The End of Speaker Cables.?

[sphinxsix]

And at the same time - the end of discussing whether they sound different or not.?

 

 

Yet another apocalyptical thread from a fan (subjectivists get ready!) of good sounding cables

 

 

Wire You Blue | Stereophile.com

[christopher3393]

I like to think of these as "bardo" threads.

The Tibetan word bardo (བར་དོ་ Wylie: bar do) means literally "intermediate state"—also translated as "transitional state" or "in-between state" or "liminal state". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo

 

It is already happening, isn't it? Audiophile market examples that come to mind that come to mind: Dynaudio's Xeo, the more recent Focus (capable of 24/192), Focal Easya for full range; Naim Mu-so for a smaller one-box solution. There are a few other decent ones. More will surely follow.

 

I personally don't want anything wireless until it becomes more reliable for my use. I don't even like cell phones. Wired connections have just been more reliable in my own subjective experience.

[Audio_ELF]

@DigiPete will tell you it was (should have been) the end of speaker cables a long time ago. :-)

 

(Meant with full respect to his view that active speakers and digital input with DSP are king)

[sphinxsix]

 

I personally don't want anything wireless until it becomes more reliable for my use. I don't even like cell phones. Wired connections have just been more reliable in my own subjective experience.

I do completly agree. People have problems even with such an advanced solution as Devialet's Air. I think wireless can be more and more popular in the mass market and audiophiles (some at least ) won't give up cables very soon.

 

BTW I know the word 'bardo'. I also think your previous avatar - the Medicine Buddha was very cool but I admit I don't recognize the present one..

[esldude]

I think Kal's comment there is seeing this correctly. This isn't about good sound, much less great.

 

OTOH, I am really surprised at this late date we don't have a wireless standard agreed to that allows transmission of lossless digital at either 44/16 or 48/24 material. I think active speakers are the way to go. And a wireless connection of quality would be a great way to do things. It goes against audiophile habits and it would eliminate all this constant flux of gear. I also think a good wireless connection (bluetooth aint it) would be a boon to those wanting a mch rig. I do note as much as I think active speakers are a plus, it actually is easier to run speaker wires all around places than to run balanced XLR's and have a power plug next to your speakers in many cases.

[mansr]

I think Kal's comment there is seeing this correctly. This isn't about good sound, much less great.

 

OTOH, I am really surprised at this late date we don't have a wireless standard agreed to that allows transmission of lossless digital at either 44/16 or 48/24 material. I think active speakers are the way to go. And a wireless connection of quality would be a great way to do things. It goes against audiophile habits and it would eliminate all this constant flux of gear. I also think a good wireless connection (bluetooth aint it) would be a boon to those wanting a mch rig. I do note as much as I think active speakers are a plus, it actually is easier to run speaker wires all around places than to run balanced XLR's and have a power plug next to your speakers in many cases.

Synchronising multiple wireless speakers would be quite difficult.

[Audio_ELF]

I think Kal's comment there is seeing this correctly. This isn't about good sound, much less great.

 

OTOH, I am really surprised at this late date we don't have a wireless standard agreed to that allows transmission of lossless digital at either 44/16 or 48/24 material. I think active speakers are the way to go. And a wireless connection of quality would be a great way to do things. It goes against audiophile habits and it would eliminate all this constant flux of gear. I also think a good wireless connection (bluetooth aint it) would be a boon to those wanting a mch rig. I do note as much as I think active speakers are a plus, it actually is easier to run speaker wires all around places than to run balanced XLR's and have a power plug next to your speakers in many cases.

There is WiSA.

 

I agree with your comment about easier to run speaker wires.

[esldude]

There is WiSA.

 

I agree with your comment about easier to run speaker wires.

 

Yes, have read a little about WiSA and it looks good if only everyone would get on board. Maybe this will be the one. Capable of 96/24 for up to 7.1 channels.

[lmitche]

There is WiSA.

 

I agree with your comment about easier to run speaker wires.

I had lunch a few weeks ago with the CEO of the company behind WISA. Late last year I had an evaluation kit sent to my house for trial.

 

This is the strongest wireless technology offering that I am aware of, multi channel capable, and designed for very low latency between speakers.

 

The evaluation kit just sounds terrific.

 

The technology is really starting to take off, and you can expect to see support from many leading manufacturers both in the audio and TV markets as evidenced here: http://www.wisaassociation.org

[DigiPete]

There is WiSA.

 

Thanks Eloise, I was just about to mention the WiSA standard.

(Wireless 7.1, up to 24/96, Rapid error detection and recovery, 5 ms fixed latency, ± 1 µs speaker-to-speaker delay)

Members includes: Bang & Olufsen, Fostex, Kipsch, LG, Martin Logan, Onkyo, Pioneer, PolkAudio & TEAC.

 

If your sound is stored in digital form, why would you translate it to analogue before absolutely necessary?

Digital transfer can be made 100% lossless, nothing else can.

And why would it improve matters to force the amps to drive speakers through a filter

Also, why be so arrogant and think you know better than the professionals how to combine amps and speakers?

I.e. actives are the way to go ;-)

 

I run AES3 digital speaker cables (the professional version of S/PDIF), but the wiring kaos is killing me - even for my little 5.1 rig (6 signal cables + 6 control cables).

WiSA is the best bid for now, but let's hope they expand the number of channels to 16.

I do get 10m absolute high end & 100% lossless speaker cable for EUR 30 / USD 34 ;-)

 

PS. I don't think Bluetooth is anywhere close to audiophile standards.

(despite being named after the Danish Viking King Harald Blåtand, that claimed the terrible deed of christening the Danes).

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi @DigiPete - I think many of us who convert to analog before the power amps are doing so because the pros outweigh the cons of a more digital system. And by pros I mean better sound quality.

 

I would love to see a modular digital speaker that enabled me to plug in a DAC module from manufacturer ABC and amps from manufacturer XYZ. This would be the best of all worlds.

[JohnSwenson]

This thread is interesting, I am in the process of designing a 16 channel optical wireless audio interface because I couldn't find anything that met my criteria. It does have to be line of sight, but is good for a hundred feet or so.

 

The use case is very different (it is for live sound personal monitoring) where each channel gets its own receiver, but they had to be cheap, none of this $1000 per person stuff. It turns out all the technology was readily available for very little, it all just had to be put together to do very high quality audio (even though it is not for "audiophiles" I just can't do it with lousy SQ).

 

Multichannel audio designed for audiophiles would be very easy.

 

John S.

[DigiPete]

Hi @DigiPete - I think many of us who convert to analog before the power amps are doing so because the pros outweigh the cons of a more digital system. And by pros I mean better sound quality.

 

I would love to see a modular digital speaker that enabled me to plug in a DAC module from manufacturer ABC and amps from manufacturer XYZ. This would be the best of all worlds.

 

 

I admit it's slim pickings of high end pure digital systems, but I have actually auditioned both sides of the fence before I drank the Kool-Ade. There was no comparison.

How many here can truly say that, rather than just voicing their untested bias?

 

The modular active digital input speaker may help push over some old-schoolers, but isn't it just another version of the "we amateurs know better than the educated professional engineers with the big labs at the manufacturer's"?

 

 

Chris, I would love to audition your TAD CR1's with all the trimmings up against Genelec SAM Coaxial Studio Monitors and Steinway-Lyngdorf equipment.

I'm sure everybody would get a run for their money.

[lmitche]

Goldmund is another high end company that is making active, wireless speakers. I from some of my European "golden ear" friends that these systems are some of the best sounding they have ever heard.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I admit it's slim pickings of high end pure digital systems, but I have actually auditioned both sides of the fence before I drank the Kool-Ade. There was no comparison.

How many here can truly say that, rather than just voicing their untested bias?

 

The modular active digital input speaker may help push over some old-schoolers, but isn't it just another version of the "we amateurs know better than the educated professional engineers with the big labs at the manufacturer's"?

 

 

Chris, I would love to audition your TAD CR1's with all the trimmings up against Genelec SAM Coaxial Studio Monitors and Steinway-Lyngdorf equipment.

I'm sure everybody would get a run for their money.

 

I admire your willingness to try both old school and new school systems and select what many in this hobby consider not high end enough. I think we both know your type of system hasn't been more accepted in high end circles because of factors other than sound quality.

 

I don't think a modular digital system would get us to the amateurs versus pros type of thing. We all have preferences and this would enable more choice. Heck, someone could throw a tube or two in a system :~)

 

Plus, if there was an MQA DAC module people could throw that in their systems should they desire the feature.

 

In a perfect world we would have iso standard sizes and connections in digital speakers, that enable all kinds of companies to build parts of the system.

 

I I too would love to put my TAD CR1s up against any system such as Genelec or Steinway. I'm not tied to any technology (old or new) and would select the one that is best for me.

[Kal Rubinson]

Thanks Eloise, I was just about to mention the WiSA standard.

(Wireless 7.1, up to 24/96, Rapid error detection and recovery, 5 ms fixed latency, ± 1 µs speaker-to-speaker delay)

Members includes: Bang & Olufsen, Fostex, Kipsch, LG, Martin Logan, Onkyo, Pioneer, PolkAudio & TEAC..

The new BeoLab 90 is WISA capable.

[DigiPete]

The new BeoLab 90 is WISA capable.

 

Thanks for letting us know!

Interesting and awesome new Danish product.

 

 

 

 

18 drivers, 18 DAC's & 18 amps - talk about going all in.

[Kal Rubinson]

Thanks for letting us know!

Interesting and awesome new Danish product.

 

18 drivers, 18 DAC's & 18 amps - talk about going all in.

I am enjoying a pair of them now............but with wires.

[DigiPete]

I am enjoying a pair of them now............but with wires.

 

The Beolab 5's were quite good - nice imaging with the acoustic lenses but the room correction was somewhat limited.

Despite being expensive lifestyle speaker, BL5 are cost efficient compared to old school audiophile products.

However, they can't compete with active digital input monitors like Genelec Coaxial Studio Monitors or Steinway Lyngdorf's entry model S

 

Bang & Olufsen usually does not have my attention.

I'll be looking forward to reading your review of the Beolab 90's from a technology point of view.

It'll be interesting to see how it stacks up!

[sphinxsix]

Completly BTW (not exactly an audiophile topic): what arouses my curiosity and to some degree my concern is the fact that in this (more and more with every year) wireless world we are the subject to increasing levels of electromagnetic and other types of radiation. Are there any scientific proofs that this very quickly increasing level of different kinds of radiation doesn't influence our health? Practically every device we use is the source of some kind of radiation from cell phones to wifi, bluetooth, microwave ovens etc. not mentioning all radio, TV, cell phones and other networks. Can we really be sure that that these high levels of electromagnetic, microvawe and other forms of radiation which appeared in fact during let's say last century are negligible for us human beings.? Maybe they are but may be in 200 years we will look like this:

 

 

because our evolved sculls will be 5 times thicker to keep all this trash out of our brains

 

BTW I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories and I won't mention the Philadelphia experiment..

 

I personally have for instance noticed that my left ear is slightly worse at high frequencies than the right one. This can be obviously caused by driving with open left window or just an individual anatomical or health reasons but maybe it's in fact caused by my cell phone - I use my left ear for phone communication.

[bluesman]

Practically every device we use is the source of some kind of radiation from cell phones to wifi, bluetooth, microwave ovens etc. not mentioning all radio, TV, cell phones and other networks. Can we really be sure that that these high levels of electromagnetic, microvawe and other forms of radiation which appeared in fact during let's say last century are negligible for us human beings.?

Both the FCC and the World Health Organization have been concerned about this for 20 years. Here's the FCC's current statement about EMF and health:

 

"In 1996, the World Health Organization (WHO) established a program called the International EMF Project, which is designed to review the scientific literature concerning biological effects of electromagnetic fields, identify gaps in knowledge about such effects, recommend research needs, and work towards international resolution of health concerns over the use of RF technology. The WHO maintains a Web site that provides extensive information on this project and about RF biological effects and research (

www.who.int/peh-emf/en/

)."

 

And here's their statement about possible links between EMF and cancer:

"Some studies have also examined the possibility of a link between RF exposure and cancer. Results to date have been inconclusive. While some experimental data have suggested a possible link between exposure and tumor formation in animals exposed under certain specific conditions, the results have not been independently replicated. Many other studies have failed to find evidence for a link to cancer or any related condition. The Food and Drug Administration has further information on this topic with respect to RF exposure from mobile phones at the following Web site:

FDA Radiation-Emitting Products Page

."

 

I've never seen a study trying to identify evolutionary effects of EMF exposure. It'd be pretty hard to demonstrate pattern changes in parameters like skull size & thickness etc yet, but there's no reason to believe that ambient EMF (like acid rain and all the other junk in which we bathe daily) wouldn't contribute to adaptive evolution.

[esldude]

One thing is ionizing radiation can definitely have effects adverse and otherwise. The radiation of phones and such devices even that of a microwave oven are non-ionizing. So that is something of an important divide. Non-ionizing radiation might still have some issues to worry about that are via more complex pathways or that are more subtle. There is good reason to think non-ionizing radiation isn't going to be large concern.

 

X-rays are ionizing. Higher band UV is ionizing. Somewhere in the UV range and lower frequencies are non-ionizing. So RF like cell phones are in the non-ionizing band of things.

 

I worked in and out of an office environment most of my working years. The last 3 was almost fully in office and on the phone a lot. The phone was on the left and I therefore used my left ear mostly. It seemed I could hear on the phone more clearly in my left ear eventually. I later tripped across research into that very thing among office workers. Indeed it appears the brain develops better pattern matching to have better hearing acuity over phones in one ear vs the other in such situations. There was no apparent effect in overall acuity for other purposes. Though I have wondered how that could be. I am guessing the brain switches in the better filtering for phone use as needed.

[bluesman]

One thing is ionizing radiation can definitely have effects adverse and otherwise. The radiation of phones and such devices even that of a microwave oven are non-ionizing. So that is something of an important divide. Non-ionizing radiation might still have some issues to worry about that are via more complex pathways or that are more subtle. There is good reason to think non-ionizing radiation isn't going to be large concern.

Non-ionizing radiation is already a big concern - for example, about 90% of all skin cancer is caused by exposure to solar UV, and there's nothing complex or subtle about the mortality rate for melanoma or the extensive destruction and disfigurement resulting from morpheaform and other aggressive basal cell carcinomas. As I can't rid my environment of its extraneous energy and chemical content, I can only learn to live with it. But that doesn't mean that I accept its benignity. As a species, we ignore these risks at our own peril - we're screwing up our planet at a pace that absolutely mandates mutation if we're to continue to inhabit it.

 

I'm truly glad that I'm no longer young. It took me all these years to build up sufficient equanimity to sleep at night and go to work every day, and I don't think I'd be as mellow if I knew that I had enough lifespan left to suffer the consequences of our collectively poor planetary hygiene. At least now I have the answer to BB's classic query: everybody asks me why I sing the blues.

 

Wireless speakers? Bring 'em on. I won't live long enough to mount a cellular response, and my kids' heads are so thick that it'll take Goldfinger's laser to penetrate them.

[mrvco]

The implementation should suit the application. Ignoring any monetary considerations, does it make any sense to get rid of the wires in my dedicated 2ch rig when the speakers are sitting a few feet on either side of my amplifier with no obstructions in between? Not really. Does wireless make sense in my kitchen, bedroom, etc. where there are space and wire routing limitations? Absolutely.

[Evo1668]

Thanks for letting us know!

Interesting and awesome new Danish product.

 

 

 

 

18 drivers, 18 DAC's & 18 amps - talk about going all in.

 

Something slightly more affordable..... and will be WISA compatible when they release their Kontrol module later this year is Kii Audio Three.

 

Kii Audio GmbH - High End Active Speakers for HiFi and Professional use.

 

I'm still waiting to hear a pair.....hopefully, should be soon