The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology

[Teresa]

...I thought we had all decided that we would agree that well made cables (Example: Blue Jeans Cables) were better that the junk that comes in the amplifier box.

 

I also thought we all agreed that the very expensive cables were nothing more than snake oil.

 

I agree with you.

 

But would like to add I hear clear differences with different gauges of speaker cable, for example 20 gauge speaker cable is thin sounding and bass shy. Going to 14 gauge restores some of the bass energy and as the cable gets thicker and thicker the bass becomes more powerful and fuller, in my system 10 gauge works the best for me. I personally don't believe there is much difference between brands of the same gauge made from at least 99.99% copper unless it is possibly in the insulation, I could be wrong but I have really only have heard differences between gauges.

 

With interconnects while I have not tried Blue Jeans Cable, the similarly priced entry level Monster Cable interconnects sound much better to me than the cheap cables that come with some components. For me the law of diminishing returns comes fairly early, however I would never try to claim other people don't hear differences in their system, or demand proof. It may be selfish but I am only concerned in what makes music sound the most enjoyable to me with my audio/video system. Other people are free to discover what works best from them, I make no judgements.

 

Also I can't imagine how part costs could justify the retail prices of megabuck interconnects and speaker cables. It doesn't make sense to me, so I would have to agree that very expensive cables were nothing more than snake oil. But it is not my position to judge other music lovers spending habits or what they think sounds the best.

[Teresa]

...What part(s) of "blind A/B testing" do you feel introduce the stress?.

 

Three "human" things ensure why blind A/B testing fails to reveal statistical differences between nearly everything:

 

• Cognitive bias - your brain will fill in missing information thus making both samples sound the same on repeated listening.
  
• Listener Fatigue - switch back and forth too often and both music files will sound like crap.
  
• Accumulative effects are hidden - Accumulative effects on sound quality increase over time and remain hidden when switching back and forth between two music files, especially things such as strident, dry, shrill or cold sound.

 

...From what I read here and elsewhere, there is general agreement that we "listen with our ears" and should trust them. If we have to know which choice we are listening to in order to have a stress-free and enjoyable experience, we are no longer "trusting our ears".

 

The main reason why sighted A/B testing usually doesn't work is conformation bias. Some mental A/B ing has to be done when shopping for new equipment, but it is long term listening when I get the thing home that reveals the differences for me and if I should keep it or return it for trade or refund. That is why it is important for me to get a 30 day satisfaction money back guarantee on any thing audio related I purchase.

 

Thus, in my opinion A/B testing either sighted or blind does not work. Long term listening over several weeks is the only way I have ever discovered to reveal important differences in the sound of music.

 

...Knowing that one's results will be scrutinised is easily dealt with as well - don't tell anyone. It's your business which you prefer, not anyone else's.

 

I agree with this, many perhaps share more than they should.

 

Sadly, we fail on at least 2 counts. We listen sighted, and we publicise our choices. And we describe our choices purely in terms of our heard impressions. We should also be including our sighted impressions - for example, the pleasure added by the glow of tubes (versus solid state), or basking in the knowledge that the braided shield cables we prefer are much more solid and professional looking than the cheap plastic ones they replaced.

 

I do often read other music lovers listening impressions, but I understand it is their listening impression and mine very well might be different.

 

Thus I cannot trust either the sighted or the blind listener, I have to hear the damn thing in my room, in my system, using my ear/brain system, with either a long term loan or a 30 day money back guarantee.

 

Personally, I try to hide my cables, but I don't own really expensive ones.

[Teresa]

On 4/11/2020 at 4:51 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

I wonder why @DRB100 hasn't made any subjective comments in the DRB100's MIT Cable Thread you created for him in the subjective area. Or why he wants to make subjective comments in the objective area. It makes no sense to me.

[Teresa]

9 hours ago, gmgraves said:

...But I have the distinct impression that most audiophiles who buy expensive cables consider any change in sound from what they had before the new cables to be an improvement. Why do I say that? Two reasons. 1) I‘ve never heard ANYONE complain that their new “boutique” cables were a mistake, and their system SQ has suffered because of them. 2) This attitude:  “I just spent $800 for a 2 meter pair of interconnects. They damn better be an improvement over what I have now!”

 

Could it be people tend to post their successes not their failures?

 

Also. if one says bad things about an interconnect or speaker cable that they didn't like and returned for a full refund, during the 30 day satisfaction guarantee period, that other posters may take it personally and attack them. Some people are very defensive about the money they spend in this hobby thus many of us don't want to rock the boat. Personally I don't want people to accuse me of having poor hearing, poor equipment, etc. Sometimes it's better to say nothing if one can't say something positive. 😊

 

P.S. IMHO The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology would be a great name for a book or a movie.

[Teresa]

16 hours ago, gmgraves said:

...I don’t willy-nilly swap-out cables. I cable-up my system, and then I leave it be. When I swap-out equipment, I don’t swap-out the cables. I guess one would say, that if you don’t go down that particular rabbit hole, you won’t develop that particular strain of audiophilia nervosa!...

 

Just speaking for myself: When I say I only replace components if they die or need repair that is too expensive to fix, this applies to cables as well. None of my cables so far have worn out. I do unplug the cables and clean their connectors once a year.  

 

16 hours ago, gmgraves said:

...cables cannot add anything to a signal because they are not active components. Cables can only subtract...

 

I agree with this, however are there cables that exist which are 100% efficient at all audible frequencies?

 

15 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

What if they modulate how other things may or may not be added such as RFI/EMI

 

...What if they 'add' distortion

 

RFI/EMI and distortion are not part of the music signal, so wouldn't these also be considered subtractions?

 

14 hours ago, Allan F said:

One could just as well ask why some people spend $US1995 for a Berkeley Alpha USB to SPDIF converter.

 

What makes a USB to SPDIF converter so expensive? That converter costs almost as much as my entire audio / video / computer system.

[Teresa]

On 5/14/2020 at 11:07 AM, PYP said:

Let's give AudioQuest some credit for not only saving suicidal electrons, but for making some very fine recordings.  I don't know if being able to make fine recordings = they know how to make great cables, but one assumes they do not use mono price cables in their recording chain.  Would be a great journalistic find if they do...

 

FYI the AudioQuest Music SACDs I have all use AudioQuest cables. Some of my favorite blues recordings in my collection.

[Teresa]

7 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Any claim that AudioQuest cables resulted in these SACDs superior sounding qualities to your ears should be taken with a grain of salt and are unlikely to be proved by Objective measurements.

 

They or I made no such claim. The AudioQuest cables are listed in the credits along with all the other equipment used. It would be silly IMHO for AudioQuest Music to use a different brand of cable. Musically and sonically some great blues IMHO.

[Teresa]

12 hours ago, fas42 said:

"All audiophiles know the room is terribly, terribly important" - I say, "No, it's not"

 

IMHO the room is very important on both the recording and playback sides. For example in my city acoustic orchestral music sounds superb in the Pioneer Center for the Performing Arts and Nightingale Concert Hall but dreadful in the Lawlor Events Center.  The construction and design of performance places has a big impact on the timbre of instruments and voices and how enjoyable music sounds in these locations. Also the listening room where the music is reproduced is just as important, as is finding the ideal  placement of speakers in the room. So, yes it is terribly important.

[Teresa]

18 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

It's possible, but not at the same time. I think the two pursuits are orthogonal. When I'm listening critically to my system, I'm much less involved in the music. When I'm listening to music, I hardly pay attention to anything related to the sound. If I try to do both at the same time, I rarely succeed.

 

Critically listening is what I try to avoid as when I try to listen analytically it destroys my enjoyment of the music. 

 

Nowadays, I only listen to music for pleasure, however poor recordings and poor sounding performance places keeps me from enjoying the music. Several decades ago I seen Maurice Abravanel and the Utah Symphony on tour at Lawlor Events Center and sound was so poor I didn't enjoy it and have never went back to Lawlor Events Center again. Lawlor Events Center was chosen instead of the Pioneer Center for the Performing Arts because it had more seating and they could sell more tickets.

 

Even before I was into audio I preferred to listen to live music in good sounding places instead of poor sounding ones. I may not be able to say why it sounded poor, I just know it didn't like music there.

 

18 hours ago, PYP said:

 ...Personally, I like to feel music as well as hear it, so I prefer dynamic speakers suitably sized to the room and that room needs to have acoustic treatments.   The gear needs to have very low distortion/noise and be very linear, or I hear extraneous sound that isn't music, which is a distraction.

 

Once I listen to music at home, I'm not thinking about the gear, I simply enjoy whatever I want to hear at that moment at the volume I prefer.  Of course, it isn't the same as a live event, with all that implies, but it often can be better.  And how many opportunities have we all had to hear live music this last year?  As some have said, this is a good time to be an audiophile.   

 

I agree, feeling the music is also important to me that is why I prefer to listen to music with the lights off. In the dark it is much easier for me to feel the music. 

 

17 hours ago, PYP said:

 ...I don't do quick A/B because that doesn't work for me.  Everything settles in over time, so trial periods of up to 30 days are best for potential purchases...

 

I agree. I have alway had a terrible time trying to compare anything music or audio related. If I listen analytically I can't enjoy or feel the music and soon everything sounds terrible. However, if I turn out the lights and let the music wash over me the musical enjoyment can be amazing, that is if it is a good recording of music I like.

 

11 hours ago, fas42 said:

Yes. The audiophile is sensitive to any anomalies in the sound, but when they don't exist, at a subjective level, then he can relax, and just go with the music.

 

A mighty good test for how good a system is together, is to listen to some recording you have never heard before, of a genre that leaves you cold, normally. If you almost immediately "get into the groove", understand what the music is all about - then the playback is doing its job properly.

 

I agree with the first paragraph and that is why I prefer audiophile recordings because I can relax and enjoy the music.

 

I disagree with the second paragraph as I don't like listening to music or genres I don't like when I'm at a live event, so I should also dislike the recorded versions as well. Thus if an audio system makes recordings of music I dislike when listening in person likable then IMHO it is not an accurate audio system.