Is there a difference in HDMI cables?
Comments
-
That's where you are wrong Monk. Metallurgy does make a difference in sound otherwise everyone would use the same cable regardless. The old 1's and 0's argument has been proven false time and time again, your a tad behind the curve on this one my friend.
I'm not setting out to change anyones mind on this, believe what you will, no skin off my nose. However if you seek further enjoyment, and wonder what a good quality cable can bring to the table, let your own ears/eyes be the judge, not me, and certainly not anyone else here.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 -
The science and theory that some of you rely solely on has over the years often been proven wrong and some times by the same people that proclaimed things to be a certain way to begin with. One should never put all their eggs in one basket.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 -
That's where you are wrong Monk. Metallurgy does make a difference in sound otherwise everyone would use the same cable regardless. The old 1's and 0's argument has been proven false time and time again, your a tad behind the curve on this one my friend.
I'm not setting out to change anyones mind on this, believe what you will, no skin off my nose. However if you seek further enjoyment, and wonder what a good quality cable can bring to the table, let your own ears/eyes be the judge, not me, and certainly not anyone else here.
Did you read ANY of the industry papers that were linked? The ENTIRE point behind both hardware an software protocols is to minimize error and standardize implementation. Even discounting HDCP and ICT which are two of many protocols that make up HDMI, the entire schema is digital for a reason of GUARANTEED data delivery. HDMI is a differential interface with complementary pairs to to ensure data integrity.
In two HDMI cables as long as the 1's and 0's get there the same way the same time you get the same output.
I'm interested in any peer reviewed and published data that you have to present. So far Kuntasensei is the only one to present anything valid, and I'm the only one that has put out a more than friendly invite for people to put their conjecture to the test.
CAT5e as example: I'm going to get the same data rates from one properly terminated length of cable that I am from any other properly terminated same length.
I'm telling you if I put you front of a test bed and have you A/B on a remote between mirrored output on an IPS display you are going to fail miserably. You CAN NOT do it reliably. I guarantee it. -
Any truth to what this guy says?
"HDMI is an abortion of an interface that was crammed down our throats by Sony and Hollywood. Silicon Image was the party that made it all possible.
The idea by Sony was to have the audio and the video both on the same cable, to avoid confusing the schmucks who buy their Sony TV sets at Best Buy and can't figure out how to connect it. Hollywood demanded "content protection", and it was decided that HDCP as developed by Intel would suffice. Silicon Image was determined to develop the silicon chips so that they could cash in on the cash cow.
Of the many problems associated with HDMI, the audio quality is totally handicapped for lack of -- a pin! They designed the connector before they finished designing the system. They didn't have enough pins to also have a master audio clock.
So with HDMI, the audio clock is derived from the video clock. For high-def TV, the video clock runs at either 74.25 MHz or 74.25 * (1000/1001) [thank you NTSC!!!]. The audio clock runs at multiples of 48 kHz. Of course, these are not related. So the receiver has a PLL to regenerate an audio clock based on instructions from the transmitter (source) telling it what to do.
The result is the worst jitter of any system yet invented. It truly sucks.
Much later, they added a thing called Audio Rate Control in HDMI 1.3a. This puts a buffer and the master audio clock in the receiver. Then commands are sent upstream on the CEC line telling the player to speed up and slow down as necessary to keep the buffer full.
The only people to use this are Sony (HATS) and Pioneer (PQLS), but both use proprietary implementations that prevent use with other equipment.
And the fee for using this pile of steaming dog dung? $30,000 per year in licensing fees. It's a beautiful world, no?"
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/8/82566.htmlLumin 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. -
Any truth to what this guy says?
"HDMI is an abortion of an interface that was crammed down our throats by Sony and Hollywood. Silicon Image was the party that made it all possible.
The idea by Sony was to have the audio and the video both on the same cable, to avoid confusing the schmucks who buy their Sony TV sets at Best Buy and can't figure out how to connect it. Hollywood demanded "content protection", and it was decided that HDCP as developed by Intel would suffice. Silicon Image was determined to develop the silicon chips so that they could cash in on the cash cow.
Of the many problems associated with HDMI, the audio quality is totally handicapped for lack of -- a pin! They designed the connector before they finished designing the system. They didn't have enough pins to also have a master audio clock.
So with HDMI, the audio clock is derived from the video clock. For high-def TV, the video clock runs at either 74.25 MHz or 74.25 * (1000/1001) [thank you NTSC!!!]. The audio clock runs at multiples of 48 kHz. Of course, these are not related. So the receiver has a PLL to regenerate an audio clock based on instructions from the transmitter (source) telling it what to do.
The result is the worst jitter of any system yet invented. It truly sucks.
Much later, they added a thing called Audio Rate Control in HDMI 1.3a. This puts a buffer and the master audio clock in the receiver. Then commands are sent upstream on the CEC line telling the player to speed up and slow down as necessary to keep the buffer full.
The only people to use this are Sony (HATS) and Pioneer (PQLS), but both use proprietary implementations that prevent use with other equipment.
And the fee for using this pile of steaming dog dung? $30,000 per year in licensing fees. It's a beautiful world, no?"
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/8/82566.html
Most certainly is true on the audio side. Which is why HDMI isn't an audiophile interface. The thing with going digital is you can add all sorts of DRM: HDCP, ICT. Google 'Closing the Analog Hole' and you will find one of the many reasons that HDMI was implemented.
Even Component R/G/B was capable of 1080i. Good ole VGA which is ~25 years old is still capable of surpassing 1080P.
The minimal buffering isn't a problem if there is never a buffer under run. The whole 'if a tree falls in a forest' thing.
And as usual HDCP and ICT are all hacked. HDCP has caused many a nightmare getting a DVD/BR player - Receiver - TV to handshake properly.
The cable is minimal in all of this however since most of the issues are software. Hardware is typically the easier part. There is a reason Apple has Display Port and Thunderbolt.
The real solution has been out there for ages however: CAT5e cabling. Even a 100Mbit connection can do 1080P w/o breaking a sweat. Check out HD Base T http://www.hdbaset.org/
100 Meter distance and I'm sure Audio Quest would then come out with a $3000 100 meter run of the stuff and another 7 page debate would debut. -
Just a little something from a Whathifi'er about his beliefs. The difference here Monk, is he at least tried them. Not saying everyone will hear or see a difference, but most who do, don't go back to monoprice HDMI cables for a reason.
.
I was wrong about HDMI cables!
Sat, Feb 23 2013, 12:37AM
.
duaplex
duaplex's picture
Offline
Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 823
For years I have argued how the cheap HDMI cable was no different to an expensive version.
However, today at the Bristol show I purchase 3 Chord Active Silver cables and it totally blew me away. For bluray playback or fir anything where data is being read actively from a disc, there is a massive boost in sound quality, the sound was sharper, crisp and punchier. Picture was also warmer, deeper in colour and rich. I am still reeling from the shock, I fully expected there to be no difference and to a certain degree I was right... Using it with sky, no difference, PC, no difference. However, bluray yes, music yes and even gaming.
My wife walked in and said "the tv looks better and sounds better". She was unaware of the test I was conducting, so that was unbiased from a non audiophile/videophile.
__________________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 -
Just a little something from a Whathifi'er about his beliefs. The difference here Monk, is he at least tried them. Not saying everyone will hear or see a difference, but most who do, don't go back to monoprice HDMI cables for a reason.
I remember mentioning BJC, but not Monoprice for my comparison offer. The difference here is I'm willing to eat my own dog food rather publicly. -
My wife walked in and said "the tv looks better and sounds better". She was unaware of the test I was conducting, so that was unbiased from a non audiophile/videophile.
__________________
Wow!!...Sounds like a vote in favor of evaluator-blinded studies to me! :cheesygrin: -
So 8 pages of back and forth ,whats the point? Who wants to make a closing statement on HDMI cables?
I want 10baseT to be the new standard. Then we can all argue about Ethernet cables. Cat 7 is the new standard. Screw HDMIDan
My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »The whole 'if a tree falls in a forest' thing.
I would encourage you to walk into the forest to listen for yourself.
CraigBeach Audio: 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 -
ft_townman wrote: »Over the weekend i decided to do a little test of my own b/c i was tired of the back and forth about whether or not high priced HDMI's are worth it over cheap 10 dollar versions. I used sum Wally world HDMI $10, and a Audiophiles cinnamon HDMI, which isn't really anything super special, $70. I tried my cheaper quality Samsung 60hz LCD TV and my bigger 240hz Samsung LCD with both cables for about 5 min. each, watching Planet Earth on bluray with fast moving to very slow moving scenes.
Let me say this first...THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. I had a friend watch with me just to make sure my eyes didn't deceive me. We started out with the Wally World one and ya it was a good picture don't get me wrong. But after looking at it hooked up with the Audiphiles HDMI we both immediately looked at eachother and said holy S*#t. The picture was so much crisper, cleaner, and more vivid, it seemed. We hooked up the cheap one again and it was like night and day to me. Everything seemed flat and dull. I am sold that it DOES matter which HDMI you have. If you don't believe me that's cool but try it for yourself and really study the details of the picture not just looking at the image as a whole.
Yes sir, I think there sure is a HUGE difference especially with the latest version which is 4.1 that can support ethernet signal as well. I guess that is the thing with all the latest Hi-Tech devices, sometimes you can hardly figure out the diferences until you test them side by side like I am having now with Oppo-103 and 105.
-
Monoprice HDMI cables have worked great for me too1
-
For years I have argued how the cheap HDMI cable was no different to an expensive version.
However, today at the Bristol show I purchase 3 Chord Active Silver cables and it totally blew me away. For bluray playback or fir anything where data is being read actively from a disc, there is a massive boost in sound quality, the sound was sharper, crisp and punchier. Picture was also warmer, deeper in colour and rich.
I think the discussion about HDMI cables today is much more emotional than it needs to be. Of course you have the super cheap cables (which are mostly crap from the manufacturing viewpoint) and the super expensive cables (which are mostly a rip-off). If you consider the fact that all cables are providing the same signal quality and that some cables are supporting more features than others (see 5 Differences in HDMI Cables ) than you will quickly see that a $5 High Speed HDMI cable from any brand you like is probably the best choice. I am happy with my Amazon cables for more than 3 years now and never had any issue with them. That's a pretty unemotional judgement :loneranger: -
Crap system and crap hdmi cables go hand in hand
-
If you consider the fact that all cables are providing the same signal quality and that some cables are supporting more features than others (see 5 Differences in HDMI Cables ) than you will quickly see that a $5 High Speed HDMI cable from any brand you like is probably the best choice. I am happy with my Amazon cables for more than 3 years now and never had any issue with them. That's a pretty unemotional judgement :loneranger:
If you consider the fact that one may have to try different cables and see for themselves......that too is a pretty unemotional piece of advice. Wouldn't you say ?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 -
You guys do KNOW that there is a HISTORY to the above debate on this site? Go back a few years and see WHO believed WHAT about HDMI cables and WHAT they NOW believe. It is an eye-opener, to say the least. Suffice it to say that HDMI cables drifted into the analog debates over audio cables in "recent" years. And once that happened, all the old cable debates reproduced themselves. The above, reprises those debates which are perennial in the audiophile world!
I say, "enjoy" your cables!
cnhCurrently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!
Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
[sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash] -
Greeks....what can they possibly know about history. :razz::cheesygrin::cheesygrin: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 -
The Integra DTR-60.5 HDBaseT Receiver preview at AH.
328 feet over Cat5/6 and 100 watts of Power Over Ethernet (POE). I hope this standard gains traction and replaces HDMI. Oh to have a locking connector. -
I'm using a red monoprice 3ft cable to my AVR-to-plasma hdmi connection and am also using 4 cheap $15 hdmi cables for my dvr, bluray, ps3 and apple tv. And they are working ever since.
Haven't notice degradation of picture, sound or anything perceivable.
Maybe i'll try those Audioquest or Monster cables and do a double blind test. Someday. -
Across all these "cable debates", I'm always amazed that there appears to be very little (if any) double-blind assessment. If I were a cable manufacturer, I'd think it was a nice marketing advantage to have data describing my claims.Polk Fronts: RTi A7's
Polk Center: CSi A6
Polk Surrounds: FXi A6's
Polk Rear Surround: RTi4
Sub: HSU VTF-3 (MK1)
AVR: Yamaha RX-A2010
B&K Reference 200.7
TV: Sharp LC-70LE847U
Oppo BDP-103 -
Across all these "cable debates", I'm always amazed that there appears to be very little (if any) double-blind assessment. If I were a cable manufacturer, I'd think it was a nice marketing advantage to have data describing my claims.
So buy some and do it yourself.
People have different perceptions of sound so double blind test don't always paint an accurate picture. Then again, the ONLY picture that needs to be painted is one drawn by YOUR own conclusions with YOUR ears.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 -
Across all these "cable debates", I'm always amazed that there appears to be very little (if any) double-blind assessment. If I were a cable manufacturer, I'd think it was a nice marketing advantage to have data describing my claims.
Why bother, isnt that what a good return policy is for? Besides even with legit data the diehard folks would still find something wrong with the test to invalidate it. Buy, try and if you dont like return....
My local hi-fi shop has cables they will let me try their cables (with a deposit of course). I havent ever taken them up on their offer as they dont carry the brand that I wanted for interconnects or speaker cables.
That said I plan on taking them up on their offer with some of their Audioquest power cables in the near future."....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963) -
Across all these "cable debates", I'm always amazed that there appears to be very little (if any) double-blind assessment. If I were a cable manufacturer, I'd think it was a nice marketing advantage to have data describing my claims.
Obviously you haven't read Ray's excellent thread regarding the history of Blind Tests. Please read this and get back to us afterwards.
Link: http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?104973-A-Historical-Overview-of-Stereophonic-Blind-Testing&
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."![:\](https://forum.polkaudio.com/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
Obviously you haven't read Ray's excellent thread regarding the history of Blind Tests. Please read this and get back to us afterwards.
Yeah, badchad, haven't you figured it out yet? :razz: There's lots of people around here that yap on and on about their own perceptions of sight and sound being all that matters, saying things like, "If you can't tell a difference, then there is no difference" (paraphrased), and similar. However, they RARELY will trust their own perceptions of how good their TV pictures and rigs' sounds are using different cables....UNLESS they can see the cables being used. :rolleyes: -
teekay0007 wrote: »Yeah, badchad, haven't you figured it out yet? :razz: There's lots of people around here that yap on and on about their own perceptions of sight and sound being all that matters, saying things like, "If you can't tell a difference, then there is no difference" (paraphrased), and similar. However, they RARELY will trust their own perceptions of how good their TV pictures and rigs' sounds are using different cables....UNLESS they can see the cables being used. :rolleyes:
Sarcasm is a poor substitute for knowedge and experience.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
I've been reading his write up and the linked to articles and have a ways to go.
Hopefully they are all publicly available. -
Sarcasm is a poor substitute for knowedge and experience.
I think you mean knowledge. :razz: Your linked thread is a real (long!) snoozer. Thanks, but no thanks. Maybe you could be so kind as to just bullet it for the rest of us.
Meanwhile, while you're doing that - actually, in a fraction of the time necessary for that - I could have someone switch out any number of cables (HDMI and otherwise), without knowing which ones they're putting into use, while playing material that I'm very familiar with and I could tell you exactly which ones sounded the best and/or gave the best picture on MY system and MY TV to MY ears and MY eyes.
Got plenty of experience - decades of viewing movies and videos and listening to a variety of music and soundtracks from various sources with a variety of sources, cables and speakers being used, to know what I like and don't like. Therefore, following the advice given in about every other thread on this forum, "trust your own eyes and ears for what works best for you", "if you can't tell a difference, none exists", etc., etc., I'm confident that my own viewer/listener/evaluator-blinded "test" can give me very valid results for MY needs.
For the rest of you, if it works FOR YOU, you can try to make heads or tails out of the thread/study that headrott linked and DK posted and buy into the notion that you can only tell for yourself what cables work best FOR YOU in YOUR system only if you can see which cables are being used. -
teekay0007 wrote: »I think you mean knowledge. :razz: Your linked thread is a real (long!) snoozer. Thanks, but no thanks. Maybe you could be so kind as to just bullet it for the rest of us.
Yes, that is what I meant. I see you are refusing to gain some due to laziness. I would suggest that you not give advice on whether some should depend upon blind tests and testing cables until you gain some knowledge about the subject. It's difficult to do if you refuse to read the initial posts that Ray posted. Perhaps your sarcasm and wit will compensate for your lack of knowledge in giving advice about blind testing and cables? I wouldn't count on it though.teekay0007 wrote: »Meanwhile, while you're doing that - actually, in a fraction of the time necessary for that - I could have someone switch out any number of cables (HDMI and otherwise), without knowing which ones they're putting into use, while playing material that I'm very familiar with and I could tell you exactly which ones sounded the best and/or gave the best picture on MY system and MY TV to MY ears and MY eyes.
Good, go for it.teekay0007 wrote: »Got plenty of experience - decades of viewing movies and videos and listening to a variety of music and soundtracks from various sources with a variety of sources, cables and speakers being used, to know what I like and don't like. Therefore, following the advice given in about every other thread on this forum, "trust your own eyes and ears for what works best for you", "if you can't tell a difference, none exists", etc., etc., I'm confident that my own viewer/listener/evaluator-blinded "test" can give me very valid results for MY needs.
Sure, for your needs I'm sure it can. That does not mean that a blind test is necessary or more importantly, fitting for an audio/video cable test. If you gained knowledge along with your self proclaimed experience you would know this. I can only post the link, Ray has done the homeowrk, and all you need to do is read and understand it.teekay0007 wrote: »For the rest of you, if it works FOR YOU, you can try to make heads or tails out of the thread/study that headrott linked and DK posted and buy into the notion that you can only tell for yourself what cables work best FOR YOU in YOUR system only if you can see which cables are being used.
Anyone can do whatever they feel is correct. It does not mean it is correct, however. Again, this involves knowing what method of testing is appropriate for audio/video cables. Please learn for yourself, but it does take some effort on your part.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
Ray's method of testing is the only one that makes any sense. It's also basically what many of us have been doing for years anyway.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 -
I can only post the link, Ray has done the homeowrk, and all you need to do is read and understand it.
Yes, I'm quite aware that's what you can do. I'm also quite confident that I can pick out which cables, that I'd even want to consider for MY system, would sound/perform the best in MY system by comparing them blindly. If you are confident that you can't do it with any such cables in your system that you might be considering, then yes, stand behind the study that DK posted. But, for the sake of others (and me, I can't follow that study :redface: too deep for me) reading this thread, please feel free to explain as to why we should not trust our own blinded evaluation of cables in our own systems.
And as a follow-up, how then, would you suggest we fairly evaluate cables for our systems?
