Which would yield the better performance gain-high end interconnects or spk.wire?

K_M

Naysayers Versus Believers.

That implies one side simply does not want to know the truth,
The other side simply imagines their own truth.

My blanket statement for most intents is true.
The proof is in the tasting of the pudding, or in the case of audio/sound, providing a convincing proof, that one's claim is verifiable.

Without proof, is is men bickering on an internet forum.
That is why some audio forums have more rigid rules when it comes to making claims, in such things that are commonly seen as questionable or very debated.

heiney9

Tony, why are you wasting your time with these people? They appear to be omniscient with all things audio.

In fact you will get farther walking up to a brick wall and talking than you will with them. They are sticking to their argument and no amount of logic will make them change their position. Most people always stay the course and never offer any proof or details about what they are parroting.

And yes it is opinionating when you are talking in absolute, absolutes and large blanket statements w/o any dialog.

H9

tonyb

How can it not be debatable when talking about anything that is subjective ?

Imagining truth ? Does it matter ? Because truth is what one believes to that individual, right or wrong. Just look at politics, everyone believes their side holds the truth. If as you say one side does not want to know the truth, and the other side imagines it, who holds the truth then ?

let me guess....science ?

lightman1

tonyb

Perfect size for a shot of Tequila.

heiney9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU

tonyb

Common sense dictates that some element of knowledge rests behind it.

jdjohn

The OP has been awfully quiet on all this. I'm not going to wade into the debate, but I will try to offer the OP some VERY basic advice, especially related to his "budget conscious" requirement. Of course this is at the risk of being TOO basic since they don't appear to be a newbie, and 'budget' is always a relative term.

Pure copper speaker wire is better than copper-coated aluminum. Larger gauge is better than smaller. To that point, maybe some 12AWG copper speaker wire with clear insulation would be a good budget choice for starters.

For IC, some shielding is better than no shielding, so any step up from normal patch cable is going to be better. You can even use component RGB video cable as a good alternative since it has good shielding required for video transmission, and you might have some lying around already.

The sky is the limit on cabling prices, but for a baseline budget, IMO these would be a good first step if not already done. It is quite possible that the OP has already surpassed this level.

nooshinjohn

rmpolk wrote: »

I have to somewhat disagree on the everyone hears differently statement,That seems to suggest a rather notable difference in sound perception between people when applied to the audio spectrum While its a proven fact in the general population as we age our sensitivity to high frequency in particular diminishes and from birth women possess a greater ability to discern them better then men.But in essence we still hear the same thing but with varying degrees of pitch,In general we still hear the same note just the perception to the high frequency changes,and on average the differences should be subtle within the same age groups.But to apply this to stereo and suggest that a piece of gear sounds more than subtly different to each user based upon their level of frequency sensitivity seems broadly exaggerated,Sure different gear does mesh better with others resulting in varying levels of sonic expression But if its more than a subtle change we will all discern the difference,So in terms of stereo a better analogy may be to say our interpretation to the presentation of the sound [not the sound itself]may be varied due to what the listener perceives as pleasing. IE-playing a piano note using the same gear but with different speakers is going to produce the same note its in the presentation of the note that changes and its in the listeners perception of it that is what is judged best, So to sum up wouldn't it be a more accurate description to say its in the interpretation of the presentation of the sound that varies among listeners

Gotta call BS on everything said above. Hearing shares the same functional basis among all humans but differs wildly between individuals. It is almost as unique as a fingerprint. We each hear frequencies, amplitude and modulation differently. Proof is that what is too loud for me might be too quite for someone else.

tonyb

All human senses vary person to person. Taste-touch-smell-hearing- sight, all varies, all subjective. How we perceive things is also subjective. If not, we'd all be listening to Lady Gaga, eating dog food, and artists would be out of a job.

steveinaz

Those who don't know, don't know that they don't know...

steveinaz

David7544 wrote: »

I love you guys. One more time;
a properly designed wire does not "sound like" anything.
any fool who spends a thousand dollars on wires would do better to donate $980.00 to their favorite charity and spend the other twenty bucks on the wires.
Not only will their sound be good, but when they go to meet their maker, they'll have a lot less explaining to do.

Well, sounds like you got it all figured out. Good luck.

K_M

steveinaz wrote: »

David7544 wrote: »

I love you guys. One more time;
a properly designed wire does not "sound like" anything.
any fool who spends a thousand dollars on wires would do better to donate $980.00 to their favorite charity and spend the other twenty bucks on the wires.
Not only will their sound be good, but when they go to meet their maker, they'll have a lot less explaining to do.

Well, sounds like you got it all figured out. Good luck.

That comment is not fair.
I am not defending the guy you quoted, nor even saying you are right or wrong, but you must realize if you have much time in audio, and have frequented many audio forums, that his view is actually the same view shared by a lot of audiophiles/music lovers/engineers/etc.

I think the burden of proof lies on those, saying that what he says it not true. Bashing this guy, does not make his comments less viable.

I mean if you are going to convert this guy to your thinking, is there something definitive you can tell or show him to prove it to him?

Just telling him he is wrong,and calling him a troll, and questioning his experience and hearing, is not proving anything to a neutral observer.

just sayin.....
If I were a Judge, the case would be thrown out...lol

heiney9

tonyb wrote: »

All human senses vary person to person. Taste-touch-smell-hearing- sight, all varies, all subjective. How we perceive things is also subjective. If not, we'd all be listening to Lady Gaga, eating dog food, and artists would be out of a job.

I'll add so does perception and interpretation and evaluation based on the varied senses.

Imagine how boring everything would be is we all had homogenous senses. In fact to even suggest that is ridiculous.

H9

tonyb

Actually Kelley, Steve didn't make any claims, David did by saying a properly designed wire doesn't sound like anything. So who then holds the burden of proof ?

Lets be clear, nobody is trying to convert anyone to anything. We only ask to back up such statements, as in experience with the topic at hand.

steveinaz

I don't believe in trying to convince anyone of anything they obviously have already made their mind up on. It's just not that important to me. You want to live in the box, knock yourself out. I use my over 40yrs experience in this hobby to decide what I bite off on, based on my own perceptions.

If you believe that bits are bits, I highly recommend you educate yourself on the SCIENCE of interface mis-matching, cable reflections, timing errors, and other digital anomalies that can and do smear the digital waveform, affecting the analog reproduction of that signal. This isn't voo-doo; it's measurable and factual.

tonyb

steveinaz wrote: »

I use my over 40yrs experience in this hobby to decide what I bite off on, based on my own perceptions.

Your gonna be one of those old guys in the nursing home that bites everyone aintcha ? lol

BlueFox

All wire damages the signal in some manner, even if their LCR measurements are the same. The issue is what wire damages the signal the least, or alters the sound in a manner that pleases the listener.

steveinaz

BlueFox wrote: »

All wire damages the signal in some manner, even if their LCR measurements are the same. The issue is what wire damages the signal the least, or alters the sound in a manner that pleases the listener.

AMEN. There it is.

tonyb

K_M wrote: »

[ that his view is actually the same view shared by a lot of audiophiles/music lovers/engineers/etc.

Maybe so, but there are just as many if not more that don't share those views. Doesn't make either right or wrong.....which is why, like we keep saying, one has to make those determinations for themselves with their ears, on their gear, in their homes.

Those that don't want to do that simply regurgitate internet opinions. Which when it comes to the internet, one can find anything to substantiate any opinion.

jdjohn

The interesting thing about the male vs female hearing is that my wife can't tell the difference most of the time between different components when I'm testing. She thinks they all sound good...or just wants to enjoy the music without fussing over it or having to listen too closely - it can become a chore. Can anyone else here remark on their wives' reactions to these types of things? It seems that guys want to debate this type of stuff, whereas women want to sing along or dance or talk about the artist while the music plays. Are they wasting their superior audiologic abilities, or do guys spend too much time trying to 'hear' nuances instead of just 'listening' to the music?

Polk Forum Member: "Wow, did you hear that little chime right there?!?"
Wife: "No, sorry, but I love that lyric - it really speaks to me."
PFM: "Wait, I'll back it up so you can -"
Wife: "No, just let it go. It sounds great...don't ruin the moment."

I think you can also substitute 'casual listener' for 'wife' there.

We all have to find our comfort zone of cost/benefit. Does a $1,000 cable sound better than a $20 cable? It probably does and could be proven with a side-by-side comparison. Does it sound 50X better (1,000 vs 20)? Probably not, so maybe not worth it to most folks. Does a $40 cable sound twice as good as a $20 cable? Probably yes, so worth it.

Getting back to the OP's original question: I would suggest doubling-down on spending for both types of cables, evaluate the impact of each separately, then decide on next steps.

tonyb

My wife is the opposite, she has the hearing of an Amazonian tribesman. Can't see worth a darn, but can hear a pin drop across town. Seriously, she can hear my phone ring from inside the house with the phone in the car, in the garage with the car windows up. Who does that ? It's not human, she must be an alien in human form.

There is certainly a law of diminishing returns in audio, the higher up you go the more you'll pay for those slight increases in sound quality. Worth it to some, not so much to others, so what....we all spend money on what pleases us the most.

steveinaz

There's a "hobby" element to this as well. When you're a car geek, you do all sorts of things to your car that other people would think was nuts; given the cost/performance ratio. But it's your "thing." It's no different with audiophiles. You want to know that you're eeking out every bit of performance that you can from your system by eliminating/improving upon possible weaknesses--of course, within a budget you can live with.

heiney9

rmpolk wrote: »

TONY-Can you site some scientific examples of your analysis.? Yes I'll agree to the fact that all senses vary however its in the amount that they vary that makes for a note worthy difference ie- a sour taste is in all probability going to be shared as sour its the degree of the variance that becomes of issue. I might like the sour taste you may not Thats then in the perception of the taste! Tom looks at the grass and says its green Jill looks at the same grass and says is green they may have a variance in say the intensity of color but it aint far enough off to say ones highly varied Again it leads to perception and not a noteworthy difference,we're wired in a way thats relevant enough to share the experience,otherwise the sugar wouldn't be sweet to the mass majority!Nosh-used used amplitude as a example in relation in the difference of snd, and hes right we may hear at varying levels but again with the mass majority it not going to be of a huge magnitude of varying levels. ie- the bird chirps it may be louder for you but it still sounds like the same bird to me Again its not the sound that changes the presentation of it.As for auditory memory when thats discussed its usually referenced to the general population ie to the average Joe if there is a negligible change in snd between two identical source snds played in succession its hard to discern the sight difference between them.Of coarse with training this can obviously be overcome.. Again its in the interpretation of the presentation of sound that varies

Lot's of assumptions in your post, where's your evidence to back it up. Who is the "average Joe", how is he classified? Where does this mass majority come from and who is it made up of? And you speak of "general population", who are they how are they trained?

Can/will you be more specific about the assumptions you make? Your statements are very general and very vague and don't support your conclusions.

H9

tonyb

How can you justify scientific data from people who are doing the tests that are also subjective with certain preferences.....doesn't seem possible.

Can there be minute differences, of course there can, but there can also be larger ones too. How will you know though ? I'll say it again for the 1000th time, try it yourself and see.

You don't become a carpenter by reading about it, you do it. You can study to be a pilot, but until you log some air time, experience, nobody will take you seriously. You can read about building a car from scratch, but until you actually do it your opinion carries little weight. See what I'm getting at ? Less talking, more doing.

afterburnt

IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: This End-User License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a single entity) and Microsoft Corporation for the Microsoft software that accompanies this EULA, which includes associated media and Microsoft Internet-based services ("Software"). An amendment or addendum to this EULA may accompany the Software. YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR USING THE SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE.
1. GRANT OF LICENSE. Microsoft grants you the following rights provided that you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:
Samples. You may modify the "samples" and distribute copies of such samples, including your modifications, in object code form, provided you comply with the distribution requirements described below.
Redistributable Code. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the programs and files and distribute such redistributable components in object code form as part of your value-added products and/or services, provided you comply with the distribution requirements described below. For purposes of this Section, a "value-added product or service" means a software product or service, including a web page, which adds significant and primary functionality to the redistributable component.
Distribution Requirements. You may only distribute the sample and redistributable code if you comply with the requirements above and you (a) do not use Microsoft's name, logo or trademarks to market or identify any of your products or services, unless you are party to a separate agreement giving you such rights, (b) indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Microsoft from and against any claims or lawsuits, including attorneys' fees, that arise from or result from the use or distribution of modified samples or from your value-added products and services, (c) include a valid copyright notice on the modified samples and value-added products and services that include redistributable components, (d) do not permit further redistribution of the redistributable components by third parties except as part of your value-added products and services, and (e) otherwise comply with the terms of this EULA.
2. DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS. You may not use any Microsoft Internet-based services associated with the Software in any manner that could damage, disable, overburden, or impair such services or interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of them. You may not attempt to gain unauthorized access to any service, account, computer systems or networks associated with the Internet-based services.
3. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND OWNERSHIP. Microsoft reserves all rights not expressly granted to you in this EULA. The Software is protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws and treaties. Microsoft or its suppliers own the title, copyright, and other intellectual property rights in the Software. The Software is licensed, not sold. This EULA does not grant you any rights to trademarks or service marks of Microsoft.
4. LIMITATIONS ON REVERSE ENGINEERING, DECOMPILATION, AND DISASSEMBLY. You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by this EULA or applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
5. NO RENTAL/COMMERCIAL HOSTING. You may not rent, lease, lend or provide commercial hosting services with the Software.
6. CONSENT TO USE OF DATA. You agree that Microsoft and its affiliates may collect and use technical information gathered as part of the product support services provided to you, if any, related to the Software. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our products or to provide customized services or technologies to you and will not disclose this information in a form that personally identifies you.
7. LINKS TO THIRD PARTY SITES. Microsoft is not responsible for the contents of any third-party sites or services, any links contained in third-party sites or services, or any changes or updates to third-party sites or services. Microsoft is providing these links and access to third-party sites and services to you only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link or access does not imply an endorsement by Microsoft of the third-party site or service.
8. ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE/SERVICES. This EULA applies to updates, supplements, add-on components, or Internet-based services components, of the Software that Microsoft may provide to you or make available to you after the date you obtain your initial copy of the Software, unless they are accompanied by separate terms. Microsoft reserves the right to discontinue Internet-based services provided to you or made available to you through the use of the Software.
9. EXPORT RESTRICTIONS. You acknowledge that the Software is subject to U.S. export jurisdiction. You agree to comply with all applicable international and national laws that apply to the Software, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, as well as end-user, end-use, and destination restrictions issued by U.S. and other governments. For additional information see <http://www.microsoft.com/exporting/>.
10. TERMINATION. Without prejudice to any other rights, Microsoft may terminate this EULA if you fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this EULA. In such event, you must destroy all copies of the Software and all of its component parts.
11. LIMITED WARRANTY FOR SOFTWARE ACQUIRED IN THE US AND CANADA.
Microsoft warrants that the Software will perform substantially in accordance with the accompanying materials for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of receipt.
If an implied warranty or condition is created by your state/jurisdiction and federal or state/provincial law prohibits disclaimer of it, you also have an implied warranty or condition, BUT ONLY AS TO DEFECTS DISCOVERED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS LIMITED WARRANTY (NINETY DAYS). AS TO ANY DEFECTS DISCOVERED AFTER THE NINETY-DAY PERIOD, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND. Some states/jurisdictions do not allow limitations on how long an implied warranty or condition lasts, so the above limitation may not apply to you.
Any supplements or updates to the Software, including without limitation, any (if any) service packs or hot fixes provided to you after the expiration of the ninety day Limited Warranty period are not covered by any warranty or condition, express, implied or statutory.

mrbiron

Good point AB.....thread closed!

Jimbo18

^^^^
?????

heiney9

rmpolk wrote: »

H9-LOL Funny stuff!!

Asking you to be more specific rather than general is funny? Guess I have a different sense of humor than the average joe, who is part of the general population and mass majority. Whoever that is.

H9

cnh

The arts and knowing what to listen for or look for is an important part of distinguishing good from bad. Can you teach a computer how to do that? A set of algorithms that can distinguish such? A Holy Grail of sorts. A few weeks ago I was at the Dali Museum taking the guided tour. A number of paintings contained hidden or only partially apparent images within them. On my own it would have taken a LONG time to identify these images, but with a few simple prompts for WHERE to look and what to look for these figures appeared in all their glory! The same is true for listening to music, see DK's protocols for listeners.

Let me provide a concrete example as well. A friend of mine wanted to buy a decent set of Headphones for music. He had NO real experience with good cans. I brought a box of cans from $20-$200 (pretty much his budget range) and had him listen to them with no mention of what cost what. I DID, though, explain WHAT to listen for, how to distinguish a good headphone from a mediocre one, in terms of things like, tightness of bass, sound stage, imaging, clarity of male and female vocals, details in the high end, sibilance, and so on. Then I had him listen to about a half a dozen Hphones. As he did it became easier and easier for him to "hear" what I had defined, and he could identify the better cans from the lesser ones. It was a revelatory experience for him!

I've also used the following example here, many times. My wife had GREAT difficulty distinguishing a 1080p TV image from a 480P. She claimed she could NOT see any difference. Now, in this case, we have some actual OBJECTIVE difference, a measurable one that cannot be SEEN! That one had to, once again, be educated regarding cues for what to look for.

Education in general, usually allows us to see MORE than others. Refines our sensibilities and senses. Think about wine, distilled spirits, cheeses, oils, fine dining vs. the opposite. The examples go on and on. Friends who are into cigars can make very fine judgments that I cannot. But can be led to with more exposure, experience. Again, could you program a machine to tell the difference between a fine Cuban vs. an old school Tiparillo, lol

The subjective, in fact, reigns supreme here! But it is NOT a simple subjective relativism! And there is really not much open to a debate. Having said that, I have not been "notified" and I have not yet been put on "notice", lol!