£16.50 diy mains power cord.

[Frank Harvey]

AL13N:My point was that your description of the 'anti brigade' was too wide a generalisation, and needed to be narrowed in the context of the views and practices of those that seem to fit the category.I was deliberately trying to be general - I thought if I was very specific, I'd be harpooned

 

[Frank Harvey]

f800:I know its been said before but how can changing 1m of flex between the wall skt outlet and your equipment make any difference? The insides of most av equipment is'nt gold plated never mind the house wiring, fusebox and miles of supply power-lines.Have you tried it?

 

[Frank Harvey]

I came across a faulty amplifier the other week, which was making some fizzly noises through the speakers. I put on another mains cable just in case it was a dodgy cable (a different one), and there was some pretty nasty stuff coming through the speakers! It might be coincidence that it got worse when I put the second one on, but what are the chances?

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi:maxflinn:the thing is david that blind tests continually prove that any potential differences between any two of any of the various cables are so small that people cannot tell them apart...
The thing is Max is that if I were hosting a blind demo, you're at my mercy. I could sway that blind demo any way I want to....true enough david, but one surely has to believe that the majority of blind tests are not corrupt? and even if some were, the majority of tests, a rather large majority i might add, still find no differences?

im not arguing that cables dont make a difference btw, im just swayed, personally, by all the evidence that says they don and the lack of a credible explanation as to how they could...

 

[AL13N]

FrankHarveyHiFi:those that claim cables, regardless of price, make no difference whatsoeverAL13N:My point was that your description of the 'anti brigade' was too wide a generalisation, and needed to be narrowed in the context of the views and practices of those that seem to fit the category.I was deliberately trying to be general - I thought if I was very specific, I'd be harpooned

Yes, but your generalisation is bordering on falsehood.

Look at self proclaimed 'anti brigade' member idc's use of cable & connectors in making DIY leads.
And others on these forums who do not prescribe to the benefits of cable using 79 - 322 strand copper cable, not 7 strand copper cable.

Do those who cannot differentiate between 7 strand and 79 strand, outside of the hearing impaired, in fact even exist? because they are the ones who would actually fit your "general" description.

 

[Anonymous]

ALI3N.. i recall you making a quite interesting point the other night on a thread that vanished, where you illustrated the chain of data that would pass from a cdp-via analogue interconnects-amp-speaker cable-speaker, would you possibly post that again here please?

 

[Frank Harvey]

Even if there is a difference, what's to say that many people don't hear it? I think there's a lot of aspects of sound that people DON'T listen to when auditioning stuff. Many people just concentrate on tonal balance, or listen to the bass in the bass line for example. It's the same when people compare DVD to Bluray - they look at faces that stuff that's close to the camera, whic actually shows less of a difference. What they fail to notice is the abundance of detail in the background of a Bluray that goes unnoticed because the background isn't the focal point. In the same way, I think a lot of people listen to what's in the foreground of the soundstage, oblivious to what's going on in the background or ambient detail.

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Even if there is a difference, what's to say that many people don't hear it? I think there's a lot of aspects of sound that people DON'T listen to when auditioning stuff. Many people just concentrate on tonal balance, or listen to the bass in the bass line for example. It's the same when people compare DVD to Bluray - they look at faces that stuff that's close to the camera, whic actually shows less of a difference. What they fail to notice is the abundance of detail in the background of a Bluray that goes unnoticed because the background isn't the focal point. In the same way, I think a lot of people listen to what's in the foreground of the soundstage, oblivious to what's going on in the background or ambient detail.there's been umpteen blind tests carried out that used hifi enthusiasts like your good self and yet they found no differences?

 

[AL13N]

maxflinn:ALI3N.. i recall you making a quite interesting point the other night on a thread that vanished... would you possibly post that again here please?
Sure maxflinn. It didn't vanish (it's here) but mine was the final post before it was locked.

AL13N:To add another perspective:

When talking about cables, people often refer to the electronics themselves as boxes. Remember, these boxes also contain wiring.

If using cables in the following configuration...

CDP > XYZ interconnect (£500) > Amp > XYZ speaker cable (£1500) > Speakers

... then the signal is still passing through lengths of relatively inexpensive wire. Now if the claims of company XYZ are correct, in that their cables are superior in extracting information, then surely those benefits are negated as the signal passes through the electronics.

If the relatively ordinary cable really is inferior, then the second you place a CD in the CDP, all benefits of expensive cables further down the chain are lost - unless you open up the CDP, Amp and Speakers and rewire them with the cable from XYZ.

I think a lot of argument could be avoided if the cable companys stopped claiming "better sound" and instead offered customers "their sound".

In other words make it clear that (according to them) their cables are changing the sound whilst it travels from CDP to Amp, and again from Amp to Speakers. If the consumer can hear, prefer and afford the change, then that is their prerogotive.

 

[Frank Harvey]

maxflinn:there's been umpteen blind tests carried out that used hifi enthusiasts like your good self and yet they found no differences?Sorry, I can't speak for them.

 

[Anonymous]

AL13N:maxflinn:ALI3N.. i recall you making a quite interesting point the other night on a thread that vanished... would you possibly post that again here please?
Sure maxflinn. It didn't vanish (it's here) but mine was the final post before it was locked.

AL13N:To add another perspective:

When talking about cables, people often refer to the electronics themselves as boxes. Remember, these boxes also contain wiring.

If using cables in the following configuration...

CDP > XYZ interconnect (£500) > Amp > XYZ speaker cable (£1500) > Speakers

... then the signal is still passing through lengths of relatively inexpensive wire. Now if the claims of company XYZ are correct, in that their cables are superior in extracting information, then surely those benefits are negated as the signal passes through the electronics.

If the relatively ordinary cable really is inferior, then the second you place a CD in the CDP, all benefits of expensive cables further down the chain are lost - unless you open up the CDP, Amp and Speakers and rewire them with the cable from XYZ.

I think a lot of argument could be avoided if the cable companys stopped claiming "better sound" and instead offered customers "their sound".

In other words make it clear that (according to them) their cables are changing the sound whilst it travels from CDP to Amp, and again from Amp to Speakers. If the consumer can hear, prefer and afford the change, then that is their prerogotive.
thanks

..

i think this example throws up a few interesting questions, perhaps the believers would like to have a go at answering them?

i mean, if a slight variation in the content/make-up/braiding/sheilding/materials etc of a given speaker/analogue cable can indeed lead to more of the music content getting to the next component in the chain in one piece and unnafected by any form of data/current loss, then how can the next conductor in the chain be capable of exactly replicating said means of transport unless its made exactly the same way and of the exact same materials? which they never are..

 

[Anonymous]

Hello David, No of course I haven't spent on cables that I don't believe in. But (before I fall headlong into your cunning trap) I have listened to friends systems who swear by these cables and have also had me install clean feeds to the kit racks and I honestly can't say I hear or see a difference.

If people believe they hear a difference then fair play to them and i'm sure they can justify the price premium.

But with my background in electrical and electronic engineering I just can't believe the marketing claims, most without using any measurable specs they use terms that can not be quantified like soundstage and presence ect.

Cables can affect the electricity that they carry but these effects are only really when dealing with high power high frequency signals such as broadcast radio , skin effect ect and not at the very low power audio level signal.

My other point of concern is that you would expect the kit manufactures to supply these high grade cables if they made such a huge change to the quality of the units.( even if as extras if not included)

But most don't and these mains cables are made by 3rd party companies

Regards Ian.

 

[AL13N]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Even if there is a difference, what's to say that many people don't hear it? I think there's a lot of aspects of sound that people DON'T listen to when auditioning stuff. Many people just concentrate on tonal balance, or listen to the bass in the bass line for example.
A bad habit. Many people also compare new kit to old kit. In other words, reproduced sound to reproduced sound.

Surely the point of a Hi-Fi system is to reproduce live sound, and that should be the reference point.

FrankHarveyHiFi:It's the same when people compare DVD to Bluray - they look at faces that stuff that's close to the camera, whic actually shows less of a difference. What they fail to notice is the abundance of detail in the background of a Bluray that goes unnoticed because the background isn't the focal point. In the same way, I think a lot of people listen to what's in the foreground of the soundstage, oblivious to what's going on in the background or ambient detail.
Very poor example. Who doesn't realise that even with off-air SD programs close up shots can look (relatively) good, but it's with background detail and long distance shots that HD really excels?

maxflinn:there's been umpteen blind tests carried out that used hifi enthusiasts... yet they found no differences?
We all have ears. That's fact.

How "golden" they are is subjective.

 

[Alantiggger]

WoW, what's to say ? what's left ?

Speakers of differing kinds will obviously sound a good deal different at times but I don't think it does with wires or with different cables .... but if people want to buy more expensive cables with the thinking that they 'can' hear a difference ... then that's cool ... it's their money after all.

I had my speakers wired with cheap 'Gale' wire bought from Richer Sounds and when I read as to how good the silver anniversary wire was I thought to myself... yep go for them... but no difference whatsoever in sound ... I did feel 'duped' lol

I wonder just how much money the pro lobby have spent on their own wiring and if that has any bearing on their views ... I'm sure some honest bloke will tell the truth one day about it all.

Different sound from a mains cable .... I should say not.

 

[audioaffair]

Trust your judgment based on how you make decisions. There are those decisions best to make on impulse and those that take greater time, care and consideration and hi-fi upgrades like this will of course usually fall into the latter - unless of course you're blown away straight off the bat

Mains upgrades will vary between area and single aspect upgrades (i.e. cable on its own without addition of a dedicated mains filter) will have arguably less of an effect than a dedicated solution.

Best advice really is to trust your own ears and listen to the changes for yourself. Most carefully engineered, professionally made cables will IMHO sound a lot better than any home made alternatives.

 

[Alantiggger]

Sounds good advice audio... it all finishes with the user and how he hears it all, you're right.... after all if it sounds better then ... it's clearly worth it to that person.

 

[Frank Harvey]

AL13N:Very poor example. Who doesn't realise that even with off-air SD programs close up shots can look (relatively) good, but it's with background detail and long distance shots that HD really excels?I thought it was quite a good example. And it seems many people don't realise it!

 

[AL13N]

audioaffair:Best advice really is to trust your own ears and listen to the changes for yourself.

I concur. Until you've experienced something, you cannot form an opinion. For example, no matter how detailed and elaborate a description you may read of an orange, or any other food, until you've tasted it for yourself there's simply no way of knowing.

audioaffair:Most carefully engineered, professionally made cables will IMHO sound a lot better than any home made alternatives.
That is a bold statement.

Especially considering the amount of praise heaped by Hi-Fi press on certain cottage industries that market "hand-made" as a major benefit.

Then there's the fact that many cables used in DIY are the same used by both cable manufacturers and sound engineers. The latter for both studio and live use by the very people who make and perform the music we listen to in the first place.

 

[Frank Harvey]

AL13N:FrankHarveyHiFi:Even if there is a difference, what's to say that many people don't hear it? I think there's a lot of aspects of sound that people DON'T listen to when auditioning stuff. Many people just concentrate on tonal balance, or listen to the bass in the bass line for example.A bad habit. Many people also compare new kit to old kit. In other words, reproduced sound to reproduced sound. Surely the point of a Hi-Fi system is to reproduce live sound, and that should be the reference point.I'm not sure you grasp what I'm referring to - but I agree, hi-fi is to reproduce a live sound. I think there's lots of people who don't listen properly.

 

[AL13N]

FrankHarveyHiFi:AL13N:Very poor example. Who doesn't realise that even with off-air SD programs close up shots can look (relatively) good, but it's with background detail and long distance shots that HD really excels?I thought it was quite a good example. And it seems many people don't realise it!
Sorry, I didn't know that. I guess you're referring to visitors to the store?

I was referring to the fact we went HD six months ago and everyone through the door has commented on the very aspect you mentioned. The amount of detail in the background is the first thing that grabs their attention.

 

[Frank Harvey]

AL13N:audioaffair:Best advice really is to trust your own ears and listen to the changes for yourself.I concur. Until you've experienced something, you cannot form an opinion. For example, no matter how detailed and elaborate a description you may read of an orange, or any other food, until you've tasted it for yourself there's simply no way of knowing.
Which is what I've said all along! If you can hear a difference that's fine, if you can't, that's fine! I'm refusing to get into any cable debates any more, it's just a waste of time. Those that know me already know what I think - I'll leave it at that.

 

[carter]

http://www.wimp.com/mcgurkeffect/

try this,dont no if its reliivant

 

[Frank Harvey]

AL13N:I guess you're referring to visitors to the store? I was referring to the fact we went HD 6 months ago and everyone through the door has commented on the very aspect you mentioned. The amount of detail in the background is the first thing that grabs their attention.
I'm referring to people who claim, on forums, that Bluray is no better than DVD - they're not watching it properly, it's plain to see the differences even on 42" screens, but only to those looking at the right aspects of the picture, it seems. Like I said, I think people do the same with audio.

 

[AL13N]

FrankHarveyHiFi:I'm referring to people who claim, on forums, that Bluray is no better than DVD - they're not watching it properly, it's plain to see the differences even on 42" screens, but only to those looking at the right aspects of the picture, it seems. Like I said, I think people do the same with audio.
The difference between DVD and Bluray can be measured (resolution/bitrate).

Whether using a £1000 or £30 interconnect there is no measured difference at the speaker (frequency/dB).

The only differences are subjective - soundstage, tonality, PRAT, etc.

 

[Frank Harvey]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Those that know me already know what I think - I'll leave it at that.