Jump to content
IGNORED

The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology


Recommended Posts

prufrock, when you say you've never tested one cable against another, does that mean listening tests, electrical characteristics tests, performance tests such as null testing, or all of the above?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I have read of an early dissection of an MIT network cable by the Audio Critic. The first box, potted with epoxy had nothing, the cable just ran through it. The second had a 1 kohm resistor across the cable leads.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CHoQtwIwBA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DbgK87tmRVeY&ei=OTflT8OoN4OQ9gTIsaCnAQ&usg=AFQjCNGfNEhsEkyn1Ey-d-b9hsNOjRTQlA&sig2=0srFMq1AakzytmKa4hSV4A

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
It appears that the cable debate simply moved to a new thread.

 

elsdude- Why do you insist on continually presenting your opinions as fact. The fact is, you don't know whether cables sound different, or not. If it were fact, then there would be no debate. Please present your factual, definitive evidence, or stop the attacks.

 

Actually, Dennis has subjectively experienced differences in sound, but hasn't been able to obtain any test results that would substantiate differences. He has performed numerous tests, and has been very good about "taking requests" for various types of testing. He's been brave enough to assume his subjective preferences could be fooling him. So I think the stated basis of your criticism is mis-aimed.

 

I'm quite interested in seeing some sort of verification of the statements about the contents of the MIT and Transparent "black boxes." If the allegations are true, those sorts of out and out fabrications would lay open MIT and Transparent to having their businesses ended and the revenues confiscated partially or entirely by any state attorney general, or federal authorities, or by any customer who felt like bringing a class action.

 

As an attorney, I can't see any reason why they would make affirmative false statements about what's in the boxes (as in the MIT YouTube video I linked to showing circuit boards installed inside MIT's boxes) and thus expose themselves to these potentially disastrous consequences, instead of simply saying nothing and thus having nothing to answer for.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

I think it's fine that prufrock would like to provide a thread and blog to collect ideas and information supporting the notion that there will be no audible differences between well constructed cables. (If I've got that wrong, prufrock, please correct me.). It's a big forum, and IMO these folks should feel free to have a discussion without "interruptions," so to speak.

 

Meanwhile, though, I think for the sake of the quality of the discussion, folks may want to desist from mere rumor-spreading ("These boxes have nothing in them, according to what some other guy said that Peter Aczel wrote!").

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Well said, and if I might.....If one must go through such rigorous preperations and conditions control to discern the slightest bit of difference, is the slight performance gain of any value in a recreational listening session? An analogy......say there's two stacks of 1$ bills...one quantity is a 1000, the other 1001. One can only take a single stack. Does one count each stack and take the larger quantity or does one just simply pick up whichever and go? IT would seem to me that time is more valuable than a buck in tHis case........and given the amount of long term listening it takes to even consider a preference, the less the value of that preference.

 

Interesting line of thought. Let me throw one out for comparison; I think both may be valid.

 

I'd bet I've owned some cables longer than some readers of this forum have been alive. Still using an S/PDIF digital cable I bought more than 20 years ago, a couple of 20-year-old analog cables, and recently replaced 20+ year old speaker cables. So think of two piles of $1 bills, one with $20,000, one with $20,100. That's a .5% initial difference. Maybe not worth spending the time counting. But now let's say the offer is of one or the other pile invested at compound interest over 20 years. Maybe now it's worthwhile? So the fact that at least some of us look at even cables as long-term parts of our systems affects the effort we are willing to put into listening. We know this may well affect our enjoyment, even if by a small amount, for a good portion of our lives.

 

I might now refer to interconnects as 'Cable Meth' for those that like to tweak......or suffer from OCD.

 

:-) When I'm in a *very* occasional tweaking mood, something relatively cheap and safe like a cable is a good way to satisfy my jones. (E.g., just bought an "audiophile" Firewire cable to connect the external hard drive that holds my music. I think it makes a slight difference, but for less than $30 I wouldn't be too perturbed if it didn't.)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Yes, I think that is one of the biggest parts of it. What is interesting is the rise of even thinking this about wire. There was a time when it simply wasn't considered. You might go buy some Telefunken tubes for such urges or some JAN tubes or you might get a new cartridge for the TT, as all of these might help without being extremely expensive. Wire just wasn't on anyone's mind.

 

I have read the suggestion a few times to budget 20% for wire. That might not sound excessive. Modern systems may have 4 or 5 things to connect or fewer. When each wire is 4-5% of the total doesn't sound bad. Yet none of your components may be more than 20% other than speakers. So really for cost of all your wire is the wire going to help more than doubling down on any one of your components other than speakers. And with speakers maybe you could upgrade to some costing 50% more. Does wire do more for your system than such upgrades. When looked at this way I think wire doesn't look like such a good investment. My opinion would be opting out of even cheap wire in audiophile terms going with truly basic gold plated wire from Radio Shack instead then spending the left over amount on better speakers would get much more improvement. Of course buying one wire now and another later on impulse to satisfy your jonesing for a fix is not something you can do with one big upgrade on speakers for example. And that is not unusual. It is part of the psychology of it.

 

Boy, I can't let you guys go for a couple days without my name being taken in vain, can I? ;-)

 

Let me talk a moment about the hardware love aspect of this before moving on to whether "mere wires" are important.

 

Having accumulated a wife, a stepson, a dog and a house (not necessarily ranked in priority order), I am very careful about where I spend my money. I do a tremendous amount of research, or window shopping, or critical listening, or whatever you'd like to call it, with audio as I do with anything else my money is used for. In the case of audio, I've been doing that for 30 years or more (back to 1968 if you count when I went shopping for my first "stereo"). Most often I satisfy any gear jones I may have by listening, not buying. It is very rare that I buy gear at all (I've mentioned before how long I've owned even most of my cables). So though I surely enjoy what brings me the music I love, I'm hardly the poster boy for "Gotta have some gear, let's buy a cable!" It has to stand a fair chance IMO of improving the sound, has to be within budget, and has to be something I can contemplate happily living with for the next 20-30 years (yeah, even a $30 cable).

 

We're on descent (wi-fi on planes is a great thing), so just briefly before I pack this up, let me leave you with this thought about "just wires:" Along with the circuitry inside those boxes and speakers, what's in there connecting it all? Remember when Spectral made a big deal about the fact that some of its internal wiring and circuit boards were run vertically instead of horizontally, and what a difference that was supposed to make to the sound? And PeterSt at least used to tell customers not to fiddle with the arrangement of the internal wiring in his DAC. I remember myself, back in the 60s and 70s, playing with the antenna cable leading to my receiver, and how a difference of a copule of inches to one side or the other made a big differene in whether I could pick up New York or Philly....

 

Sure, I enjoy

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
But with interconnects there simply appears to be no reason that anything audible is happening and that should reinforce the idea you also doubt your ears. It bears investigating and it might be someone will come up with something. My best idea now is there is nothing there beyond my ears getting fooled.

* * *

So the murky, messy, in-between area is fascinating and requires some different practical or philosophical way to deal with it. If you assume all hearing abilities are completely understood it makes it simple, but in fact we know that isn't the case. On the other hand much is understood and shouldn't be dismissed either. We can say the same for technical considerations. Much is understood, but not everything.

 

As usual you nail it pretty well.

 

What were the db-down levels that have provisionally convinced you there's no objective reality to cable differences? Are they greater, less than, or in the same general range as the levels mentioned in the following quotes?

 

-Exporting to 24-bit PCM WAV format may be dithered with a peak dither level of around -130 dB

 

-Exporting to 16-bit PCM WAV format may be dithered with a peak dither level of around -80 dB

 

Random numbers...translate to random noise (hiss) when converted to analog. The amplitude of this noise is around 1 LSB, which for 16 bit lies at about 96 dB below full scale. By using dither, ambience and decay in a musical recording can be heard down to about -115 dB, even with a 16-bit wordlength. Thus, although the quantization steps of a 16-bit word can only theoretically encode 96 dB of range, with dither, there is an audible dynamic range of up to 115 dB! The maximum signal-to-noise ratio of a dithered 16-bit recording is about 96 dB. But the dynamic range is far greater, as much as 115 dB, because we can hear music below the noise.

 

The first quote is from the Audacity wiki on dither, the second from the Digital Domain site's page on dither.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Using Diffmaker, I eventually got requirements for consistent testing worked out for the interconnects. There is some variance from test run to test run even without changing anything. But difference signals of 105-108 db according to Diffmaker. Thermal noise at the impedance of my particular equipment should be something like -114 db once you do a DA/AD loop. So there wasn't too much difference with 16 bit or 24 bit test files as the source. Off the top of my head it was around 3 db between the two bit depths. Not very many home audio systems will exceed 18 bit levels of noise all the way to the speaker leads, and darn few if any will surpass 20 bit noise levels.

 

It is true you can hear into the noise floor. With the difference files you even hear hints of the music buried among the white noise if you apply 50 db or more of digital gain. This likely is due to my other equipment rather than the cables. Something like the Bruno Puztkey's measurements with good test equipment shows lower residuals. It also was the case as I moved to better AD/DA equipment the noise floor dropped with the improvement. Any effect of the cable must have been below that. And this remember is listening only to the difference, highly amplified and not with music playing. At its natural level and with the main music signal such tiny differences just don't stand much chance of being audible. You can play the difference file at full volume over speakers and simply hear nothing at all.

 

Another thing I did because it was quicker and simpler than waiting on Diffmaker was take a difference file, then pull up the amplify effect in Audacity. This will stop the amplification when bits hit max level. You first do 50 db amping and then see what Audacity offers. Those numbers all hit right around or just under 90 db gain to reach max level. Now it could be one bit and it would limit the level of amping. But this was consistent. Doing multiple runs and looking at this with Audioquest I had an average of 89.6 db to fully amp the difference signal when the difference was between two runs with the same AQ wire. Multiple runs with two other cables averaged amping to max at 89.3 db and 89.6 db respectively. Doing this with difference results of AQ vs four other cables got results from a low of 89.1 to a high of 90.1 db.

 

The four cables in this part of the testing I used were AQ Diamond Hyperlitz, the cheapest simplest free cable from a DVD player, some very inexpensive Acoustic Research cable, and homemade RG142 (teflon insulated, silver woven shield, thick silver plated steel center conductor).

 

So the signals did not difference out to nothing, but thermal noise. They did get down close, and how close they got had to do with factors other than the cable as all cables gave essentially identical results. Which is why I haven't found reason to believe anything audible is happening with these cables. My opinion is you probably won't hear anything if get difference results to -60 db. For an extra measure of safety I think it safe to consider -80 db functionally equivalent when played back in the room. This is a judgement call on my part. Not without some evidence to support it, but not totally iron clad.

 

So in my mind, difference components to a point you hear nothing upon playing back the difference signal and you have nothing to worry about. Very simple, you need investigate nothing more you can be sure it is audibly equivalent. Not everyone will agree, it might not even be completely true. What is true is once you get things this close you haven't left much to be wrong and it cannot be wrong by very much. Chances are there are better ways to improve things than trying to get more than -80 db nulls even lower.

 

Let me first re-quote something from one of the references I used in the post you responded to above:

 

By using dither, ambience and decay in a musical recording can be heard down to about -115 dB, even with a 16-bit wordlength.

 

I think we can agree that things like ambience and decay are important to a realistic experience of music, given a recording that has them and an overall system that can present them. So the question of real differences among cables in your own system, given the DiffMaker results, I suppose hinges in part on whether such differences can to some extent "live" at levels between ~minus-105-108db and minus-115-120db.

 

Folks like Keith Johnson believe the answer is yes; folks who place reliance on things like the masking effect would say no.

 

Along these lines, let me relate two things that happened to me recently.

 

First, after many years of looking forward to the possibility, I was finally able to obtain a Keith Johnson-designed Spectral amp on the used market. My wife, no audiophile and not particularly pleased at the expenditure, who thought the old amp sounded just fine (I agree), said unprompted upon first hearing the system with the new amp that it sounded clearer to her. Again, I agree. The usual clichés about a "blacker" background apply. To me, though, the effect on perceived realism is substantial out of proportion to the slight actual diminution of noise between the very fine old amp and the current one. I really didn't consciously notice any background noise with the old amp, but I very much notice the lack of any artificial background with the current one.

 

Second, as I mentioned in another thread, recently I took the new AudioQuest Dragonfly DAC on vacation. In our rental car I plugged it into my MacBook Pro, ran an auxiliary cable from it to the car stereo, and got surprisingly enjoyable sound.

 

After some time, during which the screen on the MacBook Pro had blanked, a song from Ryan Bingham's Mescalito came on. I listen to this album a lot, as Bingham is one of my favorite artists. In my opinion the sound quality of the recording is good. But the sound coming from the car stereo seemed different and worse than what had gone before - veiled, with a lack of "life" and clarity in both the vocals and guitars. When I brought the screen back up, I saw that somehow in the process of moving my music to the laptop for vacation, Mescalito, or at least this particular song, had wound up as an mp3. (By the way, on a different note, I also noticed a drop in sound quality near the end of a long plane ride when the power had dropped to below 10% of capacity; perhaps this was due to CPU throttling to prolong battery life.)

 

So for me personally, the choice of whether to believe the audio engineering philosophy that informed the design of an amp that has exceeded even my very high expectations, or the philosophy of "masking" that informed the design of mp3 lossy compression, disappointingly audible to me through a cheap rental car stereo over 70 mph worth of road noise, is quite clear.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
The hash would correct this. If someone wanted to _truly_ reproduce the test they could only do it if the file they used matched the published hash. Using a file with a different hash is actually running a different test in my book because the tester used different source material.

 

I guess I don't understand "file degrade in some manner when copied about". A file is bits in a defined order based on file type right? Wouldn't the bits have to change for the file to "degrade"? The hash would check for that.

 

Probably the easiest thing is to go to some of user sandyk's old posts, rather than re-"hash"-ing this argument. (Not that you are intentionally doing this, it just, unlikely as it may seem to you, happens to have been the subject of a spirited argument in these forums some time back.)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Jud viewpost-right.png

a spirited argument

 

Does this mean one involving heavy drinking, or imaginary deities?

 

Daemons, of course - and heavy drinking!

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
O.K, banter aside. Here are my motives and intentions.

A revolution has been happening in home music. Now more than ever, huge numbers of music lovers are potentially able to listen to their music in audiophile quality sound but at a reasonable price. I know because I just set up a system around my desktop. It cost me just over $2000 and it sounds absolutely fantastic. All I needed was an amp with a built in DAC, 2 monitors and $25 software player. The flat screen sits on top of the amp which puts it at just the right height, and the volume knob is conveniently right there in front of me. I just needed to build a couple of shelves to bring the speakers up to the right height. I only just get by technically yet I managed to do it all. Spread the word folks. Tell music loving friends about the revolution. Don’t make it exclusive and more difficult and complex than it need be. I have already showed a few what I have done and how achievable it all is.

 

When I see people telling newcomers about their expensive audiophile cables/interconnects, and the complexities of which one sounds best with different components, it makes me mad. The whole thing is based on a phenomenon that has departed from recognized scientific principles. None of it is proved. It is unwelcome and unhelpful and will not help bring others in to share the great sound we are luxury to.

 

My blog entry, when done, will be banter free and focused on conveying the above message in unambiguous and simple language. No jokes at any ones expense, promise.

 

Oh is *that* what this is about? Heck, lessee what the very definitely audiophile quality system (access to over 1,000 CD rips, hi-res downloads, DSD files...) I listened to on the plane going to and from vacation set me back: Laptop computer, already owned it for a different purpose than audio, so $0. Audioquest Dragonfly, got a nice deal, $200. Etymotic Research ER-4P IEMs, snatched them when they were on some sort of screaming sale on Amazon a few years ago, $168. And Audirvana Plus, $50. That's it, $418.

 

But that's unfair, because yours is a desktop system. So let's look at my desktop system:

 

- Foobar player, free. May consider XXHighEnd or HQPlayer some time in the near future.

 

- The Dragonfly, doing double duty. $200.

 

- Mini-plug to mini-plug wire, generic, got it free from the dealer when I bought the Dragonfly.

 

- Audioengine N22. Dealer's demo, got a discount, $179 if I remember right, may even have been less.

 

- Speaker cables, I think they may have been Audioquest's cheapest, look like lamp cord, maybe $1 per foot when I bought them 25 years ago. About 10 feet worth (5 per side), no terminations other than stripping the insulation. So if you don't want to consider them "amortized" and thus free after 25 years, $10.

 

- Wharfedale Diamond 7 speakers, another screaming deal from Amazon, I think around $179 for the pair when I bought them many years ago.

 

Total, $578, and a real pleasure. Oh, and here's the kicker, this will send you over the top, I know: I've decided just for grins to try an Audioquest mini-plug to mini-plug cable. Getting it tomorrow for $45. Even with this extravagant cable expenditure, I still got your $2000 *way* beat with my total cost of $623.

 

So yeah, lots of folks love to get great sound cheap, and know how to do it. Even in my main system I concentrated heavily on value for money, with stuff like Vandersteen speakers, used amp and speaker cables, $450 DAC designed by Mike Moffat.... (By the way, even though Vandersteen recommends biwiring for the 2Ce, the manufacturer of my speaker cables, instead of selling me a new biwired set, insisted that a single set of used with jumpers, at close to a quarter of the price, would work just fine. It does. That's just the way these money-grubbing shyster exotic cable manufacturers are, I guess. Oh by the way, this guy is an electrical engineer with 50 years experience in audio, and his partner is an engineer who ran jet programs for the Pentagon before he got into audio manufacturing and recording.)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
In a lot of music, nuance is where the magic lies.

 

A lot, but surely not all. Most of us I'm sure have had the experience of singing our heads off at a concert or in the car, where we hear much less and enjoy the experience hugely.

 

Another factor, at least for me as someone who has come to appreciate classical music a lot more in the last ten years or so than I have previously, is that for me to "get" classical music, the reproduced timbre of the instruments has to be pretty good, and the detail retrieval for a complex symphonic piece must be great, or else I struggle to understand the intent. I find I have much less of a problem with this when it comes to music I have more familiarity with, that is, memory can often fill in the blanks. Hence I might enjoy "hearing" (imaging in reality) all the details of a piece by Yes on the car radio and fully understand the music, but take The Rite of Spring in the same context, and forget it...

 

I find that to be true also, mainly for the reason that classical has much greater dynamics, so I can't hear half of it on the car radio at normal volume. Another reason much of the enjoyment of classical lies in nuance is that these are melodies that in many cases have been performed tens of thousands of times and are utterly familiar, and the only reason to listen again is to hear something new - which either lies in radical reworking (seldom done - Gould's original Goldberg Variations would be an example) or playing/conducting of such nuance and beauty that one hears the piece as if for the first time (much of Jordi Savall's catalogue).

 

A great system will help open the door to the appreciation of a much broader range of music, as a great system will much more easily communicate the meaning of unfamiliar music to the point where one can "get it" much more easily. The better my system gets, the more I find myself expanding my musical spectrum.

 

Agreed.

 

Something else re nuance and the enjoyment of audio today: Folks were astonished at the realism of early victrolas, and many designs from the 1950s are still considered classics today. iPods sounded really good to me, especially for their compact size, when I first heard them playing through speakers. I can happily enjoy music on friends' cheap receivers and speakers, and songs like Boston's "More than a Feeling" have always sounded much better than average to me on a car radio. These days, average equipment is already 90% or more of the way there. To get something that feels extraordinary in the modern environment, you have to get very, very close to reality indeed, which may mean banishing obviously artificial sounds even if they're -110db and have only subconscious effects.

 

I say "may" mean, because I'm not altogether comfortable relying on such small measurable differences as the cause of significant differences in my musical enjoyment. But while I'd never say I'm certain of the validity of my subjective experience, it has been amazingly consistent for me over a 30 year period, so much so that purely subjective explanations don't strike me as particularly more helpful or parsimonious than objective ones (even if the objective measurements show tiny differences) in accounting for it.

 

About pricey cables: Some of the most expensive I've heard (Transparent, to name a particular brand) I have never liked, and have preferred much less costly cables. E.g., I've heard Transparent cables with Wilson speakers, Pass electronics and a Light Harmonic Da Vinci DAC sounding like electricity at an audio show, while I heard a very similar system sounding like music using AudioQuest cables at perhaps a fifth the cost or less. My preferred cables, while certainly not inexpensive to the newbie (one reason it took me 20 years to accumulate the number of them I have now) are fractions of what the equivalent big name cables cost. And for the newbie there are plenty of inexpensive choices that in my opinion sound very good indeed.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Yes, I pretty much ignore posts on listening impressions if the system context is not either in the poster's signature, or listed.

 

Jud: I am sure you already know/believe this, but for the benefit of others who may have read your post-I would suggest to never take away much from bad sound at a show demo; if I hear bad sound at a show, I just dismiss it as likely caused by the inherent limitations of show conditions. Conversely, if I hear good sound at a show, I am suitably impressed, knowing the difficulty of achieving it in a short time, usually in a very compromised environment, and often with poorly matched components as well.

 

True dat. I mentioned it because it was in line with other listening experiences I've had over a period of just a bit less than 20 years.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Daemons aren't imaginary though. They are all over linux based computer audio sources. ;)

 

Or Unix and similar systems, including Linux, yep.

 

Wikipedia: The term was coined by the programmers of MIT's Project MAC. They took the name from Maxwell's demon, an imaginary being from a famous thought experiment that constantly works in the background, sorting molecules. Unix systems inherited this terminology. Daemons are also characters in Greek mythology, some of whom handled tasks that the gods could not be bothered with.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Yes, Trust your Ears. Let me say it again. TRUST YOUR EARS!!!!! OH wait a minute, not quite enough. TRUST YOUR EARS

 

See the only problem is there are a whole host of ways that objective measurement techniques far outstrip the hearing ability of anyone. I do mean anyone. That isn't the same as saying everything is known about hearing. It is to say in quite a few ways measurements outstrips everyone and anyone's hearing. You need to get comfortable with the idea that in some significant ways human hearing is at best a second best way to evaluate fidelity.

 

Oh well, go back to ignoring those little facts. Keep patting each other on the back, at how carefully you listen, and how hard you are to fool. And how these things are just beyond understanding. If apparent hearing, and measurements conflict, TRUST YOUR EARS, and ignore the measurements. Don't try to synthesize the information from more than one source and really understand what is going on. Faith in oneself is much more important than real understanding. Genuine understanding is over-rated I take it from the responses I see here. TRUST YOUR EARS. Keep repeating it. Don't forget it. It is all you need to know. Make sure in the most flowery terms you make all your reasoning without any technical knowledge or understanding. Furthermore if you get stumped, don't bother yourself, just trust you ears and assume any of this other stuff must be simply wrong. Trust your ears, let us say it all together now. TRUST YOUR EARS!!!!!

 

Oh and ignore all the knowledge about how human perception is faulty, fooled and biased, I mean none of it applies to any of you no doubt. Somehow this hearing thing is altogether different. All this research, and work and parsing together how it all happens, and how it in predictable ways can go wrong, all of that is just bunk. Does't apply to hearing nor anyone on this forum. Just a bunch a HOOEY!.

 

Yep, I agree. This is really summarized by Feynman's statement that the first rule is you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.

 

And regarding your remark about nulls to even more inaudible depths meeting with similar responses, I can understand your frustration there, too. As I said in a previous post, I'm certainly not altogether comfortable relying on such small potential objective differences - minus 105 or even minus 120 db - to explain the significant differences I believe I hear.

 

And yet, and yet.... (I know, this is where you shake your head and think "Jud, you were almost there, back in the land of the sensible and skeptical.") I do believe I hear differences and they are consistent. So does my wife, whose motivation, if any, is to have me spend my money on things other than audio, and who was utterly unbelieving that "wires" could make any difference at all until a dealer replaced my Kimber speaker cables with Audioquest running into a pair of Vandersteen 2Cis and the sound changed tremendously. (This, by the way, is why I personally am skeptical of the "expert listener" theory - too easy to train yourself to be fooled. Give me the man or woman on the street any day with no skin in the game, in fact with a skeptical turn of mind, and see if they hear differences. Someone like you, Dennis. ;-) And I've experienced the CD "revolution," where folks not liking what they heard, in spite of great measurables, were told they were imagining things, until measurements of things like jitter became much more common.

 

So I want to maintain skepticism in *both* directions - acknowledging that what I believe I hear is subject to all sorts of potential biases and imaginings, while understanding that within just the past couple of decades we've seen a very good illustration that what's measurable may not yet completely describe what's audible.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I'll describe a situation I have been reluctant to discuss publicly as I believe it will be poorly received.

* * *

Now this doesn't explain everything about such comparisons. Doesn't mean long term auditioning isn't good or useful. There are some people who are more careful about levels than this. But I bet there will be plenty reading this and thinking I wouldn't have done that. And I bet many of them would. It just fits with habits, human nature, and the fact that without measurements people adjust volume to JND levels while much smaller differences in level reliably bias one to hear better sound on the louder component. We aren't going to level match every song with a volt meter every time. We turn it up and down as needed. Get it within the range of just noticeable difference and that is normal usage.

 

But in this case, measurement wouldn't turn up much, and listening by several people would have seemed to contradict that. With only those two pieces of the puzzle you would be forever stuck. With the additional knowledge about some very rudimentary aspects of perception and observation of human habits the situation is pretty well resolved quite simply. The complex, puzzling, and mysterious suddenly isn't.

 

Now this really is a very simple example. There are imaginable ways that perception, measurements and listening could interact in far more complex and difficult to parse combinations. Especially as you involve multiple effects beyond a single simple thing like playback volume. Makes it easy for me to think some fair number of situations where listening and measuring don't agree involve some interaction like this only at a more complex levels.

 

That is why an earlier statement that some measures are accurate to levels far beyond anyone to hear I was not showing a lack of respect for the complexity of hearing, engineers, or people who master fine recordings. It is a very simple fact just for instance in levels. Humans can pick out a difference to somewhere around .2 db while instruments can beat this by a factor of ten or hundred or more. There are plenty of other areas where this is true. Our perceptions play tricks on us. No matter how earnest, honest and careful people are there are limits to your hearing. The processing by our brain gets in there too and complicates it further. Some of the processing is currently blindingly complex and tremendously impressive. But it is being and will be unraveled in time to deeper levels of understanding. We need to respect all these factors appropriately and account for all. When we say trust our ears and refuse to believe anything else involved it doesn't help matters. And yet I am not saying never trust your hearing either. I do firmly believe that appropriate measurements will not contradict heard audible results. I see no reason to think hearing is beyond understanding, and it certainly is not beyond physics. When you have these contradictions you have to look further or come at it from another direction.

 

Oh, I can absolutely see that happening. As Julf has posted, the people who took his challenge, including me, preferred the 1db louder selection over the one that was supposedly higher resolution. (Query - Are we listening for selections that allow us to "hear better," and does greater loudness allow us to do that to some extent?) Dennis, have you done tests on cables to see whether some simply play louder than others? Because I could very easily believe that would influence me to think I could "hear better" with the louder cable, since I probably would in fact be better able to hear many aspects of the music if it were louder.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Oh, I can absolutely see that happening. As Julf has posted, the people who took his challenge, including me, preferred the 1db louder selection over the one that was supposedly higher resolution. (Query - Are we listening for selections that allow us to "hear better," and does greater loudness allow us to do that to some extent?) Dennis, have you done tests on cables to see whether some simply play louder than others? Because I could very easily believe that would influence me to think I could "hear better" with the louder cable, since I probably would in fact be better able to hear many aspects of the music if it were louder.

 

One other thought about loudness: It would be very interesting to run a test of double blind testing, in order to determine to what extent, if any, stress and various other aspects of a given test setup might affect sensitivity. For example, if people ordinarily can discriminate between two sounds .2db apart, is a greater difference necessary under a given test setup?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Pro audio doesn't believe any of this stuff

 

Depends which pros you ask.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Jud viewpost-right.png

I still got your $2000 *way* beat with my total cost of $623.

 

 

 

 

I am sure this is the sort of stuff a lot of readers out there want to hear and know about, i.e discussions on how much they need to spend to get great sound. What they often get instead is ad nauseum discussion on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

 

Which is why you decided to discuss one of those how-many-angels topics rather than a straightforward topic like "What's the lowest-cost rig you've heard that still sounds great?"?

 

Edit: And I noticed above that you also decided to comment negatively once again about people like me who have cables included in their list of equipment (which I provide so people reading my comments know if my taste is similar to theirs), rather than the fact that the cable I've recommended in these pages more frequently than any other costs all of $30.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Which is why you decided to discuss one of those how-many-angels topics rather than a straightforward topic like "What's the lowest-cost rig you've heard that still sounds great?"?

 

The purpose of this discussion/thread is to help me write a blog on the issue. And the purpose of the blog is to ensure I don't have to discuss it ever again. I will just fly in, saviour style, and dump the link.

 

OK, humor always works well with me. :-)

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I am using myself as an example of the dynamic forces at work here. If I have trouble doing this when I think its rubbish, what chance has someone undecided got?

 

Well, I'm pretty sure I'm an atypical consumer, but I literally spent more than half a year going to audio shops in 3 states before I found one where I decided to buy the majority of my equipment. The owner concentrated on getting me (and all his other customers) the maximum bang for the buck. He stocked Toshiba (if I remember correctly) equipment for folks who wanted stuff in the ordinary consumer price range, and went all the way up through Spectral, Vandersteen, and an electrostatic speaker line whose name I forget (wasn't ESL, Maggies, or Martin-Logan; maybe a Danish company?). Price level was up to the customer - if you thought analog or digital interconnects made enough of a difference to justify their cost, fine, if you wanted the least expensive cables he stocked, fine, if you wanted to go to a consumer electronics store and buy cables, fine. I spent literally hours and hours in his shop listening to music and chatting about life, and once in a while I'd even buy something, including much of what's in my current system 20+ years later.

 

We're still friends. He eventually got rid of his audio business; perhaps he wasn't making as much as the "big box" stores, or high end dealers who were more set on making money from their customers than on providing them systems with which to love music for a lifetime.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
You just have to be honest with yourself. If Joe or Jane Audiophile can't admit to him or herself to not hearing any difference between Brand $$$$ and Brand $$, then they're just doing themselves an injustice... And that's called stupidity.

 

+1

 

Why would I spend my money to have something someone else likes? There's plenty of stuff I like that I don't have enough money for.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
While there are a few people like that, I don't think it is most nor is it what prufrock is referring to here. I think he has in mind you can be biased or primed to think a certain thing. Maybe you aren't sure about cable, dealer sings it praises, you wonder if you are missing out on something. You see them look nicer, read about others proclaiming them important etc. Just the way humans work, it is by that point hard to just listen and be honest. You aren't aware of all that, but at this point when auditioning some cable you too might be thinking you hear it sound better whether it does or not.

 

Anyone who believes I buy cables because they "look nicer" can feast their eyes on the photo below. The picture actually looks better than they do in reality. Think "Strips of copper-colored foil with netting." In order to work with my speakers they required jumpers and banana plugs to be integrated at one end, so the total effect is something like your great-grandmother's underwear with all the textiles removed.

 

As far as "others proclaiming them important," I think the last time I saw them reviewed (not these specifically, but a product by this company) was about 10 years ago. I bought these (used, not new) because every cable I've ever purchased from this company, starting 20 years ago, has provided better sound in my system than anything else near its price point.

 

As I mentioned in a previous post, I don't think I am a typical consumer, even among audiophiles. I tend to give less than usual credence to what "everyone else thinks." I certainly don't claim immunity to marketing, but my tastes aren't ordinarily those of the majority, and I like it just fine that way.

 

OMPlanarI.jpg

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
How about Steve Hoffman? Alan Parsons? Bob Clearmountain?

 

Chris has already talked about Steve Hoffman.

 

Bob Clearmountain is more widely known as a mixer than a producer. The most famous recordings Parsons has worked on have been in the role of assistant engineer (Abbey Road) and engineer (DSOTM) rather than producer. I don't know whether these are distinctions that matter greatly to you or not. To me they mean these people are clearly extremely knowledgeable and competent but they did not have final say regarding the sound of the famous recordings they worked on.

 

I'll throw out more names: Keith Johnson (you knew that was coming, right?), a Grammy-winning producer, and also co-inventor of equipment used in production; Pierre Sprey, co-principal of the company that makes my ugly speaker cables, and principal of an affiliated company that puts out some great-sounding CDs which Pierre produces; and Mark Knopfler - not because I have any idea whether he pays attention to things "audiophile" (though I recall discussion of the tape deck used for the recording in the Love over Gold liner notes), but just because his stuff always sounds so good.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Have been trying unsuccessfully so far, to get listeners who have bought expensive cables/interconnects, and who now think its a scam, to come forward. Come on folks, esldude and I have both owned up. Its nothing to be ashamed of. To admit you are a fool = smart in this game. Your input could help shine a light on this issue.

 

Odd, I wouldn't have thought of you and Dennis as "owning up" to anything. You said you'd never actually done any comparisons yourself. And Dennis hears differences, but believes his test results are sufficient to discredit his ears. So you have nothing to own up to, and Dennis still heard differences. If neither of you has any change in experience vs. expectations to report, what exactly is there to confess?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...