Best speaker wire
Comments
-
Not getting in on this but get your read on, Analysis Plus.
One of my favorite brands, but I have many favorites. AP, Acoustic zen, MIT, Wireworld, Kimber, Audioquest and many more. Like an ice cream shop with flavors and characteristics to please anyone.....with any wallet.
There is a big difference too, in the lower series of these brands to the higher series, both in price and sound. I usually find, for the budget minded folks anyway, that midway or a few notches below TOTL series when bought used can yield your best bang for the buck in cables.
Some here subscribe to.....when a cables gets the signal unaltered from point A to point B, there is nothing more it can do. If that was the case, then that logic would suggest some cable series are broken, not getting the signal A-B in it's proper form. Why else would cable brands have so many series within the brand.
Audioquest has many series, so either the lower lines are somehow not doing their job, or the higher series are a waste of money because the lower lines are sufficient in getting the signal across. That logic doesn't hold water in my book.
Many things go into cable building that will influence the sound, and each series within a brand will specify what that is. Some differences in sound are slight, some more profound.....and we have many flavors to system match, synergize, with one's particular system and ears.
Like always, this hobby of ours dictates some trial and error until you reach a point your ears are happy with, with the type of music you listen to. It's really no more complicated than that.
Do No Harm
AudioQuest is driven by an equal passion for product performance and customer service. Phone calls and emails are answered by real people, and products are designed by people with a genuine love of music and film. Despite growth and success, AudioQuest remains a small company at heart that believes business is earned by staying true to its core values of performance and value.
Audio and video reproduction is fundamentally a case of damage control. The signal is at its greatest potential ... is least damaged ... at the source. Great sound and great pictures, music that consumes you, movies that transport you around the universe ... all come from honoring the original signal. It’s an unavoidable fact of life that every component and cable in a system causes distortion, changing the overall character of the signal. These aberrations add up, like layers of dirty glass between you and
an image you are trying to see. Better cables, and for that matter better components, cannot improve the signals they carry ... they can only do less harm to those signals and reduce the amount of noise and distortion introduced into a system, thus improving performance.
The goal of high quality components and cables is to be like cleaner panes of glass ... to minimize any alteration or distortion of the signal. Do No Harm!
So that's a quote from Audioquest which is what I have learned from them over the decades of working with them. BUT I also learned that once you achieve the signal from A to B there is no more you can do. Cables are not supposed to tune or make the sound better but give it a vehicle to ride on so that it can safely arrive at the next location.
And your right about your statement about lines of cables. Most of the lower end cables at some point do their jobs correctly. Which at that point continuing to climb the ladder doesn't yield and correct sonic proper benefits. you get into what you like in cables which is a EQ system.
So basically your not right or wrong man, it's just what you like. I prefer not to use cables anymore as a way of tuning a system. I prefer to use the components and speakers which also include the room as a tuning. To many factors already to add in another one.
I have said this before.....it is a wire. It carries a signal. The ideal wire will not degrade the signal.
There is really no more to be said.
A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive.
-
Not getting in on this but get your read on, Analysis Plus.
One of my favorite brands, but I have many favorites. AP, Acoustic zen, MIT, Wireworld, Kimber, Audioquest and many more. Like an ice cream shop with flavors and characteristics to please anyone.....with any wallet.
There is a big difference too, in the lower series of these brands to the higher series, both in price and sound. I usually find, for the budget minded folks anyway, that midway or a few notches below TOTL series when bought used can yield your best bang for the buck in cables.
Some here subscribe to.....when a cables gets the signal unaltered from point A to point B, there is nothing more it can do. If that was the case, then that logic would suggest some cable series are broken, not getting the signal A-B in it's proper form. Why else would cable brands have so many series within the brand.
Audioquest has many series, so either the lower lines are somehow not doing their job, or the higher series are a waste of money because the lower lines are sufficient in getting the signal across. That logic doesn't hold water in my book.
Many things go into cable building that will influence the sound, and each series within a brand will specify what that is. Some differences in sound are slight, some more profound.....and we have many flavors to system match, synergize, with one's particular system and ears.
Like always, this hobby of ours dictates some trial and error until you reach a point your ears are happy with, with the type of music you listen to. It's really no more complicated than that.
Do No Harm
AudioQuest is driven by an equal passion for product performance and customer service. Phone calls and emails are answered by real people, and products are designed by people with a genuine love of music and film. Despite growth and success, AudioQuest remains a small company at heart that believes business is earned by staying true to its core values of performance and value.
Audio and video reproduction is fundamentally a case of damage control. The signal is at its greatest potential ... is least damaged ... at the source. Great sound and great pictures, music that consumes you, movies that transport you around the universe ... all come from honoring the original signal. It’s an unavoidable fact of life that every component and cable in a system causes distortion, changing the overall character of the signal. These aberrations add up, like layers of dirty glass between you and
an image you are trying to see. Better cables, and for that matter better components, cannot improve the signals they carry ... they can only do less harm to those signals and reduce the amount of noise and distortion introduced into a system, thus improving performance.
The goal of high quality components and cables is to be like cleaner panes of glass ... to minimize any alteration or distortion of the signal. Do No Harm!
So that's a quote from Audioquest which is what I have learned from them over the decades of working with them. BUT I also learned that once you achieve the signal from A to B there is no more you can do. Cables are not supposed to tune or make the sound better but give it a vehicle to ride on so that it can safely arrive at the next location.
And your right about your statement about lines of cables. Most of the lower end cables at some point do their jobs correctly. Which at that point continuing to climb the ladder doesn't yield and correct sonic proper benefits. you get into what you like in cables which is a EQ system.
So basically your not right or wrong man, it's just what you like. I prefer not to use cables anymore as a way of tuning a system. I prefer to use the components and speakers which also include the room as a tuning. To many factors already to add in another one.
I have said this before.....it is a wire. It carries a signal. The ideal wire will not degrade the signal.
There is really no more to be said.
A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive.
K_M let it go. We heard you already.2 Channel Rosso Fiorentino Volterra II, 2 REL Carbon Limited, Norma Revo IPA-140B, Lumin U2 Mini, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Modwright PH 150, Denon DP-59l w/Denon DL-301MKII, WAY Silver 3 Ana+ Speaker Cables, WAY Silver 4+ Interconnect Cables, AudioQuest Niagara 7000 w/Dragon and Hurricane Power Cables -
I'm not a fan of harm either. Harmony, yes; harm, no. I prefer the gooder wires.Not getting in on this but get your read on, Analysis Plus.
One of my favorite brands, but I have many favorites. AP, Acoustic zen, MIT, Wireworld, Kimber, Audioquest and many more. Like an ice cream shop with flavors and characteristics to please anyone.....with any wallet.
There is a big difference too, in the lower series of these brands to the higher series, both in price and sound. I usually find, for the budget minded folks anyway, that midway or a few notches below TOTL series when bought used can yield your best bang for the buck in cables.
Some here subscribe to.....when a cables gets the signal unaltered from point A to point B, there is nothing more it can do. If that was the case, then that logic would suggest some cable series are broken, not getting the signal A-B in it's proper form. Why else would cable brands have so many series within the brand.
Audioquest has many series, so either the lower lines are somehow not doing their job, or the higher series are a waste of money because the lower lines are sufficient in getting the signal across. That logic doesn't hold water in my book.
Many things go into cable building that will influence the sound, and each series within a brand will specify what that is. Some differences in sound are slight, some more profound.....and we have many flavors to system match, synergize, with one's particular system and ears.
Like always, this hobby of ours dictates some trial and error until you reach a point your ears are happy with, with the type of music you listen to. It's really no more complicated than that.
Do No Harm
AudioQuest is driven by an equal passion for product performance and customer service. Phone calls and emails are answered by real people, and products are designed by people with a genuine love of music and film. Despite growth and success, AudioQuest remains a small company at heart that believes business is earned by staying true to its core values of performance and value.
Audio and video reproduction is fundamentally a case of damage control. The signal is at its greatest potential ... is least damaged ... at the source. Great sound and great pictures, music that consumes you, movies that transport you around the universe ... all come from honoring the original signal. It’s an unavoidable fact of life that every component and cable in a system causes distortion, changing the overall character of the signal. These aberrations add up, like layers of dirty glass between you and
an image you are trying to see. Better cables, and for that matter better components, cannot improve the signals they carry ... they can only do less harm to those signals and reduce the amount of noise and distortion introduced into a system, thus improving performance.
The goal of high quality components and cables is to be like cleaner panes of glass ... to minimize any alteration or distortion of the signal. Do No Harm!
So that's a quote from Audioquest which is what I have learned from them over the decades of working with them. BUT I also learned that once you achieve the signal from A to B there is no more you can do. Cables are not supposed to tune or make the sound better but give it a vehicle to ride on so that it can safely arrive at the next location.
And your right about your statement about lines of cables. Most of the lower end cables at some point do their jobs correctly. Which at that point continuing to climb the ladder doesn't yield and correct sonic proper benefits. you get into what you like in cables which is a EQ system.
So basically your not right or wrong man, it's just what you like. I prefer not to use cables anymore as a way of tuning a system. I prefer to use the components and speakers which also include the room as a tuning. To many factors already to add in another one.
I have said this before.....it is a wire. It carries a signal. The ideal wire will not degrade the signal.
There is really no more to be said.
A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive. -
Not getting in on this but get your read on, Analysis Plus.
One of my favorite brands, but I have many favorites. AP, Acoustic zen, MIT, Wireworld, Kimber, Audioquest and many more. Like an ice cream shop with flavors and characteristics to please anyone.....with any wallet.
There is a big difference too, in the lower series of these brands to the higher series, both in price and sound. I usually find, for the budget minded folks anyway, that midway or a few notches below TOTL series when bought used can yield your best bang for the buck in cables.
Some here subscribe to.....when a cables gets the signal unaltered from point A to point B, there is nothing more it can do. If that was the case, then that logic would suggest some cable series are broken, not getting the signal A-B in it's proper form. Why else would cable brands have so many series within the brand.
Audioquest has many series, so either the lower lines are somehow not doing their job, or the higher series are a waste of money because the lower lines are sufficient in getting the signal across. That logic doesn't hold water in my book.
Many things go into cable building that will influence the sound, and each series within a brand will specify what that is. Some differences in sound are slight, some more profound.....and we have many flavors to system match, synergize, with one's particular system and ears.
Like always, this hobby of ours dictates some trial and error until you reach a point your ears are happy with, with the type of music you listen to. It's really no more complicated than that.
Do No Harm
AudioQuest is driven by an equal passion for product performance and customer service. Phone calls and emails are answered by real people, and products are designed by people with a genuine love of music and film. Despite growth and success, AudioQuest remains a small company at heart that believes business is earned by staying true to its core values of performance and value.
Audio and video reproduction is fundamentally a case of damage control. The signal is at its greatest potential ... is least damaged ... at the source. Great sound and great pictures, music that consumes you, movies that transport you around the universe ... all come from honoring the original signal. It’s an unavoidable fact of life that every component and cable in a system causes distortion, changing the overall character of the signal. These aberrations add up, like layers of dirty glass between you and
an image you are trying to see. Better cables, and for that matter better components, cannot improve the signals they carry ... they can only do less harm to those signals and reduce the amount of noise and distortion introduced into a system, thus improving performance.
The goal of high quality components and cables is to be like cleaner panes of glass ... to minimize any alteration or distortion of the signal. Do No Harm!
So that's a quote from Audioquest which is what I have learned from them over the decades of working with them. BUT I also learned that once you achieve the signal from A to B there is no more you can do. Cables are not supposed to tune or make the sound better but give it a vehicle to ride on so that it can safely arrive at the next location.
And your right about your statement about lines of cables. Most of the lower end cables at some point do their jobs correctly. Which at that point continuing to climb the ladder doesn't yield and correct sonic proper benefits. you get into what you like in cables which is a EQ system.
So basically your not right or wrong man, it's just what you like. I prefer not to use cables anymore as a way of tuning a system. I prefer to use the components and speakers which also include the room as a tuning. To many factors already to add in another one.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.......you drank the bad Kool-Aid......WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPost edited by F1nut onPolitical Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Not getting in on this but get your read on, Analysis Plus.
One of my favorite brands, but I have many favorites. AP, Acoustic zen, MIT, Wireworld, Kimber, Audioquest and many more. Like an ice cream shop with flavors and characteristics to please anyone.....with any wallet.
There is a big difference too, in the lower series of these brands to the higher series, both in price and sound. I usually find, for the budget minded folks anyway, that midway or a few notches below TOTL series when bought used can yield your best bang for the buck in cables.
Some here subscribe to.....when a cables gets the signal unaltered from point A to point B, there is nothing more it can do. If that was the case, then that logic would suggest some cable series are broken, not getting the signal A-B in it's proper form. Why else would cable brands have so many series within the brand.
Audioquest has many series, so either the lower lines are somehow not doing their job, or the higher series are a waste of money because the lower lines are sufficient in getting the signal across. That logic doesn't hold water in my book.
Many things go into cable building that will influence the sound, and each series within a brand will specify what that is. Some differences in sound are slight, some more profound.....and we have many flavors to system match, synergize, with one's particular system and ears.
Like always, this hobby of ours dictates some trial and error until you reach a point your ears are happy with, with the type of music you listen to. It's really no more complicated than that.
Do No Harm
AudioQuest is driven by an equal passion for product performance and customer service. Phone calls and emails are answered by real people, and products are designed by people with a genuine love of music and film. Despite growth and success, AudioQuest remains a small company at heart that believes business is earned by staying true to its core values of performance and value.
Audio and video reproduction is fundamentally a case of damage control. The signal is at its greatest potential ... is least damaged ... at the source. Great sound and great pictures, music that consumes you, movies that transport you around the universe ... all come from honoring the original signal. It’s an unavoidable fact of life that every component and cable in a system causes distortion, changing the overall character of the signal. These aberrations add up, like layers of dirty glass between you and
an image you are trying to see. Better cables, and for that matter better components, cannot improve the signals they carry ... they can only do less harm to those signals and reduce the amount of noise and distortion introduced into a system, thus improving performance.
The goal of high quality components and cables is to be like cleaner panes of glass ... to minimize any alteration or distortion of the signal. Do No Harm!
So that's a quote from Audioquest which is what I have learned from them over the decades of working with them. BUT I also learned that once you achieve the signal from A to B there is no more you can do. Cables are not supposed to tune or make the sound better but give it a vehicle to ride on so that it can safely arrive at the next location.
And your right about your statement about lines of cables. Most of the lower end cables at some point do their jobs correctly. Which at that point continuing to climb the ladder doesn't yield and correct sonic proper benefits. you get into what you like in cables which is a EQ system.
So basically your not right or wrong man, it's just what you like. I prefer not to use cables anymore as a way of tuning a system. I prefer to use the components and speakers which also include the room as a tuning. To many factors already to add in another one.
I have said this before.....it is a wire. It carries a signal. The ideal wire will not degrade the signal.
There is really no more to be said.
A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive.
It's a speaker. It produces sound. The ideal speaker will not degrade the sound. A speaker that produces sound unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive. Yet, why do all the speakers you own sound different?Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Eediotsb]Beach Audio[/b]: Rega RP6 (mods) - AT33PTG/II - Parks Budgie SUT - PSAudio NPC * Eversolo DMP-A6 * Topping D90iii * Joule-Electra LA-100 mkIII * Pass Aleph 30 * MIT S3 * Polk SRS 2.3tl (mods) * PSAudio PPP3
Beach Study: Pro-Ject Stream Box S2 Ultra & Pre Box S2 * Pass ACA * DH Labs SS Q10 * Brines Folded ML-TQWT RS 40-1354 * PSA Dectet
Beach Master: WiiM Pro * Dayens Menuetto * Zu Libtec * Dynaudio Audience 50
Beach Den: Bluesound Powernode 2i * DH Labs SS Q10 * Zu Omen DWII * Richard Gray RGPC
Town Study: WiiM Pro * Chord Qute (Pardo) * Elekit TU-8600 * MIT S3 * Revel M22 * Beyer DT-990 * Shunyata Hydra 2
Town Den: Music Hall mm5.1se - Denon DL-103r - Jolida JD9ii (mods) * WiiM Pro * Cary xCiter * Rogue 99 Magnum * Schiit Aegir * MIT S3 * Polk SRS 1.2tl (mods) * Dectet * Bottlehead Crack - Senn 600
Town Porch: WiiM Pro Plus * Sunfire Sig II * Canare 4S11 * Magnepan 1.6 * Dectet -
I know how to solve this whole thread and debate. All of your cats send me your high end speaker wires and I’ll do A.B. testing over the next few months with all of them and report back slowly my findings.
-
joecoulson wrote: »I know how to solve this whole thread and debate. All of your cats send me your high end speaker wires and I’ll do A.B. testing over the next few months with all of them and report back slowly my findings.
Good point. But like always. Why would anyone listen, pun intended, to your opinion. The saga would continue.2 Channel Rosso Fiorentino Volterra II, 2 REL Carbon Limited, Norma Revo IPA-140B, Lumin U2 Mini, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Modwright PH 150, Denon DP-59l w/Denon DL-301MKII, WAY Silver 3 Ana+ Speaker Cables, WAY Silver 4+ Interconnect Cables, AudioQuest Niagara 7000 w/Dragon and Hurricane Power Cables -
This is true. But if you asked my wife she would tell you I know everything.
-
You will never convince anyone that has spent a small fortune on cables that it was an insignificant upgrade to their system and you'd have a hard time proving a moderately priced cable colors the sound of your system.
I'm sure this puts me at odds with some of the golden ear crowd here but I for one will invest money in my system where I can definitely hear a difference. As i've said before, however, if you have a $10,000 system you're probably not going to feel comfortable with 16 gauge lamp cord. I wouldn't tell anyone to not spend the money on good cable if you can afford it, but certainly don't feel pressured into thinking it's a necessity. -
Cables are as much of a component as any other piece in your system. People wanting to kid themselves otherwise are foolish.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
The_Polkster wrote: »I'm sure this puts me at odds with some of the golden ear crowd here .
Pretty sure you mean this derogatory, but it's actually very true. There is a "golden ear" crowd here, which is to say, there are individuals on this forum who have better hearing, know how to listen, know what to listen for, etc., etc. How do I know? I've sat with them, talked with them, and listened to music with them. They have pointed out changes in sound between equipment (including cables) that I couldn't originally hear for myself. I'm still not in that crowd, but they have helped me learn to listen better than I ever could before.
If you are an expert in your field, you obviously have more knowledge, experience, and expertise in that field than the average person.
I wouldn't tell a wine enthusiast that he can't sense and taste flavors in wine just because I can't detect them. Same goes for any foodie-type.
I wouldn't tell a car enthusiast that he can't hear a slight difference in his engine just because I can't hear it or that he can't tell it handles better with "x" brand/style of tires just because I can't tell a difference.
I wouldn't tell an avid hunter that the scope I bought at Wal-Mart is just as good as the one that he spent several hundred/thousand dollars on. Or that there is no way he can tell a difference in gun "x" compared to gun "y". Same goes for bows and arrows.
I wouldn't tell a golfer that there is no way he can tell a difference in ball "x" compared to ball "y".
I wouldn't tell a...well, you get the idea. The list goes on and on. I just can't believe the audacity to tell someone what they can and cannot hear.
Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive.
Then why did AT&T spend billions of dollars and decades of research and development on wire designs for telephony, when the wires weren't even going to carry the full range of audible frequencies (just voice frequencies and signaling tones)? Why is there still ongoing research in wire design for telephony if it's such a trivial matter?
Telephone cable design was of interest to telephony engineers in 1909:
F. B. Jewett, "The modern telephone cable," in Proceedings of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 947-961, July 1909.
Abstract: To those not closely in touch with the telephone situation to-day, the importance of the modern telephone cable may be indicated by stating that of the 8,000,000 miles of wire in the exchange plants of the Associated Bell telephone companies, more than 6,800,000 miles are in the form of underground, aerial, or submarine cable. These figures refer solely to the wire used for outside construction and do not include the thousands of miles of wire in cable form employed in central offices or the wiring of large buildings.
keywords: {Communication cables; Wires; Power cables; Cable insulation; Dielectrics; Cable shielding; Mechanical cables}
Telephony engineers still didn't have everything figured out 51 years later, in 1990:
A. S. Windeler, "Design of polyethylene-insulated multipair telephone cable," in Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, Part I: Communication and Electronics, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 736-739, Jan. 1960.
Abstract: Cables are designed to have special characteristics which will make them suitable for particular uses or purposes. In the case of telephone cable the purpose is primarily to transmit information at voice and carrier frequency during an expected life of approximately 30 years. To achieve this, certain mechanical and electrical characteristics must be built into the cable. Mechanical characteristics include such characteristics as resistance to environmental factors including heat, cold, wind, lightning, moisture, sunlight, and oxygen, as well as resistance to damage by rodents and insects, and by workmen. Other desirable mechanical characteristics involve factors of convenience of manufacture, installation, and joining.
keywords: {Cable insulation; Wires; Capacitance; Communication cables; US Department of Defense; Conductors}
Telephony engineers still hadn't figured out everything about telephone cable manufacturing 109 years later, as evidenced by this 2018 peer-reviewed IEEE journal paper on wire manufacturing:
A. Wodzynski, M. Suliga and K. Chwastek, "A Modified Method for Evaluation of Stress in Drawn Wires from Magnetic Measurements in the Rayleigh Region," 2018 International Conference on Diagnostics in Electrical Engineering (Diagnostika), Pilsen, 2018, pp. 1-4.
Abstract: The paper focuses on the estimation of residual stress level present in drawn wires after the production process. The presented method relies on the measurements of magnetic properties of drawn wires. Stress is calculated from a relationship derived from Sablik's theory. The Sablik's extension of the effective field is applied to a description of magnetization curve different from the originally considered.
keywords: {internal stresses; magnetic hysteresis; wires; Rayleigh region; residual stress level; Sablik theory; magnetic measurements; magnetization curve; magnetic properties; drawn wires; Magnetic hysteresis; Steel; Wires; Magnetostriction; Residual stresses; magnetic measurements; magnetoelastic coupling; hysteresis models; wire drawing}
If the concern is preserving signal integrity as much as technology allows, wire design is not trivial, not easy, and not inexpensive. This is particularly true of a full range music signal with all its transients and complex harmonic structure.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
The_Polkster wrote: »You will never convince anyone that has spent a small fortune on cables that it was an insignificant upgrade to their system and you'd have a hard time proving a moderately priced cable colors the sound of your system.
I'm sure this puts me at odds with some of the golden ear crowd here but I for one will invest money in my system where I can definitely hear a difference. As i've said before, however, if you have a $10,000 system you're probably not going to feel comfortable with 16 gauge lamp cord. I wouldn't tell anyone to not spend the money on good cable if you can afford it, but certainly don't feel pressured into thinking it's a necessity.
It appears that you are confusing audiophiles with gearphiles. Audiophiles are lovers of music well played. Gearphiles are lovers of spending lots of money on audio gear for bragging rights. It's a common misunderstanding and misconception among those who are misinformed and lack experience in this hobby. Without exception, all of the audiophiles I have personally met and interacted with could rightfully be called audio "cheapskates", because they (and I) tried to spend as less as possible to get the level of music reproduction they wanted. The fact that some of them ended up with six-figure systems is not an indication of their love for expensive gear, it is an indication of how much it cost before either their ears were satisfied or their wallets surrendered the fight.
I have spent a small fortune on cables and I have often documented in my review threads on this forum that diminishing returns kicked in the higher I went up in cable quality, but the extra incremental performance benefit was worth it to me.
If 16 gauge lamp cord gave me the sound I craved, I would have no problem using it. I say this as someone with speaker cables in my two channel system that had a five figure retail price (but which were purchased for a fraction of that on the used market).
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
-
DarqueKnight wrote: »A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive.
Then why did AT&T spend billions of dollars and decades of research and development on wire designs for telephony, when the wires weren't even going to carry the full range of audible frequencies (just voice frequencies and signaling tones)? Why is there still ongoing research in wire design for telephony if it's such a trivial matter?
Telephone cable design was of interest to telephony engineers in 1909:
nostika), Pilsen, 2018, pp. 1-4.
Abstract: The paper focuses on the estimation of residual stress level present in drawn wires after the production process. The presented method relies on the measurements of magnetic properties of drawn wires. Stress is calculated from a relationship derived from Sablik's theory. The Sablik's extension of the effective field is applied to a description of magnetization curve different from the originally considered.
If the concern is preserving signal integrity as much as technology allows, wire design is not trivial, not easy, and not inexpensive. This is particularly true of a full range music signal with all its transients and complex harmonic structure.
Everything you say simply does not apply to home audio.
We are talking home stereos with 10-20 foot long runs.
Copying and pasting a bunch of unrelated stuff........................
Stay on topic, SPEAKER CABLES carrying audio with runs of under 25 foot or so. -
The_Polkster wrote: »You will never convince anyone that has spent a small fortune on cables that it was an insignificant upgrade to their system and you'd have a hard time proving a moderately priced cable colors the sound of your system.
I'm sure this puts me at odds with some of the golden ear crowd here but I for one will invest money in my system where I can definitely hear a difference. As i've said before, however, if you have a $10,000 system you're probably not going to feel comfortable with 16 gauge lamp cord. I wouldn't tell anyone to not spend the money on good cable if you can afford it, but certainly don't feel pressured into thinking it's a necessity.
There are lots of other factors involved here. Golden "Ears" merely scratches the surface.
Any change made to a system, results in the listener listening differently and trying to hear a change, hence many times, the heightened awareness and new listening style will hear exactly that, a change or improvement.
Often Post purchase rationalization will come into play. You spend a lot, you expect to hear something darn it!
Often audio peer pressure comes into play.
Imagine coming onto this forum, having just tried some expensive cables, and saying you heard no difference.........
You would immediately have several get offended, and hint or openly suggest maybe you do not know "How" to listen....maybe you can not just hear what they hear, or shudder! Maybe you do not have a resolving enough system.
So it is NOT just a matter or trying a cable and either hearing or not hearing improvements or changes or more degraded sound.
It is the culmination of many factors.
It may not be "Do you hear what I Hear", but "Do you hear what I think I hear" -
The_Polkster wrote: »You will never convince anyone that has spent a small fortune on cables that it was an insignificant upgrade to their system and you'd have a hard time proving a moderately priced cable colors the sound of your system.
I'm sure this puts me at odds with some of the golden ear crowd here but I for one will invest money in my system where I can definitely hear a difference. As i've said before, however, if you have a $10,000 system you're probably not going to feel comfortable with 16 gauge lamp cord. I wouldn't tell anyone to not spend the money on good cable if you can afford it, but certainly don't feel pressured into thinking it's a necessity.
There are lots of other factors involved here. Golden "Ears" merely scratches the surface.
Any change made to a system, results in the listener listening differently and trying to hear a change, hence many times, the heightened awareness and new listening style will hear exactly that, a change or improvement.
Often Post purchase rationalization will come into play. You spend a lot, you expect to hear something darn it!
Often audio peer pressure comes into play.
Imagine coming onto this forum, having just tried some expensive cables, and saying you heard no difference.........
You would immediately have several get offended, and hint or openly suggest maybe you do not know "How" to listen....maybe you can not just hear what they hear, or shudder! Maybe you do not have a resolving enough system.
So it is NOT just a matter or trying a cable and either hearing or not hearing improvements or changes or more degraded sound.
It is the culmination of many factors.
It may not be "Do you hear what I Hear", but "Do you hear what I think I hear"
I see that you respond and must have read my post but refuse to respond to my specific post.
We understand you will NEVER LET IT GO or GIVE IT A REAL CHANCE. Let others spend the time and take the journey without trying to contridict everything that is said.2 Channel Rosso Fiorentino Volterra II, 2 REL Carbon Limited, Norma Revo IPA-140B, Lumin U2 Mini, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Modwright PH 150, Denon DP-59l w/Denon DL-301MKII, WAY Silver 3 Ana+ Speaker Cables, WAY Silver 4+ Interconnect Cables, AudioQuest Niagara 7000 w/Dragon and Hurricane Power Cables -
Have to disagree K_M. When I went from no name to Canare wire, thought I heard a little difference, but wasn’t quite sure. After a few weeks, switched back, and noticed that the midrange was less pronounced. Took a while, but got curious again.
Found a really good buy on Analysis Plus, and decided to spend some money, you may think way too much, and gave those a try. When they arrived, I put them in and started making dinner.
I don’t have a “golden ear” or the patience for, let alone learn, about critical listening, but I heard a dramatic improvement in the sound coming out of my system. At the time I was spinning cd’s from my BD player, using a generic HDMI cable, and was honestly upset that they made such a dramatic difference. Was really upset when the same cables were sold here for a little less, but that’s the way it is sometimes.
Like I said previously, when I tried watching a movie, I could isolate the center channel. That was after running the auto cal program and changing the HDMI cable.
Weather the signal transfer is the same or better, or the cable is coloring the signal makes no difference to me. My personal opinion is that if it wasn’t the best upgrade I did, it was certainly in the top three. The other two being a three channel amp and power conditioner.
That’s my personal experience, and I wish that it would have turned out differently. I could have used that money for other things, mainly a different toy, but these cables stay put. I won’t even mention the interconnect thing.
Like many skeptics, it really irritated the h*** out of me when I tried their ridiculous and costly advice, only to find out it actually worked.
Should have stuck with a home theater in a box and spent my money on women and liquor, like Redd Foxx. -
Man, I can swing by and organize that mess for you pretty quick with some wire cutters, tape, and velcro.joecoulson wrote: »My cable says “all your base belong to us”
I disabled signatures. -
My cable will eat your wire cutters for breakfast
-
Like many skeptics, it really irritated the h*** out of me when I tried their ridiculous and costly advice, only to find out it actually worked.
Should have stuck with a home theater in a box and spent my money on women and liquor, like Redd Foxx.
LOL.....Now that there just made my morning.
Rock on brotha HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
I liken the cable discussion to cooking. Your in essence trying to create your own recipe, using the best ingredients you can, to create something specifically designed to your own preferences. The quality of those ingredients would be apparent in the final result. Same goes for audio.....
Some can eat Taco Bell every day and be happy. Others who know what real Mexican food tastes like would have another opinion. Venture outside your comfort zones gents, that's how we make discoveries.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
[Everything you say simply does not apply to home audio.
We are talking home stereos with 10-20 foot long runs.
Copying and pasting a bunch of unrelated stuff........................
Stay on topic, SPEAKER CABLES carrying audio with runs of under 25 foot or so.
Please point us to the scientific studies that validate your opinion that the basic performance parameters of audio cables are vastly different for speaker cables of 25 feet or less. Specifically, why are concepts like wire drawing techniques, dielectric properties, cable metallurgy, shielding, etc, inapplicable to shorter length speaker cables? At the very least, you should be able to list the scientific reasons why everything I said simply does not apply to home audio.
Telephone cables come in various lengths, from a few feet to thousands of miles. Whatever the length, the basic science and problems of preserving signal integrity and reducing cable-induced noise are the same.
Here is a reference to a peer-reviewed IEEE study that should be more to your liking, since it is specific to home audio cables:
G. Bucci, F. Di Nicola and E. Fiorucci, "The Performance Evaluation of Hi-Fi Interconnection Systems," 2005 IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference Proceedings, Ottawa, Ont., 2005, pp. 451-456.
Abstract: Audio-cable is one of the most critical elements of a modern Hi-Fi system, mainly because it always introduces distortion and attenuation on the transmitted signal. Today the manufacturers produce cables with different features, suitable to transfer the various audio signals, such as low-power signals (from CD-players, musical instruments) and high-power signals (from the amplifier to the speaker). The performance evaluation of each Hi-Fi connection system requires the measurement of a wide set of parameters that can become critical when frequency increases. In this paper we propose a flexible measurement system for the performance evaluation of a wide set of different high quality cables for professional audio application, reporting also some experimental results.
keywords: {audio systems;cables (electric); Hi-Fi equipment; Hi-Fi interconnection systems; audio cable;signal distortion; signal attenuation; transmitted signal;audio signals; Hi-Fi connection system; flexible measurement system; professional audio application; Hi-Fi equipment; signal analysis; Cables; Power system interconnection; Distortion; Impedance; Attenuation; Manufacturing; High power amplifiers; Frequency; Inductance; Bandwidth;Hi-Fi equipment; audio cables; signal analysis},
The Bucci paper highlights my earlier point that the technical issues regarding preserving signal integrity for full range audio cables are much more complex than those for telephone cables designed to carry voice-band signals.
If designing high performance cable for band-limited voice grade signals is not a trivial, inexpensive exercise, then designing cable for full range music signals is not a trivial, inexpensive exercise either. That means that your opinion and assertion that
"A wire that carries a signal unharmed is NOT hard to produce nor expensive."
is not supported by valid cable science, and is WRONG.
I fully agree that low to "acceptable" audio performance can be achieved with inexpensive cable. It is not true that it is easy and inexpensive to produce wire that carries a signal UNHARMED. The differences in signal integrity among cheap and more expensive, better designed, better constructed home audio speaker cables and interconnects can be easily measured with an oscilloscope.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Have to disagree K_M. When I went from no name to Canare wire, thought I heard a little difference, but wasn’t quite sure. After a few weeks, switched back, and noticed that the midrange was less pronounced. Took a while, but got curious again.
@K_M 's experience differs from yours. She once thought she heard a difference in cables, but when she did a blind test, the differences "disappeared". When I (repeatedly) asked how the test was set up and what evaluation methodology was used (specifically, what performance criteria were listened for), she refused to answer.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Geezs, I thought I was just asking a simple question about cables.Hafler DH220 Power amp Recapped
Hafler DH110 Preamp Recapped
Hafler Digital FM Tuner
Virtue Audio M1 Piano CD Player
Technics SL-1210-MK5 with a Rega Exact Cartridge
Polk SDA1c's(Rebuilt XO's by Ben) RDO194 Tweeters -
It may not be "Do you hear what I Hear", but "Do you hear what I think I hear"
Nope. Try again. There are others who can hear differences in cables that you cannot hear (and that I cannot hear).There is a "golden ear" crowd here, which is to say, there are individuals on this forum who have better hearing, know how to listen, know what to listen for, etc., etc. How do I know? I've sat with them, talked with them, and listened to music with them. They have pointed out changes in sound between equipment (including cables) that I couldn't originally hear for myself. I'm still not in that crowd, but they have helped me learn to listen better than I ever could before.Post edited by [Deleted User] onThings work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
Geezs, I thought I was just asking a simple question about cables.
Haha. No, you fanned the flames is all. -
Geezs, I thought I was just asking a simple question about cables.
No such thing as 'simple' in this hobby. Or, conversely, simple things for simple minds. Your choice.
Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
![[Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/87d77771c4d11ba1140f7ecfd7478ce9_100.png)
