Best speaker wire

1568101117

Comments

  • K_MK_M Posts: 1,617
    mantis wrote: »
    tonyb wrote: »
    marvda1 wrote: »
    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.

    Lsi15, Lsi9, LsiC,Rta11t,M5jr+,M4, SDA SRS 2.3TL, Rti6....Still listing stuff, a work in progress.
    B+W-Sold
    Electro Voice EV-SIX
    Infinity-Sold
    Advent-Now gone
    Yamaha A-S801
    Yamaha RX-V377
    Yamaha RX-A860
    Yamaha RX-A3060
    Harman Kardon Hk-350i
    Harman Kardon Hk-........
    Harman Kardon PM-665
    Harman Kardon HK-775
    Pioneer.......Stereo Receiver

  • tratlifftratliff Posts: 1,051
    edited December 2018
    K_M wrote: »
    mantis wrote: »
    tonyb wrote: »
    marvda1 wrote: »
    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
    Legacy Focus SE, 2 REL Carbon Limited, McIntosh C50, McIntosh MC601's, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Parasound Halo JC3, Denon DP-59l w/Ortofon 2m Bronze, Marantz SA-14s1, Oppo BDP-105, Technics RS-1500, Furman Elite 15PFi, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Interconnects, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Speaker Cables, Pangea Power Cables
  • mdaudioguymdaudioguy Posts: 5,137
    K_M wrote: »
    mantis wrote: »
    tonyb wrote: »
    marvda1 wrote: »
    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.
    I'm not a fan of harm either. Harmony, yes; harm, no. I prefer the gooder wires.
  • F1nutF1nut Posts: 44,823
    edited December 2018
    mantis wrote: »
    tonyb wrote: »
    marvda1 wrote: »
    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......WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
    Post edited by F1nut on
    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

  • F1nutF1nut Posts: 44,823
    edited December 2018
    K_M wrote: »
    mantis wrote: »
    tonyb wrote: »
    marvda1 wrote: »
    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

  • vcwatkinsvcwatkins Posts: 1,976
    Eediots
    Den: Roon (Sonic Transporter) * PS Audio DirectStream Jr. * Adcom GFP-750 * Sunfire Signature II * PSAudio PP3 * MIT S3 * Polk SRS 1.2
    Study: Roon * ProJect Stream Box Ultra & Pre Box S2 * Pass ACA * PSA Dectet * DH Labs Q10 * Brines Folded ML-TQWT RS 40-1354
    Studio: Roon * LG v30 phone * Dared MP-5 * DefTech SM45
    Beach: Rega RP6 * AT33PTGII * Budgie SUT * Jolida jd9 * Roon * Sonore UltraRendu (LPS-1, WW Plat7, Iso Regen, Lush) * Schiit Yggdrasil * Joule-Electra LA-100 mkIII * Pass Aleph 30 / First Watt F5 Clone * PSA Dectet * MIT S3 * Polk SRS 2.3tl
    Beach Den: Sonore microRendu * Dayens Menuetto * Fostex BK-12m Folded Horn / KEF LS50 / Dynaudio Audience 50 / Revel M22

  • joecoulsonjoecoulson Posts: 4,602
    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.
    Auralic Vega G1/Rega TT - Parasound P6 - PS Audio M700x2 - Elac Adante AS-61 - AQ Niagara 5000 - SVS SB16u

    HT - Panasonic BDP/Tivo Bolt - Marantz SR5013 - Def tech C and In ceiling - Sony XBR 75"
  • tratlifftratliff Posts: 1,051
    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
    Legacy Focus SE, 2 REL Carbon Limited, McIntosh C50, McIntosh MC601's, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Parasound Halo JC3, Denon DP-59l w/Ortofon 2m Bronze, Marantz SA-14s1, Oppo BDP-105, Technics RS-1500, Furman Elite 15PFi, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Interconnects, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Speaker Cables, Pangea Power Cables
  • joecoulsonjoecoulson Posts: 4,602
    This is true. But if you asked my wife she would tell you I know everything.
    Auralic Vega G1/Rega TT - Parasound P6 - PS Audio M700x2 - Elac Adante AS-61 - AQ Niagara 5000 - SVS SB16u

    HT - Panasonic BDP/Tivo Bolt - Marantz SR5013 - Def tech C and In ceiling - Sony XBR 75"
  • 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.
  • F1nutF1nut Posts: 44,823
    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

  • DarqueKnightDarqueKnight Posts: 6,660
    edited December 2018
    "K_M 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:

    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.

    "So hot it burns Mice!"~DK
    "Polk SDA-SRSs are hopelessly out of date both sonically and technologically... I see no value whatsoever in older SDA speakers."~Audio Asylum Member
    "Knowledge, without understanding, is a path to failure."~DK
    "Those who irrationally rail against something or someone that is no threat to them, actually desire (or desire to be like) the thing or person they are railing against."~DK
  • DarqueKnightDarqueKnight Posts: 6,660
    edited December 2018
    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).

    "So hot it burns Mice!"~DK
    "Polk SDA-SRSs are hopelessly out of date both sonically and technologically... I see no value whatsoever in older SDA speakers."~Audio Asylum Member
    "Knowledge, without understanding, is a path to failure."~DK
    "Those who irrationally rail against something or someone that is no threat to them, actually desire (or desire to be like) the thing or person they are railing against."~DK
  • K_MK_M Posts: 1,617
    edited December 2018
    "K_M 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.
    Lsi15, Lsi9, LsiC,Rta11t,M5jr+,M4, SDA SRS 2.3TL, Rti6....Still listing stuff, a work in progress.
    B+W-Sold
    Electro Voice EV-SIX
    Infinity-Sold
    Advent-Now gone
    Yamaha A-S801
    Yamaha RX-V377
    Yamaha RX-A860
    Yamaha RX-A3060
    Harman Kardon Hk-350i
    Harman Kardon Hk-........
    Harman Kardon PM-665
    Harman Kardon HK-775
    Pioneer.......Stereo Receiver

  • K_MK_M Posts: 1,617
    edited December 2018
    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"
    Lsi15, Lsi9, LsiC,Rta11t,M5jr+,M4, SDA SRS 2.3TL, Rti6....Still listing stuff, a work in progress.
    B+W-Sold
    Electro Voice EV-SIX
    Infinity-Sold
    Advent-Now gone
    Yamaha A-S801
    Yamaha RX-V377
    Yamaha RX-A860
    Yamaha RX-A3060
    Harman Kardon Hk-350i
    Harman Kardon Hk-........
    Harman Kardon PM-665
    Harman Kardon HK-775
    Pioneer.......Stereo Receiver

  • tratlifftratliff Posts: 1,051
    K_M 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
    Legacy Focus SE, 2 REL Carbon Limited, McIntosh C50, McIntosh MC601's, VPI Prime w/SoundSmith Zephyr MIMC, Parasound Halo JC3, Denon DP-59l w/Ortofon 2m Bronze, Marantz SA-14s1, Oppo BDP-105, Technics RS-1500, Furman Elite 15PFi, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Interconnects, Douglas Connection (Furutech) Alpha Speaker Cables, Pangea Power Cables
  • msgmsg Posts: 5,762
    joecoulson wrote: »
    My cable says “all your base belong to us”
    g3kbzw0w3z97.png
    Man, I can swing by and organize that mess for you pretty quick with some wire cutters, tape, and velcro.

    I disabled signatures.
  • tonybtonyb Posts: 32,466
    edited December 2018
    rpf65 wrote: »
    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
  • tonybtonyb Posts: 32,466
    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
  • DarqueKnightDarqueKnight Posts: 6,660
    edited December 2018
    K_M wrote: »
    [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.
    "So hot it burns Mice!"~DK
    "Polk SDA-SRSs are hopelessly out of date both sonically and technologically... I see no value whatsoever in older SDA speakers."~Audio Asylum Member
    "Knowledge, without understanding, is a path to failure."~DK
    "Those who irrationally rail against something or someone that is no threat to them, actually desire (or desire to be like) the thing or person they are railing against."~DK
  • rpf65 wrote: »
    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.

    "So hot it burns Mice!"~DK
    "Polk SDA-SRSs are hopelessly out of date both sonically and technologically... I see no value whatsoever in older SDA speakers."~Audio Asylum Member
    "Knowledge, without understanding, is a path to failure."~DK
    "Those who irrationally rail against something or someone that is no threat to them, actually desire (or desire to be like) the thing or person they are railing against."~DK
  • PSOVLSKPSOVLSK Posts: 4,277
    edited December 2018
    K_M wrote: »
    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).
    PSOVLSK wrote: »
    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 KennethSwauger on
    Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden
  • joecoulsonjoecoulson Posts: 4,602
    gdphoto wrote: »
    Geezs, I thought I was just asking a simple question about cables.

    Haha. No, you fanned the flames is all.
    Auralic Vega G1/Rega TT - Parasound P6 - PS Audio M700x2 - Elac Adante AS-61 - AQ Niagara 5000 - SVS SB16u

    HT - Panasonic BDP/Tivo Bolt - Marantz SR5013 - Def tech C and In ceiling - Sony XBR 75"
  • BlueFoxBlueFox Posts: 13,535
    gdphoto wrote: »
    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. :)
    Bud - Silicon Valley

    Lumin X1 file player
    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 preamp, 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.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!