-
I believe this is the infamous ABX test too which mtrycrafts is referring:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...net%26rnum%3D1
-Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
You prove me right every time, buddy. I'll ask again. Do you have any details of the test? Other gear, double runs of what cable attached to switch box, program material, etc.?
There is no such thing as a Pass Alphen.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by WmAx
I believe this is the infamous ABX test too which mtrycrafts is referring:
Thanks, Chris! Your link (and a killer one at that when you do a reply) provided exactly the kind of documentation lacking in most reports.
Unfortunately, I am completely unfamiliar with all of those components, so I cannot comment on them. I do have a much earlier Nelson Pass design, the Threshold Stasis 3. Chauk one up for the "most amps sound alike" crowd.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident Loser
...surely you've been around long enough to understand what is meant by "singular reality"...
jimHJJ(...at least in this context...)
I've been around to know that cheap shots are the order of the day on this board. I'm just gettin' with the program here.
-
And I've heard that...
...Einstein was dyslexic...so your point is? Ones' penchant or proclivity for typos, etc. somehow invalidates the message?
I am one of the first to point out the "consider the source" scenario. To me, spelling and grammar are quite important in how one presents themselves in this anonymous bit of fol-de-rol...but that's just me. I see politicians, newscasters, "celebrities" and the like, run rampant over proper usage...and no, that doesn't make it right, it is unfortunately becoming the norm. So again, what is your point?
That fact notwithstanding, the content is what really matters...having been witness to the goings-on here for years, all I've ever seen mtry do, is attempt to get folks to realize how fallible they are. To support his premise, and unlike some, he doesn't need to pull out a laundry list of gear and post it as though it were some sort of gold star or a measure of his understanding of the issue. Few actually understand what the issue actually is.
With regard to your "corrections/addendums" re: the Pass amp...mea culpa! My cursory interest in the shennanigans here and about, limits the "depth" of my investigations into this shallow pool.
jimHJJ(...I never expect anyone to think as I do...simply to think...)
-
I do understand Loser
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident Loser
...Einstein was dyslexic...so your point is?
I am one of the first to point out the "consider the source" scenario. To me, spelling and grammar are quite important in how one presents themselves in this anonymous bit of fol-de-rol...but that's just me. I see politicians, newscasters, "celebrities" and the like, run rampant over proper usage...again, what is your point?
That fact notwithstanding, the content is what really matters...having been witness to the goings-on here for years, all I've ever seen mtry do, is attempt to get folks to realize how fallible they are. To suppoor his premise, and unlike some, he doesn't need to pull out a laundry list of gear and post it as though it were some sort of gold star or a measure of his understanding of the issue. Few actually understand what the issue actually is.
With regard to your "corrections/addendums" re: the Pass amp...mea culpa! My cursory interest in the shennanigans here and about, limits the "depth" of my investigations into this shallow pool.
jimHJJ(...I never expect anyone to think as I do...simply to think...)
I understand that he feels that the differences we hear are from psycholgical desires. He also believes that if a component is properly designed it will sound like another. I and many others just feel he is wrong. I have not spent half my life researching it or gathering scientific data. I do not have a plethora of data to prove my point. I only have the experiences have in my life to go on. I do not think we have reached perfection in engineering in any aspect of our lived including audio. This is where his argument falls apart. I guess that if we reached perfection in electrical design all perfect gear would sound the same. I do not believe this has been obtained and that is why the differences occur. I believe that science has yet to progress to the level that we have achieved perfection. The guys on the fringe of engineering making the hot rods in audio ,cars computers or whatever are the pioneers. Their productsare different from the mass market stuff. They charge alot more for the improvements they achieved. But next year their achievements will me common place and they will push the boundries further.
To assume that we are at the pinnacle is just plain rediculous.
-
Phil, Phil, Phil...
Quote:
Originally Posted by pctower
I've been around to know that cheap shots are the order of the day on this board. I'm just gettin' with the program here.
"cheap shots"...musta missed it...certainly not the use of the phrase "singular reality"...
BTW, there's a "moron" who at last count, awaits a reply...
jimHJJ(...hhmmmm...)
-
Well...
"...I understand that he feels that the differences we hear are from psycholgical desires..."
That's a part of it, as I see it...
"...He also believes that if a component is properly designed it will sound like another..."
Which begs the question: Why shouldn't they? Where does hi-fi end and sounding different, just to be different, begin?
"...I and many others just feel he is wrong. I have not spent half my life researching it or gathering scientific data. I do not have a plethora of data to prove my point..."
Therefore, as it is really speculation based on anecdotal info, it would seem to be subject to the very things mtry points out...
"...I only have the experiences have in my life to go on..."
I prefer salami when it's thinly sliced on a bias, as opposed to perpendicular to it's axis...same sausage, different presentation...it's my bias which flies in the face of all logic...
"...I do not think we have reached perfection in engineering in any aspect of our lived including audio. This is where his argument falls apart..."
Never seen THAT argument made...
"...I guess that if we reached perfection in electrical design all perfect gear would sound the same. I do not believe this has been obtained and that is why the differences occur..."
Where is there perfection? Certainly not in the recording stage. With varying trechniques and styles, who can actually say this or that is perfect. There's "live" with one of the plethora of miking techniques, multi-tracking where the "air", "width" and "depth" are artificially produced or any combination thereof. What good is tweaking the gear to reproduce something that itself may or may not be real?
"...I believe that science has yet to progress to the level that we have achieved perfection. The guys on the fringe of engineering making the hot rods in audio ,cars computers or whatever are the pioneers..."
Insofar as installing a hotter cam, or increasing displacement or adding a little NO2, these are all MEASURABLE... as is the speed, resolution or whatever in PCland...Audio? show me the numbers...very bad analogy if you think about it...
"...Their products are different from the mass market stuff..."
"Different" OK, maybe...improvement? Both debateable...especially w/o and hard data to back it up...
"...They charge alot more for the improvements they achieved..."
Yep, there's super OFC, single-crystal wire and Wonder-caps and cryogenically treated gilhoolies...all the hot-button bells and whistles...Howzabout the laser-etched faceplates and torx-head fasteners and the...this is the stuff dreams are made of...
"...But next year their achievements will me common place and they will push the boundries further...
Like raising the peak powerband to 6000rpm and grenading the engine that much sooner...that kind of thing? In audio, the limiting factor is the source...if it ain't there, it ain't nowhere...that's the boundary...
"...To assume that we are at the pinnacle is just plain rediculous..."
Given the true state of the art, its all grasping at straws in the search for the Grail...
jimHJJ(...as most eventually see...)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident Loser
"cheap shots"...musta missed it...certainly not the use of the phrase "singular reality"...
BTW, there's a "moron" who at last count, awaits a reply...
jimHJJ(...hhmmmm...)
I suspect that I must have used the term "moron" in some post to which you responded and to which I owe a reply, but my memory with respect to posts is no better than my sound comparison memory so I'm in the dark.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996turbo
To assume that we are at the pinnacle is just plain rediculous.
Why would you say this? I assume it is in relation to cable pioneering acheivements since that is what we are talking about.
Is it really ridiculous that there is nothing more to be gained sonically from cables? Do you have any examples where you feel progress limits have been reached or do you believe we can improve upon every single thing?
Personally, I can think of several examples where we have tried to push "boundaries" of design or whatnot and have produced something less than before. Could you see that happening to cables?
And finally, let's look at where real scientific pioneering takes place. One great source is the educational system. The professors and researchers who are either working on doctorates in engineering or have them already produce the most cutting edge research that I know of. In some circumstances, large corporations do this as well. Having been exposed to this environment, and working in it, I find it strange that cable research is completely absent. There are thousands upon thousands of engineering journals filled with all imaginable topics, yet not a single cable thesis that I could find.
It seems that the only pioneering done for cabling is done by cable retailers and they don't publish any findings or test results and usually don't even manufacture their cables themselves. So either this cable industry is truly unique and secretive, or it all a bunch of fluff.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pctower
God love people and the web! Two extremes, each shouting past the other, each carrying on a glorious tradition that now spans decades:
"As far as i am concerned, i am 110% sure that speaker cables DO make a difference."
_____________________
"So the great cable farce goes on."
_____________________
Only now the whole world gets to "enjoy" this perpetual shouting match.
Is there anyone out there who just buys things because of the enjoyment he derives from his purchases (or lack thereof) and doesn't need every other human being to act and believe exactly as he does?
I guess we'd never run across such a person on the Internet. He'd be too busy listening to and enjoying his system to waste his and everyone else's time.
BTW, does all this "hot air" contribute to global warming?
:) Here's one guy that has heard some differences between cables, likes trying them out while enjoying music. Just bought a new set of cables to try and just going to spend some hours listening now, instead of posting really long posts :D But I know there's difference between cables.. Used to be cynic bout cables, but not anymore...
I
-
One of the articles was a translation of the original Swedish. One of the sentences used the expression "in plain English". My question is: Do the Swedes emphasize things by saying "in plain English", or do they say "in plain Swedish?"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
No, speculation comes from lack of direct experience. Actually, I just enjoy hearing all that expensive gear available to my reviewer friends. I bought my preamp used for a third of it's retail value.
rw
I think you mean, "a third of its retail PRICE"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjorn
:) But I know there's difference between cables..
I
Anything other than 12 AWG zip cord can only degrade the signal to make it sound different. In addition, any cable that does sound different can be duplicated with 12 AWG zip cord and inductors/capacitors so why spend the money?
-
Norm Strong,
we say "på ren Svenska" in Swedish, i.e. "in plain Swedish". :)
T
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckman
Anything other than 12 AWG zip cord can only degrade the signal to make it sound different. In addition, any cable that does sound different can be duplicated with 12 AWG zip cord and inductors/capacitors so why spend the money?
May you enjoy your zip.
:)
rw
-
I was just reading the post and I can't help myself to make a post here. This topic is a total waste of time and everyone here is acting silly. There will be no end to this argument. Think about it, it doesn't matter what that other person prefer because you'll never hear what that person is hearing. Everyone hears and perceive things in a different way so if someone thinks that the cable made a difference then it did for that person. So if someone want to spend $2000 on a pair of cable then let them. Heck I say more power to them since they are helping to feed someone's family. This is a free country, if company like Halliburton can waste millions of tax payer money, then why can't we waste our own money without getting crucify. I admit I had a pair of $1600 speaker cables before and I did a comparison between my $.68/ft Canare 4S11 and you know what I did hear some differences. But did the differences justify the cost, NO. So I returned it and kept the Canare. If I had the extra money would I have kept the expensive cable, probably yes. Why? Because they are well made and look damn nice. Seriously folks if you are really into hi-end audio, you are not only buying the stuff for the sound, but also for the look and pride of owning that piece of equipment. This is the same reason why people are willing to spend $150 for a pair of Nike when they can get a normal pair of tennis shoe for half the price. It is also why women like to have LV and Hermes purses when a cheap purse from Wal-mart does the same thing. The same reason why people who have money drives BMW, Lexus, Bentley, Rolls Royce, and other expensive automobiles. My point is that it doesn't matter what the other guys thinks as long as you are satisfy and happy with what you got. Everyone value things a little differently. For example the wife or girlfriend might think that spending $1000 on a receiver is a waste of money, but at the same time she thinks it is ok to spend $1500 on a pair of diamond ear rings. The benefit gained from buying the receiver for you have a higher benefit to cost ratio then compare to the wife or girlfriend. The same is true the other way around. Simply put there is no scientific way to measure happiness and everyone utilty level is not the same even when comparing the same goods. So folks, stop getting upset at each other and just enjoy the music. :cool:
-
I could not agree with what you said more.
-
There will be no end to this argument.
That we can agree about. Neither will there be an end to the discussion of creation or intelligent design, right?
Think about it, it doesn't matter what that other person prefer because you'll never hear what that person is hearing.
Ah, now you are confusing a preference to what one hears? I doubt it is the same, right?
Hearing can be tested. Preferences most likely not as many aspects makes up a preference and in hearing, only the sound is involved, right?
Everyone hears and perceive things in a different way
Everyone perceives differently. Hopefully we all hear the same way though. There is a difference between hearing and perceiving.
so if someone thinks that the cable made a difference then it did for that person.
A sibgular reality?
So if someone want to spend $2000 on a pair of cable then let them.
Who is stopping him?
Heck I say more power to them since they are helping to feed someone's family.
Yes, one way to look at it. But, perhaps it is a family that doesn't need more feeding, the owner of the company?
This is a free country,
So far it is, to a limit.
then why can't we waste our own money without getting crucify.
No one is crucified. Many are questiond though when certain claims are made. As was Halliburton is questioned and will be required to repay.
I admit I had a pair of $1600 speaker cables before and I did a comparison between my $.68/ft Canare 4S11 and you know what I did hear some differences.
I think you perceived something. What, is the real question that can be tested.
If I had the extra money would I have kept the expensive cable, probably yes. Why? Because they are well made and look damn nice.
That is a valid issue of a preferred cable, yes by all means.
Seriously folks if you are really into hi-end audio, you are not only buying the stuff for the sound, but also for the look and pride of owning that piece of equipment.
Ah, you raise two issues here: sound quality and the rest. Sound quality can be tested. The rest, cannot.
-
I'm going to end this argument once and for all:
WHO CARES!!!
If you hear a difference or not, why try to convince someone otherwise?
Let's talk about something else: I believe in Jesus...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Klim
I'm going to end this argument once and for all:
WHO CARES!!!
If you hear a difference or not, why try to convince someone otherwise?
Let's talk about something else: I believe in Jesus...
WOW!! I stopped reading this thread after the 1st page and not until after posting my last post did I read the one before mine. I totally agree with you!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Klim
1. I'm going to end this argument once and for all:
2. WHO CARES!!!
3. If you hear a difference or not, why try to convince someone otherwise?
4. Let's talk about something else: I believe in Jesus...
1. At last! 25 years of debate is over.
2. Who cares? Who do you think cares? Isn't it obvious?
3. Why not?
4. Who?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas_A
1. At last! 25 years of debate is over.
2. Who cares? Who do you think cares? Isn't it obvious?
3. Why not?
4. Who?
1 - I wish it were.
2 - People who like to debate.
3 - Because no one is going to change the other persons mind.
4- "God so loved the world
That He gave His one and only Son (Jesus),
That whosoever believes in Him
Will not perish but have everlasting life." - John 3:16
-
3 - Because no one is going to change the other persons mind.
I guess then you haven't read DMK's message where his mind was changed?
And the countless private mails and ones who never post?
You just cannot claim what you are claiming.
4- "God so loved the world
That He gave His one and only Son (Jesus),
That whosoever believes in Him
Will not perish but have everlasting life." - John 3:16
OK, that is what that passage has to say. And? It must be so? Based on one book? That book prooves itself?
Or, there is external evidence? Good luck, enjoy your faith.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Klim
"God so loved the world That He gave His one and only Son (Jesus),
That whosoever believes in Him Will not perish but have everlasting life." - John 3:16
Good thought, Peter. Hang in there. You're not alone.
-
Hang in there, Bro
Quote:
Originally Posted by nusiclover
the answer is a positive YES....
I think there are differences between cables too. I've heard them though I can't prove that to anyone, not even myself. Nevertheless I'm reasonably convinced.
There are measurable differences between cables so why should there not be be audible differences as well? Some cable makers, (too few), publish electrical parameters for their speakers, (resistance, inductance, capacitance). You might expect that a cable with high inductance / low capacitance would emphasize bass. Maybe you could use zip cord + an inductor to achieve the same effect or maybe not: it would depend on the overall result. In any case, lots of people claim they can hear difference between similarly spec'e capacitors and inductors.
Proof is a difficult think. As RGA points out, DBT (double blind testing) cannot prove the negative proposition that there is no difference between A and B. Tobacco companies long claimed that there was no proof that tabacco caused disease: stricly speaking they were right. But we -- and they -- really knew better.
-
"There are measurable differences between cables so why should there not be be audible differences as well?"
Sometimes measureable differences are so slight as to be below the threshold of hearing of most people. Furthermore, whether these differences show up audibly and exactly how these differences manifest themselves subjectively depends on what equipment they are connected to. They become part of a network, they don't exist in a vacuum.
"As RGA points out, DBT (double blind testing) cannot prove the negative proposition that there is no difference between A and B."
I am sorry to say as is often the case, I have to disagree with RGA's statement. Even in Cable Asylum's discussion of its anti DBT rule, they acknowledge that DBTs are the ONLY way to determine if small audible differences between components exist. To be perfectly honest, most DBTs of audio equipment are probably not run fairly. The first thing anyone running such a test should do is screen the participants to determine their hearing accuity. No point in buying expensive cables (or anything else expensive in audio equipment) if you are hearing impaired. If the slight differences do exist, the first step would be to find out if the people with the sharpest ears can hear them. Then they can test and discuss the implications for the rest of us.
I am always astonished that so many people who advocate the purchase and use of expensive audio cables because of differences in linear electrical properties such as capacitance and inductance don't understand that all they are doing is changing the frequency response of their sound systems, yet would reject the use of tone controls or equalizers which perform exactly the same function in almost exactly the same way except that they do it cheaply, reliably, predictably, and controllably.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
I am always astonished that so many people who advocate the purchase and use of expensive audio cables because of differences in linear electrical properties such as capacitance and inductance don't understand that all they are doing is changing the frequency response of their sound systems, yet would reject the use of tone controls or equalizers which perform exactly the same function in almost exactly the same way except that they do it cheaply, reliably, predictably, and controllably.
The difference lies entirely with "almost exactly" I find prevention of an audio anomaly far superior to correction after the fact, especially when the "cure" involves the introduction of an otherwise superfluous complex circuit. Remember Occam's Razor? Adding an active tone control stage to "reboost" the upper frequency rolloff experienced when using high capacitance cables between my attenuators and power amp is not an elegant solution. BTW, using cables of known capacitance is also reliable, predictable, and controllable. I'll concede only the "cheaply". It all depends upon how many IC chips you want in your signal path and how much resolution you wish to sacrifice.
rw
-
How about using a bass boost and a treble cut for your phonograph cartridge to compensate for the treble boost and bass cut in the recording? That's what the RIAA curve and microgroove recording is all about. How many gain stages did you say there were in that monster 48 channel recording console, the master tape deck, the remastering deck, and in the cutter console? 30? 50?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
How about using a bass boost and a treble cut for your phonograph cartridge to compensate for the treble boost and bass cut in the recording?
Perhaps you need brushing up on the definition of "superfluous".
BTW, the RIAA example is the exact opposite of the scenario I described. Do you think the sonics of LPs would be as good if it were the highs that were initially cut and later boosted? You will get nothing but agreement from me concerning the cumulative sins of gaggles of ICs and gain stages used in most studio recordings. I greatly prefer the sonics of minimally miked and signal-simple recordings. That philosophy most certainly carries over downstream to my music system as well. I have yet to meet a perfect gain stage.
rw
-
"I have yet to meet a perfect gain stage."
Perhaps you should go back to an Edison wax cylinder phonograph. They had NO gain stages. Ony one microphone. And they used horns. RGA and Benil's favorite.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
"Perhaps you should go back to an Edison wax cylinder phonograph. They had NO gain stages.
Or, choice "B", eliminate UNNECESSARY circuitry designed to fix preventable problems.
rw
-
Or C, rely on 75 years of advances in electronic and electrical engineering that has helped transforme the world of outdoor plumbing, horse drawn carriages, telegraphs, crackly old telephones, wooden bi-planes, and medicine show remedies into the space age, the computer age, genetic cloning, the internet age. Why not try the best technology has to offer instead of rejecting all of it the way some people do. You can't power an electrostatic speaker system with an SET and gas and oil heat beat woodburing stoves and fireplaces for comfort every time. It's also nice not to have to go out to the well for water every day. If your electrostatic speaker has a high end that rolls off, why not try a professional equalizer to boost it back up. It's the same kind the recording engineers who made 98 percent of the recordings you listen to used when they made them and you will get exactly what you need, not a drop more or a drop less.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
If your electrostatic speaker has a high end that rolls off, why not try a professional equalizer to boost it back up. It's the same kind the recording engineers who made 98 percent of the recordings you listen to used when they made them and you will get exactly what you need, not a drop more or a drop less.
In your sweeping historical saga, you completely missed the point. I guess it is my fault that I thought you understood what I meant when I talked of an HF rolloff when using attenuators directly to amplifiers in lieu of a preamp. Lemme help you out here.
When you have a source like a CDP driving a power amp directly through a relatively high impedance attenuator (eliminating the superfluous line stage, i.e. unnecessary, not needed, redundant, not required, non-essential), then capacitance comes into play as a possible source of high frequency rolloff. The way to PREVENT any roll off is to minimize the capacitance through the use of short and unfortunately, more expensive cables. As opposed to introducing an otherwise unnecessary tone control stage to counter the effect after the fact. My speakers have nothing to do with this phenomena. They measure +/- 2 db from 28-20khz. The result is greater resolution and improved soundstaging.
rw
-
If you put your CDP half the distance to the power amp, you can have twice the capacitance per foot and still come out with the same overall capacitance. Of course that capacitance won't equal a hill of beans difference if the CDP output is an emmitter follower or dare I say it, a cathode follower if it is a tube CDP. Of course, the higher the input impedence of the amp, the less difference the capacitance makes anyway. Why not get a power amp or a CDP with a volume control of its own and then you can eliminate that expensive "passive preamp" altogether. Hey, how about a power amp with a CDP built in two inches away.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
If you put your CDP half the distance to the power amp, you can have twice the capacitance per foot and still come out with the same overall capacitance.
Because it is impractical. The IC run from CDP to attenuator is 0.5 meter and from attenuator to amps is one meter as is. Since the one meter run doesn't reach the preamp, I have separate 2 meter ICs going from pre to power for when I use vinyl. Audio Research preamp on top, DIY attenuators in middle and GamuT CDP on bottom. Boy it sure is dusty back there!
<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~ralphwallace/images/audio/front_rack.jpg">
<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~ralphwallace/images/audio/side_rack.jpg">
<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~ralphwallace/images/audio/behind_rack.jpg">
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
Why not get a power amp or a CDP with a volume control of its own and then you can eliminate that expensive "passive preamp" altogether.
Great suggestion. Do tell me of an amp that is as good as my VTLs with some. I know of better CDPs with gain controls, but the least expensive runs about $5k more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic
Hey, how about a power amp with a CDP built in two inches away.
Physical impossibility using tube monoblocks.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrycraft
3 - Because no one is going to change the other persons mind.
I guess then you haven't read DMK's message where his mind was changed?
And the countless private mails and ones who never post?
You just cannot claim what you are claiming.
4- "God so loved the world
That He gave His one and only Son (Jesus),
That whosoever believes in Him
Will not perish but have everlasting life." - John 3:16
OK, that is what that passage has to say. And? It must be so? Based on one book? That book prooves itself?
Or, there is external evidence? Good luck, enjoy your faith.
Mtry, in fairness, the posts by yourself and like-minded others really didn't change my mind. They did, however, give me the impetus to test cables myself. As you know, I heard no differences but I'm still not prepared to state unequivocally that the cables that come with Pioneer receivers are completely transparent. That doesn't stop me from poking a little harmless fun at cable believers, though. :)
As for the biblical passage, I'll always remember one thing my father said. He was a minister before he retired. He said "there are precious few atheists in a foxhole and even fewer in an intensive care ward." That proves nothing, of course but in his experience, even the disbelievers in those wards pray like crazy...just in case! :D
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMK
He said "there are precious few atheists in a foxhole and even fewer in an intensive care ward." :D
My father always said: "Never share a foxhole with a guy who is braver than you are".
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
My father always said: "Never share a foxhole with a guy who is braver than you are".
Nor crazier!
On the topic of cables and, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the poster who is also the guitarist who said if cables sounded different, you'd have noticed it with guitar cables? If you are (and this may sound stupid in light of the above) what's a good guitar cable that reduces hum? I just bought my son a guitar and amp at his request and we get horrible hum! Is there a cable you've used that reduces or eliminates this? Thanks.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
The difference is that I qualify my comments with respect to the system involved. You make unsupported blanket claims. Which is indeed valid for the majority of folks asking what cable they should use with their Onkyo receiver.
rw
Not necessarily, since I've had these speaker cables:
14 AWG zip cord
XLO ER-14
Kimber Kable KWIK-16
Kimber Kable 4PR
and these interconnects:
Radio Shack Gold
XLO Twinax Plus
Kimber Kable Tonik
in this system:
Onkyo TX-8211 receiver
Sony CDP-XE500 CD player
Paradigm Titan or Mini Monitor speakers
Paradigm PDR-8 or PDR-12 subwoofer
and it was easy enough to hear differences between the cables, even at this low level of resolution.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMK
Nor crazier!
On the topic of cables and, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the poster who is also the guitarist who said if cables sounded different, you'd have noticed it with guitar cables? If you are (and this may sound stupid in light of the above) what's a good guitar cable that reduces hum? I just bought my son a guitar and amp at his request and we get horrible hum! Is there a cable you've used that reduces or eliminates this? Thanks.
You might check out Evidence Audio's guitar cables and see if they help with your problem. Their website is here: http://www.evidenceaudio.com/
|