How about this argument as to why cables sound different.

[Tony_Montana]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

[skeptic]

"It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."[/b]"
[/QUOTE]


That statement seem very plausible only to a neophite. Mathematically, the cable is part of a network which consists of the source, the cable and the load. When you measure the numbers and plug them in, the cable becomes an insignificant factor. The source impedence is very low, the load impedence is relatively high to the source, and the cable as well as the differences between one cable and another are insignificant. It comes as no surprise to engineers who "run the numbers" that the differences are inaudible. That's the result they expect, that's the result you get. You want to know why electrical engineers are "objectivists" on this issue? That's way. The only exception is when you have an amplifier with a relatively high source impedence (low damping factor) a long run of cable, and a low impedence loudspeaker. Then you need something special. And that special thing is heavier gage wire to reduce the series resistance so it becomes insignificant again.

Good try Tony but again NO CIGAR!

And NO SOUP FOR YOU TODAY!

[mtrycraft]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

Then all his speculations as that is all it is, can be detected under bias controlled listening.

Bring it on

They will try all sorts of excuses before they can even demonstrate audible differences in the first place. Why is that?

[Beckman]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

? impedance, reactance = 1/impedance, same thing - inverse

? dielectric absorbtion = capacitance, included in impedance

? sonic perceptions - does this mean how the sonic percieves the music?

I agree that different cables can sound different. I also believe that if people replaced their expensive cables with 12 AWG zip cord and listened carefully they would find their system sounds equal or better.

[bturk667]

that I can hear the difference between cables in my system.
For those you can't, well, good.

[Beckman]

that I can hear the difference between cables in my system.
For those you can't, well, good.

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?

[pctower]

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?

Well, here's one reason:

http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/Loudspeakers&RoomsPt3.pdf

Pages 28-31.

Of course, even if cables had the capacity to equalize, they would do even a worse job.

Seems to me that if similar cables of similar gauge and length really can sound different, the goal should not be to use cables as "tone control" or "equalizers", but use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them (if, in fact, a cable really is capable of doing sonic "damage").

[skeptic]

"use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them "

If by damage you mean distortion, then one cable is pretty much like another. Electrical engineers are aware of two types of distortion, linear and non linear. Linear distortion, the change in frequency/phase response is correctable through equalization. That's what you do in your color tv set when you adjust the tint control. Non linear distortion meaning harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, and noise, are not correctable.

Linear distortion has been shown to vary among different speaker cables by at most two or three tenths of a db at 20khz, an insignificant quantity to anyone but those out of touch with reality. For interconnects, even that infinitesmal quantity cannot be accounted for because if the divergence were that great at 20khz, the lesser cable would not pass a 6mhz NTSC signal and yet even the least expensive ones can do it virtually perfectly. We usually think of requiring ten times the analog bandwidth transmitted to be acceptable so the cheapie interconnects for vcrs video output to tv video input should have a bandwidth of 60 mhz or more, 3000 times what is needed for high fidelity audio. All audio interconnect cables should easily meet this criteria.

As for non linear distortion, I have only John Curls numbers to go on showing (for the umpteenth time in case someone hasn't seen it before) that the worst case measured ($1 RS) was minus 120 db for the 7th harmonic of 5 khz and the best case (very expensive) was minus 135 db for the 7th harmonic of 5khz, both cases being entirely inaudible under any possible circumstances in any audio playback system. Of course there are the theorists like Jon Risch who speak of dielectic "memory" and other highly esoteric rationale for their claims of superiority of sound of one cable over another but when it comes to demonstrating electrical differences in distortion (or damage as you put it) they are at a complete loss.

When challenged with a demand for some objective proof that these differences exist and are not just imagined such as a DBT where the advocate could pick out one cable from another by sound alone, they are not only at a complete loss to give any hard evidence but at sites like CA, they refuse to even allow discussion of it under the pretense that it would only provoke flame wars. Is it any wonder then that some people viewing these claims are "skeptics?"

[pctower]

"use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them "

If by damage you mean distortion, then one cable is pretty much like another. Electrical engineers are aware of two types of distortion, linear and non linear. Linear distortion, the change in frequency/phase response is correctable through equalization. That's what you do in your color tv set when you adjust the tint control. Non linear distortion meaning harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, and noise, are not correctable.

Linear distortion has been shown to vary among different speaker cables by at most two or three tenths of a db at 20khz, an insignificant quantity to anyone but those out of touch with reality. For interconnects, even that infinitesmal quantity cannot be accounted for because if the divergence were that great at 20khz, the lesser cable would not pass a 6mhz NTSC signal and yet even the least expensive ones can do it virtually perfectly. We usually think of requiring ten times the analog bandwidth transmitted to be acceptable so the cheapie interconnects for vcrs video output to tv video input should have a bandwidth of 60 mhz or more, 3000 times what is needed for high fidelity audio. All audio interconnect cables should easily meet this criteria.

As for non linear distortion, I have only John Curls numbers to go on showing (for the umpteenth time in case someone hasn't seen it before) that the worst case measured ($1 RS) was minus 120 db for the 7th harmonic of 5 khz and the best case (very expensive) was minus 135 db for the 7th harmonic of 5khz, both cases being entirely inaudible under any possible circumstances in any audio playback system. Of course there are the theorists like Jon Risch who speak of dielectic "memory" and other highly esoteric rationale for their claims of superiority of sound of one cable over another but when it comes to demonstrating electrical differences in distortion (or damage as you put it) they are at a complete loss.

When challenged with a demand for some objective proof that these differences exist and are not just imagined such as a DBT where the advocate could pick out one cable from another by sound alone, they are not only at a complete loss to give any hard evidence but at sites like CA, they refuse to even allow discussion of it under the pretense that it would only provoke flame wars. Is it any wonder then that some people viewing these claims are "skeptics?"

My comment was directed solely at the issue of equalizers. I thought I had chosen my words carefully enough to avoid going down the do-cables-really-matter path again for the 1,389,048,201th time. I even bothered to mention cables at all in hopes of avoiding some sanctamoneous speech from someone who felt the need to jump in and point out that any problem Toole refers to in his article about equalizers would apply even more to cables, IF they even might make a difference (which was clearly a subject I had no interest in getting into on a general level, as it has been beat to death here beyond the cruelest torture man could possibly devise).

Apparently, however, that truly is the only issue anyone on this board is capable of discussing. I guess it is just too much of a temptation for the regulars here to avoid the need to repeat their canned stump speach at least 3 or 4 times daily.

[jamie_the_dude]

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?

An equalizer can only boost or cut frequencies to balance sound levels within a room to adjust for its environment which naturally may cut or boost frequencies. You battle this by doing the opposite with an equalizer. Cables can chnage the sound, not...........It can add detail to highs, clean up lows, and add warmth to sound, etc. An equalizer cannot exactly do this.

And my take- I can tell cables in my sytem too- that is all I know. With a receiver and a couple bookshelf speakers like I had in college- I could not. Good cables simply do not "mess up" already good sounding equipment. But, they can tweak the sound a bit.

Byt he way- lets all start a post about the airplane at the speed of light turning on its headlights! SWEET!

[mtrycraft]

Cables can chnage the sound, not...........It can add detail to highs, clean up lows, and add warmth to sound, etc.




Where did you get this nonsense? If it is evidence based, please expand on this evidence.

And my take- I can tell cables in my sytem too- that is all I know.

And my take is that you perceive something. That is different from hearing things that are real.
How about imaginating all this nonsense? That is a real possibility too. You will never know what you really heard unless you conduct your comparison DBT. Simple.


Good cables simply do not "mess up" already good sounding equipment. But, they can tweak the sound a bit.


Yes, if you can hear .2dB -.5dB at 16kHz and above. Good luck. Your chances are zero though.

[Thomas_A]

Completely off-topic,

but here is some interesting stuff collected on one page.

http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/links/index-en.html

BTW,

I've seen one person making a measurement of Monster M1 and 4 x Supra Classic 2.5 mm2 (equals about 4 x 13 AWG standard loudspeaker copper cable connected in parallell I think).The equipment was a high-quality amp, a tone generator, and cable length exactly 5 meters.

With a scope the voltage was set to exactly 5000 mV at the amps loudspeaker binding posts. The wires were terminated with an 8 ohm resistor. Then the voltage drop was measured on one branch of the cable. The result was the following using a square-waves:

10 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 750 mV (loss)
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

1 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 550 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

100 Hz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 250 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

Anybody that can confirm such a loss from the Monster M1?

T

[Beckman]

Byt he way- lets all start a post about the airplane at the speed of light turning on its headlights! SWEET!

Ok.
In a vacum only electromagnetic waves can travel the speed of light. If an airplane approached the speed of light and turned on its headlights to an observer in the airplane the light emmited by the headlights would be traveling at the speed of light and would appear the same as thought the airplanes was not moving. To an observer in a referance frame in which the airplane appears to be moving near the speed of light the airplane would actualy appear much shorter and the light emmitted from the headlights would be moving the speed of light. However, there would be a shift in the wavelength of light emmitted by the headlights. Just like there is a change in the frequency of the sound emmited by a train as it rolls past someone. This is known as the doppler effect. At the begining I noted that only electromagnetic waves can travel the speed of light in a vacum. Through air the apparent speed of light is actualy less, c/1.000029, through water c/1.5. This is not because the light is traveling slower, but actualy because it has to travel further due to the wave like charectristics of light and the molecules that the light is traveling through.

[woodman]

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

No, Tony, it doesn't. Dedicated, die-hard wire-nutzies go to great lengths - grasping at invisible straws - reaching desperately for something, anything to explain their obsession with spending vast sums on something that either:

a: makes NO difference whatsoever in the performance of their system, or
b: makes such a small, minuscule difference that it belies common sense

This quote is a classic example of this phenomenon. Although the statements - in and of themselves could be considered accurate and truthful, what is left unsaid is what's most important. That is, that these changes in electrical parameters are meaningful and therefore audible ... which they have very little chance of being. Very close to zero, in fact.