Audiophiles beware, the other senses are more connected than you think.

[Hyfi]

I would say that is a fair statement (albiet changing "cheap" with "quality"). But it also beg the question as what kind of advice would you give to those that have higher end systems regarding cables?

I mean, the function of cable will not change whether we have $100 system or $100,000 system

Until you actually hear a $100K system, you have no idea, except for what you read. The function itself does not change, but the different HE cables out there allow the owners of HE setups to fine tune the sound to "THEIR" desire, not what someone who has never heard a system like that's opinion.

[bfalls]

It's strange to see comments on ICs and speaker cables ranging from .5m+ From those arguing they may or may not hear a difference, yet in earlier threads state they could hear a difference using cryogenically-treated fuses in a component's power supply. You would think the effects of longer, multi-wire, constructed cables would have more potential for noticeable differences than a .5cm single pierce of wire outside the signal path. "Things that make you go hmmmmmmm."

It's much easier to follow Sir T's methodology. I believe different cables can electronically measure differently. The question is whether the differences can be heard significantly in the audio range.

[blackraven]

Mr. P hit the nail on the head stating the average person can't tell the subtle differences in high end. I think that you need to be a person who listens to music all the time and is in tune with the nuances.

Sir T, I agree that for the most part you need a high end system to be able to tell the differeces between cables. But, my son and I were easily able to tell the difference between a pair of BJC IC's and a pair of AudioQuest Corals in his system which consisted at the time of a Class D Audio CDA254 digital amp, a modded cheap Maverick Audio Tube Magic DAC/Preamp and a pair of PSB B6 speakers. The BJC's was too bright sounding while the AQ's were less bright and more pleasing with out sounding rolled off. The difference was not subtle. That system cost about $1300 and sounded awesome.

By the way. I do all my critical listening in the dark or with the lights down. I am more in tune to the music without visual distractions.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Mr. P hit the nail on the head stating the average person can't tell the subtle differences in high end. I think that you need to be a person who listens to music all the time and is in tune with the nuances.

Then the argument goes back to if the average listener cannot tell between high end, then how can they tell the differences between the cables that tie it together. The system (and room) itself is 98% of the experience, and the cables at best are 2%.

Sir T, I agree that for the most part you need a high end system to be able to tell the differeces between cables. But, my son and I were easily able to tell the difference between a pair of BJC IC's and a pair of AudioQuest Corals in his system which consisted at the time of a Class D Audio CDA254 digital amp, a modded cheap Maverick Audio Tube Magic DAC/Preamp and a pair of PSB B6 speakers. The BJC's was too bright sounding while the AQ's were less bright and more pleasing with out sounding rolled off. The difference was not subtle. That system cost about $1300 and sounded awesome.

This was probably a sighted test with all of the biases that go with it. Subjective listening test are not all that credible. Testing cables requires a much more rigorous listening process, and certainly needs equipment with better resolution than a $1300 dollar system can provide.

I have to say, any test made with equipment with tubes is automatically rejected. Too much seasoning added to the soup makes drastic changes its taste.

[blackraven]

Then the argument goes back to if the average listener cannot tell between high end, then how can they tell the differences between the cables that tie it together. The system (and room) itself is 98% of the experience, and the cables at best are 2%.



This was probably a sighted test with all of the biases that go with it. Subjective listening test are not all that credible. Testing cables requires a much more rigorous listening process, and certainly needs equipment with better resolution than a $1300 dollar system can provide.

I have to say, any test made with equipment with tubes is automatically rejected. Too much seasoning added to the soup makes drastic changes its taste.

I have to disagree with your comment about my son and I being biased. We did this without any preconceived notions about which cable would sound better. In fact, I swapped the cables without my son knowing that I had done so (although he did know that we were going to do the swap as some point). I was listening to the system with music that he was very familiar with and he walked into the room and he immediately said why does it sound so bright. He actually thought I swapped a tube as I had bought a couple of new tubes to try in his preamp.

You don't need a double blind test and a recording studio to be able to tell the difference between the 2 cables that we tested as the difference was not subtle. The BJC's were very fatiguing and bright while the AQ's were pleasing with no fatigue and a warmer sound.

And you should not be so quick to judge a system that you have not heard in person. That $1300 system is detailed with pretty good resolution, in fact it is astounding at how good it sounded. But you don't need excellent detail and resolution to hear the difference of a bright system and warm system and fatigue and non fatigue. Now if you want to listen for other nuances of cable differences then I am in total agreement with you.

It was an eye opening experience for me as I was a skeptic about cables sounding different.

[Feanor]

... The BJC's were very fatiguing and bright while the AQ's were pleasing with no fatigue and a warmer sound.
...
It was an eye opening experience for me as I was a skeptic about cables sounding different.

Curiously I found my BJC's slightly rolled off vs. the Transparent The Link. Mine are the Belden 1505F-based version; are your BJCs the LC-1?

What AudioQuest cables are you using?

[blackraven]

Curiously I found my BJC's slightly rolled off vs. the Transparent The Link. Mine are the Belden 1505F-based version; are your BJCs the LC-1?

What AudioQuest cables are you using?

I have the LC-1's and the Audio Quest cable is the AQ Coral which unfortunately broke. The ground wire broke and it blew out a tweeter in the PSB's which cost $60 to replace.

http://hcmaudio.com/comp.asp?compID=498

The HCM Coral is a little different than the standard AQ Coral. It came free with my Music Hall CD player along with an AQ power cord.

I am thinking about buying another pair as it cut down on sibilance from my Magnepans on sibilant recordings.

By the way, I think that Mr. P's system qualifies as audiophile. Mine is getting there. I need an upgrade of my speakers and DAC. I had a glimpse of what my system can sound like when the Wyred 4 Sound DSDse DAC was in my system.

[3db]

The BJC's were very fatiguing and bright while the AQ's were pleasing with no fatigue and a warmer sound.

And you should not be so quick to judge a system that you have not heard in person. That $1300 system is detailed with pretty good resolution, in fact it is astounding at how good it sounded. But you don't need excellent detail and resolution to hear the difference of a bright system and warm system and fatigue and non fatigue. Now if you want to listen for other nuances of cable differences then I am in total agreement with you.

It was an eye opening experience for me as I was a skeptic about cables sounding different.

Curiously I found my BJC's slightly rolled off vs. the Transparent The Link. Mine are the Belden 1505F-based version; are your BJCs the LC-1?

What AudioQuest cables are you using?

Here we see two very subjective results based on their hearing. (Not critizing your hearing) and based on sight bias. This is the kind of thing that would be eliminated under controlled listening tests without knowledge which cable is being used during the test. Controlled tests also eliminates relying on one's acoustic memory which as been demonstrated time and time again to be unreliable with respect to nuances that come into play.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I have to disagree with your comment about my son and I being biased. We did this without any preconceived notions about which cable would sound better. In fact, I swapped the cables without my son knowing that I had done so (although he did know that we were going to do the swap as some point). I was listening to the system with music that he was very familiar with and he walked into the room and he immediately said why does it sound so bright. He actually thought I swapped a tube as I had bought a couple of new tubes to try in his preamp.

It took time for you to swap that cable. During the time it took you to do so, your auditory memory was either dulled or erased in that time. The only way to do a cable test, a speaker test, an amp test, or any other test is to have instantaneous switching to provide an instantaneous comparison.

If your son step into the room and asked "why does it sound so bright?", then your son could have walked in on a bass node(suck out) that changed the perceived spectral content of what you are listening to. When you do a cable test(even if it is a useless subjective one), then one has to sit in the same place, make sure ALL of the source material is of equal level(level matching because louder sounds better to the ears than softer), and a whole host of other things or your results are contaminated.

You don't need a double blind test and a recording studio to be able to tell the difference between the 2 cables that we tested as the difference was not subtle. The BJC's were very fatiguing and bright while the AQ's were pleasing with no fatigue and a warmer sound.

If the difference was not subtle, then one of the cables(or both) are not well made. Bright and fatiguing would mean an excess of upper treble energy, and this is measurable. If I measured that cable, and the response was flat across the board, then I would say your are hearing things. If a cable sounds "warmer"(which is quite frankly a non-term when evaluating cables and wire) then that wire would have excessive mid-bass, which is also measurable. The deviation from a flat frequency response would have to be more than 3db's before the ear would hear it, as anything less would be masked. I have never measured a cable(even cheap ones) that had a 3db deviation at any frequency audible to the human ear. Some poorly made cables had a slight roll off near or above 20khz, but our hearing is so insensitive at that frequency we would not even notice it. I have never measured a cable that had a mid-bass bump of 3db(or more) as that would be a frequency shaping device, not a piece of passive wire.

And you should not be so quick to judge a system that you have not heard in person. That $1300 system is detailed with pretty good resolution, in fact it is astounding at how good it sounded. But you don't need excellent detail and resolution to hear the difference of a bright system and warm system and fatigue and non fatigue. Now if you want to listen for other nuances of cable differences then I am in total agreement with you.

I don't think I wrote anything that could be passed as a judgement against your son's system - I have not heard it. However, it would take a system with more resolution than just "good" to reveal the differences between cables. If the "system" is bright, you don't change the cable, you change the room acoustics. A warm system is not accurate, and unfit as a reference to judge cables.

It was an eye opening experience for me as I was a skeptic about cables sounding different.

Now try it DBT and watch how closed eyed you get from your eye opening experience.

What you guys are telling me here is that you guys have figured out a way to make a silicon chip in a dirty room. Since I know this is not possible, my suspension of belief is torn to shreds.

[Mr Peabody]

I borrowed this from TAS, this is from report of T.H.E. audio show. Notice the last sentence and then my sig. Those cables seem modest in company of such gear.

"Picking up where it left off at CES was the peerless Focal Grande Utopia EM ($195k). It was a personal highlight of the show it was playing in the company of two other Focal Utopia speaker, the slightly smaller Maestro (pictured above) and Stella (D’Agostino power). The Maestro was powered by McIntosh gear while the Grande U was driven by an all Boulder “semi-mega” setup (the flagship Boulder gear is another discussion altogether) which included the 1021 Network Player streaming via UPnP 2110 Preamp ($54k) 2150 Mono Amps ($98k). My hosts cued up Michael Jackson’s “Billie Jean” track in high res on both systems. My best prediction was that the Maestro would own the speed and transient departments while the big Grande would overwhelm with dynamic and low end energy but sputter a bit trying to maintain the pace and jump of this iconic dance track. Once again my prediction was stone-wrong. The square-shouldered Grande U sounded both bigger, weighter yet more sensitive to low level detail and delicate micro-dynamics than the McIntosh powered Maestro. Room setup, amplifier character? The unshakable grip and inner detail of the Boulder gear? Is there anything the Subzero-scale Focals won’t do? Yes-they won’t fit in my room. Anchored by XTC racks (all prices custom) and all Clarus Crimson cabling."

[blackraven]

It took time for you to swap that cable. During the time it took you to do so, your auditory memory was either dulled or erased in that time. The only way to do a cable test, a speaker test, an amp test, or any other test is to have instantaneous switching to provide an instantaneous comparison.

If your son step into the room and asked "why does it sound so bright?", then your son could have walked in on a bass node(suck out) that changed the perceived spectral content of what you are listening to. When you do a cable test(even if it is a useless subjective one), then one has to sit in the same place, make sure ALL of the source material is of equal level(level matching because louder sounds better to the ears than softer), and a whole host of other things or your results are contaminated.



If the difference was not subtle, then one of the cables(or both) are not well made. Bright and fatiguing would mean an excess of upper treble energy, and this is measurable. If I measured that cable, and the response was flat across the board, then I would say your are hearing things. If a cable sounds "warmer"(which is quite frankly a non-term when evaluating cables and wire) then that wire would have excessive mid-bass, which is also measurable. The deviation from a flat frequency response would have to be more than 3db's before the ear would hear it, as anything less would be masked. I have never measured a cable(even cheap ones) that had a 3db deviation at any frequency audible to the human ear. Some poorly made cables had a slight roll off near or above 20khz, but our hearing is so insensitive at that frequency we would not even notice it. I have never measured a cable that had a mid-bass bump of 3db(or more) as that would be a frequency shaping device, not a piece of passive wire.



I don't think I wrote anything that could be passed as a judgement against your son's system - I have not heard it. However, it would take a system with more resolution than just "good" to reveal the differences between cables. If the "system" is bright, you don't change the cable, you change the room acoustics. A warm system is not accurate, and unfit as a reference to judge cables.



Now try it DBT and watch how closed eyed you get from your eye opening experience.

What you guys are telling me here is that you guys have figured out a way to make a silicon chip in a dirty room. Since I know this is not possible, my suspension of belief is torn to shreds.

You are so off base here and are making suppositions with out even being present to hear the differences. I guess we are not able to tell the differece between speakers, preamps and amps. I said the difference was night and day, not I think we can hear a difference. Its easy to be an arm chair quarterback from your perspective. I guess we were imagining listening fatigue and brightness. I was also imagining the decrease in sibilant's with the AQ cable vs the BJC.

[Smokey]

The function itself does not change, but the different HE cables out there allow the owners of HE setups to fine tune the sound to "THEIR" desire.

But fine tuning the sound is not function of cable. That will remain true whether we have low end or high end system

[JohnMichael]

But fine tuning the sound is not function of cable. That will remain true whether we have low end or high end system

But cables do tune a system. So if you buy a cable that makes your system sound bright you should just live with it? I would find a cable that makes my system sound balanced. Which I call tuning the system. I also find purchasing a new cable if the sound is bright than buying dark sounding amp just to use the much less expensive IC.

[Smokey]

But cables do tune a system. So if you buy a cable that makes your system sound bright you should just live with it? I would find a cable that makes my system sound balanced.

I would say that be a common sense approach assuming that all the audio (and sources) played on that system have same 'audio' quality and EQ biasing.

But since that will not be the case (as even each recordings have different EQ), then we should wonder as how cable is effecting different sound quaity. And we could never could figure that out if we are using cable to tame our system.

So the problem of cable as part of a puzzle to achieve more balance system will never be solved

[JohnMichael]

I would say that be a common sense approach assuming that all the audio (and sources) played on that system have same 'audio' quality and EQ biasing.

But since that will not be the case (as even each recordings have different EQ), then we should wonder as how cable is effecting different sound quaity. And we could never could figure that out if we are using cable to tame our system.

So the problem of cable as part of a puzzle to achieve more balance system will never be solved

Of course I disagree. With my choice of AQ IC's and speaker cables they let all the music present itself wonderfully with my selection of components and speakers.

[3db]

But cables do tune a system. So if you buy a cable that makes your system sound bright you should just live with it? I would find a cable that makes my system sound balanced. Which I call tuning the system. I also find purchasing a new cable if the sound is bright than buying dark sounding amp just to use the much less expensive IC.

Cables don't tune a system nearly as much as does seating position within the room and the room's acoustics. Most people in gross error try to go to tune using cables and interconnects then to fix the seating position and the room's acoustics. Cables/interconnects are sooo far down the affects list yet so many people in error put so much weight on them. I find this strangely amusing.

[Hyfi]

Cables don't tune a system nearly as much as does seating position within the room and the room's acoustics. Most people in gross error try to go to tune using cables and interconnects then to fix the seating position and the room's acoustics. Cables/interconnects are sooo far down the affects list yet so many people in error put so much weight on them. I find this strangely amusing.

Some people have done all they can do to their rooms and the way seating is setup. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a dedicated listening room where they can set all that up optimally so what is left? Tweaks and Cables.

[3db]

Some people have done all they can do to their rooms and the way seating is setup. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a dedicated listening room where they can set all that up optimally so what is left? Tweaks and Cables.

My point is that the effects of interconnects and cables on sound are so low compared to everything else that one will not get results they are looking for by cables and interconnects. The analogy I draw is one trying to make an oar out of log using 220 grit sandpaper. Its just not going to happen.

[Hyfi]

My point is that the effects of interconnects and cables on sound are so low compared to everything else that one will not get results they are looking for by cables and interconnects. The analogy I draw is one trying to make an oar out of log using 220 grit sandpaper. Its just not going to happen.

Worked fine for me in one application and seems to work for the many I associate with on several other sites. I am not sure what your gear is, or what cables you have rolled, but my gear resolves some cable differences and so does the systems of others in this thread. If I have a known bright system, and I put a know bassy cable in place and I like the sound it gives me, all the theory goes out the window.

[Mr Peabody]

My point is that the effects of interconnects and cables on sound are so low compared to everything else that one will not get results they are looking for by cables and interconnects. The analogy I draw is one trying to make an oar out of log using 220 grit sandpaper. Its just not going to happen.

Your analogy isn't correct, more like whether you have a Civic or Porsche you can choose to drive on donuts or expensive Michelan, both the donut or Michelan will get the vehicle down the road but one will do a much better job while the other has limitations. Most audiophiles I know with reasonable quality gear who have actually compared cables agree there are not only differences in sound but improvements to be had. And, you do have to compare, there are so many cable companies popping up out of the woodwork these days.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Some people have done all they can do to their rooms and the way seating is setup. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a dedicated listening room where they can set all that up optimally so what is left? Tweaks and Cables.

How can anyone possibly hear any differences between anything in a non-optimized room? They can't, hence my skepticism on this topic coming from these sources.

Sometimes all you can do is not always good enough.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

But cables do tune a system. So if you buy a cable that makes your system sound bright you should just live with it? I would find a cable that makes my system sound balanced. Which I call tuning the system. I also find purchasing a new cable if the sound is bright than buying dark sounding amp just to use the much less expensive IC.

Cables do not tune a system, and if one understands the function of cables they could not make this claim. If a cable sounds bright, get rid of it. If the cable sounds neutral and revealing, keep it. If you are interested in bright or dark sound(or anything in between), add EQ or add or remove acoustical panels, not cables.

Tuning requires a function of control...cables offer no controls which makes them to crude and unsuitable for tuning. Adapting the speakers to the room requires EQ and acoustical panels which do have controls.