Audible difference between analog interconnects

[CR250]

+1

 

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but have either of you spent any time with SR Cables? I have, and I can tell you 2 things from listening. First, is that the different models sound very different from each other. For example, if I tried 3 pairs of IC's, it was very easy to pick out the differences. That's not typical with most brands. The differences are usually much smaller. 2nd thing is, after leaving SR cables in my system for any length of time, I always ended up not liking them. They seem to wow at first, but over time weaknesses reveal themselves.

 

So, my point is maybe SR designs are BS. I really don't know how they get the results that they do. But I would at least take into consideration, that there are real differences in how the cables sound. What are they doing to account for these differences? For me that's the real question. If its BS, then OK. If not, maybe there's something to be learned.

[Sal1950]

I like Synergistic Research's little dots that you put on the tonearms headshell of a vinyl rig. They really work! I did that many years ago with a penny. wOOt

[PopPop]

That was so long ago that the penny had an Indian head on it. [emoji6]

[Jud]

In some cases, e.g. Synergistic Research, it's easy to spot the bullshit. The "explanations" they offer are nothing but meaningless technobabble. If they know better, they are deliberately misrepresenting the product. If they genuinely believe their own statements, they are obviously clueless about engineering. Either way, not someone you want to buy from.

 

Yes. You can add to that their reaction when called out. I critically mentioned their website's claim that they treated cables by "quantum tunneling" (shooting static charges through them, actually) in the comments section at Audiostream, where one of the Synergistic principals showed up to argue with me. The next time I saw the website, it referred to "a process *we call* quantum tunneling," which makes about as much sense as referring to "a process we call general relativity."

[Jud]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but have either of you spent any time with SR Cables? I have, and I can tell you 2 things from listening. First, is that the different models sound very different from each other. For example, if I tried 3 pairs of IC's, it was very easy to pick out the differences. That's not typical with most brands. The differences are usually much smaller. 2nd thing is, after leaving SR cables in my system for any length of time, I always ended up not liking them. They seem to wow at first, but over time weaknesses reveal themselves.

 

So, my point is maybe SR designs are BS. I really don't know how they get the results that they do. But I would at least take into consideration, that there are real differences in how the cables sound. What are they doing to account for these differences? For me that's the real question. If its BS, then OK. If not, maybe there's something to be learned.

 

What we're saying is that SR's statements about how their stuff works are BS. Either they know and are intentionally blowing smoke, or they don't know themselves. One way or the other, it doesn't motivate me to give them my money.

[mansr]

What is/are your specialization(s)?

 

Electronics and software.

[mansr]

You're not wrong. In fact Tice purchased his clocks from the same source as did Radio Shack, and they were the same model. The "value added" on Tice's part was what he "did" to the clocks once he got them. He never revealed what that was, but many have speculated that he cryogenically treated each clock. That was the difference between $19.95 and $199.95! And while "parallel conditioning" is a real thing, there never was any evidence that Tice's clock acted as a parallel conditioner. The mistake he made was using a clock that was available anywhere. That made it easy to check "before" against "after". As I recall, nobody could either measure or hear any difference between the Radio Shack model, the Tice model, and nothing at all.

 

There were people who claimed to hear an improvement with the regular, "untreated" RS clock, much to the annoyance of Tice.

[sandyk]

Electronics and software.

 

That's an extremely broad "specialization". Jack of all trades, and Master of none perhaps ?

[Paul R]

That's an extremely broad "specialization". Jack of all trades, and Master of none perhaps ?

 

What are yours? I do not see engineer behind your title.

 

Yep- it most definitely is in mine, and has been for decades.

[CR250]

What we're saying is that SR's statements about how their stuff works are BS. Either they know and are intentionally blowing smoke, or they don't know themselves. One way or the other, it doesn't motivate me to give them my money.

 

I'm not saying you guys are wrong. The points you make are valid. I'm just saying that after trying many different pairs of SR cables, and hearing some significant differences, there may be something to support their claims. Could I be wrong? Yes. I've been wrong many times. Just trying to look at all possible factors. Nothing more.

 

What false claims does SR make?

 

Since were talking about legit cable claims, what do you guys think about this claim from Purist Audio Design?

 

"Purist's most advanced technology uses a light source to illuminate the cable's dielectric, which produces an ethereal three-dimensional soundfield that sounds like surround sound from two channels. The Radiant Light Source (RLS) cables basically add this optical illumination to the company's award-winning (the absolute sound's 2003 Golden Ear Award Winnerfor Interconnect and Loudspeaker Cables) Dominus cables. The Purist web site describes the RLS cables thusly: "The Radiant Light Cable System, newly introduced by Purist Audio Design in 1998, is the only system of its kind in the world. It takes the already superb Dominus cable and adds a special form of radiant-optical fiber. These optical fibers are illuminated by a specially designed light source and radiate light around the conductors. The light changes the properties of the insulation surrounding the conductors, thus minimizing distortion in music reception."

 

Could something like that even work?

[sandyk]

What are yours? I do not see engineer behind your title.

 

Yep- it most definitely is in mine, and has been for decades.

 

Unlike know-it-alls like yourself and mansr, I don't claim to be an Engineer.

Also, it's blindingly obvious to most that you aren't qualified in the general E.E. area either.

Neither do I see either of you normally jumping in and assisting with power supply queries either, which should be right up the alley of a well qualified E.E.

I am not disputing that you are probably highly experienced in your own field though.

[plissken]

I heard if you beat your kids with high end cables they listen better vs zip cord.

[mansr]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong. The points you make are valid. I'm just saying that after trying many different pairs of SR cables, and hearing some significant differences, there may be something to support their claims. Could I be wrong? Yes. I've been wrong many times. Just trying to look at all possible factors. Nothing more.

 

What false claims does SR make?

 

Most of their claims fall in the "not even wrong" category.

 

Since were talking about legit cable claims, what do you guys think about this claim from Purist Audio Design?

 

"Purist's most advanced technology uses a light source to illuminate the cable's dielectric, which produces an ethereal three-dimensional soundfield that sounds like surround sound from two channels. The Radiant Light Source (RLS) cables basically add this optical illumination to the company's award-winning (the absolute sound's 2003 Golden Ear Award Winnerfor Interconnect and Loudspeaker Cables) Dominus cables. The Purist web site describes the RLS cables thusly: "The Radiant Light Cable System, newly introduced by Purist Audio Design in 1998, is the only system of its kind in the world. It takes the already superb Dominus cable and adds a special form of radiant-optical fiber. These optical fibers are illuminated by a specially designed light source and radiate light around the conductors. The light changes the properties of the insulation surrounding the conductors, thus minimizing distortion in music reception."

 

Technobabble at its finest.

 

Could something like that even work?

 

No.

[Paul R]

Unlike know-it-alls like yourself and mansr, I don't claim to be an Engineer.

Also, it's blindingly obvious to most that you aren't qualified in the general E.E. area either.

Neither do I see either of you normally jumping in and assisting with power supply queries either, which should be right up the alley of a well qualified E.E.

I am not disputing that you are probably highly experienced in your own field though.

 

I only look like a "know it all to you" in comparison to your sad lack. (Sticking out toung...)

 

What is your degree in any way? If you don't have one, that is cool, but I thought you were some kind of telephone engineer? Me - Comp. Science and Math. And 40 years of various add on certifcations, management training, etc. When I retire, ai plan to go back to school and work on Art History and Humanities, or something like that, just for fun.

[esldude]

I only look like a "know it all to you" in comparison to your sad lack. (Sticking out toung...)

 

What is your degree in any way? If you don't have one, that is cool, but I thought you were some kind of telephone engineer? Me - Comp. Science and Math. And 40 years of various add on certifcations, management training, etc. When I retire, ai plan to go back to school and work on Art History and Humanities, or something like that, just for fun.

 

No way Paul. Everyone knows engineers don't enjoy music or any art. Worse you are not fooling anyone pretending an engineer can have fun.

[esldude]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong.

 

What false claims does SR make?

 

 

[/size][/font]

 

Let us keep it simple. Just list any SR claims that are not false. It is a dramatically shorter list.

[esldude]

I heard if you beat your kids with high end cables they listen better vs zip cord.

 

I heard if they are balanced cables it leads to a more stable personality.

[sandyk]

I only look like a "know it all to you" in comparison to your sad lack. (Sticking out toung...)

 

What is your degree in any way? If you don't have one, that is cool, but I thought you were some kind of telephone engineer? Me - Comp. Science and Math. And 40 years of various add on certifcations, management training, etc. When I retire, ai plan to go back to school and work on Art History and Humanities, or something like that, just for fun.

 

Paul

Before retiring after 44 years service, I was a Principal Telecommunications Technical Officer with Telstra, responsible for the maintenance of a group of LME ARE11 Processor controlled Telephone Exchanges,including After Hours recalls etc. Previous to that I was a shift leader at an after hours Telephone Exchange control centre (Chatswood) responsible for 10 other Telephone Exchanges in Sydney's north, and Northern Beaches.

I have also been a DIY electronics hobbyist since my early teens.

 

Alex

[Paul R]

No way Paul. Everyone knows engineers don't enjoy music or any art. Worse you are not fooling anyone pretending an engineer can have fun.

 

Aw- it can be fun! For example, to get certified as a Software Engineer, I had to learn to weld... (no kidding!) If that won't make a person laugh, they are seriously in trouble.

[gmgraves]

I'm not saying you guys are wrong. The points you make are valid. I'm just saying that after trying many different pairs of SR cables, and hearing some significant differences, there may be something to support their claims. Could I be wrong? Yes. I've been wrong many times. Just trying to look at all possible factors. Nothing more.

 

What false claims does SR make?

 

Since were talking about legit cable claims, what do you guys think about this claim from Purist Audio Design?

 

"Purist's most advanced technology uses a light source to illuminate the cable's dielectric, which produces an ethereal three-dimensional soundfield that sounds like surround sound from two channels. The Radiant Light Source (RLS) cables basically add this optical illumination to the company's award-winning (the absolute sound's 2003 Golden Ear Award Winnerfor Interconnect and Loudspeaker Cables) Dominus cables. The Purist web site describes the RLS cables thusly: "The Radiant Light Cable System, newly introduced by Purist Audio Design in 1998, is the only system of its kind in the world. It takes the already superb Dominus cable and adds a special form of radiant-optical fiber. These optical fibers are illuminated by a specially designed light source and radiate light around the conductors. The light changes the properties of the insulation surrounding the conductors, thus minimizing distortion in music reception."

 

Could something like that even work?

 

While I don't even pretend to understand what it is that they are saying, I'd almost be willing to bet money that nobody else does either - including SR! If there were anything to procedures like this, they would be discussed in peer reviewed journals. That they apparently are not, speaks volumes. This sounds to me like pure marketing speak, and definitely falls under my earlier definition of snake oil. Maybe they are on to something, if so, I'd expect to see words associated with their description like "patent pending" and papers submitted to such agust bodies as the IEEE, or the AES, but I've never heard or seen any such activity mentioned on SR's web site, so I doubt that any such patent protection or any real research has been done. I could be wrong, of course, but the above description reads so much like bullpuckey, that I kind of doubt that I am.

[gmgraves]

Most of their claims fall in the "not even wrong" category.

 

 

 

Technobabble at its finest.

 

 

 

No.

 

Actually it is technobabble at it's most transparent. They must think that all audiophiles are complete idiots. Why don't they just come out and say: "We think our cables sound better than anyone else's, but to be honest, like all of our competitors in this market segment, we haven't the slightest notion as to why." At least that wouldn't insult people's intelligence!

[Teresa]

...So many people seem to hate audio, as well as hate people who judge audio components by listening to them. Its like a crime to listen to something other than a spec sheet. If everyone's so worried about getting sold snake oil, why not just buy a snake oil detector and be done with it?

 

I agree with your sentiment and would like to add, no one needs to get stuck buying snake oil as audio cables come with a 30-day and in some cases a 60-day money back guarantee. Plenty of time to discover the true sound of a cable and if it offers an improvement, a diminishment or sounds the same as what it was intended to replace.

[Teresa]

It doesn't take an engineer to listen to music.

 

I agree!

[Teresa]

I like Synergistic Research's little dots that you put on the tonearms headshell of a vinyl rig. They really work! I did that many years ago with a penny. wOOt

 

I would never put a penny or anything else on top of a tonearm's head-shell, if your cartridge is skipping on clean mint LPs the stylus is worn and needs to be replaced.

[sandyk]

I would never put a penny or anything else on top of a tonearm's head-shell, if your cartridge is skipping on clean mint LPs the stylus is worn and needs to be replaced.

 

It may help in the case of a warped LP though.