Cable Con?

[bigboss]

There are no restrictions on the links you post anymore, unless they contain profanities or abuse to WHF staff.

So yes,you can post it.

 

[aliEnRIK]

There are no restrictions on the links you post anymore, unless they contain profanities or abuse to WHF staff.

So yes,you can post it.

Cheers

Linky
It would take something quite a bit more accurate to measure, but I would love to see the differences between various passages of music

 

[MajorFubar]

I've not read all through this old thread again but I'm not sure if anyone with half a brain has said that different cables can't effect the sound of analogue audio. That's implying all cables have the same electrical properties. But I think what most people agree is that if you take into consideration all the known variables, as acknowleged by 150+ year old physics theorems, there's no reason why two cables which meet the same electrical specification, one costing £3.69* a meter and the other costing a magnutude of 10x or 100x more, are going to sound different. The alleged con is not that all analogue cables sound the same. The alleged con is that more expensive cables which to all intents and purposes measure the same as cheaper ones (and hence would pass the test you've linked to) still sound better because they're expensive and have been breathed on by some pseudo-scientist with cotton gloves and a white coat.

*random figure pulled out of thin air but you catch my drift.

 

[aliEnRIK]

I've not read all through this old thread again but I'm not sure if anyone with half a brain has said that different cables can't effect the sound of analogue audio. That's implying all cables have the same electrical properties. But I think what most people agree is that if you take into consideration all the known variables, as acknowleged by 150+ year old physics theorems, there's no reason why two cables which meet the same electrical specification, one costing £3.69* a meter and the other costing a magnutude of 10x or 100x more, are going to sound different. The alleged con is not that all analogue cables sound the same. The alleged con is that more expensive cables which to all intents and purposes measure the same as cheaper ones (and hence would pass the test you've linked to) still sound better because they're expensive and have been breathed on by some pseudo-scientist with cotton gloves and a white coat.

*random figure pulled out of thin air but you catch my drift.

The point of the post was also to show that they did in fact measure pretty much exactly the same 'until' they were connected to the loudspeaker.
I will quote from it : "They were all very much sceptics with regard to significant loudspeaker cable differences - at least between adequately rated cables'
Which suggests to me that the cables measured quite similarly, well within the realms of what sceptics believe is a perfectly adequate cable in that one will perform pretty much the same as another (And looked to be exactly that from the 1st test).
But tests seem to show that one cable 'may' subjectively sound better in one system but worse in another. To say the expensive cables dont subjectively sound any better isnt particularly scientific, but measurements, as I have provided, can at least show there are measureable differences. However, as you say, if two cables are 'exactly' the same in every concievable way, then theyre exactly the same regardless of cost. I will point out something you wrote though : all 'known' variables. I know from reading science magazines that scientists are finding more and more out about life, the universe and everything in it every day. (And I am talking about far wider reaching subjects than what differences a cable makes in a hifi system) : Imagine looking at a cable at the atomic level to see what the electrons are really doing? The possibilities of quantum cables? We are a very very long way off the 'perfect; hifi system (One that recreates sound perfectly), but as the years roll by, we get ever closer.
Just because people haven't accurately measured something, or measured something the correct way, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Can you please also apologise for the 'half a brain' comment? Im an aerospace engineer with quite a breadth of far reaching information.
Im not pointing fingers or saying 'this is right or this is wrong', im presenting measured facts to people.
I am not trying to start an argument, just healthy debate. Name calling is a pretty poor start if I am honest.

 

[Anderson]

You can be employed in any profession you like doesn't mean in the context of the discussion you're protected from being called an idiot.

Audiophooles are always chasing that sweet foo.

 

[aliEnRIK]

You can be employed in any profession you like doesn't mean in the context of the discussion you're protected from being called an idiot.

Time will tell who the fool is
Do you refute the findings of the post I linked to?

 

[aliEnRIK]

"In science, ideas can never be completely proved or completely disproved. Instead, science accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, and may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives."

 

[Anderson]

I'll humour you.

Tell us how their findings relate to audiobility?

 

[aliEnRIK]

Tell us how their findings relate to audiobility?

Anything over 3db in change from one cable to another will definitely be audible to anyone who has 'adequate working' ears. Its believed some 'golden eared' people can even tell 0.1db changes as everyones ears are different

I think you may have accidentally missed my question though : do you refute their measurements?

 

[Anderson]

Tell us how their findings relate to audiobility?

Anything over 3db in change from one cable to another will definitely be audible to anyone who has 'adequate working' ears. Its believed some 'golden eared' people can even tell 0.1db changes as everyones ears are different

I think you may have accidentally missed my question though : do you refute their measurements?

Sorry I did miss that.

No I don't dispute the measurements, I'm disputing the relevance. Are you saying that those with "golden ears" are able to discern 3db difference of intermodulation distortion, that's what they're measuring btw.

For further reading you may wish to read the original authers paper..

 

[aliEnRIK]

Sorry I did miss that.

No I don't dispute the measurements, I'm disputing the relevance. Are you saying that those with "golden ears" are able to discern 3db difference of intermodulation distortion, that's what they're measuring btw.

For further reading you may wish to read the original authers paper..

Please do explain in as much detail as you can. I am fascinated by what you have to say

 

[Anderson]

I'll just be trying to paraphrase a 20 something page report.

 

[chebby]

I'll just be trying to paraphrase a 20 something page report.

Nevertheless, you should complete any homework you've been given.

 

[Overdose]

Whilst the article is accurate, the implications are that sonic differences if they exist, are due to deficiencies in the design of the equipment in question. In particular, esoteric equipment displays a much greater degree of susceptibility to the vagaries of mismatched equipment and substandard tolerances employed in such designs.

In addition, the examples used, particulary regarding the impedences of the cables are rather extreme, with figures of around a tenth of that quoted being more typical.

 

[MajorFubar]

The point of the post was also to show that they did in fact measure pretty much exactly the same 'until' they were connected to the loudspeaker.

So they did measure differently then, once an appropriate load had been introduced. I'm pretty sure that doesn't disprove my point, which is two cables that measure the same won't sound different just because one of them is £3.69 from Maplins and the other is £3690 from the website of a pseudo-scientist in a white lab-coat and cotton gloves

 

[Anderson]

I'll just be trying to paraphrase a 20 something page report.

Nevertheless, you should complete any homework you've been given.

Yes sir, sorry sir!

 

[aliEnRIK]

So they did measure differently then, once an appropriate load had been introduced. I'm pretty sure that doesn't disprove my point, which is two cables that measure the same won't sound different just because one of them is £3.69 from Maplins and the other is £3690 from the website of a pseudo-scientist in a white lab-coat and cotton gloves

Yes

I think everyone can agree that if two cables are 'exactly' the same in every conceivable way (Why am I having to repeat myself?), they will perform exactly the same (Within the parameters of physics)
Well done you. I can see now why you made the 'half a brain' claim

 

[aliEnRIK]

Whilst the article is accurate, the implications are that sonic differences if they exist, are due to deficiencies in the design of the equipment in question. In particular, esoteric equipment displays a much greater degree of susceptibility to the vagaries of mismatched equipment and substandard tolerances employed in such designs.

In addition, the examples used, particulary regarding the impedences of the cables are rather extreme, with figures of around a tenth of that quoted being more typical.

Can you please list the 'esoteric' equipment you refer to? Also the imped'A'nces you quote

 

[aliEnRIK]

I'll just be trying to paraphrase a 20 something page report.

It would also be paraphrasing a report one suspects you haven't actually read

 

[Overdose]

Whilst the article is accurate, the implications are that sonic differences if they exist, are due to deficiencies in the design of the equipment in question. In particular, esoteric equipment displays a much greater degree of susceptibility to the vagaries of mismatched equipment and substandard tolerances employed in such designs.

In addition, the examples used, particulary regarding the impedences of the cables are rather extreme, with figures of around a tenth of that quoted being more typical.

Can you please list the 'esoteric' equipment you refer to? Also the imped'A'nces you quote

These are the words of your stated link. If you read para 6.8.2 of part four, you will see the statement. Indeed, the article implies that in general, that it is only the equipment that is of poor design that suffers such inconsistent performance. More carefully produced designs and in particular, those from companies employing good quality control and good design principles, do not suffer from this susceptibility to the vagaries of other substandard equipment.

So yes, if an amplifier of marginal performance and stability is used with a speaker of difficult loading and connected with an 'exotic' cable of exceptionally high impedence or capacitance, variations between it and equipment of similarly dubious design may well exhibit different characteristics that can be heard, but these are extremes and certainly to my mind, not desireable situations.

For the figures used in the cable impedence calculations a figure of 1 ohm is used as an example. 1 ohm is a particularly high impedence figure for a speaker cable and unlikely to be encountered in a typical home environment, for it would need to be particularly long and/or thin.

 

[aliEnRIK]

Whilst the article is accurate, the implications are that sonic differences if they exist, are due to deficiencies in the design of the equipment in question. In particular, esoteric equipment displays a much greater degree of susceptibility to the vagaries of mismatched equipment and substandard tolerances employed in such designs.

In addition, the examples used, particulary regarding the impedences of the cables are rather extreme, with figures of around a tenth of that quoted being more typical.

Can you please list the 'esoteric' equipment you refer to? Also the imped'A'nces you quote

These are the words of your stated link. If you read para 6.8.2 of part four, you will see the statement. Indeed, the article implies that in general, that it is only the equipment that is of poor design that suffers such inconsistent performance. More carefully produced designs and in particular, those from companies employing good quality control and good design principles, do not suffer from this susceptibility to the vagaries of other substandard equipment.

So yes, if an amplifier of marginal performance and stability is used with a speaker of difficult loading and connected with an 'exotic' cable of exceptionally high impedence or capacitance, variations between it and equipment of similarly dubious design may well exhibit different characteristics that can be heard, but these are extremes and certainly to my mind, not desireable situations.

For the figures used in the cable impedence calculations a figure of 1 ohm is used as an example. 1 ohm is a particularly high impedence figure for a speaker cable and unlikely to be encountered in a typical home environment, for it would need to be particularly long and/or thin.

Well Fubar has read the official paper. I cant wait to hear what actual equipment and cables were used in the experiment. I think its also worth noting in Part 4 that whilst it is well known certain equipment is highly suspect to minute changes, it doesnt mean a 'cable is a cable'.

 

[Overdose]

Whilst the article is accurate, the implications are that sonic differences if they exist, are due to deficiencies in the design of the equipment in question. In particular, esoteric equipment displays a much greater degree of susceptibility to the vagaries of mismatched equipment and substandard tolerances employed in such designs.

In addition, the examples used, particulary regarding the impedences of the cables are rather extreme, with figures of around a tenth of that quoted being more typical.

Can you please list the 'esoteric' equipment you refer to? Also the imped'A'nces you quote

These are the words of your stated link. If you read para 6.8.2 of part four, you will see the statement. Indeed, the article implies that in general, that it is only the equipment that is of poor design that suffers such inconsistent performance. More carefully produced designs and in particular, those from companies employing good quality control and good design principles, do not suffer from this susceptibility to the vagaries of other substandard equipment.

So yes, if an amplifier of marginal performance and stability is used with a speaker of difficult loading and connected with an 'exotic' cable of exceptionally high impedence or capacitance, variations between it and equipment of similarly dubious design may well exhibit different characteristics that can be heard, but these are extremes and certainly to my mind, not desireable situations.

For the figures used in the cable impedence calculations a figure of 1 ohm is used as an example. 1 ohm is a particularly high impedence figure for a speaker cable and unlikely to be encountered in a typical home environment, for it would need to be particularly long and/or thin.

Well Fubar has read the offical paper. I cant wait to hear what actual equipment and cables were used in the experiment. I think its also worth noting in Part 4 that whilst it is well known certain equipment is highly suspect to minute changes, it doesnt mean a 'cable is a cable'.

Having read more of those reports/articles, I am not entirely convinced that the author is entirely unbiased in his views. However, regarding cables being cables, it is quite obvious that various cable designs abound, but that is not to say that they are suitable for audio use, even if the marketing blurb that precedes them says that they are designed specifically for it and that they excel. Sometimes nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[MajorFubar]

So they did measure differently then, once an appropriate load had been introduced. I'm pretty sure that doesn't disprove my point, which is two cables that measure the same won't sound different just because one of them is £3.69 from Maplins and the other is £3690 from the website of a pseudo-scientist in a white lab-coat and cotton gloves

Yes

I think everyone can agree that if two cables are 'exactly' the same in every conceivable way (Why am I having to repeat myself?), they will perform exactly the same (Within the parameters of physics)Well done you. I can see now why you made the 'half a brain' claim

Ignoring your sarcastic remark, threads like this commonly reach 10+ pages because there are people out there who cannot grasp that concept.

 

[CnoEvil]

Me, I like a good inquisition (whether expected, or unexpected)......anyone here Spanish? *crazy*

 

[aliEnRIK]

Ignoring your sarcastic remark, threads like this commonly reach 10+ pages because there are people out there who cannot grasp that concept.

I dont know how many times you want me to say this before it sinks in, but (AGAIN!?!) if two cables are 'exactly' the same then theyre the same cable regardless of price differences.
Do you now have a grasp of this concept?