$35K for Speaker Cables!

[02audionoob]

You are absolutely right. It's not because one has the money that one should spend it mindlessly.

If one has money, one may spend it as desired. There isn't really a "should" involved.

[02audionoob]

Or they could donate it to help people when their unemployment or health coverage expires due to a$$holes the US Congress.

I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.

You stretched my comment to your own ridiculous extreme. I say it's better the rich man spends his money than stash it away in his bank account. You say than means I've said his extravagance is as good as a charitable donation. Not a logical interpretation.

[Feanor]

You stretched my comment to your own ridiculous extreme. I say it's better the rich man spends his money than stash it away in his bank account. You say than means I've said his extravagance is as good as a charitable donation. Not a logical interpretation.

Well I'm glad to hear that you're not saying that. I apologize if I seemed to be saying you were. However it is an argument that some other people have made. Yes, economically it is far better that the rich guy spend his money, whether on cables or charity, than it is for him to save it.

[poppachubby]

I believe the children are our future, teach them well and...

[Ajani]

I believe the children are our future, teach them well and...

let them lead the way... show them all the beauty they posses inside...

I love sing alongs!!! Now let's all join hands and sing together as one Audiophile community!!!

[Luvin Da Blues]

let them lead the way... show them all the beauty they posses inside...

I love sing alongs!!! Now let's all join hands and sing together as one Audiophile community!!!

Kumbayah, My Lord, Kumbayah

[audio amateur]

I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.

[Ajani]

I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.

Nope... we don't agree on that.... I'd never spend that much money on cables, but I wouldn't call it mindless either...

As for how people spend money:

I believe in encouraging people to give to the less fortunate, but not in condemning the purchases of those persons who have more money than me... As I'm not interested in those with less money than me, condemning me for my purchases....

I don't see that any of us has a right to point fingers at others, while indulging in our own money wasting activities...

[Feanor]

...

As for how people spend money:

I believe in encouraging people to give to the less fortunate, but not in condemning the purchases of those persons who have more money than me... As I'm not interested in those with less money than me, condemning me for my purchases....

I don't see that any of us has a right to point fingers at others, while indulging in our own money wasting activities...

BTW, Ajani, I agree with you that how people spend their money is their business. And certainly we all spend money frivolously.

Earlier, in suggesting one might give $35k to charity rather than to a cable hawker, I was only mentioning it as an alternative. In fact there are a minority of people who would actually get more satisfaction giving to charity. I'm not saying that I personally would give to charity, much less that I am judging charity-givers better people. After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.

However what I was earlier questioning from an ethical perspective was the economic argument that all consumption is equal. This might be true in terms of economic stimulation, but it isn't an moral justification for self-indulgence at a time when others are suffering.

[audio amateur]

After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.

Better that not giving at all, right?

[Ajani]

Better that not giving at all, right?

Yes it is... but I think the real point is to not start patting ourselves on the back for minor contributions we make, while pointing fingers at others....

Yesterday I went into town to the bank, to make a wire transfer of 400 USD (shipping included) to Emotiva for a UPA-2 Amp... Now even the stingiest anti-audiophile among us is unlikely to give me grief for buying a $300 amp (heck, Pix owns one!)... On the way from the bank, I stopped in BK and bought a burger... I dropped my change into the Haiti relief fund can on the counter.... I left BK and walked through town, and passed a homeless man lying dead on the side of the road... Now I can give myself a huge pat on the back for dropping some spare change in the Haiti Relief fund, and ignore the fact that had I given that 400 USD to that homeless guy when I got paid last month, he might not be dead... It's not like I really need the amp... I have an excellent sounding $2K Headphone setup and a very decent sounding set of $400 active speakers already... and even if I didn't, I still wouldn't "need" the amp...

So I don't see how I can realistically sit here and claim the guy spending loads of money on cables or art or watches or cars is being brainless or selfish, when I'm wasting money on stuff I like...

[Ajani]

BTW, Ajani, I agree with you that how people spend their money is their business. And certainly we all spend money frivolously.

Earlier, in suggesting one might give $35k to charity rather than to a cable hawker, I was only mentioning it as an alternative. In fact there are a minority of people who would actually get more satisfaction giving to charity. I'm not saying that I personally would give to charity, much less that I am judging charity-givers better people. After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.

However what I was earlier questioning from an ethical perspective was the economic argument that all consumption is equal. This might be true in terms of economic stimulation, but it isn't an moral justification for self-indulgence at a time when others are suffering.

I do agree that there is a significant difference between donating to charity and buying expensive toys in order to "help the economy"...

I don't believe in 'trickle down economics'... It's like thinking that if your company gets more customers (and profit) that it means the boss will give you all raises or even employ more workers... It might happen, but often it doesn't or at least not proportionately... so your boss may get a lot richer and you may see a slight increase in pay (or none at all) but a whole lot more work...

[Hyfi]

Interesting debate going on here. The bottom line is, most people with expendable cash tend to buy expensive items, not kmart items whether the item is any better than the other or not.

I am sure the 35K cable is a bit better than the $50 Blue jean but in no way is it 3500 times better and anyone with a brain would agree.

I have some friends with money and they do it all the time. They look down on us frugal people while spending way too much for a similar item of similar quality. They could not possibly admit to shopping at kmart, they had to buy the same thing at Nordstroms.

Now onto expensive cables. With the components I am currently using, I also got a pair of Synergistic Research Signature II speaker cables which are 16 feet long due to the location the original owners system was. I really only need about 6 feet and inquired about splitting the cables to make 2 8 foot pairs both randomly and through Synergistic. I don't see anything special but then I am not a cable termination expert.

The original owner spent about $1400 on this pair of cables. When I contacted Synergistic, I was told that they would only deal with an original owner and that they would only shorten them by reterminating one set of ends but not make 2 pairs. They also stated the cost would be $200 and that they would have to stop production of new cables to be able to do it.

WTF should it cost $200 to cut a cable in half and put a new spade on it? I chose to just have a mess of extra cable rather than do it myself and lose the total value of the cables. Since I am not the original owner, I did not have the other option which I still would not have done.

As far as the charity issue, most of the people I know who have money, do give to charities along with the rest of their frivolous spending. As far as the original topic goes, people with money tend to buy expensive things mainly as a sign of status or keeping up with the rest of the millionaire Jones's.

My same friend just had to have a Mercedes SL 500 convertable because he is a Dr and he could not be seen driving a lesser status car. That $125,000.00 could have been well spent in many other places and he could have bought a new car every 6 years until death. But, when you have the money, you tend to spend it. If I had millions, I would probably have gear that far outpaced its diminishing returns but would not care. I would also give a bigger chunk to charities than I do now also.

You can't point fingers at people who keep the economy going by putting their hard earned, or otherwise, money back into a failing economy. Would we be better off if they spent the $35k at Wall Mart or an American Small Business? I would rather give the cash to a small business.

I just purchased a new suit that I will pick up today. I have not bought a suit for 20 years and have altered the two I have several times. I went to Mens Warehouse where some pushy female that barely spoke english tried to push me to buy any suit on the racks made by close to slave labor countries. I also could have bought the same suits at Macy's on a special sale. I chose instead to buy a suit from a small mens store in my neighborhood. Every suit they had was a fine Italian made piece. He had sales going on and what I got, at half price was still more than all the sales everywhere else. I chose to get one I really liked, while helping to keep a small local business going. I also see that as charity.

I say, if you have the money and choose to spend it on items deemed frivolous by others without, go for it. I wish I had money to blow like that and knowing all too well that a system like that will never sound 1000 times better than my present $15k system, I would still do it. I have had the chance to see and hear systems of that caliber and would love to have one. I never will of course but I would never say the next guy shouldn't.

I too would like to have a status watch, but at the same time I would also like to have a nest egg for retirement so my $100 dollar watches, that by the way keep time to within seconds a year same as a $20 Timex or a $20K Rolex, is what I will probably have on my wrist the rest of my life.

The only issues I see out of all this is people who do not have the cash to pay for things, go into debt over it, and the rest of us pay to bail them out of bankruptcy and pay more for the same items because the store lost their money too.

[frenchmon]

I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.

Not to a person who has the money to burn....like Oprah!

IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.


fenchmon

[audio amateur]

IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.


fenchmon

You would?

[klif570]

Not to a person who has the money to burn....like Oprah!

IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.


fenchmon

Would you also buy a 24k gold mains socket for 20k? lol

[nightflier]

Well since most of us can agree that what's happening in the little box isn't what warrants the high price, then the next question is: what does? While I know this is taboo around here, I would love to hear what the engineers are MIT have to say about this cable.

I also wish one of the more reputable evaluators would do a story on these cables. I applaud Audioholics for their debunking of the Lexicon BR player, and I hope they take this one on too. I think this cable should be filed in the same category. More importantly, it's this kind of product that continues to paint high end audio with a broad and very negative brush.

[Ajani]

Well since most of us can agree that what's happening in the little box isn't what warrants the high price, then the next question is: what does? While I know this is taboo around here, I would love to hear what the engineers are MIT have to say about this cable.

I also wish one of the more reputable evaluators would do a story on these cables. I applaud Audioholics for their debunking of the Lexicon BR player, and I hope they take this one on too. I think this cable should be filed in the same category. More importantly, it's this kind of product that continues to paint high end audio with a broad and very negative brush.

Let's assume that what is in the box is just a tone control. Suppose MIT learned their lesson from that experience that Sir T refered to and put some expensive circuitry in the box... So same basic function but made from diamond and platinum or some other expensive materials... Would the cable then be worth the money?

I don't think there is anyway that MIT can justify the cable's price to most of us... And why should they? We're not customers or even potential customers...

I think the entire established approach to 'high end audio' is what is responsible for the broad and very negative image... (not just guys like MIT or even Lexiclown)...

1) Pretending that HiFi is solely about performance and nothing else is a joke... You don't buy a luxury car simply because it outruns a cheaper one or an expensive watch because it supposedely keeps better time than a Seiko... You also buy them for aesthetics, craftmanship and comfort (not to mention exlcusivity)... So trying to diss all the HiFi companies who make attractive gear only hurts the industry...

2) Focusing so much on technologies that the majority of persons believe went extinct decades ago... When I read reviews where the reviewer continues to diss digital in 2010 and proposes that readers use only vinyl or "better yet" reel to reel tape... Reel to what??? Nothing wrong with using such products if you enjoy them (and can find recordings on them), but honestly trying to push them as the only choice of "real audiophiles" makes the hobby look like it is the preserve of dinosaurs and the mentally handicapped....

3) Don't get me started on the use of terms like 'mid-fi' and the antisocial nature of the 'swetspot' in the listening room... Seriously, a single chair in the listening position? And then you wonder why your wife/girlfriend/kids show no interest in your hobby....

[nightflier]

1) Pretending that HiFi is solely about performance and nothing else is a joke... You don't buy a luxury car simply because it outruns a cheaper one or an expensive watch because it supposedely keeps better time than a Seiko... You also buy them for aesthetics, craftmanship and comfort (not to mention exlcusivity)... So trying to diss all the HiFi companies who make attractive gear only hurts the industry...

...we're just talking about a cable, here.

Aesthetics?
How good can a cable look, really? Sure it can be colored purple with pink highlights and a neon sheen, but let's be honest, it's still just a piece of wire. Not to mention that it typically sits behind the gear.

Craftmanship?
This isn't something that is a mystery. Cables have been made for decades, some for scientific applications that require a much higher degree of perfection and still cost a bundle less (can't quite see a purchasing agent working for even the military approving a $35K cable for anything). In the end, a cable is a cable and has one function: to pass a signal with a s little interference or coloration as possible

Comfort?
For what? to please the mind with the knowledge that it's there?

Exclusivity?
Even that one is a hard sell. A Ferrari on the driveway certainly would do this, but a cable, hidden behind a rack, doesn't quite measure up that way. Unless the owner expends a lot of energy bragging about it, and well that doesn't appeal to too many people, especially not here.

Ultimately, it's just a cable that apparently colors the sound and is outrageously priced for doing this quite possibly questionable thing.

[Ajani]

...we're just talking about a cable, here.

Aesthetics?
How good can a cable look, really? Sure it can be colored purple with pink highlights and a neon sheen, but let's be honest, it's still just a piece of wire. Not to mention that it typically sits behind the gear.

Craftmanship?
This isn't something that is a mystery. Cables have been made for decades, some for scientific applications that require a much higher degree of perfection and still cost a bundle less (can't quite see a purchasing agent working for even the military approving a $35K cable for anything). In the end, a cable is a cable and has one function: to pass a signal with a s little interference or coloration as possible

Comfort?
For what? to please the mind with the knowledge that it's there?

Exclusivity?
Even that one is a hard sell. A Ferrari on the driveway certainly would do this, but a cable, hidden behind a rack, doesn't quite measure up that way. Unless the owner expends a lot of energy bragging about it, and well that doesn't appeal to too many people, especially not here.

Ultimately, it's just a cable that apparently colors the sound and is outrageously priced for doing this quite possibly questionable thing.

Hey, I strongly suspect that a $35K Cable is more exclusive than a Ferrari! (even though very few of us really want to be part of the exclusive cable group - whereas most of us would have no problem with being part of the Ferrari owners group)...

Also you need to remember that cables are not used in isolation... You won't just buy a $35K Cable and throw it on some Monitor Audio RX6s... You already likely own (as I mentioned earlier in this thread) a $350K setup... So you're not going to put any old $300 cable on that... That's like putting Toyota rims on a Ferrari (regardless of whether they do they job, they just don't fit the exclusive image)

[GMichael]

(Mike peeks in to see two old friends ripping each other appart)

Is this why you guys both quit being mods? You missed the action?

(Mike slips out the door before anyone could grab him)

[Ajani]

(Mike peeks in to see two old friends ripping each other appart)

Is this why you guys both quit being mods? You missed the action?

(Mike slips out the door before anyone could grab him)

Damnit. I want an arch-nemesis too!!! Why should Sir T and E-Stat get to have all the fun???

AA, PoppaC, GM? Any takers?

[audio amateur]

Damnit. I want an arch-nemesis too!!! Why should Sir T and E-Stat get to have all the fun???

AA, PoppaC, GM? Any takers?

Haven't you already had your turn with all three of us?

[Ajani]

Haven't you already had your turn with all three of us?

(That sounds so wrong, btw).... but that was only for this thread... that's not quite the same as having never-ending battles in multiple threads...

[audio amateur]

(That sounds so wrong, btw).

loool, hadn't thought of that. I guess my mind isn't as perverted as yours