Cable questions

[SteveR750]

C'mon guys, especially TrevC

Even if you don't believe in cables making any difference, surely you want something looking half decent hanging out of your rack, no?

I mean, do you ever spend more than £5.00 on a primark shirt perhaps if you go to a dinner party?

Perhaps not

I can easily blow £50 on a night out with the boys, more on occasions. Admittedly these are a little rarer these days. So spending a hundred quid on a decent set of leads which are potentially used for years and which won't leave that nagging feeling ... 'what if' ... will make you feel better, no?

Perhaps you are just very tight?

I am preparing the next thread, Mains cables.

I'm beginning to suspect that you are a regular contributor to screwdriver weekly.

I swear my router has burnt in, my Internet speed is way faster than it was the first couple of days!

 

[Gazzip]

After nine years, you know what I realise? Ignorance is bliss.

How else would poultry farms operate? Just peck, peck, peck, and worry not.

Amen to that brother.

Although chickens are not as innocent as they look. Never forget that.

 

[cheeseboy]

I swear my router has burnt in, my Internet speed is way faster than it was the first couple of days!

ac

actually that's quite normal, it's the connection between the modem and the exchange working out what the best speeds are. Usually it will start safe, then disconnect and try reconnecting at a higher speed until it settles out. Usually happens if you either have a new connection or new new modem put on the line, or if they upgrade at the exchange end.

 

[SteveR750]

After nine years, you know what I realise? Ignorance is bliss.

How else would poultry farms operate? Just peck, peck, peck, and worry not.

Amen to that brother.

Although chickens are not as innocent as they look. Never forget that.

Especially that Evil Chicken of Bristol

 

[Gazzip]

After nine years, you know what I realise? Ignorance is bliss.

How else would poultry farms operate? Just peck, peck, peck, and worry not.

Amen to that brother.

Although chickens are not as innocent as they look. Never forget that.

Especially that Evil Chicken of Bristol

Steve knows.

 

[ifor]

And there was also this "test" from 6 years ago: http://www.audio-forums.com/threads/the-cable-test-listen-and-decide.105...

The big reveal is on page 3. It's entertaining reading.

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

 

[cheeseboy]

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

why would they be reduced? Surely if there is a difference, it should be obvious for people to hear, or at least that what's people keep telling me....

 

[ifor]

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

why would they be reduced? Surely if there is a difference, it should be obvious for people to hear, or at least that what's people keep telling me....

Imagine four very slightly different coloured window panes, which some claim are all the same and others claim they are slightly or very different, when looked through. Those four window panes are analogous to the four tested interconnects. Now take photographs of the four, but view the photographs through yet a fifth slightly different window pane. This fifth window pane is my/your system including my/your interconnects, source, amplification etc. Too many variables have been introduced; we are not now looking through just the original four windows or just listening for differences between the original four interconnects.

 

[TrevC]

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

why would they be reduced? Surely if there is a difference, it should be obvious for people to hear, or at least that what's people keep telling me....

Imagine four very slightly different coloured window panes, which some claim are all the same and others claim they are slightly or very different, when looked through. Those four window panes are analogous to the four tested interconnects. Now take photographs of the four, but view the photographs through yet a fifth slightly different window pane. This fifth window pane is my/your system including my/your interconnects, source, amplification etc. Too many variables have been introduced; we are not now looking through just the original four windows or just listening for differences between the original four interconnects.

Imagine that a hugely expensive pair of interconnects sound better and, backed with a very positive WHF review, voila they do. Job done, cable company and you happy. But in reality there is no difference, it's only a bit of wire after all. It can't add anything that any other bit of wire cannot.

Has a deception taken place, or is it always buyer beware?

There was a story a while back about a 'high end' company that used the innards of a budget CD player inside its top of the range high end product. It got excellent reviews until one day someone looked inside and twigged. I can't remember what make it was, something like Goldmund I believe. When people that bought the player discovered it they were angry.

Was their anger justified? Had a deception taken place, or is it always buyer beware?

 

[ifor]

Yes, Trevor. We all know your view/opinion/facts; how could we not? But, your comments in your previous post have absolutely no relevance whatsover to the posts that you quote! You're now boring me even when you're not responding directly to something.

 

[radiorog]

As far as I can see it, cables do sound different, by varying margins. A certain two cables may be indestguishable from each other when another two may be correctly told apart from each other whilst blindfolded. To me, the people who say that cables don't make a difference are like people who say all fruit taste the same because they have sampled oranges and tangerines. I used to think they were just trolls, I genuinely thought this for a long time, but now I think the fruit analogy fits. I would advise trying some different fruit, you might like it ;-)

Sorry, no disrespect to you guys (cables sound the same club) and I'm not trolling, but isn't it also about time some of us bought some of these £1 copper cables that people have mentioned, and report back our findings?

I already have. Well £1.49 interconnects anyway. And £1.10 per mono metre speaker cable.

Not that I'm in the cables sound the same club. I'm in the club where I suggest starting with good but inexpensive cables and then trying whatever you fancy and making your own mind up.

And there was also this "test" from 6 years ago: http://www.audio-forums.com/threads/the-cable-test-listen-and-decide.105...

The big reveal is on page 3. It's entertaining reading.

Thanks for the link...I will try to make it to page three. I have read most of page one and have come to my own conclusion the test is totally flawed and uncontrolled, and there completely dismissable. For one it was done in 2004 when acd's were surely not as revealing or accurate as they should be when it comes to distinguishing the finer details in HiFi like cable choice. Couldn't that be the weakest link in the chain, and not the cables?

 

[TrevC]

Yes, Trevor. We all know your view/opinion/facts; how could we not? But, your comments in your previous post have absolutely no relevance whatsover to the posts that you quote! You're now boring me even when you're not responding directly to something.

Mine was more interesting than yours, and it did follow on with the word 'imagine'. What was that all window colour stuff about?

 

[Vladimir]

"Say hello to my LIDL friends!"

Good one! *dance4*

 

[pauln]

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

why would they be reduced? Surely if there is a difference, it should be obvious for people to hear, or at least that what's people keep telling me....

Imagine four very slightly different coloured window panes, which some claim are all the same and others claim they are slightly or very different, when looked through. Those four window panes are analogous to the four tested interconnects. Now take photographs of the four, but view the photographs through yet a fifth slightly different window pane. This fifth window pane is my/your system including my/your interconnects, source, amplification etc. Too many variables have been introduced; we are not now looking through just the original four windows or just listening for differences between the original four interconnects.

First, the "photographs" were all taken by the same "camera" so that's not a variable.

Second, the "fifth window" is the same (for each listener) because presumably they listened to all four files on the same system so that's not a variable either.

Third, admittedly, listening to a recording of another system might muddy it a bit but are you really claiming that the photo/window thing obscured the detail so much that 68% could not distinguish between the expensive cables and the one with the screw, the key and the aluminium foil as part of the circuit? In fact, of those who expressed a favourite, the cable that got the most votes was that one! Outstanding!

 

[radiorog]

You missed one...

Oh yes. CRT TVs are very important.

[/quote

"Say hello to my LIDL friends!"

(A comment from someone on my Facebook after I stole and posted it) ;-)

 

[ifor]

Third, admittedly, listening to a recording of another system might muddy it a bit ...

If we're only talking about small, if any, differences in the first place, I would suggest that muddying it a bit makes the whole thing completely flawed.

 

[pauln]

Third, admittedly, listening to a recording of another system might muddy it a bit ...

If we're only talking about small, if any, differences in the first place, I would suggest that muddying it a bit makes the whole thing completely flawed.

Are you saying that you believe there would be only small, if any, differences between the homemade comedy wire and the Chord?

What about the rest of my post and your flawed analogy?

 

[ifor]

I make no comment at all about whether or not I expect there to be any audible differences. I don't have an opinion on this. The only comment I make is about the methodology being flawed. I'm not sure why you think my analogy is flawed.

 

[pauln]

I make no comment at all about whether or not I expect there to be any audible differences. I don't have an opinion on this. The only comment I make is about the methodology being flawed. I'm not sure why you think my analogy is flawed.

I thought I'd explained it in my post - commenting on your assertion that there were too many variables. Oh well, it doesn't matter.

 

[lindsayt]

And there was also this "test" from 6 years ago: http://www.audio-forums.com/threads/the-cable-test-listen-and-decide.105...

The big reveal is on page 3. It's entertaining reading.

I don't think anyone can take that seriously. Listening to a "recording of interconnects" through different interconnects! If there were any differences originally they're going to be substantially reduced when played back through a participant's kit.

I think that's a very valid point you've made there ifor.

Anyone thinking that digital recordings, like the ones made by RobHolt in that thread, offer a perfect recreation of the original will be less inclined to agree with you.

However, for the princely sum of £1.49, plus a few minutes rummaging around for bits of junk, anyone can create their own version of the RobHolt blind test winning interconnect.

It's the sort of thing where instead of spending time debating it on an online forum, you might as well go ahead and do your own test to see what happens when you try it in your system, with your ears, with your test tracks.

 

[SteveR750]

It's the sort of thing where instead of spending time debating it on an online forum, you might as well go ahead and do your own test to see what happens when you try it in your system, with your ears, with your test tracks.

Except that your ears / brain will be lying to you, doncha know?

 

[Anderson]

I make no comment at all about whether or not I expect there to be any audible differences. I don't have an opinion on this. The only comment I make is about the methodology being flawed. I'm not sure why you think my analogy is flawed.

You wouldn't say that down the bar with my hard mates!

 

[pravstar]

Thanks for mentioning my post, I feel it is important for me to contribute on here.

I agree fully that the post just deviated well away from what was a pretty standard question, maybe the budget allocated upset a few people. But you are right that posts should be relevant to the thread. A new thread could have easily been opened up, and I would not have had to sift through a lot of repetititive points in my post.

The constant point being raised were that you can use cheap cable to compete against some of the more expensive brands. It was put across so badly on my post that it seemed insignificant, yep it was a valid point, but not to a true audiophile as many are on here.

However as my system is on the low midrange, probably equivalent to one box hifi systems in comparison to some of the systems peole have on here, it was something I looked into, van damme being an example.

But I agree that posts should not become too diluted, it all gets wishywashy and uncomfortable to read

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Surprised and disappointed Drummerman.. Starting two threads knowing the result and not really contributing..I had thought better of your suggestions, advice & comments

 

[lindsayt]

To be fair to Drummerman, I think he made his point very well in the first post of this thread and therefore has no need to elaborate if he doesn't want to.