive.And probably tricky too do properly. If I'd paid kilobucks for cables I would be happy to spend $300 to have them re terminated by the manufacturer.

Hyfi

05-07-2009, 04:58 AM

And probably tricky too do properly. If I'd paid kilobucks for cables I would be happy to spend $300 to have them re terminated by the manufacturer.

Too bad I'm not the original owner, they don't want "new happy customers" unless you buy new cables. Oh well, still glad to have them at the price I got them for.

markw

05-07-2009, 05:48 AM

Too bad I'm not the original owner, they don't want "new happy customers" unless you buy new cables. Oh well, still glad to have them at the price I got them for.Now this is the way to win the hearts and minds of loyal customers, or potential customers.

http://bryston.com/warranty.html

Hyfi

05-07-2009, 07:03 AM

Now this is the way to win the hearts and minds of loyal customers, or potential customers.

http://bryston.com/warranty.html

Odyssey lets you transfer their 20 year warranty.

http://www.odysseyaudio.com/service-20yearwarranty.html

markw

05-07-2009, 07:13 AM

Odyssey lets you transfer their 20 year warranty.

http://www.odysseyaudio.com/service-20yearwarranty.html [sarcasm on]I guess these aren't as technically complex or as difficult to work on as those cables of yours.[/sarcasm off]

IBSTORMIN

05-08-2009, 07:48 PM

I Am Going To Give My Thoughts On Monoprice Cables In A New Thread.

angelgz

05-20-2009, 08:05 AM

OK, it feels good to be back : )

First of all, I haven't read all of your replies, but the comparison between cables and fuel just caught my eyes. I drive a Mercedes S55 and the manual specifically says that I need gas with a minimum 91 Octane rating. I talked to my mechanic about the science behind this and he replied that dedicated engines are build with little room for dust and impurities. These impurities build up in the engine and eventually ruins it. This is not some electrical theories or something can't be seen with naked eye. It's real, tangible facts, which if you take apart an engine, you will see it. With audio cables, it's totally different. As long as the cables deliver deliver the same AWG, I don't think it makes a difference at all. Given that, I still bought some Tara Labs cable and it made no difference at all compared to my regular 12AWG cable bought from Home Depot.

I also took the opportunity to talk to a professional musician about cables. He told me that the only time a cable makes a NOTICEABLE difference is if it goes over 50 feet. To be safe, he says that I should use a relatively higher grade interconnects if the preamp is more than 25 feet away from the amp. Also, a XLR cable is superior than a RCA cable when it comes to distant wiring.

Mr Peabody

05-20-2009, 06:51 PM

Were the Tara Labs speaker connects? What gear were they connected to?

O'Shag

05-20-2009, 07:51 PM

I have two Mercs - they both have problems with sticking in low gear - sometimes this happens out of the blue. I have to shift into neutral to get the gears operational again - have you had this problem?

O'Shag

05-20-2009, 07:57 PM

Whoops did I say Mercs? - I meant to say AMC Gremlins.

IBSTORMIN

05-20-2009, 08:57 PM

OK, it feels good to be back : )

First of all, I haven't read all of your replies, but the comparison between cables and fuel just caught my eyes. I drive a Mercedes S55 and the manual specifically says that I need gas with a minimum 91 Octane rating. I talked to my mechanic about the science behind this and he replied that dedicated engines are build with little room for dust and impurities. These impurities build up in the engine and eventually ruins it.

I don't agree with the previous anology of wires to gasoline, but having been a technician I offer a definition of Octane from Wikipedia:
The octane rating is a measure of the resistance of gasoline and other fuels to detonation (engine knocking) in spark-ignition internal combustion engines. High-performance engines typically have higher compression ratios and are therefore more prone to detonation, so they require higher octane fuel. A lower-performance engine will not generally perform better with high-octane fuel, since the compression ratio is fixed by the engine design.

It has nothing to do with dust and impurities like your technician said but with compression ratios and spark knock. Your Benz has higher than normal compression and therefore requires a higher octane gas. In the days of computer controls the worry is no longer that spark knock from lower octane will damage an engine. The computer will back off the timing to prevent spark knock damage but performance will suffer with the change in timing, My '83 Monte Carlo SS knocks with 92 octane, worse with 91 Octane, because the computer is not as sophisticated as today's computers.

I really don't know what this has to do with speaker wires. Maybe "high performance amps and speakers require high performance wires"?

Hyfi

05-21-2009, 07:57 AM

I really don't know what this has to do with speaker wires. Maybe "high performance amps and speakers require high performance wires"?

It means that there is something wrong if you own an expensive car that requires a more expensive gas than other cars, and you just bought Home Depot cables for you $5k audio system.

E-Stat

05-21-2009, 10:05 AM

I need gas with a minimum 91 Octane rating. I talked to my mechanic about the science behind this and he replied that dedicated engines are build with little room for dust and impurities. These impurities build up in the engine and eventually ruins it.
Octane ratings have nothing to do with dust and impurities. He was either pulling your leg or is really doesn't understand engine design. It is a matter of matching higher compression ratio or forced induction engines with higher octane fuels to suppress knocking. All three of my Honda products (two and four wheel alike) also require premium because of their high compression, high output per liter motors. So does a 1960 Plymouth Valiant (leaded fuel back then had higher octane).

As long as the cables deliver deliver the same AWG, I don't think it makes a difference at all.
Capacitance and inductance do matter with some speaker/amplifier combinations.

rw

Kevio

05-21-2009, 01:28 PM

As long as the cables deliver deliver the same AWG, I don't think it makes a difference at all. Given that, I still bought some Tara Labs cable and it made no difference at all compared to my regular 12AWG cable bought from Home Depot.

I also took the opportunity to talk to a professional musician about cables. He told me that the only time a cable makes a NOTICEABLE difference is if it goes over 50 feet. To be safe, he says that I should use a relatively higher grade interconnects if the preamp is more than 25 feet away from the amp. Also, a XLR cable is superior than a RCA cable when it comes to distant wiring.A couple other points here:
1/ Just because you or I can't hear a difference doesn't mean others can't. Whether the difference is worth any extra money, we'll only ever know if these customers or companies learn to stop worrying and love double-blind testing.
2/ In my experience, musicians are probably not usually the most critical listeners. Classical and jazz musicians and the like tend to hear through deficiencies in the recording or the reproduction system and listen the the performance. Rock musicians tend to have hearing damage.
3/ The 50 ft and XLR vs. RCA comments are generally well-accepted. Maybe this is a musician with a technical background.

Mr Peabody

05-21-2009, 07:54 PM

2/ In my experience, musicians are probably not usually the most critical listeners. Classical and jazz musicians and the like tend to hear through deficiencies in the recording or the reproduction system and listen the the performance. Rock musicians tend to have hearing damage.

* That has been my observation as well and was going to bring it up in my prior post but thought better of it at the time. I know there must be exceptions but it always struck me odd how musicians I've met are not much into home audio. I was at a music store one time for a album signing thing, when I met the guy who signed my CD insert I asked him what type of system he had and he really didn't have an answer. I was thinking "big time musician, I bet he has a killer system".

IBSTORMIN

05-23-2009, 05:46 AM

It means that there is something wrong if you own an expensive car that requires a more expensive gas than other cars, and you just bought Home Depot cables for you $5k audio system.

LIKE HE SAID ! ! ! ! ! !

Unless you can't hear a difference, but then you probably shouldn't have spent $5K on an audio system.

Feanor

05-23-2009, 10:01 AM

http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/debunking-the-myth-of-speaker-cable-resonance

I am still a skeptical to spend $400 on cables. I got some good advice from people here but I have to say this article above makes a lot of sense too.

Thanks guys. I'll keep my eyes out.

Audioholics has just gone up a bit in my esteem. I have read the odd link to their site on quite a few occassions but somehow missed the orientation to "objectivist" audio. Readers of Angelgz link should also read this one ...
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/top-ten-signs-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-oil

I don' consider myself an "objectivist" if only because I buy what sounds best to me without reference to, e.g., specifications. However when it comes to cables I have listened an found no significant differences among well-made lower-middle price interconnects, such as Blue Jeans, ($30), and upper-upper middle price counterparts, such as Monster, Kimber, or QED, (up to $200). This doesn't dispose me to want to try $500+ interconnects. The same is pretty much true for speaker cables.

A few years ago when I was getting back a bit more into the hobby, I felt I was hearing some differences amoung cables & interconnects. Today I believe I was probably kidding myself. I no longer hear difference among the sorts of lower- to higher-mid priced cables I mentioned. If you have and entry to mid-level system, I strongly advise you to spend your extra money on other components than cables; just invest in the likes of Blues Jeans and you'll be fine indefinitely.

Why is it so difficult for some people to admit that they might be kidding themselves about cable differences. Yes, yes, they are "hearing" differences. But they are forgetting that somewhere between our ear receptors and our conscious perception we all have an imagination signal processor.

audio amateur

05-23-2009, 10:08 AM

My best buddy has a 1.4L hatchback Rover and fills it with 100 octane Shell V-Power :lol:
His dad has some diplomatic status and is detaxed on Shell petrol. Makes me laugh...

Auricauricle

05-23-2009, 12:59 PM

I like that term, Fean: "Imagination Signal Processor". I'll call it the ISP, if you don't mind....

Mr Peabody

05-23-2009, 07:30 PM

Feanor if your imagination is so active how can you be sure of anything? I'm not about to admit anything that isn't true. i've heard enough cables to know there is a difference to be heard. Some larger than others depending on what the cable was. If I was biased I would have never admit that BJC was as good as I found them to be, and according to you and others I wouldn't have found them to be because my imagination wouldn't have allowed me to recognize their value. I don't know if I have exceptional hearing, have developed a knack over years of experience listening or just some knack of being in tune with my equipment, but I have no problem evaluating cables. The fact that some one can't hear this difference leads me to wonder how they can be trusted to evaluate any equipment at all. I certainly wouldn't trust that person's judgment on sound of anything.

I don't know what caused the ax you all feel you have to grind with cables but if it wasn't so pathetic and ridiculous it would be funny. A cable is a component to be evaluated as every other piece of the audio system chain. So if our imagination was so out of control and we were so influenced by everything we hear or see, we wouldn't know what the hell we were listening to or how any of it sounds. We could just light magical incense and make our system sound like all reference gear. Why spend big bucks at all just get a pretty boombox and just pretend it's a million dollar system. I mean imagination is imagination. I just can't believe the nonsense that gets posted here sometimes. You and your imagination to the butt wipe who claims we can't taste the flavor of a damn Lifesaver unless we see it.

Feanor

05-24-2009, 02:43 AM

Feanor if your imagination is so active how can you be sure of anything? I'm not about to admit anything that isn't true. i've heard enough cables to know there is a difference to be heard.
...

In the first place my comments weren't aimed a you in particular. Secondly I have never gone so far as to say there positively are not differences between cables. You might very well have such superb hearing that you can hear such differences as there actually are. For my part I have not hear significant difference among mid-priced cables; (I have no real experience with $500+/meter cables nor am I likely to ).

Please take my point, and I have always qualified my advice carefully. People with entry or middle level systems, (and I suspect that excludes you), are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables.

OK, done: there are differences among cables and you hear differences them. Now, do you deny that biases and presupostions play a big role in the (sighted) evaluation of components (by some people some of time)? The concurrent thread about DBT of speakers demonstrates (or, RGA's quibbling aside, prove), the even experienced listeners (like you and, maybe, me), come to different conclusions when their suppositions are not in play. We wouln't even touch on the realm of 'Brilliant Pebbles', jade elephants, or the like.

markw

05-24-2009, 03:50 AM

Well, since it was me that made that statement, why not simply man up and refer to me by name? After all, you're the only one you might be fooling.

Or, do Feanor's simple truths have you so on the defensive with no facts to support you that you must resort to childish name-calling (indirectly, of course) in order to TRY to prove the validity of your beliefs. Does it really make you that angry? Are you really a grown man?

As for the "nonsense posted here", you're responsible for a goodly portion yourself. You're so susceptible to what you read and WANT to believe that your BS detector is permanently disabled, by your choice. From some of our mutual encounters in the past here, you don't know enough to be able to tell BS you read on the Internet from what's real. Shall I go back and post some links?

tis a shame. Every time I think I'm gaining some little respect for you, you somehow manage to destroy that. Face it P. You're so full of yourself that one good enema would wipe you off the face of the earth.

Feanor

05-24-2009, 05:05 AM

Well, since it was me that made that statement, why not simply man up and refer to me by name? After all, you're the only one you might be fooling.

Or, do Feanor's simple truths have you so on the defensive with no facts to support you that you must resort to childish name-calling (indirectly, of course) in order to TRY to prove the validity of your beliefs. Does it really make you that angry? Are you really a grown man?

....

Or perhaps it is you who is on the defensive? Mr Peabody thought I was referring to him; you think I'm referring to you. I was speaking about the frailties of people generally: if you see these faults in yourself, I don't need to apologize.

The only thing I really believe in is skepticism and some self-doubt is a healthy part of that. My ears have lied to me betimes: once in a while your ears have lied to you. Confess this to yourself.

markw

05-24-2009, 05:18 AM

Or perhaps it is you who is on the defensive? Mr Peabody thought I was referring to him; you think I'm referring to you. I was speaking about the frailties of people generally: if you see these faults in yourself, I don't need to apologize.

The only thing I really believe in is skepticism and some self-doubt is a healthy part of that. My ears have lied to me betimes: once in a while your ears have lied to you. Confess this to yourself.Mr P doesn't respond when confronted and has no logical defense; he lashes out.

As far as I know, I'm the only one here that ever made reference to that lifesaver trick, in post 41 of this thread : http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=30496&highlight=lifesaver. As such, who else would he be referring to?

I just can't believe the nonsense that gets posted here sometimes. You and your imagination to the butt wipe who claims we can't taste the flavor of a damn Lifesaver unless we see it.

Now, if he had just left off that last sentence, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? It certainly didn't add anything to the points he tried to make, did it? Heck, it's not even a valid senence!?!

And, for the record, nowhere did I ever think you, Feanor, were referring to me.

So, as for Mr P, he can make like a shepard and go flock himself.

E-Stat

05-24-2009, 06:51 AM

My best buddy has a 1.4L hatchback Rover and fills it with 100 octane Shell V-Power
It is not only silly to use higher octane than required, it is counterproductive to performance and may cause carbon buildup in the cylinders. Higher octane resists combustion which if overdone can cause incomplete combustion. Not sure of his model, but it would seem quite normal to use 91 octane (which is what we consider "premium" in the States) if it has a 10.5:1 compression ratio as I've found Googling specs on Rover engines.

rw

Feanor

05-24-2009, 12:12 PM

Mr P doesn't respond when confronted and has no logical defense; he lashes out.

As far as I know, I'm the only one here that ever made reference to that lifesaver trick, in post 41 of this thread : http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=30496&highlight=lifesaver. As such, who else would he be referring to?

Now, if he had just left off that last sentence, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? It certainly didn't add anything to the points he tried to make, did it? Heck, it's not even a valid senence!?!

And, for the record, nowhere did I ever think you, Feanor, were referring to me.

So, as for Mr P, he can make like a shepard and go flock himself.

I did misconstrue your remarks. Now that I have read them properly I see that my position is closer to yours than Mr P's (for example).

audio amateur

05-24-2009, 01:31 PM

It is not only silly to use higher octane than required, it is counterproductive to performance and may cause carbon buildup in the cylinders. Higher octane resists combustion which if overdone can cause incomplete combustion. Not sure of his model, but it would seem quite normal to use 91 octane (which is what we consider "premium" in the States) if it has a 10.5:1 compression ratio as I've found Googling specs on Rover engines.

rw
Thanks E. To be honest we've talked about it and he's thinking he should go lower. He says he notices better power across a certain rev range (he drives a mountain path of about 7 miles to get to College which is worthy of a rally stage in Corsica). I think it'd be wiser to go lower though, and he'll probably agree. The fuel ratings in France (like most other countries I've been to aside USA) are 95, 98 & sometimes 100. I'm not quite sure why this is higher than in the US. Me thinks the octane in US & French petrol is no different, and I am mostly right, as I've just done a wiki search. US 91 is equivalent to Euro 95.
He owns a Rover 25 which according to him uses a 1.4L engine built by Rover but a copy of the 1.4L Honda VTEC. I love the VTEC sound:)

Smokey

05-24-2009, 03:04 PM

Please take my point, and I have always qualified my advice carefully. People with entry or middle level systems, (and I suspect that excludes you), are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables.

Given that cables should be chosen independent of system’s cost, I don’t see any reason why that statement wouldn’t apply to people with high level systems also.

angelgz

05-24-2009, 03:21 PM

LIKE HE SAID ! ! ! ! ! !

Unless you can't hear a difference, but then you probably shouldn't have spent $5K on an audio system.

I disagree. I've sent more than $10k on my speakers, amps and processors, but not wires and power cords. If you open up one of your amps or processors, you'll see the cables (internal wiring) are not silver or anything close to that. They are are just reasonably good cables you can get anywhere. Trying also opening up your Dynaduio Contour speaks, you'll see the same internal wiring. I think the very famous Evidence Master doesn't use silver cables either. With that said, I don't think I need to get a cable any better than the cables inside these systems, especially not those with a battery in it (pure scam). Though I am against buying expensive cables, but home depot cables are just too ugly to use so I got Tara Labs Prism (bi-wire) which was $2 a foot -- the guy gave me a good deal. I am very content with these cables since they look expensive haha:devil: .

However, my $$ DID go to a few very expensive power conditioners. I can see the logic for people to spend $$ on power conditioners because some old houses (like mine) have low voltage issues. The "normal" current coming out from the wall, I tested, is 114 volts and sometimes drop below 100 volts when the central air conditioner kicks in during the summer. This has been a problem for many rooms in my house and there's just no way to re-do all the wrings unless i tear apart the house. The difference was noticeable after installing these power conditioners. Meanwhile they protect my systems very well in the event of a power surge.

The "cable" money I saved could probably buy me another amp which will make a REAL DIFFERENCE. I tested a Onkyo TX-875 Receiver vs a Parasound Halo A53 Amp with + the C2 Controller. The difference is literally night and day. Using my frequency generating software, I found that the Onkyo produces tremendous amount of distortion in the higher octaves. After reaching 16,000hz, there was nothing but AUDIBLE distortion.

Mr Peabody

05-24-2009, 04:54 PM

Feanor

05-25-2009, 04:57 AM

Given that cables should be chosen independent of system’s cost, I don’t see any reason why that statement wouldn’t apply to people with high level systems also.

I don't know that I agree with the premise. If we suspend disbelief for a moment and allow that "expensive" equates to higher quality, better resolving, whatever, then such subtle difference as there might be favoring more expensive cables, should be more apparent in the higher-cost system.

Then again there is the relative arguments that (1) more expensive cables are no more than proportionals to cost of the system as a whole, and (2) that the richer people who can afford the expensive system can also afford the expensive cables.

E-Stat

05-25-2009, 07:39 AM

I love the VTEC sound:)
Honda's clever idea has been copied by virtually every other major car manufacturer. The concept is actually pretty simple. Provide two cam profiles: a mild one for low engine speed and a wild one with big time overlap for high engine speeds. The S2000's transition occurs at just over 6000 RPM - at which time the engine's character goes from Jekyll to Hyde and races to redline!

rw

Smokey

05-25-2009, 02:45 PM

I don't know that I agree with the premise. If we suspend disbelief for a moment and allow that "expensive" equates to higher quality, better resolving, whatever, then such subtle difference as there might be favoring more expensive cables, should be more apparent in the higher-cost system.

That is a fair statement if we suspend disbelief. But on the same note if we go by that assumption, then the statement....

"People with entry or middle level systems, are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables."

......also have to be suspended since it does not hold true anymor. :)

Feanor

05-25-2009, 03:40 PM

That is a fair statement if we suspend disbelief. But on the same note if we go by that assumption, then the statement....

"People with entry or middle level systems, are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables."

......also have to be suspended since it does not hold true anymor. :)

I'm just not following, Smokey.

I practical terms what I'm saying is the listener will get better sound buying a $1200 CDP with, say, $30 Blue Jeans cable, than spending $700 on the player and $500 on the interconnects, or buying a $1500 amp with $50 speaker cable vs. $1000 for the amp and $550 for the cable.

Once you get into real high-end, say $3000+ components, bets are off.

Smokey

05-25-2009, 08:56 PM

Sorry for being not clear. I think me and you are on the same page, but difference seem to arise when we are talking about higher end systems.

For example when you say that all bets are off when it comes to high end system, are you saying that for that type of systems, choosing cable should be system’s cost dependent?

Kevio

05-25-2009, 09:40 PM

I personally think it is dangerous to make assumptions about price vs. performance in audiophile equipment or luxury goods in general.

Feanor

05-26-2009, 05:15 AM

....
For example when you say that all bets are off when it comes to high end system, are you saying that for that type of systems, choosing cable should be system’s cost dependent?

Well sort of. That is, it is unlikely (though not impossible) that spending $500 on pair of cables will offer as much performance benefit as spending an additional $500 on an entry to mid-level active component, (CDP, amp, etc). Say a $1300 versus a $800 amp.

However the with high-end equipment, (as Kevio suggests, in this case at least), buying the $500 pair of cables might possibly provide your performance more than spending the same amount on an active component. Say a $3500 versus a $3000 amp.

Kevio

05-26-2009, 06:32 AM

Actually what I'm suggesting is that in the strata of luxury goods there's not necessarily a positive correlation between price and performance. You could spend more for a CD player or cables and end up with lesser or equivalent sound in either case.

Marketers can take advantage of the fact that when we pay more we assume we're getting more and that assumption creates its own reality. They also understand that in luxury markets, many customers (whether they'll admit it or not) are actually looking to buy status. Performance can be secondary.

Hyfi

05-26-2009, 06:39 AM

Were the Tara Labs speaker connects? What gear were they connected to?

I am guessing this was a question for me. I was using all Tara Labs cables before I got the Synergistics. I had the Prism Bi-wire for speaks and several ICs including Original-"S", Quantum 4 or 5s, and several Prism ICs. I had the Quantums between Amp and Pre and S's between CD and pre.

I now have Synergistic Kaleidoscope ics between CD and pre and pre and amp with Signature II speaker cables. Yes there was a big difference between cabling.

Mr Peabody

05-26-2009, 01:36 PM

Hyfi, I believe the OP said he had Tara Labs but he couldn't tell any difference over the zip cord. At least you could tell a difference between Tara and Synergistic.

Smokey

05-26-2009, 08:09 PM

However the with high-end equipment, (as Kevio suggests, in this case at least), buying the $500 pair of cables might possibly provide your performance more than spending the same amount on an active component. Say a $3500 versus a $3000 amp.

Sorry Feanor, but I do not necessary agree with that statement.

You said you are going by assumption that more expensive cables provide better performance. But if we go by that assumption, then you also have to agree that expensive cable will also improve the sound of low and mid level system.

That is the reason I said your previous statement “people with entry or middle level systems, are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables” will not hold true if we go by above assumption. If more expensive cable can improve high end systems, it can also do the same for low and mid level systems. We can’t have it both ways :)

Actually what I'm suggesting is that in the strata of luxury goods there's not necessarily a positive correlation between price and performance. You could spend more for a CD player or cables and end up with lesser or equivalent sound in either case.

Marketers can take advantage of the fact that when we pay more we assume we're getting more and that assumption creates its own reality. They also understand that in luxury markets, many customers (whether they'll admit it or not) are actually looking to buy status. Performance can be secondary.

Excellent post. Lets hope Mr. P doesn't start calling you names too :D

Feanor

05-27-2009, 04:00 AM

Sorry Feanor, but I do not necessary agree with that statement.

You said you are going by assumption that more expensive cables provide better performance. But if we go by that assumption, then you also have to agree that expensive cable will also improve the sound of low and mid level system.

That is the reason I said your previous statement “people with entry or middle level systems, are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables” will not hold true if we go by above assumption. If more expensive cable can improve high end systems, it can also do the same for low and mid level systems. We can’t have it both ways :)
...

Look, Smokey, (and Kevio), I never state any believe in a fixed relationship between price and performance. At best there is a loose correlation, and I'm not sure that this applies to cables at all.

Here is specifically what I'm conviced of:

I hear no difference, certainly no significant differences, amoung decent quality cables I've heard; (these have been in the $30 to $300). In this regard I personally would be stupid to pay more that $30 in that range, depending on the length, etc.
I'm included to believe that whatever differences there are amoung cables regardless of price, they are likely to be small. That is, the rule of diminishing returns will work with a vengence in the case of cables.At best, cables are a minor tweak, (at worst they are jewellery). To keep things in perpective, if you are rich and can thus afford to spend money a lot of money on your hifi system, wasting it or not, then indulge yourself in expensive cables. If your a poor person, as I am relatively speaking, I say you're a fool to buy expensive cables.

Mr. Peabody evidently has extraordinary hear and can hear differences between say, Monoprice and Blue Jeans. Good for him, but I'll bet even he will admit that the differences are very small, especially compared to other components in general.

Mr Peabody

05-27-2009, 05:54 AM

The differences heard in cables depends on the cable and gear. When going from a typical Monster RCA between my CJ preamp and power amps to my Siltech the difference was significant and well worth the money. When comparing Siltech to Transparent, both are good and it comes down to preference and system synergy. When comparing BJC to Transparent the difference is obvious but actually for a certain application I used the BJC, it is easier on the ears at extremely high volumes like in my work out room which is also still pretty live inspite of some cloth on the walls for damping. The BJC regardless of what they say on their website does roll off the highs especially compared to the higher priced cables I've compared them to like Transparent and Ixos.

As I once stated cables are no different than any other component, or product, price paid is never a guarantee it will equal performance.

I bought a very expensive set of Siltech speaker connects on special believing they would perform as well as my prior experience with Siltech. It was a different series. In the midrange they were very good but I was getting virtually no bottom end and the presentation was light and airy, having no impact or realism though. If I didn't have the ability to properly evaluate my system those cables would still be here, instead they went back and I replaced them with the New York series which in place I was very happy with.

Cables are something that people should try for themselves, if they can't hear a difference then don't spend the money but because they didn't hear a difference with their certain gear and the cables tried is no proof that differences do not exist.

I believe what Feanor is saying is that equipment with more resolution will better reveal a difference in cables, just as a better amp is better capable of taking advantage of a better CD player. A cable may improve sound some between a $500.00 CDP and a $500.00 receiver but the difference in the same cable should be more obvious between a $5k CDP and $5k amp. Prices are just for example and contrast. The "diminishing return" thing can be minimalized by buying within range of your gear. Just as some one wouldn't buy a $5k CDP to put on the front of a $500.00 receiver. If one spends $5k on an audio component it is foolish not to at least try a better cable to see if gains can be heard.

Just to relay another experience when I was comparing BJC to other RCA's, one of the brands were Ixos. I did not care for the sound of this set of Ixos, I can't make a blanket or generalization of all their stuff but I'd use the BJC hands down before the Ixos and I believe they cost quite a bit more. I found the Ixos to be unbalanced in sound with all the emphasis on the highs. There could be certain systems that need this boost and these sound fine, maybe. So spending money certainly does not guarantee always better results. And, I guess if some one can't hear any difference in cables it would be irresponsible to spend more money, wouldn't it.

Those who are holding fast to the "no difference" argument though can post links but have no real world experience comparing cables nor have ever owned more than a receiver or what might be considered 'high end" gear. Feanore is the exception that I know of. I'd have more respect for their opinion if they could actually convey some comparing experience. They are going solely on faith of what is written on the internet.

angelgz

05-28-2009, 06:03 AM

I wonder if you didn't hear a difference in cables or did it just not show up on your screen. Same with the amp, did the Parasound sound better or just look better on your screen?

And, you are wrong, Dynaudio certainly does not use ordinary wire on there Evidence series and I doubt on any.

dynaudio evidence

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/262/index1.html

No, I am not wrong. I said Evidence doesn't use silver cable; that doesn't mean they use bad cables. In that example, I am only saying there's no difference between Pear Cable Anjou that costs $7250 per foot vs Tara Labs Prism which costs only $2 a foot.

angelgz

05-28-2009, 06:08 AM

Then again there is the relative arguments that (1) more expensive cables are no more than proportionals to cost of the system as a whole, and (2) that the richer people who can afford the expensive system can also afford the expensive cables.

No, that statement is incorrect. I can put together a reasonably high end system for $15-20k but if you add some of the ridiculous cables such as Pear Cable or Tara Labs "The Zero" then that would make your $20k system cost $40k. I really don't see the point of that. If I have an extra $20K, I'd probably save it to buy another pair of Genesis 6.1 or a Krell Evo amp but not cables. Opportunity cost buddy.

angelgz

05-28-2009, 06:13 AM

Hyfi, I believe the OP said he had Tara Labs but he couldn't tell any difference over the zip cord. At least you could tell a difference between Tara and Synergistic.
I have to say Mr. Peabody is correct. I first bought some 12AWG generic cables from Home Depot to replace my 16AWG, "known to be crappy" monster cables. They did sound clearer and a little bit louder! Then, I went to get Tara Labs Prism terminated with audioquest banana jack. Honestly, I could not tell any difference beside the latter looks expensive : )

E-Stat

05-28-2009, 06:28 AM

No, that statement is incorrect. ...but if you add some of the ridiculous cables
Such would hardly represent a proportional cost as Feanor worded.

rw

Feanor

05-28-2009, 06:48 AM

No, that statement is incorrect. I can put together a reasonably high end system for $15-20k but if you add some of the ridiculous cables such as Pear Cable or Tara Labs "The Zero" then that would make your $20k system cost $40k. I really don't see the point of that. If I have an extra $20K, I'd probably save it to buy another pair of Genesis 6.1 or a Krell Evo amp but not cables. Opportunity cost buddy.

Uhmm ... I think you're agreeing with me. :crazy: (Or is it me with you?)

Feanor

05-28-2009, 06:57 AM

...
I believe what Feanor is saying is that equipment with more resolution will better reveal a difference in cables, just as a better amp is better capable of taking advantage of a better CD player. A cable may improve sound some between a $500.00 CDP and a $500.00 receiver but the difference in the same cable should be more obvious between a $5k CDP and $5k amp. Prices are just for example and contrast. The "diminishing return" thing can be minimalized by buying within range of your gear. Just as some one wouldn't buy a $5k CDP to put on the front of a $500.00 receiver. If one spends $5k on an audio component it is foolish not to at least try a better cable to see if gains can be heard.
...
Yes, that's what I'm saying.

...
Just to relay another experience when I was comparing BJC to other RCA's, one of the brands were Ixos. I did not care for the sound of this set of Ixos, I can't make a blanket or generalization of all their stuff but I'd use the BJC hands down before the Ixos and I believe they cost quite a bit more. I found the Ixos to be unbalanced in sound with all the emphasis on the highs.
...
Actually, I have a couple of pairs of Ixos. I'll swap them for the BJCs I'm using in my main system and decide whether I still hear no (noticable) difference.

...
Those who are holding fast to the "no difference" argument though can post links but have no real world experience comparing cables nor have ever owned more than a receiver or what might be considered 'high end" gear. Feanore is the exception that I know of. I'd have more respect for their opinion if they could actually convey some comparing experience. They are going solely on faith of what is written on the internet.
Whether my gear is high-end is doubtful, but one thing I'll admit is that I am stone deaf about 10 kHz.

Auricauricle

05-28-2009, 07:27 AM

Mr. P's post (no. 86) has me wondering if cables, like other components, ought to be matched to the components to which they are linked....?

Hyfi

05-28-2009, 07:45 AM

I have to say Mr. Peabody is correct. I first bought some 12AWG generic cables from Home Depot to replace my 16AWG, "known to be crappy" monster cables. They did sound clearer and a little bit louder! Then, I went to get Tara Labs Prism terminated with audioquest banana jack. Honestly, I could not tell any difference beside the latter looks expensive : )

I used Tara Prism Bi-Wire cables for years and did enjoy the performance boost when they replaced Rat Shack wire.

I also am now enjoying how the Synergistic Research cables blow away the Tara Labs.

I do think bare wire or good spades give a better connection than banana plugs so maybe your losing something.

Actually though, when you biwire, it has been recommended that you use different gauge wire for highs and lows, thinner for highs so the Prism cables are just a 4 core solid wire that they terminate as a bi-wire or singles just doubled up.

The best thing I liked about the Prisms is how flexible and easy to route they are. The Synergistic cables are like trying to route re-bar behind your gear.

Hyfi

05-28-2009, 07:50 AM

Mr. P's post (no. 86) has me wondering if cables, like other components, ought to be matched to the components to which they are linked....?

This is an accurate wonderment. However, there will be several cables that match each set of gear, not just "only this cable will work".

Before I got the current system I am using, I was there when the former owner swapped out PBJs and Kimber 8Tc speaker wire for the Synergistic ICs and Speaker cables with a jaw dropping effect.

Auricauricle

05-28-2009, 12:19 PM

It is a puzzlement, indeed!

Mr Peabody

05-28-2009, 08:56 PM

angelgz

06-06-2009, 02:32 PM

Angelgz, when comparing cables do you listen to music in a "direct" mode of some type bypassing the processing? Your gear is good enough to show a difference in cables, not sure why you aren't picking that up.

Actually most of my electronics are hooked up to the HDMI port or the optical on the Rotel Processor. I don't use any analog device despite some people believe that analog musics are more "true". So I don't think that's "direct".

I also do notice a difference but I only when the Gauge is different on the speaker wire. The interconnects didn't make a difference at all. I used to have monster cable interconnects and a regular 5 dollar HDMI cable. I replaced them with audioquest and did not notice a difference. However, the TOSlink optical cable did make a significant difference, because I was using a $10 radioshack cable and it was too long!

Mr Peabody

06-06-2009, 06:35 PM

Ah, that explains a lot. I've had some occasional differences in digital cable but I was talking about analog where the difference seems to be more noticeable. Using digital the processor's internal DAC will always be doing the playback and you probably won't notice much difference in players, possibly some in cables, but again, not like an analog cable

Whether an analog or digital connection is best for music depends on which DAC and analog circuits are the best, inside the processor or the source player. If just using a DVD player or something then digital would even be better because the Rotel's DAC is better. If wanting to put enough money into a CD player with great sound then analog is best simply because the CD player will perform better.