The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology

[prufrock]

What a bunch of bollocks. Over the last three years or so, Nordost, with the help of an independent defense contractor in the UK (which specialized in the development and testing of SONAR systems) developed a new and different testing protocal for audio components/systems. The main basis of this trsting which differentiated it from typical audio testing is that it used actual music signals, and then did comparisons, using quite complex analysis and mathematical models developed by the SONAR experts. This testing protocal analyized both amplitude and time domain perfromance.

Nordost did not do the testing themselves, they paid the independent third party to do it, and they did not let the third party know what they were testing.

The results of these tests were clearly able to show objective differences in playback using different cables, including power cabling. Additionally they tested for differences using various methods of vibration control, these tests also showed objective differences.

 

What was the result of all this development and testing when Nordost presented the work to the audio public: The subjectivists, knowing that they hear these differences accepted the results, and the so called objectivists, denied that the testing could be valid, claiming that their must be something wrong with the testing methodology!

 

It appears to me that the so called objectivists will only accept the results of objective testing when these results support their belief system, so it may not even be worth bothering.

 

Barrows, have you got any links to these that shows the testing protocols involved?

BTW, I am more impartial here than you might think. As I have already said, I have never compared one cable/interconnect to another- ever. There is no personal baggage on my part.

[prufrock]

O.K. Just been onto the Nordost site. You dont have to go far to know you have just run into more of the same old crap. Read the first download link for example. Its laughable stuff.

[prufrock]

 

Even more relevant to this thread is that the fervent, fanatical advocating of a few "true believers" here has really made me question even the effects I had until now acknowledged. If the effects are for real, why do they need such desperate, fanatical defending? And why are people so strongly against trying to measure and understand those effects?

 

Its a hard one isn't it. I do actually empathise with them. They genuinely do hear these things. They are not trying to con anybody. Yet they continually have to deal with people like us telling them that they shouldn't be hearing what they do. I would guess that there is almost certainly a physiological counterpart to what they are hearing - created by expectation and a myriad other factors in this whole debacle.

Its a very challenging thing to tell someone that they are "imagining things." It has medical connotations, i.e delusions, hallucinations, etc, that most people would find very unwelcome. I have nursed in mental health for around 25yrs (mostly treating schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and personality disorders) and have to do this on a daily basis. We call it reality testing. It is difficult and rarely effective, even for those with some insight. Their hallucinations and delusions are completely real to them and there is little you can do to convince them otherwise.

The cable "phenomenon" has nothing whatever to do with the medical conditions mentioned above btw. IMO, it is more in a stable alongside all the other cults, movements, sects that have gone off on a tangent from normal scientific/rational thought yet survive and prosper due to the weight of numbers effect and other individual facilitating factors.

[prufrock]

Manufacture/ Dealer/customer

 

So it seems the beginning of the eighties sees the startup of cable companies in the U.S. in a significant way. Initially appearing in a restricted number of outlets, then widening out to dealer networks. Prior to this most audiophiles used generic cable. Audiophile urges were met pulling tubes in and out, upgrading cartridges etc. Now when an audiophile walked into a Hi Fi store he would increasing be aware of brandname cables/interconnects. Glossy brochures would catch his eye with likely claims of better sound and performance - purer/more finely etched highs; warmer/more engaging mids; and a tighter, more controlled bass.

Consumer orientated HiFi mags would be displaying much of the same stuff. What would a poor audiophile do? Some would have bought the hype, taken the bait and taken it home. Mates would have come around and said, whats with the fancy cord? Have a listen would be the reply, I think you will be surprised.

If at this point in time the manufacturers have been required by law to prove up their claims with independent DBT this thing would most likely have been nipped in the bud. Modern day consumers are used to being protected against misleading advertising. They would have had this notion at the back of their mind when purchasing. And no doubt still do today. Go onto any cable maker website now and and you will find the same wild and outrageous claims - Graphs and figures of cable properties that point to sonic improvement, but never ever any published studies that significantly link the two. The ubiquitous disclaimers at the bottom seemingly enough to cover their ass. And, as has been said previously, 30 day money back return meant no one got pissed off enough to get litigious.

Hard to know how much of a deliberate scam it all has been. I am inclined to think most of these merchants actually believe the rubbish themselves. When will the scam stop? Cant see it happening until advertising comes into line with reality.

[prufrock]

 

This audio stuff is just not that big a deal considering how much is really "wrong" with our world.

 

I mean really, show me the audiophile who starved to death because he spent all his money on Nordost "Odin".

 

Have that attitude if you wish. If you can sleep well knowing audiophiles out there are at risk of RSI from pulling cables in and out, good for you.

[prufrock]

Oh really? Would we have the vitamin and supplements industries if this were the case? How about gas and motor oil additives? Cosmetics? Only if cables were prescription medicine would they be required to prove efficacy with DBT. Don't you think consumers should have the right to make their own decisions about how they spend their money on harmless luxury goods?

 

Another whose commitment to audiophilia seems a little wanting. I suggest you go away and have a think about how you can provide a better world for audiophiles, instead of putting them down and comparing them to typical drongo consumers.

[prufrock]

 

Question: What are your reasons and/or motives for creating this thread?

 

 

 

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.

[prufrock]

I am sure your blog will become the No. 1 hit on google for cable sceptics all around the world.

 

 

No, mine will be a very modest affair. Short, and penned in a simple style and language. Written by a noob for other noobs really.

 

What made me go down the computer audio path was hearing it at someone else's place. I then went home and put "computer audio" into the search engine. This site came up and you have been charmed with my presence ever since. However there would multiples of me out there reading this forum who do not post.

What they would be seeing is virtually an eternal debate on cables/interconnects. They would also notice that many learned posters have brandname cables listed at the bottom of their posts. Put yourself into the shoes of a newbie - what sort of message would this convey? What it told me was that for many experienced listeners, cable/interconnect types/brands were an integral part of a system setup. And any time anyone changes or upgrades systems, cables/interconnects usually come into play.

 

However, a little research informed me that what I was seeing on this forum was far removed from the wider reality. Pro audio doesn't believe any of this stuff and they have been at it for quite some time now. They also have the best measuring equipment. Someone completely new to all this who came upon this forum would be getting a completely false impression.

I have already stated that I can understand this eternal debate. There is no easy way to tell someone that they are 'hearing things." Do that and it is natural that they will defend themselves long and loudly. So this situation its nobodies fault really.

 

My blog (among other things) will inform other newcomers of the situation above.

[prufrock]

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.

[prufrock]

Since when are we all supposed to reduce this all down to support only newbies at the expense pushing the envelope?

 

I recognise that this is not going to happen. Hence the blog.

[prufrock]

I mentioned the manufacturer/dealer/customer dynamic a while back. More can be said on the high end dealer/HiFi shops I think. Any high end HiFi shop I have ever gone into has had quite a few different cables/interconnects for sale, ranging from mildly expensive to wildly expensive. Has anyone ever gone into a Hi Fi shop and been told by the owner that it is a scam? There would be the odd one around I presume. I have never come across one though. Some are more non- committal than others. One I know shrugs his shoulders and says many of his customers can definitely hear differences so he has to stock them otherwise they will go elsewhere. This last point is significant as it virtually guarantees that they will all carry the expensive lines, since the phenomenon has reached a critical mass of followers.

Since the high end places tend not to stock just ordinary, cheap (but well made) stuff, anyone who has just bought components there will have to make a decision to go elsewhere to get the cheap cable, or "give in" and just buy the mildly expensive stuff. This is what I do. But I despise myself for doing it. I know I am just being pulled in by the gravity of the "phenomenon".

 

Another poor piece of reasoning that you often hear at the shops is this: "plan to spend 5% on cables in a new setup". Often phrased sometimes like this:" That's a pretty impressive setup you have selected there. You wouldn't want to let it down with substandard cables."

[prufrock]

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.

[prufrock]

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.

 

If cables don't matter (beyond being well constructed), what's the point? They all taste the same.

[prufrock]

(*sigh*) If you "despise" yourself, why do it? I am quite sure you have a big box store somewhere around that sells zip cord. Just use that, and if you are happy with what you hear, then why get all hot an bothered?

 

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?

[prufrock]

Pressing on relentlessly with the etiology leads me to another point which may be relevant.

Imagine our audiophile has just been to the HiFi shop to window shop/ hang out. Maybe even a bit of retail therapy wouldn't be out of the question. The dealer points him towards an expensive interconnect that has been selling well. Our audiophile expresses doubt that it could be as good as the price would indicate. Take it home says the dealer. Give it a try. If you don't like it, bring it back.

So he takes it home and gives it a whirl. What would be some of the forces at work here?

Well, for a start the dealer has told him it is popular. Maybe he even mentioned a couple of audiophiles known to them both who each had expensive systems and now use it. Would our audiophile want to be the Dumbo who had to return to the shop and admit that he couldn't hear the difference? Or would he instead chose to join the select breed of golden ears who could?

[prufrock]

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.

 

What I am suggesting I think, is that although Joe (forget Jane, there are none remember) has every intention of being honest with himself, these processes may be working away in the background beyond his conscious awareness. This sort of thing happens all the time to humans. We are a very social species who, generally speaking, like to share a consensus reality and remain with the group. It has made us the success we are.

[prufrock]

+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.

 

I am suggesting that what you like, and the reasons that led to you liking it, may be not as clear cut as you might imagine. Every time you go to the supermarket and pick something off the shelf, there are a whole range of factors that influenced your decision that you were almost certainly completely unaware of. Companies spend a lot of time, effort and money on researching colours shapes etc that may give them the edge. The "you" that you think is you, is only the tip of the iceberg.

[prufrock]

Some things I can guarantee that you will never see:

 

You will never see any cable manufacturer who sells outrageously priced cables/interconnects put those items to an independent agency to test on consumers.

 

Nor will you ever be witness to any of the big name music industry figures mentioned above submitting to a study to prove up their claims.

 

Long live the cable debate.

[prufrock]

barrows,

I have a sneaking suspicion that prufrock's POV is influenced by the post count of 'his' thread and perhaps this latest post is just stoking the flames with another outragous statement whenever things seem to slow down

 

"poke the beast and it Roars !"

 

Daudio

I do post on several other forums (mostly stock market related). Nothing to do with audio. I do like this method of talking to people and sharing ideas. In a way it harks back to the days of old and written communication. Because it is anonymous, it also allows directness and honesty in many ways. I actually try and keep my posts as short as possible and only reply when I think I have something worthwhile (or funny) to say. I have been posting a lot on this thread as I want to get my take on this issue over and done with.

[prufrock]

That's how it's looking to me also. Needling is the term that came to my mind.

 

And then posts like this looks like he's trying to turn an audio site into a psych site.

 

I think you are being a little unfair there. I do banter on about "audiophiles" in general for a bit of fun. I never make it personal though, ever.

 

Not trying to turn this into a psych site. Its just that my stance is opposite yours and my argument just happens to involve issues in this domain.

[prufrock]

Julf: I think you made an error here, which if you even think about a little, you will agree that it is in error:

 

"Exactly. And the job to be done is reproducing music accurately."

 

For most part, I suspect that recording/mastering engineers are trying to produce a sonic result which will "get them paid" (thanks Paul), and accuracy has little to do with that in most cases: hence the use of the various modes of DSP mentioned by Mitch, and things like Autotune enabling non-singers such as Taylor Swift to be perceived as someone who can sing, or the overuse of compression/limiting to raise average levels well beyond anything which could be considered accurate. I do not think that any of these (commonly used) approaches produce a result which anyone could consider "accurate". Furthermore, if the current batch of pros were striving for accuracy, I suspect their recording techniques and approaches would be closer to those used by folks like Barry Diamante, Cookie Marenco, Wilma Cozart Fine, Keith Johnson, Winston Ma, Ray Kimber, and many of the other recording engineers who have adopted (or created) what some term "audiophile" approaches to recording.

 

Not to sound like some kind of audiophile snob, let me make it clear that I enjoy lots of recordings produced in the studio, using all the trickery possible: as a specific example, the studio recording of Peter Gabriel comes immediately to mind. But I would not call the end result "accurate".

 

My kids listen to music in almost exclusively non audiophile environments, i.e cars, iphones with earplugs etc. I guess the pros have to provide them with a product they can hear above all the background noise. Thus the compression etc. Young people tend to listen to a lot of music I notice. More so than older people, so its a big market that has to have its needs filled. I cant stand any of the music they listen to. It all sounds absolutely dreadful.

[prufrock]

Prufrock: I understand what you are saying, at the same time I would not describe the activity of your kids as actually "listening", it is more about having music as a background to other activities.

 

No, they are very much into music, with huge collections of current stuff. They know all the lyrics and have a very detailed knowledge of it all. They have tried the IEMs and said they didn't like the sensation of them in the ear canal. I don't either. Hope you are right about all not being lost. But honestly, the stuff they listen to is just garbage.

[prufrock]

Getting back on topic of how this cable thing got going........I find it interesting that it took off really big time when CD was introduced. It could be simple coincidence or confluence of events of course. That also is when a renaissance of tube based audio seemed to really pick up steam in a big way. Both wire and tube rebirth were already taking shape a few years before CD. Both seemed to explode shortly after CD. Did CD have a hand in causing that explosion? Did CD cause an explosion in interest of high quality home audio and the rest just grew with it? Or was it the introduction of the Quad ESL63 in 1981? See with coincidence you just don't know.

 

Interesting point. With the introduction of CD, lots of people would have been out there buying CD players obviously. Mainstream would have bought from the ordinary retail outlets with cables included. However audiophiles would have tended to go upmarket. Good opportunity for the hi end salesman to sell the "new cable technology" to go with the new digital player.

[prufrock]

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.

[prufrock]

Ok so now that everyone has expressed an opinion and we are pretty much where we started I think we can put a fork in this one. All newbies can be directed to this thread and we can move on to more interesting topics.

 

Yes I'm being a bit facetious :-)

 

The point of this thread was to use it as a working group to get a sort of consensus on the issue. I don't believe directing noobs to the thread itself would be very useful. Too rambling and full of unrelated stuff. What they need is a succinct 1-2 page synopsis that is well written enough to hold their interest. But I agree, the thread looks to nearing the end of its useful life.

 

So if its O.K with you Chris, I will do that in the next few days and post it up here for people to look at. And they can point out any things that need wording differently. I will then use that as a blog entry with a link at the bottom of my posts. Thanks everyone for your help.