aftermarket powercords

dragon1952

louthewiz wrote:

and to tell you the truth the same cables that these companies claim to be superior in quality can be made by going to your local home center or electrical supply house and be built for less than $10.00!!

Well considering that the male and female Wattgate connectors that those comapny's use will run you about $35 total DIY it's awful hard to make a PC for $10...LOL!

shack

amulford wrote:

Where'd that come from?

Did you actually READ the thread?

louthewiz wrote:

I have been in the field for the last 25 years as a Master Licensed Electrician and to tell you the truth the same cables that these companies claim to be superior in quality can be made by going to your local home center or electrical supply house and be built for less than $10.00!!

F1nut

Anthony, http://www.psaudio.com/products/xstream_power_statement.asp

My favorite! I buy them used, of course. Be sure to look for the ones that have the removable ground pin as the body is round instead of oval making them easier to bend. Also that version has a much better IEC end on them.

amulford

No, Shack, I want to know who actually made that cord... Geez...

Thank you, F1...

F1nut

shack wrote:

Did you actually READ the thread?

Look out, it's a Shack Attack!!!

John K.

WW, again the powercord tweak raises its ugly head, apparently still attractive to those who think that after exhaustive efforts to design a receiver/amp the designers would then sabotage their own creation with an inadequate powercord. This is yet another of the numerous areas in audio in which charlatans prey on the gullible, often attempting to claim that casual listening should be used to evaluate their products. Of course when a proper blind test of amps, players, wires etc. is conducted the differences previously claimed disappear when the nameplates and pricetags disappear. Specifically on powercords, a recent blind test again illustrated the point: many participants confident that they could hear differences, and in fact had heard differences, but the results showing that they were wrong. Note that the author of that article is a believer in, and advocate of, various bizarre audio oddities, e.g. note his recent shameless "review" of this silliness . Bill, don't support these characters; save your money for things that count.

F1nut

John, don't you have a Sony boom box calling your name, you CRACK POT!!!

Early B.

Here's the conclusion of the article John K. referenced:

"To many in the engineering community, blind ABX is an accepted experimental design. Using the blind ABX protocol, we failed to hear any differences between an assortment of generic power cords and Nordost Valhalla. Therefore, we cannot conclude that different power cords produce a difference using the blind ABX protocol. However, we also cannot conclude that there are no differences. We simply failed to prove that differences can be detected to a statistically significant degree using a blind ABX protocol."

Hmmm. A study between generic power cords and a single aftermarket power cord?? Sounds real scientific, doesn't it? Perhaps you should actually read the article before you link it.

DarqueKnight

John K. wrote:

WW, again the powercord tweak raises its ugly head, apparently still attractive to those who think that after exhaustive efforts to design a receiver/amp the designers would then sabotage their own creation with an inadequate powercord.

No one said that stock power cords are "inadequate" and that they "sabotage" the electonics they come attached to. If you read prior posts carefully, most posters have reported performance improvements over the stock power cord. Most enthusiasts in any field, whether it is major league baseball, automobiles, or audio, value performance gains, even if they are small and incremental.

So what if some reviewer says upgrade power cords are a scam? Maybe the cords the reviewer evaluated did fall into the scam/sham category. Maybe the reviewer has some "agenda". There are scams in every field of manufactured goods. Reviews are nothing more than some insight into a particular individual's experiences and observations. That means that a reviewer's observations may or may not be duplicated in my own personal use of the item under review. I like to try things out with my own ears.

dragon1952

John K. wrote:

WW, again the powercord tweak raises its ugly head, apparently still attractive to those who think that after exhaustive efforts to design a receiver/amp the designers would then sabotage their own creation with an inadequate powercord. This is yet another of the numerous areas in audio in which charlatans prey on the gullible, often attempting to claim that casual listening should be used to evaluate their products. Of course when a proper blind test of amps, players, wires etc. is conducted the differences previously claimed disappear when the nameplates and pricetags disappear. Specifically on powercords, a recent blind test again illustrated the point: many participants confident that they could hear differences, and in fact had heard differences, but the results showing that they were wrong. Note that the author of that article is a believer in, and advocate of, various bizarre audio oddities, e.g. note his recent shameless "review" of this silliness . Bill, don't support these characters; save your money for things that count.

Just another example of someone who relys on other people instead of making their own decision. They love to regurgitate what other people (that they don't even know) say like it's the gospel. Geez, I've read that crap a million times....same freakin' article quoted a gazillion times by people who are too cheap to tweak themselves but feel the need to justify it somehow.

DarqueKnight

Early B. wrote:

Here's the conclusion of the article John K. referenced:

"Using the blind ABX protocol, we failed to hear any differences between an assortment of generic power cords and Nordost Valhalla. Therefore, we cannot conclude that different power cords produce a difference using the blind ABX protocol. However, we also cannot conclude that there are no differences. We simply failed to prove that differences can be detected to a statistically significant degree using a blind ABX protocol."

These types of "blind tests" are usually conceptually flawed because they usually require the participants to recall listening events from memory. Seldom, if ever, do you read of the participants taking careful, detailed notes of what they heard (or didn't hear) and then objectively comparing their listening notes on paper, rather than comparing their listening experiences in their hear. If there are differences, and if the differences are small, after a few "trial's", your brain begins to mash everything together until there are no apparent differences.

TroyD

again, those that don't know.......


BDT

Toxis

so I wasted my money on my wires and should've just used what came in the boxes? Crap. Crazy, but you're right. Companies would dump millions into the free cables just so everything's hooked up to it's best ability. I mean, why would they want to save a buck and throw in the cheap crap? I know I love my R-W-Y rca's hooking up my dvd player. mmm mmm MMMM!

TheReaper

TroyD wrote:

again, those that don't know.......

Those that don't know, are the happiest. Ignorance is bliss.

PolkThug

It doesn't matter if it really makes a difference or not. If someone thinks it does, then it does for them.

The powercord that is in the cable demo made no measureable difference in bass output when compared to the powercord that comes stock with an SVS sub.

However, if someone else thinks it will make their sub play "deeper and tighter" bass, I'm not going to call them names because it made a difference to them, and that's what really counts.

Regards,
PolkThug

mhardy6647

Re: the "weak link" theorem...

uhhh... for most folks, the 'weak link' in power transmission to their hi-fi's is probably either their household wiring or (even more likely) the cheap-jack wiring in the amp/receiver/preamp/whatever itself (themselves). Three feet of esoteric power cabling isn't likely to help either one.

And the best way to avoid (if one is concerned about it) the RF hash of switching power supplies and digital devices in the reproduction chain is to just avoid using the aforementioned hash-generators, IMNSHO.

jdhdiggs

Early B. wrote:

Here's the conclusion of the article John K. referenced:

"To many in the engineering community, blind ABX is an accepted experimental design. Using the blind ABX protocol, we failed to hear any differences between an assortment of generic power cords and Nordost Valhalla. Therefore, we cannot conclude that different power cords produce a difference using the blind ABX protocol. However, we also cannot conclude that there are no differences. We simply failed to prove that differences can be detected to a statistically significant degree using a blind ABX protocol."

Hmmm. A study between generic power cords and a single aftermarket power cord?? Sounds real scientific, doesn't it? Perhaps you should actually read the article before you link it.

Early, You are guilty of the same thing in this instance. That chord tested in the study is known/rumored to be the holy grail of power chords. Go check the AVS section where the people spend more on a single component than most people make in a year. They had a poll a while ago and that particular cable received around 80% of the votes for being the "best". If you can't tell the difference between the best and something generic, what hope is there for anything else? That's the point.

That said, I'll sit back and watch the ignorance of both sides flail about.

steveinaz

W WALDECKER wrote:

is it true that sources and preamplifiers tend to benefit alot more than power amplifiers with a powercable upgrade?

I think power amps benefit more than any other, with sources coming in 2nd. My own observation.

jcaut

First off, I've never tried one (though I have "upgraded" the power cords on various equipment, more for saftey and asthetic reasons) so I AM one of those who don't know. And I'm NOT arguing that they DON'T make a difference, ('cause I don't know) and instead, just trying to explain why I think this one is so controversial.

The problem that I, and I think most of the people who are non-believers, have with power cords, is that from a scientific standpoint, they can't make any difference. Well, "can't" may be too strong, but the chances that they could make a difference in the sound put out by an audio component would have to be slim to none, as long as the stock cord is able to carry sufficient current without dropping voltage.

In all the audio components that I'm aware of, there's a transformer inside that drops the incomming AC voltage down to a lower AC voltage, and then a rectifier that converts that AC voltage to a DC voltage. The transformer is an inductive coupling. There is NO direct connection-- no continuity-- between the input and output side of the transformer. In other words, the power cable that you plug into the wall simply feeds the input side of the transformer. It is not even connected, electrically, to any of the other circuitry within the component-- well, maybe the ground, but anyway... From an electrical point of view, the circuitry after the transformer doesn't much care about the quality of the AC power, as long as the voltage and frequency are about right. Even the waveform shape doesnt' make much difference, as long as it alternates such that you get the right voltage out of the transformer. The DC supplies have filter capacitors that remove most any noise and "take up the slack" so to speak.

So it could be argued that the only place that it would be possible for the power cord to have an effect is on the quality of AC power, from the wall outlet to the transformer. Then you can argue about the however many feet of 12-2, or 14-2 Romex, from the breaker box to the wall receptacle, the other junk connected to the circuit, all those nasty, noisy-looking connections IN the breaker box, the wire the electric utility ran from the transformer to your house, right on down the line. It just doesn't seem to add up to a worthwhile modification. Interconnects, you can make a science-based case for, because they're actually carrying low-level audio signals from one component to the other. Speaker cables CAN have an effect (Cobra Cables?). Digital cables, coax vs. optical? Same boat as the power cords: Hard sell, from a science perspective.

The next logical science-based approach is the double-blind test... And we know how that goes. On, and on, and on......

Everyone who is considering this tweak, should try to listen for themselves and determine if the sound improvement, real or imagined, is worth the cost. Dorokusai and others have worked hard and put considerable time, effort, and money into the cable swap program, just so that people can answer these questions for themselves, without monetary risk. We all owe them a big thank-you! People who are determined to PROVE that it does NOT make a difference are wasting their time. People who ask others if it makes a difference or not are likewise wasting their time. Hell, I'm wasting my OWN time.. I have to get back to work. :eek:

Jason

Skynut

Here we go again.

I replaced my cable runs to my RT3000p and Cs1000p amps. I needed to go with long power runs to get the amps plugged into my power conditioner/surge protector and I did not want to have an extension cord in the mix. I got cables that are 10' and 15' long and are stainless steel braided which is supposed to provide shielding from electrical noise interference. The cables are beefy as all get out and look real impressive.
I would like to say I heard an improvement in sound but I really did not do a test nor did I sit back after the install and just think "WOW" what an improvement.
So for me sonically I did not get a large enough sound improvement to really brag or declare "anyone who is into audio needs to do this".
I do however think it is an improvement to my overall system as far as looks and possibly even less interference.
Will I replace more of my power cords? Yes. I plan to replace all that are replaceable with these cords mainly because I really like them. They give me peice of mind that if the original cords were a weak like they are not anymore and also the shielding looks cool as hell and may be working.

Incase any of you are interested in the type of cable I bought here is an E-bay link

shack

F1nut wrote:

Look out, it's a Shack Attack!!!

It's a lot more fun bustin' on Anthony than beating this "dead horse" topic.....

Early B.

jdhdiggs wrote:

Early, You are guilty of the same thing in this instance. That chord tested in the study is known/rumored to be the holy grail of power chords. Go check the AVS section where the people spend more on a single component than most people make in a year. They had a poll a while ago and that particular cable received around 80% of the votes for being the "best". If you can't tell the difference between the best and something generic, what hope is there for anything else? That's the point.

That said, I'll sit back and watch the ignorance of both sides flail about.

You missed the point, so let me make it clear. This study was supposed to be "scientific." The point is that only one power cord among hundreds of aftermarket power cords was used in this study. One cannot make any assumptions whatsoever about aftermarket power cords, in general, based on the results of one of them. Therefore, the study is inherently and ridiculously flawed. You would have realized that if you read it.

Early B.

I know some people will get pissed off about this, but you really gotta have decent equipment to be able to tell the difference in power cords. I changed out the power cords on my HT system and the differences were marginal. But when I changed out the cords on my 2-channel system (tube amp and tube CD player), I noticed a bigger difference. The main benefit was in creating a quieter background.

2+2

I bought some Cobalts when they were on sale b/c I wanted to plug the amp directly into the wall instead of through a surge protector and I needed a longer cable...it was the same price for me to buy it off Cobalt then to make it my self.

Did I notice a difference? Yes....but that may be due to the fact that I bypassed the surge protector....who knows. Definately, the difference was NOT as noticeable as changes in interconnects, source, preamp, amp, or just about everything else.

My thought is that these things should be one of the last things on the list of things to upgrade.

BobMcG

I feel that I killed two birds with one stone so to speak by both going to aftermarket cables and building them myself.

Seven of the eight power cables on my main 2ch rig I built using AQ power cables and Hubbell connectors from TPC in Canada. (I never got around to doing the one to my Legacy sub.) I went to the trouble of running a dedicated line from my breaker box for the system and I make use of separate power conditioners too. (One just for amps.) So, having taken these steps....

Bird one: Making my own cables allowed me to make each one a custom length for it's application and at a fraction of the cost had I bought them stock from an AQ dealer. There is no extra cable to route "somewhere" out of the way either unlike buying them in stock offered lengths. (I was also able to install additional RF filtering right on the cables.)

Bird two: I didn't sit down later and do a bunch of cable swapping to determine the overall effect of the new cables but I could at least feel comfortable in knowing that if the stock power cables were a weak link in the chain, I had addressed that aspect.

If nothing else the re-bringing up of this often "hot" topic reminds me to come up with a new cable for my sub. Thanks.

And a side note on digital cables used in my systems: I've had three different DACs on the main 2ch rigs that have all allowed me to switch back and forth between coax and "toslink" optical cables in an instant. Not only to me but even to other casual listeners the difference has been pronounced and coax has been the winner in my systems every time. So much for ones and zeros "always" sounding the same... Maybe the math is there but sorry, the "sound " isn't.
Donning flame suit and activating reflective force shield so forget it.

(Current DAC can handle ATT glass too but I didn't pay for the option on it's transport mate and wish I had. The ATT glass is supposed to be excellent.)

marker

FWIW, I replaced the stock power cord on my new Jolida tube CD player with one from PS Audio. In all honesty, I could NOT hear a difference. That's not to say that there wasn't one as it may very well have been, but if it was, it was so slightly subtle at best as to be unnoticable. It for sure wasn't any kind of dramatic, night & day kind of difference, and I knowing what I do now, I wish I would have just put those $$$ into new CDs instead. YMMV.

heiney9

Here we go again....more on power cable/interconnects I'm staying out of this one because I've said my piece in other threads :eek:.

Jason(Jcaut) very nice, intelligent, well thought out response . Not sure if it's right or wrong but it sure makes sense from an electrical p.o.v.

EarlyB...you're right on the money with having better equipment to perhaps notice a difference. If the connections from the EIC terminal to the power trans are low quality because the amp is of lesser quality an upgraded power chord isn't going to do anything to help, etc....

H9

Early B.

Does anyone know if there could be reasons for the perceived differences among power cords due to geographic considerations? Urban vs. rural vs. suburban? In other words, I would imagine that some areas or even some homes in the same area have "cleaner" power than others, thus minimizing the value of power cords and power conditioners. Just wondering if there are other factors at play here than simply our individual ability for audible perception.

heiney9

BobMcG wrote:

And a side note on digital cables used in my systems: I've had three different DACs on the main 2ch rigs that have all allowed me to switch back and forth between coax and "toslink" optical cables in an instant. Not only to me but even to other casual listeners the difference has been pronounced and coax has been the winner in my systems every time. So much for ones and zeros "always" sounding the same... Maybe the math is there but sorry, the "sound " isn't.
Donning flame suit and activating reflective force shield so forget it.

(Current DAC can handle ATT glass too but I didn't pay for the option on it's transport mate and wish I had. The ATT glass is supposed to be excellent.)

I feel the same way about "toslink" vs. "coax". I use a toslink cable in my computer system simply becasue the only way to get a digital stream out of the sound card I have is via a toslink connection. It really makes no difference in this system becasue the AMC Dac isn't the kind of unit that you can hear a diff. between the coax and toslink connection. On my main 2-ch system I use the coax connection as there is a diff between the two on the Adcom.

H9

bknauss

Early- there are probably hundreds of factors that could go into quality of the signal coming out of the wall. Some big things could be:
-Do you live in CA?
-How close are you to a power plant? Are you just mooching off of a plant a couple states away?
-Are a ton of people in the area using high current appliances?
-What type of power supplies are connected to your outlets, or even what kind of power supplies is the guy down the street connecting to his outlets? If you've got a lot of poorly designed, or cheaply designed, power supplies, there's the possibility you're going to distort the wall signal of your house, and maybe even other people around you.