expensive cables

[sofsoldier]

First of all, I'm not an electrical engineer! Now that is out of the way, I have some issues that I want to bring up with cables - and hopefully get some very calm and logical responces.

I used to be a cable believer, meaning that I thought these exotic designs for cables make a difference. While testing myself and really nit-picking the result, I came to the conclusion that I could not tell one way or another. So I sold my expensive cables and made a good bit of cash!

I buy some music online, mostly for LP's, through places like Music Direct and Accoustic Sounds. They have great selections, and sell some pretty cool equipment. They also sell cable. The prices on some of these cables is enough to give a guy a heart attack! Some of them are prices more that 3 50 inch plasma screen televisions! Or a small car!

Now I cannot prove they make a difference, and I cannot prove they do not make a difference, so I came up with a few questions:

1. If cables of varying design do indeed make some type of an improvement, why don't audio equipment makers implement (or contract out) the same wire designs within the chassis of a piece of audio gear? Or speakers?

2. If buying premium cables will make such a huge difference ("elevated to a new level of musical enjoyment" as quoted by one advertisement), why not include some lower level model for free with all pieces of audio gear sold? I mean, it would be good advertising, and perhaps the owner would be willing to upgrade if a difference is heard.

I just have a hard time accepting that a thousand dollar power cord, six thousand dollar speaker cables, and eight hundred dollars of interconnects actually yield 7800 dollar increase in musical clarity.

I say buy more music if one has that much to spend!

Rick

[FLZapped]

I say buy more music if one has that much to spend!

Rick

On this board, that appears to be the majority opinion. However, you can go to the cable forum on Audio Asylum and these folks believe their cables are making huge diffrences....it is so fervered that the moderators tend to erase andy posts and eventually ban anyone that upset this view.

So far, no one has been able to conclusively that anything beyond the basic LCR parameters have an effect on "cable sonics."

-Bruce
(For non techen der geekspeak: L=inductance, C=capacitance, R=resistance)

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Since I can't link the post without the entire thread attatched, here's my response to that very same question.

This subject has been discussed many times and I’ve shared this before but for those unfamiliar… In the last four years I’ve had numerous conversations with two designers on the subject of internal wiring: Craig Uthus, designer/President of Moth Audio and Alan Yun, designer/President of Silverline Audio.

Alan Yun is a designer of loudspeakers, ranging in price from $1,500>$35,000; he also manufactures his own line of speaker cables and interconnects. In conversations with the distributor that sold me the Silverline Sonatinas I learned that Alan uses the same wire in his cables that he also uses to internally wire his speakers. Included with my speaker purchase were two complimentary 10' runs of Alan's speaker cables and his interconnect. A couple of years later I contacted Mr. Yun about his new Sonatina II as I was curious if the new upgrades could be incorporated into my speaker. We discussed the modifications in the new speaker and eventually the internal wiring of his speakers. As a speaker designer he felt the internal wire was a valid consideration, finding good results with the wire selected. We parted company on the choice of conductor; he prefers copper, myself silver. And so he encouraged me to experiment if I was so inclined. We also discussed other upgrades, such as the copper Edison-Price binding posts. I came away with the distinct impression that he felt the collection of these ancillary elements do affect the signature of his finished product. In this respect our POV was quite similar.

Craig Uthus designs single-ended triode amps that have a retro appeal and a respect for modern applications of the SET philosophy. He also designs single driver speaker systems. The circumstances involving my connection to Moth Audio was quite different from the purchase of the Silverline. Foremost, the amp I purchased was not a stock product like the Silverline; instead it was a custom project that Craig elected to build for me. We discussed many of the internal parts; resistors, caps, potentiometer, secondary winding of the OPT as well as internal signal wire as possible upgrades. I told him I wanted to use pure silver as signal wire and contacted various suppliers / manufacturers before selecting Bob Crump. Bob had sent me products to demo in the past and was happy to supply the same wire he uses to hookup his 10k “Blow Torch” pre-amp for my project. Aside from amplification components he also designs cables and power cords. Bob's wire consists of a separate run of small gauge [22awg] solid silver wire [signal] and a silver-plated copper Wonder Wire [current]. He provided me very specific instructions along with the wire for Moth, including the wires directionality. In the course of our conversations I’d asked Craig about the captive power cords in his earlier designs. His response gave me the impression that the I.E.C. facility in the new designs was based more on customer requests than a personal endorsement of that product type.

Three months later the amp finally arrived and I was tickled pink about the build quality, looks, performance, heck it even came in a wooden shipping crate. It's cool as hell and the heart and soul of my system. Then some months removed I receive an email from the wire supplier, Bob Crump, informing me he thought my amp was "wired backwards". At least it appears so from the photo I posted in a review. So I contacted Craig at Moth about the allegation. Well, he was not the least receptive to my inquiry. He told me "it was wired correctly". That regardless of my wishes or the instructions given by Mr. Crump, he felt it simply wouldn't matter what wire was used. Strangely, this was never mentioned in our earlier conversations. I respect his professional opinion but didn't appreciate that he compromised our agreement on the specifics of the build process, knowing that the customization was a key element of the purchase. I admitted to him that I had no idea which of the two configurations would be "best" but that I respected Bob's reputation and experience on the subject and wanted it corrected.

Craig did not offer to "fix it" or compensate me and we've not spoken since. And honestly, I wasn't about to ship my amp back cross-country for such a simple procedure, even if I'd discovered it the day it arrived. It was more the matter of his "professional integrity" that pissed me off. I eventually had the amp wired correctly and in all honesty the difference was so slight [least my initial impression] that I forgot about the entire matter. I will say I do feel better about getting it "to spec". I realize I would have been better served if I had tested both configurations myself [as well as all the other custom passive parts] but the intent wasn’t to build the amp myself or get involved with a DIY project. Instead, I wanted to take an existing design and fine-tune it, which Craig was willing to do. So there is my limited experience with two manufacturers who have a different POV on the internal wiring of their components. One who considers the internal wire in his speakers to have an effect and another who doesn’t believe the difference [if any] is audible.

I don't know exactly what your position on cables are but perhaps your expectations were unrealistic. I've had good results with after-market cables but don't find them to provide a "huge difference". I've compared cables to other fine-tuning devices and I've found them to if not yield the least system benefit than certainly to offer the least value for that benefit. In other words, with limited funds I'd do other things before spending big money on cables. This assumes that you FIRST put your money into the "best" core components you could afford. There are many reasons why manufacturers don't follow your logic. Some don't believe cables / wire matter and others think [rightly] that THAT is a system/listener-dependant decision that NO manufacturer can "guess right". And if you want to go there, then do so on your own. Are any products perfect or not built to a price point? I think not, and that is why some people choose to maximize the performance by using better parts. Of course, better parts don't always = better performance but many times they do. Anything can be improved.

MikE

[E-Stat]

I used to be a cable believer, meaning that I thought these exotic designs for cables make a difference. While testing myself and really nit-picking the result, I came to the conclusion that I could not tell one way or another.

Regardless of what anyone else says, that's what really counts, isn't it? While I would be considered a "believer" (at least to the extent that my JPS Labs sound marginally better than my Monster zip), the differences would not be considered huge to most folks. Discernable to me, yes. I only became a "believer" after first doing some informal testing with a friend to see if indeed I could tell the difference. I was sufficiently satisfied that on MY system using MY music sans any superfluous added cables or switchboxes in the mix, I can hear a difference that I find brings me closer to the recording. While I won't attempt to debate your findings, I will suggest, however, that perhaps you may not know what to listen for. I have benefitted from the experience of a couple of audio reviewer friends over a period of decades who have helped me in that regard. To master any skill, I aver that one needs training and practice. On the other hand, I would readily agree that most folks simply don't enjoy critically listening to music.

I just have a hard time accepting that a thousand dollar power cord, six thousand dollar speaker cables, and eight hundred dollars of interconnects actually yield 7800 dollar increase in musical clarity.

Indeed such value questions are always difficult to assess. What does an $8000 improvement sound like? I would be the first agree that it is not wise to plunk down additional cash on any cables first. If you were to hear a $300k system using such cables like Nordost Valhallas (as I have) perhaps you might have a different perspective. Can you hear the benefits of astronomically priced cables on astronomically good (and expensive) systems? I assert that trained listeners can. Is it worth it? Who's to say?

Just for grins, I did some very informal (sighted) testing last night with an average recording of Dido's newest offering. First I listened to a cut with the JPS hearing some subtle deep-in-the-recording details that I doubted would be as prevalent with the old Monster 12 gauge. I switched to the Monster and listened again. Well, most of those details I first heard were still there, if not even more present. Switch back to the JPS Labs and listen further to passages with her voice and with an acoustical guitar. Back to the Monster for comparison. Gradually after switching back and forth about five or six times, I could start to hear a pattern of differences. They were subtle, but discernable. Dynamics, especially the ability to render softer passages were better with the JPS Labs. There was more "sheen" on the acoustic guitar strings. Articulation on her voice was better.

Contrary to what many say, most seasoned reviewers like Harry Pearson of TAS will readily admit that there is way too much snake oil in the cable business. I think it is not an all or nothing question. To each his own.

rw

[Monstrous Mike]

...my JPS Labs sound marginally better than my Monster zip...
rw

Here's what I don't understand. We can send a man to the moon but we can't figure out why some cables sound apparently better than zip cord.

Sure there are lots of reports like about clearly audible improvements and there are many people with lots of technobabble on why one cable sounds better than another.

But where is the scientific paper? Where are the repeatable test results?

I know a lot people say "who cares about all that science stuff" and that's just fine. But I would be highly suspicious of any claim that seems to be fairly widespread (or perhaps not so widespread seeing as we might be living in a fishbowl here) but has absolutely no scientific backing or even foundation.

[E-Stat]

...We can send a man to the moon but we can't figure out why some cables sound apparently better than zip cord.

...Where are the repeatable test results?

I would love to see the full details behind any one DBT test that you would consider "academic" and relevant concerning something like zip vs. Valhalla or any other universally accepted high resolution cable. Over at AA, Zapped by Jitter and others usually parade the ex-MacIntosh guy Russell's site as the evidence. Have you read how sad and utterly incomplete those references are? All are pathetically devoid of any test details (in terms of documenting virtually anything used in the test, be it equipment, music, listener, superfluous switch boxes, etc) There was another reference he posted that was equally amusing and useless. Here's my favorite line from the "researcher's" comments:

The amplifiers used by the headphones and loudspeakers were assumed to be phase linear.

P.S. Can you thing of any other product, other than art, that has such a large range of price for virtually the same functionality?

Let's talk cars. You can easily get any pickup truck to measure the same lateral G force as a Ferrari Modena on the 200 foot test circle by stiffening up the simplistic suspension. What does that tell you about either vehicle's dynamic ability in the real world?

rw

[Monstrous Mike]

I would love to see the full details behind any one DBT test that you would consider "academic" and relevant concerning something like zip vs. Valhalla or any other universally accepted high resolution cable. Over at AA, Zapped by Jitter and others usually parade the ex-MacIntosh guy Russell's site as the evidence. Have you read how sad and utterly incomplete those references are?

rw

I'm not sure what you find sad about those references, other than the word of self-proclaimed technically competent people and I believe you know who I am talking about, but as you have also noted, there is zero reliable scientific explanation for what is claimed to be going on with audio cables. I have said, and will continue to repeat as long as necessary, that a lack of evidence is proof of anything but a continued lack of evidencde points to the fact that there is no evidence.

Let's talk cars. You can easily get any pickup truck to measure the same lateral G force as a Ferrari Modena on the 200 foot test circle by stiffening up the simplistic suspension. What does that tell you about either vehicle's dynamic ability in the real world?

rw

I'm not sure what analogy you are trying to draw here but I am going to assume that it has something to do with driving a car like a Ferrari, getting a feel for the handling, and not being able to attribute that feel to any one particular spec or measurement. Well that may be true, but you have to remember a car is a very complex machine with many performance parameters which have a sum total "feel" wrt to handling, etc.

An audio cable is a simple piece of wire transporting a signal from A to B. It seems you (and others) want to give this simple passive device a set of characteristics similar to a complex machine and thus assess its performance in a similar manner.

I do not believe this is a good comparison. Every tweak and odd claim audiophiles make always seem to have to be complicated to a point which is beyond scientific explanation. While this may be convenient to the audiophile I personally feel it is a stretch beyond which I, or any other person of science, would take.

And once again, people do not need scientific approval to spend their money and enjoy their hobbies, but if something is expensive has no scientific basis for its claims, I generally need to investigate in an objective manner.

[E-Stat]

I'm not sure what you find sad about those references, other than the word of self-proclaimed technically competent people and I believe you know who I am talking about...

You mean that amusing exchange between jj and ZbJ as to the value of using trained listeners with familiar musical material for their DBTs? Yeah, you can dumb down the tests so as to prove whatever you would like to. As for the Russell references, well there are NO DETAILS. Tests prove what they prove. Ok. Some unspecified group of people listening to something on some kind of system in some kind of environment were unable to hear the difference between 50' of generic zip vs. Monster zip. That conclusively proves...well what? It is when the results of such tests are then extrapolated to somehow cover every future combination of completely different systems that they become ludicrous.

I gather the answer to my question concerning any fully documented tests is no.

...Well that may be true, but you have to remember a car is a very complex machine with many performance parameters which have a sum total "feel" wrt to handling, etc.

An audio system is also a very complex system with many parameters which have a sum total "feel" with respect to musical reproduction.

An audio cable is a simple piece of wire transporting a signal from A to B.

A tire is a simple piece of rubber transporting a vehicle from A to B.

Perhaps you are not aware that a hundred years later, tire technology continues to improve with LOTS of driver experimentation encompassing a host of variables that defy any simple numerical analysis. It requires exhaustive track testing by guys like Michael Schumacher to determine what works and what doesn't on differing track conditions.

rw

[FLZapped]

Over at AA, Zapped by Jitter and others usually parade the ex-MacIntosh guy Russell's site as the evidence.
rw

Uhm, how about posting a link to the site I supposedly reference instead of some vague reference to it.

-Bruce

[pctower]

Bruce:

Why don't you and the others who purport to take a "scientific" approach to this subject just admit that most, if not all, of the reported cable DBTs results are woefully unreliable due to lack of appropriate protocol, statistical analysis and/or appropriate documentation of test procedures?

That doesn't mean cables sound different - far from it. It just means that serious scientific DBT cable tests have not been reported. Isn't the goal to get to the truth, as we currently know it, rather than promote a particular agenda. "Truth", it seems to me, includes accurately reporting and commenting on the reliability of test results that are widely quoted and tossed around on the internet.

If I am mistaken and there are DBT cable reports of tests that you believe are reasonably reliable from an appropriate scientific view point, then I will stand corrected. I have no need to promote anything other than a legitimate search for the truth.

[E-Stat]

Uhm, how about posting a link to the site I supposedly reference instead of some vague reference to it.

-Bruce

Here 'ya go:

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire.htm

And if you're up to it, my observations on the gripping evidence presented:

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?f...at&r=&session=

rw

[bturk667]

1. If cables of varying design do indeed make some type of an improvement, why don't audio equipment makers implement (or contract out) the same wire designs within the chassis of a piece of audio gear? Or speakers?

2. If buying premium cables will make such a huge difference ("elevated to a new level of musical enjoyment" as quoted by one advertisement), why not include some lower level model for free with all pieces of audio gear sold? I mean, it would be good advertising, and perhaps the owner would be willing to upgrade if a difference is heard.

I just have a hard time accepting that a thousand dollar power cord, six thousand dollar speaker cables, and eight hundred dollars of interconnects actually yield 7800 dollar increase in musical clarity.

I say buy more music if one has that much to spend!

1. Some audio companies do. McCormack does as up-grades on the original equipment, pre Conrad-Johnson. Coincident Speaker Technology does, as an up-grade. There are others.

2. Who ever said premium cables will make a huge difference? Huge, I doubt it. Don't always believe what you read in ads! But I do believe cables make a difference, just not huge.

I doubt a pair of $40,000 mono block amps are forty times better than a $1000 stereo amp. I not sure a $100,000 pair of speakers is one hundred times better than a $1000 pair. But you know what? That doesn't stop people from buying them.

If peole want to spend insane amounts of money on THEIR equipment, and cables, who in the hell cares. It's THEIR money, not yours. I say go for it. Trust me, the people who spend that kind of money on equipment also spend money on music. Probably more than you or I do.

[pctower]

Here's an interesting technical discussion from a company that sells very expensive cables:

http://www.mitcables.com/technology/power1.asp

I'm not qualified to pass judgment on the technical merits of this paper, but it seems fairly reasonable to me. However, the most interesting part of the paper to me was the final side bar, which read as follows:

"Through the use of the power factor, we at MIT have been led to conclude that a poor power factor is a mechanism for distortion. That is, that networks exhibiting poor power factor transport and play in-phase music along with out-of-phase music simultaneously. What level of this distortion is audible? We are continuing our research in this area."

When I read that I thought I would like to ask the president of that company whether he thought it a little strange that his company went to such lengths to solve the problem discussed in that paper (assuming the paper is legitimate and not mere snake oil) and charges their customers such astronomical prices to solve this problem when this company (which has been in business over 20 years) hasn't even yet determined whether the problems in cables they are trying to remedy are even audible.

And, BTW, from my own experience based solely on uncontrolled listening, for purposes of my own perceptions, cables do make a difference,

[mtrycraft]

to solve this problem when this company (which has been in business over 20 years) hasn't even yet determined whether the problems in cables they are trying to remedy are even audible.,

Yep, some like to put the cart before the horse, or give causes before there are any

[sofsoldier]

I did not know that certain brands offer internal wiring upgrades, but you are talking about equipment that is way beyond my price range. I still need to buy my pizza and beer!

It seems the consensus is that there are some audible difference with cables, but it is interesting that a major cable manufacturer (MIT) is still researching the possibility if the power distortions are audible!

That the trick though, right? I mean, specifications are one thing. Hearing the result is another. An example is my love for vinyl. CD's, SACD and DVD-A's have better frequency responce, better dynamic range, and a quieter noise floor. But I still like the sound of vinyl better!

Have a Merry Christmas everyone!

Rick

[pctower]

Sof:

I don't mean the following comment to be flip, but my 30-plus years in this hobby have taught me that there is no such thing as a concensus in anything having to do with home audio, and probably never will be. That's part of what keeps it interesting.

My advice: do what works for you, keep a tight grip on your wallet, and consider cables as the last place you choose to look for improvements. Many here with a lot of knowledge and experience will advise you never to look to cables as a place for improvements. Others, on other boards will disagree.

I say try everything you can within reason and consistent with maintaining your own enjoyment of the hobby. I often have to remind myself that listening is what it is all about and tinkering or upgrading is at best a means to an end. Above all, don't buy into the belief that more money necessarily buys improvement in performance.

As for choice of formats, my own personal experience leads me to believe the quality of the original recording and the number of masters and re-masters it has been through are far more important than the particular choice of format. Beyond that, the cost and availability of software is also extremely important.

You have a very merry and happy holiday season.

[skeptic]

"Through the use of the power factor, we at MIT have been led to conclude that a poor power factor is a mechanism for distortion. That is, that networks exhibiting poor power factor transport and play in-phase music along with out-of-phase music simultaneously. What level of this distortion is audible? We are continuing our research in this area."

This is a technical paper ONLY in the eyes of non technical readers looking at advertising copy.

All of the technical explanations about impedence, capacitance, inductance are AC electricity 101 to an electrical engineer.

There are some factual errors; "Since a High-End audio cable is typically constructed with many coils of wire, constructing a cable is like constructing an inductor. In fact, it is during the winding process that the important element of inductance is added."

Actually they are constructed with many STRANDS (not coils) of wire but they are each pulled off coils in the cable assembly plant. Series inductance of the overall cable is the result of the geometry of the oveall cable meaning the diamater of the aggregate conductor and the spacing between them.

Power transfer for signals fed through interconnects is insignificant probably at most in the microwatts if not nanowatts. If power or voltage transfer of an interconnect were a consideration in audio cables, they would cause enormous distortions in video signals fed through them because they require 300 times the bandwidth. They don't.

Power factor changes created by a few feet of lamp cord to power equipment is virtually insignificant and probably not even measurable.

Power factor changes to loudspeaker loads by "normal" speaker cables
such as zip cord are undoubtedly insignificant. MIT says you have to have the right mix of inductance and capacitance? What is the right mix? Every loudspeaker load is different and most are highly inductive. If there was a right one for one speaker, it would be wrong for another. If there was a right "mix" created for a certain cable of a certain length, it would be wrong if you used a different length. If the wire had the right inductance stretched out, it would be wrong if it were curled up.

The graph is virtually worthless. You can't see a thing. Comparative data on a chart would have been better. MIT's claim that some cables such as zip cord do not allow efficient transfer of low frequencies presumably because of power factor is not borne out by experience and there is no data to support it. Changing the power factor to a load not only depends on the impedence of the cable but the impedence of the load. Compared to loudspeaker loads, inductance and capacitance of most cables are insignificant. This concept of power factor is no different than the concept of LCR changing frequency response except made more complicated by stating it differently so it sounds like something new and different.

There are no double blind tests to show that there is any audibly detectable difference between their cable and others.

There are no waveform capture photographs or computerized analysis to show that there is any difference between current or voltage waveforms transmitted through their cable and anybody elses.

There is not one single objective fact or suggestion of a fact to justify the purchase of their very expensive product in preference to much cheaper alternative.

BTW, what the hell is "in phase and out of phase music"? I never heard of such a thing. The phase angle of non periodic waveforms typical of music always varies all over the place. Nothing new there either.

It all sounds to like technobabble smoke for suckers. This is what they produce because this is what the law allows. Suggestion, inuendo, hypothesis, complex irrelavent facts, but no actual claims. Example; "Power that is not transported in phase may still be transported to the load. But it will be out-of-phase power." The concept of reactive power is of some use to industrial power distribution engineers like me, because some users eat up utility company amp capacity on transmission lines without using up watts. Beyond a point, some utilities charge extra for low power factors and so there are industrial means to deal with it (large power factor correction capacitors.) But it has no relevance or meaning here. Just there to impress and confuse prospective non technical customers.

BTW, I'm not picking on MIT. They each have their own way of doing exactly the same thing. Each different, each worthless.

Buyer beware.

(Sofsoldier, I am an electrical engineer.)

[sofsoldier]

(Sofsoldier, I am an electrical engineer.)

Great!

As an electrical engineer, have you considered a website with the purpose of acuratly educating people with such things? I mean, there is a host of very expesive "tweaks" that may or may not provide audible improvements (like a demagnetising CD or cable elevators), that should be challenged! You said it best: "Buyer Beware."

Example: As an Astronomer, I find it comical to read media information on news of Astronomy, as well as the Astrology b.s. There is a really great source of info at www.badastronomy.com. It is well researched and its purpose is to educate.

[Rockwell]

Great!

As an electrical engineer, have you considered a website with the purpose of acuratly educating people with such things? I mean, there is a host of very expesive "tweaks" that may or may not provide audible improvements (like a demagnetising CD or cable elevators), that should be challenged! You said it best: "Buyer Beware."

I think you are looking at that website Actually, I think there are several such websites, but I don't have any links.

Unless companies selling tweak/wire products can give real evidence that their products do what they claim, it is wise to consider those products rubbish. If audiophiles actually put the responsibility on the companies to prove questionable audio tweaks make a positive difference, then those comanies would dry up quickly because they likely can't. As it is now, said companies make claims, audiophile buy. No proof needed because audiophiles buy and trust their ears will tell them. Unfortunatley, ears may tell them whatever they want to hear, without controlled blind testing.

[skeptic]

Unless companies selling tweak/wire products can give real evidence that their products do what they claim, it is wise to consider those products rubbish.

As it is now, said companies make claims, audiophile buy.

But you see they haven't made any claims. They've made statements of facts which are either well known or irrelevant using technical jargon to impress people who don't know what they are talking about. They have not anywhere said that your stereo system will sound better if you use their product. That is an inference you and many other people draw by reading into their statements more than is actually there. That's how they stay within the law or at least as close to it as they can.

They have not claimed that you will have less distortion, flatter or wider frequency response, greater dynamic range, lower noise or anything else. They have simply compared theoretically ideal wires with real ones pointing out some of the deviations from perfection in those areas where they might be able to prove some aspects of their products closer to perfection than some other alternative product not telling you that it makes an audible improvement or if it's at the cost of some other factor somewhere else.

The manufacturer of a car could say something for example like; my product has more trunk room than a BMW, more leg room than a Ferrari, more glove compartment space than a Caddilac, and will stop from 60 to 0 in less time and distance than a Rolls Royce. He wants you to come to the conclusion that his car is better than the others even if it is a Yugo. And if you buy it, that's your problem, not his. Until the FTC gets on his case that is. Maybe it's time for me to start a new posting about FTC rules of fair advertising again. It's been a while.

[Monstrous Mike]

Great!

As an electrical engineer, have you considered a website with the purpose of acuratly educating people with such things? I mean, there is a host of very expesive "tweaks" that may or may not provide audible improvements (like a demagnetising CD or cable elevators), that should be challenged!

In my time on these boards and reading the points of view of various people, I would suggest that no proof would be acceptable to counter the beliefs of those select few.

Even if Albert Einstein came back from the grave and did another PhD specifically on audio cables and found the whole high end industry was a farce, I believe the response of the select few would be: "Yeah, but what kind of system does he own?"

And I honestly say this not cynically, but rather because I believe it is the God's honest truth.

It's sort of like convincing your grandma that she is wrong about some old wive's tale she has believed all her life. Sometimes it's better just to let her go on believing it.

[pctower]

In my time on these boards and reading the points of view of various people, I would suggest that no proof would be acceptable to counter the beliefs of those select few.

Even if Albert Einstein came back from the grave and did another PhD specifically on audio cables and found the whole high end industry was a farce, I believe the response of the select few would be: "Yeah, but what kind of system does he own?"

And I honestly say this not cynically, but rather because I believe it is the God's honest truth.

It's sort of like convincing your grandma that she is wrong about some old wive's tale she has believed all her life. Sometimes it's better just to let her go on believing it.

Is that the "select few" that your fellows-in-arms repeated claim are throwing "millions of dollars" down the drain on cables? Have you ever noticed that almost weekly new cable companies emerge and that the existing ones seldom go out of business?

You simply can't get beyond your pre-conceived notion that purchases of audio cables are based on "belief". What about the placebo effect you often talk about? You can't have it both ways. So which is it? Do the majority of cable buyers buy because of their "beliefs" or because of the "perceptions" they derive from trying different cables (be they derived from placebo or from actual audible differences)?

[FLZapped]

Here's an interesting technical discussion from a company that sells very expensive cables:

http://www.mitcables.com/technology/power1.asp

Sorry Phil, this one goes in the snake oil bin too......

Here's some hints;

1) Where is their actual test set-up used to test with?

2) Each load(speaker design) has a different impedance/phase vs frequency profile requiring a unique power factor correction(at each frequency), so what complex load impedance did they use when writing this paper? I don't see any mention anywhere of a complex load impedance being attached to the wires, they only seem talk about the wires as if they were the load impedance that needed the phase correction(power factor). You can't do power factor correction until you know what your load looks like - and the wires ain't da load.

I would worry about power factor correction if I were trying to drive a hugely inductive analog power supply with a small generator, not my amplifier driving my speakers.

Wire Power Factor is a Non-Factor and I don't think it will make the O'Reilly Factor......

-Bruce

[Norm Strong]

First of all, I'm not an electrical engineer! Now that is out of the way, I have some issues that I want to bring up with cables - and hopefully get some very calm and logical responces.

I used to be a cable believer, meaning that I thought these exotic designs for cables make a difference. While testing myself and really nit-picking the result, I came to the conclusion that I could not tell one way or another. So I sold my expensive cables and made a good bit of cash!

I buy some music online, mostly for LP's, through places like Music Direct and Accoustic Sounds. They have great selections, and sell some pretty cool equipment. They also sell cable. The prices on some of these cables is enough to give a guy a heart attack! Some of them are prices more that 3 50 inch plasma screen televisions! Or a small car!

Now I cannot prove they make a difference, and I cannot prove they do not make a difference, so I came up with a few questions:

1. If cables of varying design do indeed make some type of an improvement, why don't audio equipment makers implement (or contract out) the same wire designs within the chassis of a piece of audio gear? Or speakers?

2. If buying premium cables will make such a huge difference ("elevated to a new level of musical enjoyment" as quoted by one advertisement), why not include some lower level model for free with all pieces of audio gear sold? I mean, it would be good advertising, and perhaps the owner would be willing to upgrade if a difference is heard.

I just have a hard time accepting that a thousand dollar power cord, six thousand dollar speaker cables, and eight hundred dollars of interconnects actually yield 7800 dollar increase in musical clarity.

I say buy more music if one has that much to spend!

Rick

Is there a question in there? I see nothing wrong with your logic, and I suspect you are taking the proper action.

[Toho]

I use Mogami Cables that I got from http://www.hookupvideo.com and that is all I ever use anymore. I use to use Monster and AudioQuest but they where over priced and do not perform as good audio and video like Mogami. I'm not sure if it 's because they are made in Japan or not using excellent Japanese ingenuity. However this is the prime cable brand of over 90% of audio and video recording studios use around the world. The prices are extremely cheap for pro version interconnects.