Nice mains cables

[Jota180]

Trev, Native,

I am not trying to say that you are wrong about cables, just that the "recording studios don't use them so why would you" argument sucks badly. You can drive a bus through it guys.

When you put forward science as your anti-cable reasoning it is much more compelling.

Don't you think that's what engineers whose livelihood is based on this do? That also goes for mains power leads.

No. I think they mix/master recordings. I don't think that they give two hoots about the cables they use as long as they are robust. I doubt it is even a consideration.

Utter nonsense. Recording engineers are in the business of capturing audio at the highest possible quality and if, as you suggest, cables make enough of a difference in quality of the transmission of the audio (and remember these studio's are using much longer runs than your home HIFI) then of course they'd be interested in more expensive cabling (and remember, another arguement given is they're better built too!). The same arguement goes for the power leads.

 

[Jota180]

I still don't have the foggiest idea as to the relevance of what recording studios use in the context of home audio playback.

That's why you're not a qualifed audio engineer. The relevance is if there was evidence that cables made a significant difference to the audio quality, recording engineers would all use more than the basic cables. Since they don't, unless handed the stuff free gratis, we can say cables inluence on audio quality is not worth bothering about. If it was worth bothering about, every recording engineer would be using it.

 

[andyjm]

I still don't have the foggiest idea as to the relevance of what recording studios use in the context of home audio playback.

That's why you're not a qualifed audio engineer. The relevance is if there was evidence that cables made a significant difference to the audio quality, recording engineers would all use more than the basic cables. Since they don't, unless handed the stuff free gratis, we can say cables inluence on audio quality is not worth bothering about. If it was worth bothering about, every recording engineer would be using it.

Just to be clear, of course cables make a difference. A cable has to be suitable for the job. Coax is coax for a reason, twisted pair is twisted pair for a reason and so on. So good luck using mains cable as a downlead for your satellite dish. It simply won't work.

What won't make a difference is swapping one perfectly good, adequately specified cable for another perfectly good adequately specified cable.

 

[Gazzip]

Trev, Native,

I am not trying to say that you are wrong about cables, just that the "recording studios don't use them so why would you" argument sucks badly. You can drive a bus through it guys.

When you put forward science as your anti-cable reasoning it is much more compelling.

Don't you think that's what engineers whose livelihood is based on this do? That also goes for mains power leads.

No. I think they mix/master recordings. I don't think that they give two hoots about the cables they use as long as they are robust. I doubt it is even a consideration.

Utter nonsense. Recording engineers are in the business of capturing audio at the highest possible quality and if, as you suggest, cables make enough of a difference in quality of the transmission of the audio (and remember these studio's are using much longer runs than your home HIFI) then of course they'd be interested in more expensive cabling (and remember, another arguement given is they're better built too!). The same arguement goes for the power leads.

I never said cables improve sound quality. My original point, which has been twisted, was that what "somebody else uses" is utterly irrelevant to this debate, however "in the know" those people might be. This information is not scientific. It is not substantive. It does not prove the point. This is ESPECIALLY so because some studios DO use exotic cables so the evidence is actually split.

I don't mind the use of scientific facts in proving that all properly terminated mains cables are all the same. I actually happen to think the science is correct on that point. What I mind is the blindly ignorant peddling of "evidence" that is actually suppositional piffle!

 

[Covenanter]

Trev, Native,

I am not trying to say that you are wrong about cables, just that the "recording studios don't use them so why would you" argument sucks badly. You can drive a bus through it guys.

When you put forward science as your anti-cable reasoning it is much more compelling.

Don't you think that's what engineers whose livelihood is based on this do? That also goes for mains power leads.

No. I think they mix/master recordings. I don't think that they give two hoots about the cables they use as long as they are robust. I doubt it is even a consideration.

Utter nonsense. Recording engineers are in the business of capturing audio at the highest possible quality and if, as you suggest, cables make enough of a difference in quality of the transmission of the audio (and remember these studio's are using much longer runs than your home HIFI) then of course they'd be interested in more expensive cabling (and remember, another arguement given is they're better built too!). The same arguement goes for the power leads.

I never said cables improve sound quality. My original point, which has been twisted, was that what "somebody else uses" is utterly irrelevant to this debate, however "in the know" those people might be. This information is not scientific. It is not substantive. It does not prove the point. This is ESPECIALLY so because some studios DO use exotic cables so the evidence is actually split.

I don't mind the use of scientific facts in proving that all properly terminated mains cables are all the same. I actually happen to think the science is correct on that point. What I mind is the blindly ignorant peddling of "evidence" that is actually suppositional piffle!

It's hard to argue with that.

Chris

 

[andyjm]

I never said cables improve sound quality. My original point, which has been twisted, was that what "somebody else uses" is utterly irrelevant to this debate, however "in the know" those people might be. This information is not scientific. It is not substantive. It does not prove the point. This is ESPECIALLY so because some studios DO use exotic cables so the evidence is actually split.

I don't mind the use of scientific facts in proving that all properly terminated mains cables are all the same. I actually happen to think the science is correct on that point. What I mind is the blindly ignorant peddling of "evidence" that is actually suppositional piffle!

At the risk of taking this thread entirely off topic, the scientific method would encompass what people 'in the know' do.

The appropriate 'scientific method' approach would be to suggest a theory, for example, 'properly specified cables are indistiguishable from each other' and then use this to predict users behavoir.

It is very reasonable to examine the choices of individuals who use cables to make a living as they are likely to be discerning users, have been exposed to many different cables types, and have most to gain by improving the quality of their product. In all but a few exceptional cases, it would seem that the behavoir of the majority of professional users supports the theory that cables are indistinguishable.

What's not scientific about that?

 

[drummerman]

That's why you're not a qualifed audio engineer. The relevance is if there was evidence that cables made a significant difference to the audio quality, recording engineers would all use more than the basic cables. Since they don't, unless handed the stuff free gratis, we can say cables inluence on audio quality is not worth bothering about. If it was worth bothering about, every recording engineer would be using it.

I don't think many would say cables make a 'significant' difference.

However, they make enough difference for many to warrant an outlay comensurate to the worth of their systems.

Just because some studios use VanDamned and similar cheap stuff doesn't mean others don't see the point in investing in better ones, some examples of which have been mentioned earlier in this glorious thread of mine

Furthermore, as I have said before, many studios nowadays just seem to be factories churning out compressed one day wonder stuff as quickly as they can ... probably just to survive in what seems to be an increasingly volatile environment. They probably have absolutely no audiophile pretentions whatsoever.

I do agree with Gazzip on the question why Studio's even come into this conversation ... ever noticed that Hairdressers often have the worst hair cuts ...?

I think the 10% rule on cables and accessories is a good one. By any means, spend more if you feel you have to or less if you get away with it but don't neglect that final small contributor to your systems sound.

 

[drummerman]

Guys, are you all ok out there?

It's been almost twenty minutes an no-one has disagreed with me yet.

Starting to worry now

 

[Gazzip]

Guys, are you all ok out there?

It's been almost twenty minutes an no-one has disagreed with me yet.

Starting to worry now

No you aren't.

 

[Vladimir]

I don't think many would say cables make a 'significant' difference.

However, they make enough difference for many to warrant an outlay comensurate to the worth of their systems.

 

[andyjm]

Guys, are you all ok out there?

It's been almost twenty minutes an no-one has disagreed with me yet.

Starting to worry now

There is so much to disagree with, the problem is knowing just where to start....

 

[cheeseboy]

I don't think many would say cables make a 'significant' difference.

apart from all those people who say it made a night and day difference of course

However, they make enough difference for many to warrant an outlay comensurate to the worth of their systems.

Enough *percieved* difference, not just enough. (see the entire threads about if you want to make sure a cable is actually making a difference then blind testing blah blah etc)

Just because some studios use VanDamned and similar cheap stuff doesn't mean others don't see the point in investing in better ones, some examples of which have been mentioned earlier in this glorious thread of mine

It depends on if they purchased the cables themselves, or the cable manufacturers paid to have them installed in order to use them for advertising. This makes a big difference.

Furthermore, as I have said before, many studios nowadays just seem to be factories churning out compressed one day wonder stuff as quickly as they can

sorry, that's wrong. There's actually not that many studios that do that. Studios can be so different that you can't just say that. Think about all the different stuff that gets recorded in studios.

They probably have absolutely no audiophile pretentions whatsoever.

no, because most studio engineers would laugh at the term audiophile, as already said. They really couldn't care less about the person that spends thousands on a power cable. Why should they, it's such a small minority of people, and the irony being, those people are the ones trying to create what the engineer is hearing, yet refuse to listen to what that person says about how they can achieve that.

There's this incredibly odd arrogance and hubris Audiphiles seem to have in that no matter what is established, what science is written, what people have been doing for however many years, whatever experiments have been carried out that somehow, the audiophiles suddenly seem to know better. You only have to look at what's currently happening with the whole digital side of things to see that. Suddenly, somebody who listens to a bit of Vivaldi in his armchair seems to think he knows more then the entire computer industry does on what makes a computer work.

I do agree with Gazzip on the question why Studio's even come into this conversation

why wouldn't it. Audiophiles wouldn't have much to do without the studios would they? Unless they get off on listening to test tones.

I think the 10% rule on cables and accessories is a good one.

I don't. No point in spending 10% for say a HDMI cable is there?

By any means, spend more if you feel you have to or less if you get away with it but don't neglect that final small contributor to your systems sound.

And just to confuse you, I agree with this bit

 

[Jota180]

Trev, Native,

I am not trying to say that you are wrong about cables, just that the "recording studios don't use them so why would you" argument sucks badly. You can drive a bus through it guys.

When you put forward science as your anti-cable reasoning it is much more compelling.

Don't you think that's what engineers whose livelihood is based on this do? That also goes for mains power leads.

No. I think they mix/master recordings. I don't think that they give two hoots about the cables they use as long as they are robust. I doubt it is even a consideration.

Utter nonsense. Recording engineers are in the business of capturing audio at the highest possible quality and if, as you suggest, cables make enough of a difference in quality of the transmission of the audio (and remember these studio's are using much longer runs than your home HIFI) then of course they'd be interested in more expensive cabling (and remember, another arguement given is they're better built too!). The same arguement goes for the power leads.

I never said cables improve sound quality. My original point, which has been twisted, was that what "somebody else uses" is utterly irrelevant to this debate, however "in the know" those people might be. This information is not scientific. It is not substantive. It does not prove the point. This is ESPECIALLY so because some studios DO use exotic cables so the evidence is actually split.

I don't mind the use of scientific facts in proving that all properly terminated mains cables are all the same. I actually happen to think the science is correct on that point. What I mind is the blindly ignorant peddling of "evidence" that is actually suppositional piffle!

So what are you saying then? Rattling on about expensive cables that don't improve quality over 'normal' cables?

Some studio's use exotic cables gratis with a quid pro quo to adding their names to the advertising of these cables. They know these cables wont make the audio quality worse so it's money for old rope.