Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 109
  1. #76
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    I don't know that I agree with the premise. If we suspend disbelief for a moment and allow that "expensive" equates to higher quality, better resolving, whatever, then such subtle difference as there might be favoring more expensive cables, should be more apparent in the higher-cost system.
    That is a fair statement if we suspend disbelief. But on the same note if we go by that assumption, then the statement....

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

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

  2. #77
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    That is a fair statement if we suspend disbelief. But on the same note if we go by that assumption, then the statement....

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

    ......also have to be suspended since it does not hold true anymor.
    I'm just not following, Smokey.

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

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

  3. #78
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    Sorry for being not clear. I think me and you are on the same page, but difference seem to arise when we are talking about higher end systems.

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

  4. #79
    Forum Regular Kevio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    452
    I personally think it is dangerous to make assumptions about price vs. performance in audiophile equipment or luxury goods in general.

  5. #80
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    ....
    For example when you say that all bets are off when it comes to high end system, are you saying that for that type of systems, choosing cable should be system’s cost dependent?
    Well sort of. That is, it is unlikely (though not impossible) that spending $500 on pair of cables will offer as much performance benefit as spending an additional $500 on an entry to mid-level active component, (CDP, amp, etc). Say a $1300 versus a $800 amp.

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

  6. #81
    Forum Regular Kevio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    452
    Actually what I'm suggesting is that in the strata of luxury goods there's not necessarily a positive correlation between price and performance. You could spend more for a CD player or cables and end up with lesser or equivalent sound in either case.

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

  7. #82
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    Were the Tara Labs speaker connects? What gear were they connected to?
    I am guessing this was a question for me. I was using all Tara Labs cables before I got the Synergistics. I had the Prism Bi-wire for speaks and several ICs including Original-"S", Quantum 4 or 5s, and several Prism ICs. I had the Quantums between Amp and Pre and S's between CD and pre.

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

  8. #83
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Hyfi, I believe the OP said he had Tara Labs but he couldn't tell any difference over the zip cord. At least you could tell a difference between Tara and Synergistic.

  9. #84
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    However the with high-end equipment, (as Kevio suggests, in this case at least), buying the $500 pair of cables might possibly provide your performance more than spending the same amount on an active component. Say a $3500 versus a $3000 amp.
    Sorry Feanor, but I do not necessary agree with that statement.

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

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

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

    Marketers can take advantage of the fact that when we pay more we assume we're getting more and that assumption creates its own reality. They also understand that in luxury markets, many customers (whether they'll admit it or not) are actually looking to buy status. Performance can be secondary.
    Excellent post. Lets hope Mr. P doesn't start calling you names too

  10. #85
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    Sorry Feanor, but I do not necessary agree with that statement.

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

    That is the reason I said your previous statement “people with entry or middle level systems, are better to spend their money elsewhere than on expensive cables” will not hold true if we go by above assumption. If more expensive cable can improve high end systems, it can also do the same for low and mid level systems. We can’t have it both ways
    ...
    Look, Smokey, (and Kevio), I never state any believe in a fixed relationship between price and performance. At best there is a loose correlation, and I'm not sure that this applies to cables at all.

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

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

  11. #86
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    The differences heard in cables depends on the cable and gear. When going from a typical Monster RCA between my CJ preamp and power amps to my Siltech the difference was significant and well worth the money. When comparing Siltech to Transparent, both are good and it comes down to preference and system synergy. When comparing BJC to Transparent the difference is obvious but actually for a certain application I used the BJC, it is easier on the ears at extremely high volumes like in my work out room which is also still pretty live inspite of some cloth on the walls for damping. The BJC regardless of what they say on their website does roll off the highs especially compared to the higher priced cables I've compared them to like Transparent and Ixos.

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

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

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

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

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

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

  12. #87
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    I wonder if you didn't hear a difference in cables or did it just not show up on your screen. Same with the amp, did the Parasound sound better or just look better on your screen?

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

    dynaudio evidence

    http://www.stereophile.com/floorloud...62/index1.html
    No, I am not wrong. I said Evidence doesn't use silver cable; that doesn't mean they use bad cables. In that example, I am only saying there's no difference between Pear Cable Anjou that costs $7250 per foot vs Tara Labs Prism which costs only $2 a foot.
    Setup:
    Rotel RSP 1570 Preamp
    Front & Center: Parasound Halo A53
    Surround: Parasound New Classic 5125
    Dynaudio - Customized Fronts 5 way (Similar to Contour S 5.4), Bi-Amp
    B&W Nautilus HTM1 Center
    Dynaudio Contour 1.1 Surround Backs
    Vienna Acoustics Schonberg Surround Sides A.
    Dynaudio Audience 52SE Surround Sides B.
    Vienna Acoustics Subson Subwoofer.
    Dynaudio Active Sub 500.
    Tara Labs Prism speaker wires.
    Audioquest Interconnects
    Tripplite Power Conditioner

  13. #88
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Then again there is the relative arguments that (1) more expensive cables are no more than proportionals to cost of the system as a whole, and (2) that the richer people who can afford the expensive system can also afford the expensive cables.
    No, that statement is incorrect. I can put together a reasonably high end system for $15-20k but if you add some of the ridiculous cables such as Pear Cable or Tara Labs "The Zero" then that would make your $20k system cost $40k. I really don't see the point of that. If I have an extra $20K, I'd probably save it to buy another pair of Genesis 6.1 or a Krell Evo amp but not cables. Opportunity cost buddy.
    Setup:
    Rotel RSP 1570 Preamp
    Front & Center: Parasound Halo A53
    Surround: Parasound New Classic 5125
    Dynaudio - Customized Fronts 5 way (Similar to Contour S 5.4), Bi-Amp
    B&W Nautilus HTM1 Center
    Dynaudio Contour 1.1 Surround Backs
    Vienna Acoustics Schonberg Surround Sides A.
    Dynaudio Audience 52SE Surround Sides B.
    Vienna Acoustics Subson Subwoofer.
    Dynaudio Active Sub 500.
    Tara Labs Prism speaker wires.
    Audioquest Interconnects
    Tripplite Power Conditioner

  14. #89
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    Hyfi, I believe the OP said he had Tara Labs but he couldn't tell any difference over the zip cord. At least you could tell a difference between Tara and Synergistic.
    I have to say Mr. Peabody is correct. I first bought some 12AWG generic cables from Home Depot to replace my 16AWG, "known to be crappy" monster cables. They did sound clearer and a little bit louder! Then, I went to get Tara Labs Prism terminated with audioquest banana jack. Honestly, I could not tell any difference beside the latter looks expensive : )
    Setup:
    Rotel RSP 1570 Preamp
    Front & Center: Parasound Halo A53
    Surround: Parasound New Classic 5125
    Dynaudio - Customized Fronts 5 way (Similar to Contour S 5.4), Bi-Amp
    B&W Nautilus HTM1 Center
    Dynaudio Contour 1.1 Surround Backs
    Vienna Acoustics Schonberg Surround Sides A.
    Dynaudio Audience 52SE Surround Sides B.
    Vienna Acoustics Subson Subwoofer.
    Dynaudio Active Sub 500.
    Tara Labs Prism speaker wires.
    Audioquest Interconnects
    Tripplite Power Conditioner

  15. #90
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by angelgz
    No, that statement is incorrect. ...but if you add some of the ridiculous cables
    Such would hardly represent a proportional cost as Feanor worded.

    rw

  16. #91
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by angelgz
    No, that statement is incorrect. I can put together a reasonably high end system for $15-20k but if you add some of the ridiculous cables such as Pear Cable or Tara Labs "The Zero" then that would make your $20k system cost $40k. I really don't see the point of that. If I have an extra $20K, I'd probably save it to buy another pair of Genesis 6.1 or a Krell Evo amp but not cables. Opportunity cost buddy.
    Uhmm ... I think you're agreeing with me. (Or is it me with you?)

  17. #92
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    ...
    I believe what Feanor is saying is that equipment with more resolution will better reveal a difference in cables, just as a better amp is better capable of taking advantage of a better CD player. A cable may improve sound some between a $500.00 CDP and a $500.00 receiver but the difference in the same cable should be more obvious between a $5k CDP and $5k amp. Prices are just for example and contrast. The "diminishing return" thing can be minimalized by buying within range of your gear. Just as some one wouldn't buy a $5k CDP to put on the front of a $500.00 receiver. If one spends $5k on an audio component it is foolish not to at least try a better cable to see if gains can be heard.
    ...
    Yes, that's what I'm saying.

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

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

  18. #93
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Mr. P's post (no. 86) has me wondering if cables, like other components, ought to be matched to the components to which they are linked....?
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  19. #94
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by angelgz
    I have to say Mr. Peabody is correct. I first bought some 12AWG generic cables from Home Depot to replace my 16AWG, "known to be crappy" monster cables. They did sound clearer and a little bit louder! Then, I went to get Tara Labs Prism terminated with audioquest banana jack. Honestly, I could not tell any difference beside the latter looks expensive : )

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

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

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

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

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

  20. #95
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    Mr. P's post (no. 86) has me wondering if cables, like other components, ought to be matched to the components to which they are linked....?
    This is an accurate wonderment. However, there will be several cables that match each set of gear, not just "only this cable will work".

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

  21. #96
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    It is a puzzlement, indeed!
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  22. #97
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Angelgz, when comparing cables do you listen to music in a "direct" mode of some type bypassing the processing? Your gear is good enough to show a difference in cables, not sure why you aren't picking that up.

  23. #98
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    Angelgz, when comparing cables do you listen to music in a "direct" mode of some type bypassing the processing? Your gear is good enough to show a difference in cables, not sure why you aren't picking that up.
    Actually most of my electronics are hooked up to the HDMI port or the optical on the Rotel Processor. I don't use any analog device despite some people believe that analog musics are more "true". So I don't think that's "direct".

    I also do notice a difference but I only when the Gauge is different on the speaker wire. The interconnects didn't make a difference at all. I used to have monster cable interconnects and a regular 5 dollar HDMI cable. I replaced them with audioquest and did not notice a difference. However, the TOSlink optical cable did make a significant difference, because I was using a $10 radioshack cable and it was too long!
    Setup:
    Rotel RSP 1570 Preamp
    Front & Center: Parasound Halo A53
    Surround: Parasound New Classic 5125
    Dynaudio - Customized Fronts 5 way (Similar to Contour S 5.4), Bi-Amp
    B&W Nautilus HTM1 Center
    Dynaudio Contour 1.1 Surround Backs
    Vienna Acoustics Schonberg Surround Sides A.
    Dynaudio Audience 52SE Surround Sides B.
    Vienna Acoustics Subson Subwoofer.
    Dynaudio Active Sub 500.
    Tara Labs Prism speaker wires.
    Audioquest Interconnects
    Tripplite Power Conditioner

  24. #99
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Ah, that explains a lot. I've had some occasional differences in digital cable but I was talking about analog where the difference seems to be more noticeable. Using digital the processor's internal DAC will always be doing the playback and you probably won't notice much difference in players, possibly some in cables, but again, not like an analog cable

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

  25. #100
    abNORMal IBSTORMIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Blue Springs, MO
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by angelgz
    However, the TOSlink optical cable did make a significant difference, because I was using a $10 radioshack cable and it was too long!
    I had read that a digital cable was preferred over optical by Audiophiles so I bought one from BJC and it is better than the several optical I have. The two digital cables I purchased from Monoprice, although the premium sounds better than the standard, are not good at all.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •