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

[esldude]

How can they be when so many people hear them?

 

(I know, I know. The DBT card will be played next.)

 

Capacitance is energy storage. That energy gets injected back. It's possible (some of) our ears and brains are sensitive enough to assess when one cable reduces the harm of this effect relative to another.

 

There are measures of that which are more sensitive than your ear. It isn't a problem.

[gmgraves]

How can they be when so many people hear them?

 

Obviously what they are hearing are NOT "reactive characteristics'

 

(I know, I know. The DBT card will be played next.)

 

Capacitance is energy storage.

 

Except when the capacitance is too low to store any energy in the passband of interest.

 

That energy gets injected back.

 

Would that it were. Apparently, due to the extremely low capacitance of cable at the lengths used in interconnects, it's not, as no attenuation of anything in the audio passband can be measured or otherwise detected.

 

It's possible (some of) our ears and brains are sensitive enough to assess when one cable reduces the harm of this effect relative to another.

 

Possible, but unlikely. It is possible​, and I won't discount the possibility, that our ears are detecting something that we aren't measuring or haven't quantified, but I seriously doubt that it has anything to do X_​l or X_c.

[gmgraves]

If such unknown effects exist, one would expect them to manifest in other places than audio cables.

 

Yes, there is that. A lot of audiophiles do tend to treat audio as if it were somehow "special" or "magic"; not subject to the laws of physics like every other branch of electronics. The argument seems to be that just because a cable can successfully carry the signals needed to fly a jet airplane from one continent to another, or get a rover to Mars, doesn't mean that it can carry an audio signal from one's DAC to one's pre-amp successfully. The reality is that audio is about the easiest of all AC signals (the only thing "easier" is our mains) to conduct.

 

So the question remains: What could subtly alter the sound of an audio signal yet not alter more complex signals like RF and microwaves, and not alter the operation of complex machinery that relies, day in and day out on complex, often life critical signals getting from point to point unchanged from their source?

 

Yet, I cannot, in good faith, just write-off those here who are 100% sure that interconnects can alter the sound of their stereo systems. There are too many of them, and too many of them are good, intelligent, and knowledgeable people to just chalk up their empirical results to hysteria or mass delusion.

[jabbr]

Yes, there is that. A lot of audiophiles do tend to treat audio as if it were somehow "special" or "magic"; not subject to the laws of physics like every other branch of electronics. The argument seems to be that just because a cable can successfully carry the signals needed to fly a jet airplane from one continent to another, or get a rover to Mars, doesn't mean that it can carry an audio signal from one's DAC to one's pre-amp successfully. The reality is that audio is about the easiest of all AC signals (the only thing "easier" is our mains) to conduct.

 

So the question remains: What could subtly alter the sound of an audio signal yet not alter more complex signals like RF and microwaves, and not alter the operation of complex machinery that relies, day in and day out on complex, often life critical signals getting from point to point unchanged from their source?

 

Yet, I cannot, in good faith, just write-off those here who are 100% sure that interconnects can alter the sound of their stereo systems. There are too many of them, and too many of them are good, intelligent, and knowledgeable people to just chalk up their empirical results to hysteria or mass delusion.

 

There are clearly measurable differences between different cables. These differences do not, however, necessarily correlate to price, nor do they correlate with magical properties ascribed to certain cables by certain people.

[PopPop]

Transparent, MIT, Monster or cable with network boxes.

 

I once replaced some heavy lamp cord speaker cables with MIT interconnects between my old Harmon Kardon integrated amp and a pair of B&W DM602s. They actually expanded the sound stage a bit, noticeably so. Anyone who listened to them described exactly the same effect. But as you say, they may have been acting as a filter. When I upgraded to a Rotel Integrated amp the MIT, the effect of the MIT cables was negligible.

[mansr]

Yet, I cannot, in good faith, just write-off those here who are 100% sure that interconnects can alter the sound of their stereo systems.

 

I can, and I do.

[Allan F]

I can, and I do.

"A closed mind is a dying mind."

-Edna Ferber

[Audio_ELF]

I once replaced some heavy lamp cord speaker cables with MIT interconnects between my old Harmon Kardon integrated amp and a pair of B&W DM602s. They actually expanded the sound stage a bit, noticeably so. Anyone who listened to them described exactly the same effect. But as you say, they may have been acting as a filter. When I upgraded to a Rotel Integrated amp the MIT, the effect of the MIT cables was negligible.

There are some characterises of cables which can be measured and may affect amplifiers.

 

For instance Kimber's speaker cable weave tends to offer a high capacitance vs. more traditional side by side "shotgun" speaker cable. With some amplifiers (for example Naim) this can cause a problem and so affect sound quality.

[Richard Dale]

There are some characterises of cables which can be measured and may affect amplifiers.

 

For instance Kimber's speaker cable weave tends to offer a high capacitance vs. more traditional side by side "shotgun" speaker cable. With some amplifiers (for example Naim) this can cause a problem and so affect sound quality.

 

I think I read once that Ray Kimber discovered the beneficial effects of the way he weaves speaker cables when he was doing a professional sound installation and found that much to his surprise the cables sounded different when they we twisted. I think he believes the twisted cable is better at rejecting RFI.

[semente]

I think I read once that Ray Kimber discovered the beneficial effects of the way he weaves speaker cables when he was doing a professional sound installation and found that much to his surprise the cables sounded different when they we twisted. I think he believes the twisted cable is better at rejecting RFI.

 

This might be down to the fact that some Kimber cables have abnormally (perhaps even dangerously) high capacitance:

 

Kimber 8VS - 291.0 pF / meter

 

Kimber 8TC - 346.0 pF / meter

 

Kimber MONOCLE XL - 1,199.0 pF / meter

 

R

[gmgraves]

There are clearly measurable differences between different cables. These differences do not, however, necessarily correlate to price, nor do they correlate with magical properties ascribed to certain cables by certain people.

 

 

Yes, there are definitely measurable differences between cable. Often the differences are in the very areas that we wonder about: capacitance/meter, inductance/meter, and resistance/meter. What is important to note, however, is the fact that that the differences between these cable characteristics can be orders of magnitude from one cable type to the next and still be too minuscule to have any measurable or audible affect on the audio passband. The effects of capacitive and inductive reactance on an AC signal is frequency dependent. At less than VHF frequencies, short, 1-2 meter runs of coax simply have too little capacitance, and too little inductance to have any attenuating affect on the audio passband. Whatever audiophiles are hearing, it is not a C-L-R phenomenon.

[gmgraves]

I once replaced some heavy lamp cord speaker cables with MIT interconnects between my old Harmon Kardon integrated amp and a pair of B&W DM602s. They actually expanded the sound stage a bit, noticeably so. Anyone who listened to them described exactly the same effect. But as you say, they may have been acting as a filter. When I upgraded to a Rotel Integrated amp the MIT, the effect of the MIT cables was negligible.

 

 

Since MIT is the company with the big aluminum boxes in-line with their speaker cables (some of which have actual controls on them), I'd have to say that they most assuredly are acting as filters!

[esldude]

Yes, speaker cables can genuinely effect the sound. Still down to nothing more than RLC effects. There is no special magic. You effect the edge of dynamic peaks, and frequency response and it can have surprising subjective results. Yet while real it is a very poor method of doing minor EQ and minimal compression.

[gmgraves]

There are some characterises of cables which can be measured and may affect amplifiers.

 

For instance Kimber's speaker cable weave tends to offer a high capacitance vs. more traditional side by side "shotgun" speaker cable. With some amplifiers (for example Naim) this can cause a problem and so affect sound quality.

 

 

The speaker/amplifier interface can be a very complex one. Definitely speaker cables can be a part of that interface, and their characteristics can dictate how the pair interact with each-other and therefore how they sound. Not always, though. Some speaker/amp combinations completely ignore cables and as long as the cable is of sufficient girth to cary the required current, it doesn't matter what one uses.

[gmgraves]

Yes, speaker cables can genuinely effect the sound. Still down to nothing more than RLC effects. There is no special magic. You effect the edge of dynamic peaks, and frequency response and it can have surprising subjective results. Yet while real it is a very poor method of doing minor EQ and minimal compression.

 

Absolutely. In the case of speaker cables, any interaction is most assuredly the result of LRC.

[jabbr]

Yes, there are definitely measurable differences between cable. Often the differences are in the very areas that we wonder about: capacitance/meter, inductance/meter, and resistance/meter. What is important to note, however, is the fact that that the differences between these cable characteristics can be orders of magnitude from one cable type to the next and still be too minuscule to have any measurable or audible affect on the audio passband. The effects of capacitive and inductive reactance on an AC signal is frequency dependent. At less than VHF frequencies, short, 1-2 meter runs of coax simply have too little capacitance, and too little inductance to have any attenuating affect on the audio passband. Whatever audiophiles are hearing, it is not a C-L-R phenomenon.

 

There are two issues:

 

a) Maxwell's equations along with Lorenz force law describe electromagnetic phenomena and for practical purposes describe any electromagnetic circuit including cables, that we are discussing, including any quantum effects.

 

b) The so-called placebo effect, which is very real and significant, describes the power of expectation bias.

 

I suspect both are involved.

 

Placebo's are fine as long as they are not prohibitively expensive. Because healthcare is such a universal problem, and has great cost, at least in the USA the FDA aims to protect the public against overpriced placebos. Audiophilia has not gained national attention.

[Jud]

There are two issues:

 

a) Maxwell's equations along with Lorenz force law describe electromagnetic phenomena and for practical purposes describe any electromagnetic circuit including cables, that we are discussing, including any quantum effects.

 

b) The so-called placebo effect, which is very real and significant, describes the power of expectation bias.

 

I suspect both are involved.

 

Placebo's are fine as long as they are not prohibitively expensive. Because healthcare is such a universal problem, and has great cost, at least in the USA the FDA aims to protect the public against overpriced placebos. Audiophilia has not gained national attention.

 

I agree placebo effect must be involved. We're human, and that's part of us. However, what keeps me from comfortably accepting it as a full explanation is that I've experienced violations of my expectations.

 

It's like taking a pill in a blinded experiment and feeling worse rather than better. Better, fine, down to placebo effect. But worse?

 

So how to account for the times the more expensive, fancier-looking cable sounds worse?

[jabbr]

I agree placebo effect must be involved. We're human, and that's part of us. However, what keeps me from comfortably accepting it as a full explanation is that I've experienced violations of my expectations.

 

It's like taking a pill in a blinded experiment and feeling worse rather than better. Better, fine, down to placebo effect. But worse?

 

So how to account for the times the more expensive, fancier-looking cable sounds worse?

 

I'm not saying its all placebo effect!

 

Its either a real electrical and hence measurable behavior *and/or* placebo effect/expectation bias.

 

Actually also:

 

c) measurement error

[jabbr]

...and yes placebo effect/expectation bias can go either way: better or worse.

 

In fact essentially all double blinded placebo controlled studies have undesirable "side effects" in the control groups.

[esldude]

I agree placebo effect must be involved. We're human, and that's part of us. However, what keeps me from comfortably accepting it as a full explanation is that I've experienced violations of my expectations.

 

It's like taking a pill in a blinded experiment and feeling worse rather than better. Better, fine, down to placebo effect. But worse?

 

So how to account for the times the more expensive, fancier-looking cable sounds worse?

 

Taking a pill you expect to make you better and instead feeling worse is still placebo. There was no reason for it yet a perceived change occurred. It has been called nocebo. That term is used both for negative reactions to expected good from a sham treatment, and negative reactions to something containing a warning that it may have negative side effects.

 

So just because fancy and expensive cables are heard as worse or not better doesn't change the basic mechanism. If nothing else experiencing a difference where one doesn't exist whether good or bad whether according to expectations or contrary to them is a similar effect.

[mansr]

Taking a pill you expect to make you better and instead feeling worse is still placebo. There was no reason for it yet a perceived change occurred. It has been called nocebo. That term is used both for negative reactions to expected good from a sham treatment, and negative reactions to something containing a warning that it may have negative side effects.

 

So just because fancy and expensive cables are heard as worse or not better doesn't change the basic mechanism. If nothing else experiencing a difference where one doesn't exist whether good or bad whether according to expectations or contrary to them is a similar effect.

 

If the expensive cable fails to deliver the expected improvement, it could easily be perceived as worse than the cheaper one it replaced, even if there was in fact no change at all.

[semente]

The speaker/amplifier interface can be a very complex one. Definitely speaker cables can be a part of that interface, and their characteristics can dictate how the pair interact with each-other and therefore how they sound. Not always, though. Some speaker/amp combinations completely ignore cables and as long as the cable is of sufficient girth to cary the required current, it doesn't matter what one uses.

 

You may have read this before but if not here's some interesting writing on speaker wire and amplifiers:

 

Cables 1 - Ohm Improvements

 

Cables 2 - Ohm and Away

 

Taking the Lead

 

R

[Teresa]

…A lot of audiophiles do tend to treat audio as if it were somehow "special" or "magic"; not subject to the laws of physics like every other branch of electronics.

 

It’s music that is special and magical. Audio equipment and cables are used to reproduce music. We just want that magic in our listening rooms, we let others worry about physics, music is the important thing.

 

The argument seems to be that just because a cable can successfully carry the signals needed to fly a jet airplane from one continent to another, or get a rover to Mars, doesn't mean that it can carry an audio signal from one's DAC to one's pre-amp successfully.

 

The signal in the jet or Mars rover doesn’t need to image well, doesn’t need warm, full and powerful bass, doesn’t need an accurate midrange, doesn’t need smooth beautiful high frequencies, doesn’t need convincing ambiance, etc.

 

So the question remains: What could subtly alter the sound of an audio signal yet not alter more complex signals like RF and microwaves, and not alter the operation of complex machinery that relies, day in and day out on complex, often life critical signals getting from point to point unchanged from their source?

 

Simple, those types of signals don’t reproduce music. If the signals that operate complex machinery sound terrible it would not effect their operation at all.

 

Yet, I cannot, in good faith, just write-off those here who are 100% sure that interconnects can alter the sound of their stereo systems. There are too many of them, and too many of them are good, intelligent, and knowledgeable people to just chalk up their empirical results to hysteria or mass delusion.

 

I’m happy to read this! (;-)

 

I can, and I do.

 

That could be why I disagree with almost all of your posts.

 

By the way, you still haven't told me why your portrait in your avatar is colored blue.

 

"A closed mind is a dying mind."

-Edna Ferber

 

I agree.

[mansr]

It’s music that is special and magical. Audio equipment and cables are used to reproduce music. We just want that magic in our listening rooms, we let others worry about physics, music is the important thing.

 

The signal in the jet or Mars rover doesn’t need to image well, doesn’t need warm, full and powerful bass, doesn’t need an accurate midrange, doesn’t need smooth beautiful high frequencies, doesn’t need convincing ambiance, etc.

 

Simple, those types of signals don’t reproduce music. If the signals that operate complex machinery sound terrible it would not effect their operation at all.

 

You evidently know nothing whatsoever about electronics, music related or not.

 

By the way, you still haven't told me why your portrait in your avatar is colored blue.

 

The lighting was blue.

[Paul R]

Maybe you guys need to slow down a bit a define exactly what "fancy and expensive" cables are. Can a cable be fancy and cheap? Plain and expensive? What limits?

 

I am sure we can all agree that speaker cables costing $30,000/meter are expensive, and I think most would agree or not dispute that they are probably fancy snake oil.

 

Just as certainly, most would also agree, or at least not dispute, that a $10 Belkin Gold USB cable is both plain and inexpensive.

 

The area of dispute lies within the two extremes of course. Is a $50 Optical TOSLink cable expensive? Fancy? Worth the cost?

 

How about a $150 USB cable?

 

Is expensive and/or plain/fancy relative here? Compared to what?

 

Yep it is less exciting to try and deal with facts than to mudsling. But at least we might all learn something or gain some new insight if we start with facts and agree what each term really means.