Spearker cables..fact or fiction?
Comments
-
treitz3
Then you should be able to demonstrate the ability to hear the differnce between speaker cables in a scientifically conducted double blind test.
The only reason for a double blind test is the concern that the person switching the cables might somehow influence the listener's opinions. But a double blind test is very difficult logistically to set up for this sort of test, if you think about it.
As I have mentioned several time, I have done blind listening tests where I am completely satisfied that no such influence or bias was introduced by the person doing the switching. If that is not good enough for you then you might as well go away now, because your position is simply unreasonable.Steve Carlson
Von Schweikert VR-33 speakers
Bel Canto eVo2i integrated amp
Bel Canto PL-2 universal disc player
Analysis Plus Oval Nine speaker cables and Copper Oval-In Micro interconnects
VH Audio Flavor 4 power cables
Polk Monitor 10B speakers, retired but not forgotten -
DarqueKnight wrote: »:rolleyes:
There are some differences in the sides. On one side you have people who have tried different cables in their systems and reported what they heard. On the other side you have people saying that, because the differences have not been verified by an "expert" scientific panel, the differences must be due to imagination.
Typically, when someone shows up on this forum with an opposing viewpoint on cables, rarely do they do so from the position of:
"I tried these cables with this gear and didn't hear an improvement."
It is usually along the lines of:
If you introduce yourself to a group by "throwing down the gauntlet", you shouldn't be surprised if that gauntlet gets stuffed down your throat.
This is the thread where your quotes were taken from:
Does Anyone Use Equalizers Anymore?
The consensus seems to be that as you move up in gear quality, equalizers do more harm than good. Furthermore, there are numerous threads here on room treatment, so there are few here that would argue against room treatment when it's needed.
Wow....equalizers and experimenting with Cat5 speaker cable. What a great leap forward in audio performance enhancement.:rolleyes:
Consensus? Really? You need to get out more.
Where is this so called consensus? May be some veterans got embarrassed for opening their yap and sticking (not a gauntlet) a foot in it. I can see how that would create a poison atmosphere. -
Do you think for one moment I would feel the urge too?
I trust my ears. If you really think about it, we can also flip this around back at those who say that CAT5 is just as good if not better than some.....as they say.....outrageously priced SC's. How about they prove that to us? How about they prove that premium cables don't make any difference? How about them doing their own DB testing? Me?
I trust my ears.
I also trusted my ears when I listened to equipment and compared them.
When I finally set up a simple double blind test I was shocked that I couldn't demonstrate any differnce. I'm not saying you can't however. I'm just interested if you or anyone can demostrate the differnce in speaker cables or other equipment by double blind testing. I am not calling you names or accusing you of anything. I think many people would be very interested in the results of double blind testing before spending their money.
I'm interested in data more than opinions. -
I also trusted my ears when I listened to equipment and compared them.
When I finally set up a simple double blind test I was shocked that I couldn't demonstrate any differnce. I'm not saying you can't however. I'm just interested if you or anyone can demostrate the differnce in speaker cables or other equipment by double blind testing. I am not calling you names or accusing you of anything. I think many people would be very interested in the results of double blind testing before spending their money.
I'm interested in data more than opinions.
If you can't hear the difference I understand where your thought process comes from. I can't tell the difference between cheap wine, and good wine. For me to prove anything about wine via a double blind test wouldn't have any conclusive results. As for data do you really think that humans are so smart that they have figured out how to measure everything:rolleyes:Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
The only reason for a double blind test is the concern that the person switching the cables might somehow influence the listener's opinions. But a double blind test is very difficult logistically to set up for this sort of test, if you think about it.
As I have mentioned several time, I have done blind listening tests where I am completely satisfied that no such influence or bias was introduced by the person doing the switching. If that is not good enough for you then you might as well go away now, because your position is simply unreasonable.
Accurate double blind testing requires more than removing the bias of the person doing the switching. There are many papers about double blind testing.
It can be an interesting subject.
What is unreasonable about talking about double blind testing? -
treitz3
Then you should be able to demonstrate the ability to hear the differnce between speaker cables in a scientifically conducted double blind test.
Double blind is valid, but also hard to do accurately. It can be done but is a lot of effort. Everything needs to be balanced out so the only measurable change would be the interconnects.
I wonder how a 'follow your favorite set of IC's' would fare against 3 other sets of quality IC's. Like a 'hide the ball under a shell' game. That would be interesting.
With that said if something simply sounds better to you, go for it. It's such a subjective thing. -
As for data do you really think that humans are so smart that they have figured out how to measure everything:rolleyes:
Well now that is The Question isn't it.
My answer would be YES.
That is the quest to scientifically undertsand the universe we live in.
Galileo was an Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher who tried to understand the universe. He was different from all people before him because he got out of his comfy chair and did experiemnts to prove or disprove his ideas. Many people hated him for doing this as I'm sure you know. -
Double blind is valid, but also hard to do accurately. It can be done but is a lot of effort. Everything needs to be balanced out so the only measurable change would be the interconnects. .
I agree completely. There are also many ways to cheat in double blind testing. -
Well now that is The Question isn't it.
My answer would be YES.
That is the quest to scientifically undertsand the universe we live in.
Galileo was an Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher who tried to understand the universe. He was different from all people before him because he got out of his comfy chair and did experiemnts to prove or disprove his ideas. Many people hated him for doing this as I'm sure you know.
OK if you asked the same question before Galileo built his telescope about how many stars there are you would hear around 2,200 stars. After the invention of the telescope he discovered that there were to many to be counted. So as for your YES answer that we are smart enough to measure every thing that is measured by humans via many body parts, nerves, and how our individual minds process this information you just are really living in a make believe world. Lay of the grass bro;) The thing that scientist have proved over and over again is that they have proved themselves wrong. Please don't get me wrong. I love science, and the quest for knowledge, but to be so pampas as to think we have definitively figured out anything is just laughable. People will look back at some of this audio stuff in the future and laugh. Seriously think about it. We can all see "the same thing", but are we all seeing it the same way? We are taught that blue is blue, but what blue is may look different to me than you.
Thanks
BenPlease. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
treitz3
Then you should be able to demonstrate the ability to hear the differnce between speaker cables in a scientifically conducted double blind test.
You crack me up. Why should any one have to demonstrate their ability to hear differences in audio gear by your standard? When you audition pieces of gear you are going to purchase do you go through the trouble of setting up a scientifically controlled double blind test before a purchase? I think not. -
Consensus? Really? You need to get out more.
Awwwwww mannnnn. I didn't realize that H9's comments hurt you so deeply that you had to run to AVS for comfort and solace.:(
For future reference, referring a performance oriented audiophile, such as myself, to AVS is like asking a Ferrari owner to go to a Toyota Camry forum for performance enhancing tips. True, the Camry and the Ferrari are both automobiles and share certain basic design features, but actually, the Ferrari owner and the Camry owner live in two different worlds. Some things that would enhance the performance of a Camry would be totally useless on a Ferrari. Likewise some of the performance enhancing practices that work well with low-fi and mid-fi gear would be detrimental with high performance, high end audio gear. It is not something you really come to understand until you start living in that (our) world.
I'm not clear on why you felt the need to post only a couple of H9's comments on AVS for review. Anyway, don't they have better things to do over there besides reading what we are saying over here? By the way, if the members at AVS, Audioholics, etc. are so much mo' betta that we are at Club Polk, why bother with us at all?
After talking to H9 on the forum for a number of years and actually having met him, he seems like a cool guy. He can be a little high strung at times, but I'm sure he didn't mean you any harm. Don't let him steal your joy like that.
By the way, I do "get out" quite a bit...particularly with regard to exchanging information with other performance audio enthusiasts on this forum and others (but not at AVS, Audioholics, etc because they are not performance oriented).Where is this so called consensus?
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear in my answer. I should have said that the consensus among high performance oriented audiophiles is that EQ's and tone controls do more harm than good. If EQ's are the cat's meow for you, great.
I went back and read some of H9's OTHER comments from that thread and I didn't find anything worthy of scorn. I didn't find anything worth of having a conniption fit over:No equalizer or tone controls are needed if you're gear is up to snuff. There are extreme situations where room acoustics might dictate trying to fix gaping problems. For me personally I'd not use that room or figure out a different configuration before using an EQ or any tone control.
With my set-up I'm willing to take the warts and all with the recordings. With a passive pre-amp and 2 gain stage amplifier it's about as close to straight thru as one can reasonably get. My system sounds fantastic with well recorded material and so-so with poorly recorded material, but I get all the "essence" of the original recordings. No EQ will make the poor recordings sound like the stellar recordings...........the damage was done at the mastering/recordings phase.
Listening to the Beatles is certainly just as rewarding as listening to a GRP jazz selection even though the recording process and quality are worlds apart. Some people just like the "boom, boom, tizz, tizz" not me.Not sure it's a luxury but I have a lot of trial and error to get where I am. It's just my personal opinion not having any tone controls. I've never found tone controls/eq's or eq type circuits to be beneficial in any way. They seem to sound very unnatural in most instances.
I admit at times for some older recordings a bit of bass boost would be nice, but in the end it ruins the "essence" of the original recordings. I would deem it sacreligous to add bass boost to an old Robert Johnson recording........just doesn't seem right
Not sure if I made it clear but I'm strictly 2 channel and perhaps some fine tuning is needed with an HT system to really make it shine for movies and special effects, etc.
YMMVLook I've been down the EQ path in the early 80's. Left them as well as tone controls behind. After 25+ years in this hobby, I know what sounds good and frankly I'm there as far as a stellar sounding rig. The more I take out of the chain, the better and better the system sounds. Why would I want to start adding things back in? I've worked long and hard and spent some $$$ to make my sytem as basic and simple as possible. It has paid off in a big way.Look JJ, I don't disagree totally, but my advice to any "lay person" is tread lightly with this kind of stuff because if things are that deficient, then it's time to start looking for better gear if you find yourself being unsatisfied.Never said that or eluded to that. In my direct experience what I thought were room issues several years ago were "cured" by moving up the gear ladder, not by trying to EQ the deficiencies out of my lesser equipment. Not saying that is absolutely always the case............but everytime I made an improvement in gear the sound became more pleasing.
You always seem to read more into a post than anyone I know. Feel free to add whatever you deem necessary to twist these words to fit into your personal POV.
As always in this hobby YMMVIf you HT guys want to run the auto eq set-ups for your settings, knock yourselves out. For higher end 2ch listening, I find it totally unecessary to use tone controls.
As always YMMV
Seems to me H9 was just talking about what he had personally experienced. He says over and over again that YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary). His experiences reflect my own and those of the vast majority of performance oriented audiophiles. I found his discourse to be level headed, fair, and informative.
I realize that personal experience is, by default, an alien, incomprehensible concept in the naysayer community. Conversely, performance oriented audiophiles prefer to speak from experience rather than constantly regurgitate the uninformed, emotionally driven drivel picked up from naysayer forums.:)
I realize that, from the outside looking in, a lot of the things that performance oriented audiophiles do and say seems crazy. It is a different world that is not easily related to or comprehended by outsiders.
Whether or not you use an EQ is not important. The important thing is that you are enjoying your music. You are enjoying your music aren't you?Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DK, I'm flattered he called me an audiophile
.
You know I've been thinking about this idea of invading another forum to troll and be contraversial and he must get some sort of self validation. I don't agree with most of the populous at AVS or Audioholics (I peruse there occasionally) or some of the other sites who's audio ideas don't quite align with mine.
But, I've never joined another forum just become a troll all over the board and to stir things up and make blanket statements and add derogitory tags to threads and be combative. I am mature enough to understand that there are other forums out there that preach different ideas and I CAN leave well enough alone if I don't agree. It would be very disrespectful for one to go there for that SPECIFIC reason.
It seems, Ju Ju, Seafart, C3P0, JVC, Xcapri and a host of others feel a need to get self satisfaction by coming in here and being combative for the sake of being combative and in some cases passive/aggressive and for what reason? To run to another board and report that there are some over in the Polk Forum who don't believe what the other forums believe.
How pathetic and how sad...............really that is so childish and revealing of their personal character. I am really starting to feel bad for these types of people..........that their existence is so pathetic and lacking that they have to resort to being noticed by SOMEBODY in this way.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
What is unreasonable about talking about double blind testing?
There is nothing at all unreasonable about talking about, or conducting, a double blind test. A DBT is merely an analytical tool.
However, we must be reasonable and realize that every analytical tool is not suitable for every type of situation. As I and many others have stated, there are too many perception variables at work to make DBT'ing of audio phenomenon valid. I realize this is difficult for those who are not pursuing performance audio to understand.
For example, I am currently evaluating audio grade fuses in my power amp, preamps, and SACD player. The differences are very easy to discern. However, when I replaced my very high resolution $8,000 Cary CD 306 Pro SACD player with my moderate resolution $1,400 Adcom GCD-750, the differences the fuses made ranged from little to imperceptible. DBT'ing with the Cary would have yielded one set of results and DBT'ing with the Adcom would have yielded an entirely different set of results.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
It is also standard practice for someone like Ju Ju to post something like those sentences completely out of context of the rest of my responses. Because had he posted the responses you quoted DK, the thread would die quickly.
But ,he has hand picked 2 sentences, about 15 words, and made them audio gospel for his flock of people to be outraged at.
Such hereacy I have unleashed :eek: with those 15 or so words which DO NOT in any way represent my true opinion on the subject...........for that see post #1177"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
Sha-dooby! Shattered, shattered....
-
Consensus? Really? You need to get out more.
Where is this so called consensus? May be some veterans got embarrassed for opening their yap and sticking (not a gauntlet) a foot in it. I can see how that would create a poison atmosphere.
The only "poison atmosphere" is the one you are creating. The mear fact that you had to run to another forum seeking support for your position is evidence of that. The fact that you used selective quotes out of context in your quest is flat out pathetic. What I find hilarious about your attempt is the fact that you didn't exactly get the support you were seeking. Yeah ju ju, you've been pwned.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 thing that scientist have proved over and over again is that they have proved themselves wrong. Please don't get me wrong. I love science, and the quest for knowledge, but to be so pampas as to think we have definitively figured out anything is just laughable.
Wrong
Science is always trying to refine the rules to better understand the laws of nature. We assume, but could be wrong, that the laws of nature are constant and apply through out the universe. The laws of nature that Galileo found are still correct and apply today. What is different is that Galileo's laws don't apply to things that go very fast and/or to things that get very small or very big. Imagine a graph with the Y axis Size and the X axis Speed. In the middle of the graph would be a shaded area that are the laws of Galileo for all things. As things get smaller or bigger the laws get less accurate. The quest is to find a single sets of laws that apply to all things that go faster and are smaller and bigger. Faster would be things going closer to the speed of light and smaller would be subatomic particles. Galileo's laws don't apply to those things but they still apply to things like moving balls and speakers.
I never said we have figured everything out. -
hearingimpared wrote: »You crack me up. Why should any one have to demonstrate their ability to hear differences in audio gear by your standard? When you audition pieces of gear you are going to purchase do you go through the trouble of setting up a scientifically controlled double blind test before a purchase? I think not.
You don't have to demonstrate anything to me. But when someone says things that make no sense or contradic the laws of nature and physics I question it. As I'm sure you would also. We all want informed advice to improve our systems. I don't understand why I can't question your experiences without every one going **** house.
I'm just suggesting that I have been fooled by thinking there were differnces in sound from different componets but when I took the time to set up the DBT I couldn't demonstrate the differnces to myself. This is a forum to help people have fun with audio. I'm not telling you what to buy or sell. But if you recommend equipment that makes no sense it would be helpfull to back it up with some data.
There are many types of audio equipment and features that can easily pass a DBT.
It would be fasinating to try to understand how some people can in fact hear these differences if true. Special hearing? ??? I just need some data besides opinions. And I'm not trying bust your balls or anyone else. -
There are four camps
Those that don't hear.
Those that don't want to hear.
Those that want to hear.
Those that hear.
Pretty simple stuff.
I wish I didn't hear.
Thanks
BenPlease. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
DarqueKnight wrote: »However, we must be reasonable and realize that every analytical tool is not suitable for every type of situation. As I and many others have stated, there are too many perception variables at work to make DBT'ing of audio phenomenon valid. I realize this is difficult for those who are not pursuing performance audio to understand.
I think what you are saying is that the differnces in audio you are pursuing are revealed with very expense and sensitive equipment. If so we agree.
And I also agree that DBT may not be the best test.
But maybe consider that DBTs is a method to determine if the audio differences are large or small. -
It would be fasinating to try to understand how some people can in fact hear these differences if true. Special hearing? ??? Ielse.
This raises a fundamentally important point: just as people vary in terms of eyesight (i.e. some go their whole life with near perfect 20/20 vision while others' require glasses/eye contacts and a big range in between, not to mention deteriorating eyesight over time), would it not make sense that people's aural abilities also vary?
I'm glad you brought this up because I was wondering what the opinion was on this matter from those who question differences among speaker/IC/power cable.2 Ch.
Parasound Halo A23 Amp
Parasound Halo P3 Preamp
Parasound Halo T3 Tuner
Bada HD22SE tube CD Player
Magnum Dynalab Signal Sleuth
Magnum Dynalab ST-2 antenna
polkaudio Lsi9s (upgraded cross-overs)
MIT Shotgun S-3 Bi-wire Interface Speaker Cables
MIT Shotgun S-3 Interconnects (3)
IegO L70530 Power cords (3)
HT
Denon 2808ci AVR
polkaudio RTi A5s (fronts)
polkaudio RTi A1s (rears)
polkaudio Csi A6 (center)
Signal Cable Ultra Speaker Cables
Signal Cable Analog II Interconnects -
I think what you are saying is that the differnces in audio you are pursuing are revealed with very expense and sensitive equipment. If so we agree.
And I also agree that DBT may not be the best test.
But maybe consider that DBTs is a method to determine if the audio differences are large or small.
I was just talking to, and have talked with many Polkies. If you need a double blind test to hear the difference then it is close enough to justify not needing the better cables. To each his own.
BenPlease. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
[QUOTE=Norm I'm glad you brought this up because I was wondering what the opinion was on this matter from those who question differences among speaker/IC/power cable.[/QUOTE]
Let's all have hearing tests, especally the audio critics -
Sorry but you ought to be confused because this bullying attitude started right from the start of this long discussion with the first poster, some others when through the same including me, even someone asking a legitimate question without taking any sides what so ever got the threathment. It seems no matter how one would be civilized, if you don't share the pack's opinion, you will get a taste of their wrath.Just to reiterate, I think the reason for the hostility is not what were saying, but how you went about it. And if YOU cannot see my points here then, well, I too am confused.
I fully agree with H9 on this one. On a few occasions, I mentioned to you not to get caught in to this behavior pattern. The fact that one's giving you the ride doesn't justify giving it back. It is much harder to disciplined self and ignore the ignorant than actually getting in his game. This thread could have been a fruitfull discussion if people had used intelligence and be grown-ups ratter than teanage backyard school fighters over who's right or wrong.If you don't agree with it.....you are free to leave or ignore those things that upset you.
Look at post 1067 provided by F1nut for example, it was very enlighthening and so was your response afterward. This kind of discussion brings positive learning for everyone, from this sort of knowledge people can weight everything and make decisions which they feel are best suited for their specific needs!
Cheers DARE TO SOAR:
Your attitude, almost always determine your altitude in life -
Please check the below quote which is from POST #1 THE OP and try post a different statement!DarqueKnight wrote: »:rolleyes:
Typically, when someone shows up on this forum with an opposing viewpoint on cables, rarely do they do so from the position of:
[b]"I tried these cables with this gear and didn't hear an improvement."[/b]
Wow....equalizers and experimenting with Cat5 speaker cable. What a great leap forward in audio performance enhancement.:rolleyes:
The OP DID try some different and WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED in the end result and COMPANY PROMISES! There was many IFs in his first post to sort of point out that who knows in some specific circumstances it may have made a difference!!! This kind of lead me to wonder where you actually started your reading of this discussion or if you are somewhat selective in the answers you post and your quotes?????? You never quoted anything related to the piss poor answers he was getting from his legitimate OP!!!!!!! To make it short, HE WAS THE PROBLEM!!! NOT the CABLES!!!!! Except for providing a manufacturer MAKETTING PITCH and the USUAL "HEARING IS BELEIVING" and the tons of childish and un-educated name calling, NOTHING intelligent was actually brought to the table to prove that MON$$TEROUSLY priced cables were actually making any difference!!!!!I don't under stand the price for speaker cables....some cost more then the equipment there hookup to....The price is insane. The Stereophile mags review these....of course there not going to say anything bad about them..they get paid to do this...then sit there and try to tell you....oh yes we hear this one gives you more highs, or this one is more clear.....BULL...
Sorry..it's a piece of wire...when you get to a certain point...thats about it.
I have a 12 gauge speaker cable, I will not say which kind. I went and spent $250 (on sale)...some supposed great cable......NO DAM DIFFERENCE.No way you could tell the difference between the 2. Now OK...."MAYBE" if your playing some violin thing........MAYBE you could hear something different, but my guess would be NOT. If I changed cables on these "reviewers"...they would not have a clue............
OK, I play mostly rock and blues, but do throw in some classic music.
If Stravinsky, or Tchaikovsky..sound the same to me, over different cables..well I get the fact.....basically you have just been riiped off, because it's called "audiophile"....and no I'm not tone deaf...I've mixed CD's for people , run PA mixers...I know what good sound is.
It's like Boats...if it's marine..you pay a ton....same crap you can buy for cheap...Audiophile.....the price goes up.....
Most of this "sound" is precived..just because you spent..300 plus on a cable.
Thank YOU!!DARE TO SOAR:
Your attitude, almost always determine your altitude in life -
Oh yeah no tech kid speaks again:rolleyes: and loud:cool:Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
Thanks
Ben -
I agree with what you are saying and am on the same page as you are: "the backyard childish debate" are totally useless and negative to this discussion and has pointed out started with the OP which was quite civil and actually did some testing and created this discussion because of his disapointment!Actually I wasn't referring to the technical discussions, I am referring to the flurry of childish name calling that erupts from both sides after each attempt to discuss...FWIW DK you have been quite civil in your attempts to maintain an actual debate here.DARE TO SOAR:
Your attitude, almost always determine your altitude in life -
Wow... This is getting old.HT
RTi70 mains
CSi30 center
RTi28 Rears
Velodyne CHT-12
H/K AVR-247
ADCOM GFA-7000
Samsung PN58B860
Playstation 3
2-Channel
Polk Audio LSi15's
Rotel RCD-1072
Nakamichi CA-5 Pre
ADCOM GFA-555
Signal Cable Analog II IC's
Signal Ultra Bi-Wire Speaker Cables -
a_mattison wrote: »Wow... This is getting old.
That's exactly what I'm thinking. I'm not even enjoying arguing with these trolls anymore.
This thread has gotten really stupid.The nirvana inducer-
APC H10 Power Conditioner
Marantz UD5005 universal player
Parasound Halo P5 preamp
Parasound HCA-1200II power amp
PolkAudio LSi9's/PolkAudio SDA 2A's/PolkAudio Monitor 7A's
Audioquest Speaker Cables and IC's -
Why are you EMU thread sponsors allowing this CABLE thread to over take the WORLD REFERENCE THREAD?
This is OUTRAGEOUS. I SAY IT'S BARBARIC! :mad::Da_mattison wrote: »Wow... This is getting old.comfortablycurt wrote: »That's exactly what I'm thinking. I'm not even enjoying arguing with these trolls anymore.
This thread has gotten really stupid.Trying out Different Audio Cables is a Religious Affair. You don't discuss it with anyone. :redface::biggrin:
This discussion has been closed.