v1c:aliEnRIK:idc:
Unfortunately for those who do say there is a difference in cables, that difference is not found in the cable, but in their heads instead. That part is very difficult for some people to accept. Hence we still end up with argumentative cable threads.
You got that wrong pal. Its because those that cant see or hear differences have bad eyesight/hearing (or simply havnt given the cable enough time)
It seems this is very difficult for YOU to accept.
Now that's a bit harsh wouldn't you say. I've recently been converted to non believer status..... and as such am a bit miffed i've wasted so much money on cables so while i figure out what mug i can get to take some cable of my hands i've found my replacement cable 13 x 0.2 Strand Twin Speaker Cable they have another cheaper cable Bell wire for door bell and chimes which i'm sure will work as well because the cables make no difference. It may be that we have to pay more for the dearer cable because it says "speaker" in it and so are paying for the name. Not sure why the concert/studio people haven't sussed this out yet because as we non believers know it doesn't matter what cable you use they are all the same.
So its ok for someone to call me insane. But I cant tell them their hearings not as good as mine???
Unfortunately for those who do say there is a difference in cables, that difference is not found in the cable, but in their heads instead. That part is very difficult for some people to accept. Hence we still end up with argumentative cable threads.
You got that wrong pal. Its because those that cant see or hear differences have bad eyesight/hearing (or simply havnt given the cable enough time)
It seems this is very difficult for YOU to accept.
Now that's a bit harsh wouldn't you say. I've recently been converted to non believer status..... and as such am a bit miffed i've wasted so much money on cables so while i figure out what mug i can get to take some cable of my hands i've found my replacement cable 13 x 0.2 Strand Twin Speaker Cable they have another cheaper cable Bell wire for door bell and chimes which i'm sure will work as well because the cables make no difference. It may be that we have to pay more for the dearer cable because it says "speaker" in it and so are paying for the name. Not sure why the concert/studio people haven't sussed this out yet because as we non believers know it doesn't matter what cable you use they are all the same.
So its ok for someone to call me insane. But I cant tell them their hearings not as good as mine???
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
aliEnRIK:idc:
Unfortunately for those who do say there is a difference in cables, that difference is not found in the cable, but in their heads instead. That part is very difficult for some people to accept. Hence we still end up with argumentative cable threads.
You got that wrong pal. Its because those that cant see or hear differences have bad eyesight/hearing (or simply havnt given the cable enough time)
It seems this is very difficult for YOU to accept.
You will of course now back that up with evidence. At the moment you are assuming the cause is down to differences in hearing.
My evidence to the contrary comes from
- Sean Olive and Harman International (who own AKG and various speaker brands) and his findings that 'experienced' audiophiles and unexperienced listeners in blind tests came out with the same results in blind tests.
- the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Unfortunately for those who do say there is a difference in cables, that difference is not found in the cable, but in their heads instead. That part is very difficult for some people to accept. Hence we still end up with argumentative cable threads.
You got that wrong pal. Its because those that cant see or hear differences have bad eyesight/hearing (or simply havnt given the cable enough time)
It seems this is very difficult for YOU to accept.
You will of course now back that up with evidence. At the moment you are assuming the cause is down to differences in hearing.
My evidence to the contrary comes from
- Sean Olive and Harman International (who own AKG and various speaker brands) and his findings that 'experienced' audiophiles and unexperienced listeners in blind tests came out with the same results in blind tests.
- the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
chebby
Well-known member
- Jun 2, 2008
- 1,257
- 34
- 19,220
aliEnRIK:So its ok for someone to call me insane. But I cant tell them their hearings not as good as mine???
IDC's phrase... "in their heads" was referring to the listener's perception of differences between cables, and was not a judgement of your sanity.
IDC's phrase... "in their heads" was referring to the listener's perception of differences between cables, and was not a judgement of your sanity.
Alantiggger
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2007
- 274
- 33
- 18,920
Lol, people or companies get back-handers from time to time to 'show' or 'talk-up' certain products ... it's as old as time.
Cables and wires probably DON'T differ so much when listened to by the 'normal well balanced' person with 'normal' hearing.
It's a well known fact that aliens live among us and it is they who can hear the differences which are well and beyond the 'normal' range of hearing
Lol, just thought .... the peoples who would maybe argue the point about the cables/wires being better or worse sounding ... more than likely have paid out a fortune on expensive ones and therefore would argue till blue in the face that they CAN hear the difference
Cables and wires probably DON'T differ so much when listened to by the 'normal well balanced' person with 'normal' hearing.
It's a well known fact that aliens live among us and it is they who can hear the differences which are well and beyond the 'normal' range of hearing
Lol, just thought .... the peoples who would maybe argue the point about the cables/wires being better or worse sounding ... more than likely have paid out a fortune on expensive ones and therefore would argue till blue in the face that they CAN hear the difference
idc: - the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
I found it hard to accept at first as well alienRik but i'm being told by reliable sources that the cables don't make any difference so i'm now a non believer. Trust me just accept it in good faith that when we are told it's all in our heads it's the truth, believe me you will be liberated my friend.
v1c:I found it hard to accept at first as well alienRik but i'm being told by reliable sources that the cables don't make any difference so i'm now a non believer. Trust me just accept it in good faith that when we are told it's all in our heads it's the truth, believe me you will be liberated my friend.
I really wont. Ive done enough of my own testing to know otherwise
I really wont. Ive done enough of my own testing to know otherwise
Alantiggger
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2007
- 274
- 33
- 18,920
Lol, just thought .... the peoples who would maybe argue the point
about the cables/wires being better or worse sounding ... more than
likely have paid out a fortune on expensive ones and therefore would
argue till blue in the face that they CAN hear the difference
about the cables/wires being better or worse sounding ... more than
likely have paid out a fortune on expensive ones and therefore would
argue till blue in the face that they CAN hear the difference
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
aliEnRIK:So its ok for someone to call me insane. But I cant tell them their hearings not as good as mine???
I do not think that you are insane. I do think that you are wrong to attribute sound quality differences to the cable.
My hearing is fine for someone of my age and it goes from 20Hz to 15000 kHz. Teenagers can make it to 20000 kHz. Even then you run into problems. Some prefer 'lower' quality lower bit rate. Does that mean their hearing is worse, or is it all in the mind and their subjective preference? What is to stop someone with better hearing preferring a lower bit rate?
I do not think that you are insane. I do think that you are wrong to attribute sound quality differences to the cable.
My hearing is fine for someone of my age and it goes from 20Hz to 15000 kHz. Teenagers can make it to 20000 kHz. Even then you run into problems. Some prefer 'lower' quality lower bit rate. Does that mean their hearing is worse, or is it all in the mind and their subjective preference? What is to stop someone with better hearing preferring a lower bit rate?
I posted this in another thread, it's relevant here and as I say, this isn't mentioned when blind tests are raised:
It is rarely if ever considered when mentioning blind trials or A/B
trials that the kind of differences we're talking about here (and even
most cable "believers" would say they're subtle, unless they're selling
them) that the human ear (and brain) might need far longer to
familiarise itself with the sound in order to notice the difference. The
same applies to the infamous "burning-in" question.
Therefore,
unless it's different equipment being A/B tested that obviously sounds
different (even then, ask many people if there is a difference between
two CD players say, they won't hear it), there is little point in a
minute or two of one mains cable (or interconnect), a minute or two of
another. You will not hear a difference.
It is rarely if ever considered when mentioning blind trials or A/B
trials that the kind of differences we're talking about here (and even
most cable "believers" would say they're subtle, unless they're selling
them) that the human ear (and brain) might need far longer to
familiarise itself with the sound in order to notice the difference. The
same applies to the infamous "burning-in" question.
Therefore,
unless it's different equipment being A/B tested that obviously sounds
different (even then, ask many people if there is a difference between
two CD players say, they won't hear it), there is little point in a
minute or two of one mains cable (or interconnect), a minute or two of
another. You will not hear a difference.
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
aliEnRIK:
idc: - the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
Taking one test in isolation is wrong. Taking all blind cable tests as a meta analysis we find that such results are random. Since it is random you would expect some to get 100% as well as some to get 0%, which has also happened. If there really was something in the cable the results would not be so random and no matter the listener we would get very high percentages of passes in blind tests. But we do not.
idc: - the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
Taking one test in isolation is wrong. Taking all blind cable tests as a meta analysis we find that such results are random. Since it is random you would expect some to get 100% as well as some to get 0%, which has also happened. If there really was something in the cable the results would not be so random and no matter the listener we would get very high percentages of passes in blind tests. But we do not.
I think that cables used at a concert venue aren't - dare I say it - as important as those in a home environment which is subjected to a more critical audition where nuances in the sound of the cable could be better spotted.
However I am very interested in what is used in recording studios as these guys are mastering the mix and sound that you will eventually hear and running channels through busses to add tiny intricate amounts of effects that have an effect on the overall listening experience. Some people have paid thousands of pounds on Hi-Fi gear to hear every last one of these nuances.
Even more interesting is when you start to look at studio headphones where a pair of AKG271s (£130ish) or Sennheiser 380Pros (£140ish) are considered accurate enough to create mixes from. So this begs the question - why pay more for headphones?
And if the same studio is mixing on monitors connected with £3.00 /metre speaker cable (ignoring the Abbey Road reference system I spoke of earlier) - should we ever pay more than that on speaker cable at home?
However I am very interested in what is used in recording studios as these guys are mastering the mix and sound that you will eventually hear and running channels through busses to add tiny intricate amounts of effects that have an effect on the overall listening experience. Some people have paid thousands of pounds on Hi-Fi gear to hear every last one of these nuances.
Even more interesting is when you start to look at studio headphones where a pair of AKG271s (£130ish) or Sennheiser 380Pros (£140ish) are considered accurate enough to create mixes from. So this begs the question - why pay more for headphones?
And if the same studio is mixing on monitors connected with £3.00 /metre speaker cable (ignoring the Abbey Road reference system I spoke of earlier) - should we ever pay more than that on speaker cable at home?
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
datay:
I posted this in another thread, it's relevant here and as I say, this isn't mentioned when blind tests are raised:
It is rarely if ever considered when mentioning blind trials or A/B
trials that the kind of differences we're talking about here (and even
most cable "believers" would say they're subtle, unless they're selling
them) that the human ear (and brain) might need far longer to
familiarise itself with the sound in order to notice the difference. The
same applies to the infamous "burning-in" question.
Therefore,
unless it's different equipment being A/B tested that obviously sounds
different (even then, ask many people if there is a difference between
two CD players say, they won't hear it), there is little point in a
minute or two of one mains cable (or interconnect), a minute or two of
another. You will not hear a difference.
All hifi forums are full of claimed cable differences that are far from subtle.
I posted this in another thread, it's relevant here and as I say, this isn't mentioned when blind tests are raised:
It is rarely if ever considered when mentioning blind trials or A/B
trials that the kind of differences we're talking about here (and even
most cable "believers" would say they're subtle, unless they're selling
them) that the human ear (and brain) might need far longer to
familiarise itself with the sound in order to notice the difference. The
same applies to the infamous "burning-in" question.
Therefore,
unless it's different equipment being A/B tested that obviously sounds
different (even then, ask many people if there is a difference between
two CD players say, they won't hear it), there is little point in a
minute or two of one mains cable (or interconnect), a minute or two of
another. You will not hear a difference.
All hifi forums are full of claimed cable differences that are far from subtle.
I'm starting to think a bigger conspiracy is going on. I've seen some reliable information from (SSSHHHH the Daily Mail and SSSSHHH Which Magazine PPPTTHHH) about Blu-ray not being any better than DVD. I don't think i can take much more , i......i......i thought i had a good hobby...... nnnnn...nnnoow...... i think i've been conned. WWWAAAHHHHHHH
v1c:I'm starting to think a bigger conspiracy is going on. I've seen some reliable information from (SSSHHHH the Daily Mail and SSSSHHH Which Magazine PPPTTHHH) about Blu-ray not being any better than DVD. I don't think i can take much more , i......i......i thought i had a good hobby...... nnnnn...nnnoow...... i think i've been conned. WWWAAAHHHHHHH
Exactly - also, sorry to be the one to tell you but all record players sound the same too...
Exactly - also, sorry to be the one to tell you but all record players sound the same too...
I'll add my perspective.
I think that cables can make a difference. From a rational perspective because different cables have different properties and characteristics and so it's not hard to believe that can influence a musical signal, and from an experience perspective, because I've experimented with different cables and some of them have made a difference.
I do think that not all differences amount to one being better than the other except in the ear of the beholder based on personal preferences and partnering kit, and I do think that the based on the prices of cables that professional musicians and recording engineers pay that the cables for the consumer 'hi-fi' market are way overpriced. Part of it is also that in the quest to eek the last ounce of (often theoretical) performance out of a cable and to create a unique selling point manufacturers are employing ever more exotic materials and production techniques, which lead to an extremely diminished return for the consumer.
2 experiences of mine to highlight the fact that a) differences do exist *sometimes* and b) expensive doesn't always mean better are:
1) traying out Atlas Hyper 2.0 (£15/m) as an upgrade from Van Damme (£4/m) - the Atlas had noticeably better mid-range detail and tighter bass
2) Comparing a £250 Chord Chorus 2 i/c to one hand made by some guy selling on ebay - he was using high quality materials, and the total cost was £30 - thought I'd give it a bash and I could not tell the slightest difference.
I think that cables can make a difference. From a rational perspective because different cables have different properties and characteristics and so it's not hard to believe that can influence a musical signal, and from an experience perspective, because I've experimented with different cables and some of them have made a difference.
I do think that not all differences amount to one being better than the other except in the ear of the beholder based on personal preferences and partnering kit, and I do think that the based on the prices of cables that professional musicians and recording engineers pay that the cables for the consumer 'hi-fi' market are way overpriced. Part of it is also that in the quest to eek the last ounce of (often theoretical) performance out of a cable and to create a unique selling point manufacturers are employing ever more exotic materials and production techniques, which lead to an extremely diminished return for the consumer.
2 experiences of mine to highlight the fact that a) differences do exist *sometimes* and b) expensive doesn't always mean better are:
1) traying out Atlas Hyper 2.0 (£15/m) as an upgrade from Van Damme (£4/m) - the Atlas had noticeably better mid-range detail and tighter bass
2) Comparing a £250 Chord Chorus 2 i/c to one hand made by some guy selling on ebay - he was using high quality materials, and the total cost was £30 - thought I'd give it a bash and I could not tell the slightest difference.
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
I have been further convinced that a cause for cables sounding different is in the head and not the cable by Ben Goldacre's chapter in Bad Science on the power of suggestion (otherwise know as the placebo effect) and its effects on people.
Furthermore, as regarding bad science, those who say cables do sound different have yet to show any evidence backed up by experiment as to why that should/could be. So it is not so much bad science as no science.
Furthermore, as regarding bad science, those who say cables do sound different have yet to show any evidence backed up by experiment as to why that should/could be. So it is not so much bad science as no science.
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
- Sep 6, 2007
- 295
- 1
- 18,890
idc:aliEnRIK:
idc: - the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
Taking one test in isolation is wrong. Taking all blind cable tests as a meta analysis we find that such results are random. Since it is random you would expect some to get 100% as well as some to get 0%, which has also happened. If there really was something in the cable the results would not be so random and no matter the listener we would get very high percentages of passes in blind tests. But we do not.
If you went to a car dealership to test drive a car and it felt great and seemed nippy, smooth, or whatever, would you need to spend a few hours in and out of other cars for your first impression to be validated? I have done some (minor) testing with cables before, however, I normally try one and if I think it sounds good, I might keep it. I don't need to get a notepad out, put my geek jumper on and spend the day listening to the opening bars of an intricate track! Why do the doubters always have to make an A/B nonsense out of cables? You don't agree with others, wow! That's not unusual. It happens. What I find amazing is money is always thrown into the ring. It's not like all 'exotic' cable lovers are rich and the Gotham brigade are poor. Whoever enjoys tweaking their system (and believes that it makes a difference), they are not wasting their money as they believe it makes an improvement. It would be a waste of money for said non believers as they don't hear the improvement - and they won't be buying them so it doesn't matter.
idc: - the numerous blind testing that has shown those who believe their hearing is better, still cannot reliably pick out differences.
Except of course from 'that' forum where the believers picked them out 100% of the time and the none believers were around the 50% mark
Taking one test in isolation is wrong. Taking all blind cable tests as a meta analysis we find that such results are random. Since it is random you would expect some to get 100% as well as some to get 0%, which has also happened. If there really was something in the cable the results would not be so random and no matter the listener we would get very high percentages of passes in blind tests. But we do not.
If you went to a car dealership to test drive a car and it felt great and seemed nippy, smooth, or whatever, would you need to spend a few hours in and out of other cars for your first impression to be validated? I have done some (minor) testing with cables before, however, I normally try one and if I think it sounds good, I might keep it. I don't need to get a notepad out, put my geek jumper on and spend the day listening to the opening bars of an intricate track! Why do the doubters always have to make an A/B nonsense out of cables? You don't agree with others, wow! That's not unusual. It happens. What I find amazing is money is always thrown into the ring. It's not like all 'exotic' cable lovers are rich and the Gotham brigade are poor. Whoever enjoys tweaking their system (and believes that it makes a difference), they are not wasting their money as they believe it makes an improvement. It would be a waste of money for said non believers as they don't hear the improvement - and they won't be buying them so it doesn't matter.
I think Dan kind of nails it - the law of diminishing returns happens a lot cheaper than the manufacturers would have us believe. So is £15/m the point where speaker cable effectively tops out? Well, that's for the listener to decide.
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,142
- 117
- 19,370
Dan Turner:
I'll add my perspective.
I think that cables can make a difference. From a rational perspective because different cables have different properties and characteristics and so it's not hard to believe that can influence a musical signal, and from an experience perspective, because I've experimented with different cables and some of them have made a difference.
I do think that not all differences amount to one being better than the other except in the ear of the beholder based on personal preferences and partnering kit, and I do think that the based on the prices of cables that professional musicians and recording engineers pay that the cables for the consumer 'hi-fi' market are way overpriced. Part of it is also that in the quest to eek the last ounce of (often theoretical) performance out of a cable and to create a unique selling point manufacturers are employing ever more exotic materials and production techniques, which lead to an extremely diminished return for the consumer.
2 experiences of mine to highlight the fact that a) differences do exist *sometimes* and b) expensive doesn't always mean better are:
1) traying out Atlas Hyper 2.0 (£15/m) as an upgrade from Van Damme (£4/m) - the Atlas had noticeably better mid-range detail and tighter bass
2) Comparing a £250 Chord Chorus 2 i/c to one hand made by some guy selling on ebay - he was using high quality materials, and the total cost was £30 - thought I'd give it a bash and I could not tell the slightest difference.
But which properties and characteristics make for a better sound? Resistance causes volume differences by attenuation, but that is of no great consequence in terms of sound quality. Capacitance, inductance how do they affect sound quality? It does not appear to matter what a cable is made with, its maker will claim better sound.
Please blind test the Atlas, Van Damme, Chord and ebay cables and post the results back.
I'll add my perspective.
I think that cables can make a difference. From a rational perspective because different cables have different properties and characteristics and so it's not hard to believe that can influence a musical signal, and from an experience perspective, because I've experimented with different cables and some of them have made a difference.
I do think that not all differences amount to one being better than the other except in the ear of the beholder based on personal preferences and partnering kit, and I do think that the based on the prices of cables that professional musicians and recording engineers pay that the cables for the consumer 'hi-fi' market are way overpriced. Part of it is also that in the quest to eek the last ounce of (often theoretical) performance out of a cable and to create a unique selling point manufacturers are employing ever more exotic materials and production techniques, which lead to an extremely diminished return for the consumer.
2 experiences of mine to highlight the fact that a) differences do exist *sometimes* and b) expensive doesn't always mean better are:
1) traying out Atlas Hyper 2.0 (£15/m) as an upgrade from Van Damme (£4/m) - the Atlas had noticeably better mid-range detail and tighter bass
2) Comparing a £250 Chord Chorus 2 i/c to one hand made by some guy selling on ebay - he was using high quality materials, and the total cost was £30 - thought I'd give it a bash and I could not tell the slightest difference.
But which properties and characteristics make for a better sound? Resistance causes volume differences by attenuation, but that is of no great consequence in terms of sound quality. Capacitance, inductance how do they affect sound quality? It does not appear to matter what a cable is made with, its maker will claim better sound.
Please blind test the Atlas, Van Damme, Chord and ebay cables and post the results back.
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.
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.
I think it's worth investing in good quality copper cable for speakers due to lower resistance with copper wire.
However, the current big con is copper coated aluminium wire - much of the budget speaker wire being sold on ebay and amazon being CCA. It looks great, and is described as high quality, multi-strand, etc, but not worth the budget price it often comes at.
If you've purchased what you thought was some bargain speaker wire, try scaping it with a blade, if it's genuine copper wire the colour won't change.
However, the current big con is copper coated aluminium wire - much of the budget speaker wire being sold on ebay and amazon being CCA. It looks great, and is described as high quality, multi-strand, etc, but not worth the budget price it often comes at.
If you've purchased what you thought was some bargain speaker wire, try scaping it with a blade, if it's genuine copper wire the colour won't change.
Its been a touch embarrassing reading through this. I shall have to learn to chill, and I apologise for being so abrupt.
As I am still unable to post new threads I thought this was ideal to mention that I have found some very interesting graphs on the internet done by cable sceptics :
3 tests on 3 different types of speaker cable into an 8 ohm load and out of the amplifier terminals
They were all pretty much exactly the same
Then they used a loudspeaker with a passive crossover and did the same : but measuring from the amplifier terminals and the louspeaker terminals. The results were different for each cable at both the amp end whilst at the loudspeaker end they were markedly different : easily over 5 db in some areas!
Finally they did the same experiment into a subwoofer with what I would describe as even greater differences.
This is well within the realms of being to hear differences.
Id post a link if the team are happy for me to do so?
As I am still unable to post new threads I thought this was ideal to mention that I have found some very interesting graphs on the internet done by cable sceptics :
3 tests on 3 different types of speaker cable into an 8 ohm load and out of the amplifier terminals
They were all pretty much exactly the same
Then they used a loudspeaker with a passive crossover and did the same : but measuring from the amplifier terminals and the louspeaker terminals. The results were different for each cable at both the amp end whilst at the loudspeaker end they were markedly different : easily over 5 db in some areas!
Finally they did the same experiment into a subwoofer with what I would describe as even greater differences.
This is well within the realms of being to hear differences.
Id post a link if the team are happy for me to do so?
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
AMAZING APPLE TV 4K 128 GB, ETHERNET (3RD GENERATION)!!!
- Started by Harish_Hyderabad_India
- Replies: 9
-
-
-
-
Bi-wiring my Cyrus 8.2 amplifier to my PMC Twenty.21 bookshelf speakers- Started by lucioso
- Replies: 25
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram