Detectable Differences In Monster? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Detectable Differences In Monster?



Defshep
02-17-2005, 10:25 AM
I'm still fairly new to home theater. Well, I've had a system (low end Pioneer & Sony components) for a couple of years. Question about Monster & Acoustic Research cables & speaker wire. I know there are better grades than others. Heck, even Radio Shack & RCA make expensive cables. But I recently read that most of the difference in quality is undetectable by the human ear. Is this just a matter of opinion?

musicoverall
02-17-2005, 11:48 AM
I'm still fairly new to home theater. Well, I've had a system (low end Pioneer & Sony components) for a couple of years. Question about Monster & Acoustic Research cables & speaker wire. I know there are better grades than others. Heck, even Radio Shack & RCA make expensive cables. But I recently read that most of the difference in quality is undetectable by the human ear. Is this just a matter of opinion?

Yes, it's a matter of opinion. There is no proof that zip cord (the lowest quality in terms of sonics) sounds identical to higher definition cable in all systems and to all people, just as there is no proof of any sonic differences. Scientists accept the lack of proof for differences as reason enough to be sure of that POV and audiophiles accept what their senses tell them when they perceive differences. It seems to be a never ending debate.

markw
02-17-2005, 12:31 PM
And, by that same token, nobody has ever been able to tell whether they are listening to a $5.00 cable or a $500.00 cable witout knowing what they were listening to.

Of course, when they can see the cables they are listening to, the differences are apparant. riiiiiiiiiight.

You would think someone would be able to accurately justify these price disparities without looking by now, wouldn't ya?

musicoverall
02-17-2005, 01:11 PM
And, by that same token, nobody has ever been able to tell whether they are listening to a $5.00 cable or a $500.00 cable witout knowing what they were listening to.

Really? How do you know? I've heard of several people and organizations that claim to have done just that. How do you know their claims aren't factual? One of the audio mags in England tests everything blind in their listening tests. Are they lying? How do you know? What criteria do you use to determine which claims are valid and which aren't? Why should I or anyone else use the same criteria?

Having said (asked) all that, I'm going to try the blind tests that you spelled out. If I score 8 out of 10 I'm most definitely going to strenuously argue your point above.

markw
02-17-2005, 01:29 PM
You might want to check out the other post dealing with statistical probabilities. My own test comprised 20 notations, and I scored 12 outta 20 correct.

And, If I'm looking at a Mercedes for 60k and a Hyundai for 15k, I really want to be able to see what that extra 300% is paying for. I don't think my auto comparison would be a problem.

musicoverall
02-17-2005, 04:37 PM
You might want to check out the other post dealing with statistical probabilities. My own test comprised 20 notations, and I scored 12 outta 20 correct.

And, If I'm looking at a Mercedes for 60k and a Hyundai for 15k, I really want to be able to see what that extra 300% is paying for. I don't think my auto comparison would be a problem.

My cable comparisons aren't a problem, either! :)

Do you recall of your 20 trials, were you totally guessing or did you think you were you pretty sure of which cable was in service at each or most of the trials?

My point in the last post was that we really don't know that no one has picked out cables blind - not for sure. If we're going to be suspicious of cable sonics, we may as well be suspicious of everything, including the validity of any test methodology and whether the tester reported the results accurately. After all, if cable sonics violates known physical laws and the scientific community is so enamored of them, they might cover up positive tests... until they have the opportunity and/or the inclination to test the wire(s). Perhaps there's an agenda at work. Silly? Perhaps as silly as I find second guessing my perceptions to be? It would prove long and tiresome for me to test each and every one of my sensory perceptions for validity.

It should be noted that poster jneutron is currently undertaking cable tests for differences in sonic characteristics. It seems he's not as sure zip cord sounds the same as Nordost. Perhaps he can help put this debate to rest. As it stands, it's still two-sided.

markw
02-17-2005, 05:57 PM
I'm not sure about anything, honestly. All I can say is that I listened liesurely, to pieces of music that I thought were ready indicators of the differences in the cables. After careful considration I DID force myself to identify either one or the other. Refusing to do so would have been a copout and an admission that I couldn't tell the difference. We had already agreed that by refusing to identify a cable, it would have been counted as wrong so I figured I'd get better odds guessing.

E-Stat
02-18-2005, 11:06 AM
And, If I'm looking at a Mercedes for 60k and a Hyundai for 15k, I really want to be able to see what that extra 300% is paying for. I don't think my auto comparison would be a problem.
Would that be a blind test? ;)

Otherwise, the performance metrics are not all that different.

rw

markw
02-18-2005, 12:56 PM
...but I'm fairly confident that if someone blindfolded me and took me for a vigorus ride in both vehiches, I've venture to say that I could differentiate between the two fairly consistently.

Of course, here in Jersey, blindfolding someone and taking them for a ride isn't looked upon as a laughing matter. ;)

A-Audiophile
04-06-2005, 07:52 AM
Would that be a blind test? ;)

Otherwise, the performance metrics are not all that different.

rw

So the question is...Is it possible to be able to subjectively differentiate between audio cables at all....

Cardas and its peers can package anything put a big price tag on it and everyone who knows the name and price will automatically think the cable sounds better than brand B.

Well....I for one can hear a difference in cables regardless of price and name.....to my ear in my system $40 RatShack Fusion cables sounded better than the $200 Kimbers I had...even though I knew Kimber was a better "name brand" and the product costs 5 times more.

But then when I replaced my stock 16-18ga power cord on my CDP with 12ga it sounded better too.... :rolleyes:

A-Audiophile
04-06-2005, 07:59 AM
I'm not sure about anything, honestly. All I can say is that I listened liesurely, to pieces of music that I thought were ready indicators of the differences in the cables. After careful considration I DID force myself to identify either one or the other. Refusing to do so would have been a copout and an admission that I couldn't tell the difference. We had already agreed that by refusing to identify a cable, it would have been counted as wrong so I figured I'd get better odds guessing.

Yes sometimes it can be difficult to tell the difference [better/worse/other] between cables...but by the "nay-sayers" logic rolling tubes in your tube gear should not make a difference either....one 6922 should sound like all 6922's. :confused:

Beckman
04-06-2005, 11:40 AM
But I recently read that most of the difference in quality is undetectable by the human ear. Is this just a matter of opinion?

YES! Some people swear they can hear a difference and some say they can't. If I were you I would look at upgrading speakers or your amplifier before upgrading speaker cable.

hermanv
05-02-2005, 12:42 PM
If you compare the performance of a Ferrari and a Toyota in a busy shopping center parking lot you might conclude that the person that spent $300,000 for his Ferrari is a fool. On the autobhan you might reach a different conclusion.

Likewise it seems more than a little silly to spend $1000 for interconnects between a Radio Shack $200 receiver and a pair of Realistic $150 speakers.

I used to own expensive Japanese mass market electronics and try as I might couldn't hear what all the cable fuss was about. Yes there was some small improvement from zip cord but no additonal improvement with the high priced spreads. So I was in the "it's all snake oil" camp.

Now I own equipment priced probably 8-10 times the cost of the expensive Japanese gear and suddenly my mid priced interconnects were inferior to higher priced models. My system sounds better than ever but I can easily believe that if I could afford even more expensive gear carefully auditioned and researched it would sound better yet.

I can also believe that my current cables might turn out to be inadequate in this new I can't afford it system.

The message is that not all the differences between various cables will be apparent unless the rest of the system is not the limiting element of the overall sound quality.

Even the cheapest boom box will reproduce recognizable music. As the price goes up the differences become smaller and smaller but there seem to be incremental improvements available all the way up the price curve. This is the reason that amplifiers that cost as much as a nice car exist, if you buy and listen carefully there are real sonic rewards for those lucky enough to be able to afford this gear. Only your own perspective on the value of money can decide if the rewards justify the expense.