Those who own Audioquest cable...what do you think?

[semente]

What is your method of comparison?

 

I draw the curtains, close the living room door and sit in the sweet spot listening to how equipment/accessory reproduces sound of different types of music.

I know that your past experiences have made you tremendously sceptical of your listening abilities (probably because you gave too much credit to magazines and hype) but you'd be better off getting over it and learning to listen to sound/performance from an observational perspective; you'll still need measurements to confront your findings, just as I do, but it is possible to assess performance with one's ear/brain combo.

 

R

[sandyk]

parallel-distant IC topologies

 

 

???

If you mean widely separated active and 0 volts wires ,with no additional screening, it would have much lower capacitance, and would almost certainly also be adversely affected by today's much higher RF/EMI pollution in a modern city.

[semente]

???

If you mean widely separated active and 0 volts wires ,with no additional screening, it would have much lower capacitance, and would almost certainly also be adversely affected by today's much higher RF/EMI pollution in a modern city.

 

See here.

I have recreated this cable but with only two live and a single ground conductors, and only air between the PTFE-coated solid-core Cat5 wires.

Give it a try and let me know if you can hear any "pollution"; mine are just 20cm long.

 

R

[sandyk]

See here.

I have recreated this cable but with only two live and a single ground conductors, and only air between the PTFE-coated solid-core Cat5 wires.

Give it a try and let me know if you can hear any "pollution"; mine are just 20cm long.

 

R

 

It's not suitable for my system which relies for highest visually measured S/N on a very low resistance 0 volts (earth) being extended from the source component (DAC), then both legs switched by the selector switch in the Preamp,and ending up at the signal "earth" inputs of my P.A. which provides the earth reference. I use double screened coax type construction interconnects, so you can see that this gives a very low resistance earth path right throughout the signal chain.

The S/N was adjusted and checked using a 10 x gain , Low noise battery operated Preamp with my C.R.O to extend it's maximum sensitivity.

[Jud]

I draw the curtains, close the living room door and sit in the sweet spot listening to how equipment/accessory reproduces sound of different types of music.

I know that your past experiences have made you tremendously sceptical of your listening abilities (probably because you gave too much credit to magazines and hype) but you'd be better off getting over it and learning to listen to sound/performance from an observational perspective; you'll still need measurements to confront your findings, just as I do, but it is possible to assess performance with one's ear/brain combo.

 

R

 

Dennis (esldude) has an excellent system, has given long and hard thought to topics concerning subjective assessment of audio performance, and has done a *lot* of testing. I'm not saying that you should replace your thinking with his at all, just that you ought to give what he says quite serious consideration, and see how it fits in with your own views.

[Jud]

???

If you mean widely separated active and 0 volts wires ,with no additional screening, it would have much lower capacitance, and would almost certainly also be adversely affected by today's much higher RF/EMI pollution in a modern city.

 

Hi Alex. Looks like it's a good thing I haven't lived in or near a modern city for a quarter century or so.

[Jud]

Sorry, I find the conclusion to be at odds with starting with a properly shielded cable design in a interconnect and the example provided to be an apples-oranges comparison.

 

In any case ain't neither of us going to be swayed, but we'll get back to this in time anyway, it's inevitable. LOL

May the force be with ya

 

And also with you.

[Jud]

So with full detail, the first TT had nothing really to do with it. I have had shielded phono connection and humming TT's as well. Sometimes you added a 3rd pin ground on the power cord which many TT's don't have. Or an additional ground strap leading to elsewhere. Or use a cheater plug to disconnect 3rd pin ground on the pre-amp which many did have or other things. The fact it had hum with shielded cable and removing a connection on cart doesn't have anything to say about the second TT.

 

Yep, that's fair. Just wanted to establish it was a ground hum that was fixed by removing the ground strap connection on the cartridge, as mansr in particular seemed very curious as to whether there was anything that would indicate an induced hum.

 

Now going from the ribbon to a thin cable fixed hum in the second TT. Would going with a conventional shielded phono cable have done so as well? We don't know. Was it fixed due to high resistance of the thin cable? We don't know. The second cable if I understood the description of it was shielded in the way it was constructed. So you can't parse out which was responsible for hum going away.

 

I would think it would be a rather unusual induced hum that didn't vary a whit with regard to location vis-a-vis any possible source (remained the same in spite of the ribbon interconnects to the turntable being moved from one side of my system to the other, and not being very close to a likely source of hum in either location), but was sensitive to grounding (reduced but not eliminated when I connected the turntable ground to the pre-amp grounding screw). Anything is possible, but it seems to me to be far from the most parsimonious explanation under the circumstances.

[semente]

Dennis (esldude) has an excellent system, has given long and hard thought to topics concerning subjective assessment of audio performance, and has done a *lot* of testing. I'm not saying that you should replace your thinking with his at all, just that you ought to give what he says quite serious consideration, and see how it fits in with your own views.

 

Hi Jud,

 

I'm not questioning his thoughtfulness, which comes through as deep and knowledgeable from all of his posts; I just feel that he is over-sceptic of the effectiveness of subjective assessment...

I am quite sceptic myself and like to understand the hows and whys, but try to sit halfway between listening and measuring.

 

Regarding his comment, I did mention that my preferred cable "seemed to produce"; it was just an impression and could be wrong.

This is why I tend not to worry about audio cables (I haven't done any comparisons for almost a decade and chose to compare different topologies instead of expensive-brand propaganda).

 

R

[PopPop]

Sure, but each has areas of strengths and weakness. You've already determined under what musical conditions which one is more accurate. If you want one speaker that is more accurate in all areas you have to spend a LOT more money. But you already know these things.

 

Dang esl, you beat me to the draw.

 

And that's all I was trying to say. Accuracy is circumstantial, not absolute. So trying to measure or label accuracy of a single component becomes incredibly complex if not impossible.

[PopPop]

Two different types of music have different parameters. Rock has a need for loudness and overall energy that a string quartet does not. A better speaker might serve both types of music better than what you have. So you have speakers with different limitations which serve different types of music. You could say they are more accurate for each respective kind of music. A single better speaker might encompass all the parameters of both genres with the intimate soundstage when called for and able to rock out when no such quality is in the music itself.

 

Taken to the extreme that would mean that every one should have the exact same system, which has been engineered to perfection. Personally I like the characteristics of the planar speakers for most of the music I listen to and am willing to compromise a bit when I cue up CSNR. Thanks for your comments.

[sdolezalek]

Although several of us have asked whether there might be valid technical reasons for cables to sound differently, it seems that the only concession being made is that proper shielding could play a role, but that otherwise all properly designed cables should sound the same.

 

So let me take this a slightly different direction: if a cable was going to make a difference which one would it be, power, speaker, interconnect, USB, Ethernet, etc.?From looking at everyone's equipment choices, it appears that even among those more focused on measurement you are making choices as to where to spend more or less on cables. Why?

[mansr]

Although several of us have asked whether there might be valid technical reasons for cables to sound differently, it seems that the only concession being made is that proper shielding could play a role, but that otherwise all properly designed cables should sound the same.

 

So let me take this a slightly different direction: if a cable was going to make a difference which one would it be, power, speaker, interconnect, USB, Ethernet, etc.?From looking at everyone's equipment choices, it appears that even among those more focused on measurement you are making choices as to where to spend more or less on cables. Why?

 

Cables carrying low-level analogue signals need to be properly shielded. The rest don't matter as long as they meet relevant specs.

 

For digital connections I use whatever is cheapest and still works. I have encountered bad USB and HDMI cables, and they were obviously defective.

 

My most expensive cable is probably a £30 Audioquest interconnect I got for free with an amp. I don't believe their marketing spin, but the cable appears to work as well as any.

[Sal1950]

Cables carrying low-level analogue signals need to be properly shielded. The rest don't matter as long as they meet relevant specs.

 

For digital connections I use whatever is cheapest and still works. I have encountered bad USB and HDMI cables, and they were obviously defective.

 

My most expensive cable is probably a £30 Audioquest interconnect I got for free with an amp. I don't believe their marketing spin, but the cable appears to work as well as any.

 

+1 exactlly.

[Daphne]

I have a basic general outlook on the subject of audio cables. If there is one thing I have learned being an unhinged audiophile over the past 25 years or so - there is a difference between theory and reality, a difference between objective data and the subjective listening experience.

 

Here is my opinion on cables:

 

HDMI cables: From my experience, most of the claims made my manufacturers of outrageously expensive high end HDMI cables are pure nonsense.

 

Analog interconnects: I have found the sonic difference between balanced interconnects to be so minimal I have actually induced a headache attempting to hear the difference. Then again I have only been using cables with superior shielding which tend to cost more.

 

USB cables: I am not a fan of USB. I will hold my head down in shame as I confess wasting too many dollars on USB cables, not to mention all the wasted time comparing cables. Even more idiotic, twice I purchased pairs of USB cables to compare in an attempt to verify the theory of burn in time, only to discover that was nonsense. Now, if I need to use USB I will generally connect through the Berkeley Alpha USB interface.

 

Ethernet cables: I have a Meridian system with drives and a server connected to several rooms with Meridian in wall speakers. I am not sure what type of LAN cable was installed. The rest of the internet around the home is using Cat6a. I was using a GISO isolator for my Lumin S1 and the result was like they say “not subtle.” IMO forget expensive Ethernet cable and go fiber for a fraction of the cost with superior isolation and sonic results.

 

Speaker cables: I have tried a number of speaker cables over the years and all have produced a slightly different sonic signature. Why, I don’t exactly know, and basically don’t care. The difficult part is in deciding which one I prefer over the other. One thing is for certain, I am not parting with the same amount, or more, for a pair of speaker cables than the cost of an excellent amplifier.

 

Power cables: Power cables can make a sonic improvement. However, what I have found to make the most significant improvement with any system is delivering clean power to each component and isolating the digital components away from the analog components. Power cables are secondary.

 

So, addressing the main thread subject; here is a unique, and confusing, marketing statement AudioQuest has published on their website in bold type:

 

“DO NO HARM! Cable design is all about damage control. No Cable can make your system sound or look better, they can only cause damage to the original signal. AudioQuest’s perspective has always been to design cable that DO NO HARM!”

 

For a company that offers 5 to 10 levels of each type of cable, it is obvious that some cables do “more harm” that others. I assume it is left to the consumer how much harm to the audio signal each is willing to live with. Don’t forget, “no cable can make your system sound better.”

 

As I was writing the above AudioQuest statement my thoughts were spinning. It is like reading some type of oxymoron statement – “Always be sincere, even though you do not necessarily mean it.”

 

This brought to mind my dad’s opinion on audio cables. Most audio cable manufacturers (not all) are a direct result of the Maker Culture. Basically, someone tinkering with a piece of wire and a multi meter with a good dose of bricolage thrown in. They have reduced the marketing strategy of the audio industry into “if you make it, they will buy it.” Then there is the dark side where a good 25% of audio cable manufacturers are nothing more than unscrupulous opportunists – the definition of a carpetbagger.

 

My dad also has a theory about why some cables may sound different than other cables. He believes it is partially related to the connectors. Factors such as the metallurgy of the connectors, lack of quality control when bonding the wire to the connector and possibly the insulation within the connector, or any combination the three, may affect the sound quality.

 

Just some Tall Talk from a man in his late 60s who has been an eccentric audiophile, tube loving, vinyl aficionado for the past 50 years. I can recall watching him cut the RCA terminals off cables and soldering the connections between the turntable, to the internal components of the phono pre amp, pre amp and amplifier. He was eliminating the problems associated with connectors and the atmospheric contaminants which cause tarnish and corrosion on non-soldered and non-gas-tight electrical connections. Purchase top quality cable in bulk like the type used in recording studios, hard wire all your components, and never waste any time or energy listening to anything a cable manufacturer claims.

 

Oh, my dad has many opinions on the audio world. Now my daughter is a young, 25 year old digital audiophile and proud of it. She believes everything her grandfather has to say, right up to the point when she turns to ask, “mom, it that true?”

[jhwalker]

Cables carrying low-level analogue signals need to be properly shielded. The rest don't matter as long as they meet relevant specs.

 

For digital connections I use whatever is cheapest and still works. I have encountered bad USB and HDMI cables, and they were obviously defective.

 

My most expensive cable is probably a £30 Audioquest interconnect I got for free with an amp. I don't believe their marketing spin, but the cable appears to work as well as any.

 

Same here, though I'll admit I *purchased* my $18 analog interconnects from Blue Jeans Cables and they're much sturdier than the $5 cables I used to buy at Radio Shack. Not sure I can hear a difference sound-wise - my system has always sounded pretty good.

[gmgraves]

The same could be said of effects created via equalization or dsl processing, etc.

But what about the concept of High Fidelity, accuracy to the source as best we can accomplish. What has happened to those goals?

 

 

Have they been replaced by "if it sounds good (to my ears) do it"? Sometimes it seems like it. But in defense of that attitude, with most of today's recordings, the listener has no idea what the original source actually sounded like, so is that goal really even relevant these days? The idea of accuracy is really only important to listeners of classical and other unamplified, acoustic music.

 

I argue that unless the listener of pop and rock has the exact make and model of the speakers upon which a given recording was mixed, any semblance of accuracy to the original in impossible. The listener will never hear what the musicians, producers and engineers heard on playback without having the same monitor speakers, so accuracy is pretty much a moot point. The performance doesn't really exist without the electronics and the playback monitors, so, without the same ones, the listener is just hearing an approximation of the performance as it was intended.

[gmgraves]

Although several of us have asked whether there might be valid technical reasons for cables to sound differently, it seems that the only concession being made is that proper shielding could play a role, but that otherwise all properly designed cables should sound the same.

 

So let me take this a slightly different direction: if a cable was going to make a difference which one would it be, power, speaker, interconnect, USB, Ethernet, etc.?From looking at everyone's equipment choices, it appears that even among those more focused on measurement you are making choices as to where to spend more or less on cables. Why?

 

If any cable were to actually make a real difference, it would be speaker cables, and even then, not all speaker/amp combinations would be affected. It is also possible that that the cable from a tone-arm on a record player to the phono preamp could have some effect on the sound, especially if one were using a low-output MC cartridge. These are such tiny signals that a few pf of Xc and a few nanoHenrys of X_l could alter the frequency response of the output.

 

There is no reason in all electrical theory why the last 6 ft or so of your electrical mains' journey from the power plant where it was generated to the power supply of your hi-fi gear should give a good rat's ass about the cable through which it is passing, except for that cable's ability to carry current needed by the audio component, which by definition, here in the USA is going to be a maximum of 15 amps.

 

It is possible that a USB cable of the wrong cable impedance (I believe that it should be 90 Ohms, but I could be disremembering here) could induce digital errors, but that has yet to be proven.

 

I wouldn't worry about Ethernet cable were I you. Any internet digital audio signal has already been subjected to far more indignities on it's long journey via copper, glass fiber, microwave, and satellite than any few of feet of CAT5 Ether cabling between one's modem and one's computing device or wireless router could possibly inflict.

[Jud]

Although several of us have asked whether there might be valid technical reasons for cables to sound differently, it seems that the only concession being made is that proper shielding could play a role, but that otherwise all properly designed cables should sound the same.

 

 

I don't want to be argumentative, but I'm not granting either premise (that shielding is the only difference, or that properly shielded cables should all sound the same).

 

A properly shielded cable can have a ground hum; it's less subject to hum induced *ex*ternally, but can still be subject to hum or noise being carried *in*ternally on one of the conductors, or crosstalk.

 

Nor is shielding the only thing that might make a difference. On a test bench yes, but as we've discussed, in a system something like the resistance of one cable versus another can determine how ground currents flow, for example, or how/whether noise flows through ground, and thus hum or noise behavior of the system.

[esldude]

Dennis (esldude) has an excellent system, has given long and hard thought to topics concerning subjective assessment of audio performance, and has done a *lot* of testing. I'm not saying that you should replace your thinking with his at all, just that you ought to give what he says quite serious consideration, and see how it fits in with your own views.

 

Thank you Jud for the kind and respectful comments.

[Jud]

There is no reason in all electrical theory why the last 6 ft or so of your electrical mains' journey from the power plant where it was generated to the power supply of your hi-fi gear should give a good rat's ass about the cable through which it is passing....

 

As I've noted before: When studying what sort of solar power system I might want to put in my retirement home, I found out it's what's *inside* the home that easily makes the most profound difference. Utilities are required by law to provide a certain quality of power to the home (e.g., regulations usually require harmonic distortion of less than 2%), and thus to be able to cope with all the distortions put into the line by what's inside all the hundreds of thousands or millions of residences on its grid. These distortions consist primarily of harmonic distortion (electric motors, as in refrigerators, and small appliances are culprits), reductions in power factor, and digital hash put into the lines by everything with a computer chip in it, meaning everything from LED lights to toasters these days.

 

So what shows up at your doorstep is as clean as it's going to get. What you need to worry about is stuff like your fridge turning on in the middle of a listening session. How well does your system cope with the harmonic distortion that puts into the electrical circuits in your home?

[Jud]

Thank you Jud for the kind and respectful comments.

 

Good thing they happen to be true then, eh?

[gmgraves]

Same here, though I'll admit I *purchased* my $18 analog interconnects from Blue Jeans Cables and they're much sturdier than the $5 cables I used to buy at Radio Shack. Not sure I can hear a difference sound-wise - my system has always sounded pretty good.

 

It never hurts to buy good quality interconnects. By quality, I'm referring to physical quality; i.e. the materials used and the build quality. Excellent, reliable cables can be bought from numerous sources without costing an arm and a leg. I buy mine in bulk from MyCableMart.com. they are made from real RG59U and it says so right on the cable jacket. The plugs are gold-plated and are well constructed with nicely molded strain reliefs from sturdy materials. They cost just a couple of dollars each. I have never had one fail. But, IMHO, wherever you buy yours, there is simply no practical reason to pay more than about $35 for a 1-meter pair of interconnects.

 

You might also take a look at their TOSLink cables too (if your system uses them). They are exactly the same optical cables that some other cable manufacturer (Kimber, IIRC) sell for more than 10X what Mycablemart is asking. I have compared them directly.

[esldude]

Taken to the extreme that would mean that every one should have the exact same system, which has been engineered to perfection. Personally I like the characteristics of the planar speakers for most of the music I listen to and am willing to compromise a bit when I cue up CSNR. Thanks for your comments.

 

No, not at all. If for no other reason than the same speakers will sound different in your room vs my room. The size and quietness of that room may mean a different amp is needed even for the same speakers. BTW, I too am generally prone to prefer panel speakers.

 

There are plenty of other reasons we wouldn't all want the same system. I do think it would be helpful if we all worked from a base of excellent fidelity. A base from which we can season to preference. I feel the confusion of preference with fidelity harms the pursuit of satisfying sound in our music listening experience.

 

My favorite example being tube amps. Quite a few people come to believe tube amps are capable of some unmeasurable fidelity that is beyond and superior to SS amps. Then decisions are made to look for this missing ingredient, some claim to know what it is, alterations to SS amp design are sometimes made to make them closer to what tubes can do. For what it is worth I once believed this too. The truth is the better SS amps have a larger performance envelope than tube amps, have higher genuine fidelity to the source and are lacking nothing. The tube amps have some inherent coloration that often sounds better to humans than true fidelity.

 

Now this doesn't mean I think no one should own or prefer tube amps. I like them quite a lot myself. It means I think the whole industry is better off understanding what is going on rather than pursuing something that can't be found based upon a premise which is not true. There is no right or wrong preference. People should not be obligated to shoot for extreme fidelity if they don't wish to do so. That is all fine. Quite naturally people are aiming for maximum enjoyment. Max enjoyment and max fidelity are not always the same thing. Judging fidelity by enjoyment then is potentially a mistake.

[gmgraves]

As I've noted before: When studying what sort of solar power system I might want to put in my retirement home, I found out it's what's *inside* the home that easily makes the most profound difference. Utilities are required by law to provide a certain quality of power to the home (e.g., regulations usually require harmonic distortion of less than 2%), and thus to be able to cope with all the distortions put into the line by what's inside all the hundreds of thousands or millions of residences on its grid. These distortions consist primarily of harmonic distortion (electric motors, as in refrigerators, and small appliances are culprits), reductions in power factor, and digital hash put into the lines by everything with a computer chip in it, meaning everything from LED lights to toasters these days.

 

So what shows up at your doorstep is as clean as it's going to get. What you need to worry about is stuff like your fridge turning on in the middle of a listening session. How well does your system cope with the harmonic distortion that puts into the electrical circuits in your home?

 

 

Every point you make is absolutely true, and there is little that you can do about it. Sure, you can buy an expensive mains filter, and that surely helps, but your electricity is running around in your walls and is connected to the microwave, the fridge, electric razors, the Cuisinart, the computer, etc and that interference has imposed itself on the mains feeding your audio system. Some people have gone to the trouble to have an electrician wire in a separate circuit for their audio systems, but I've never talked to anyone who did it who found that it helped enough to be worth the cost. Maybe in some cases it helps a lot, but, it must be pointed out that at some point in the house, even a separate line has to rejoin the incoming power line. even if it's on the other phase from the rest of the house.