Good equipment but not a clue

[esldude]

Now Jud, while I appreciate your loyalty to your BFF my advice was to let the OP take a risk free audition and decide for himself. Dennis's advice was basically don't bother because it is all snake oil. That is audio lobotomy at it's worse.

"Don't audition and decide for yourself just listen to me because i know best!"

You said it yourself, none can be entirely sure who is right or wrong. dennis made it sound like he can, no need to decide for yourself. That is the bad advice, not the cables he suggested (although those Monoprice cables are pretty shoddy)

 

Actually there are good reasons why the risk free audition is bad advice and not risk free. I can tell you will disagree with that. It isn't audio lobotomy, it isn't listen to me because I know best. It is use your brain and look at the facts as they are known and make good decisions.

[Jud]

Now Jud, while I appreciate your loyalty to your BFF my advice was to let the OP take a risk free audition and decide for himself. Dennis's advice was basically don't bother because it is all snake oil. That is audio lobotomy at it's worse.

"Don't audition and decide for yourself just listen to me because i know best!"

You said it yourself, none can be entirely sure who is right or wrong. dennis made it sound like he can, no need to decide for yourself. That is the bad advice, not the cables he suggested (although those Monoprice cables are pretty shoddy)

 

So try looking at this from the other point of view. Someone says "Trust your ears," and you believe (on not inconsiderable evidence) that ears can't be trusted in a sighted listening situation. So wouldn't you want to alert the OP that he was getting bad advice?

 

By the way, any "loyalty" I might have to Dennis wouldn't stand in the way of my saying he was being discourteous if that's what I felt. I don't.

 

By now I'm sure the OP has gotten more cable advice than he ever wanted, and can make his own decision. So shall we move on?

[sandyk]

Someone says "Trust your ears," and you believe (on not inconsiderable evidence) that ears can't be trusted in a sighted listening situation.

 

That's not always correct, especially when the cables/ gear isn't your own, and you have no expectations due to the amount of money spent on them, or have high expectations due to the name of the designer/manufacturer.

[witchdoctor]

So try looking at this from the other point of view. Someone says "Trust your ears," and you believe (on not inconsiderable evidence) that ears can't be trusted in a sighted listening situation. So wouldn't you want to alert the OP that he was getting bad advice?

 

By the way, any "loyalty" I might have to Dennis wouldn't stand in the way of my saying he was being discourteous if that's what I felt. I don't.

 

By now I'm sure the OP has gotten more cable advice than he ever wanted, and can make his own decision. So shall we move on?

 

We had moved on, check post #11. If you want to move on ask your BFF to start a new thread about his own cable preferences like I did on power cords after the other thread he started. Sad.

[witchdoctor]

Actually there are good reasons why the risk free audition is bad advice and not risk free. I can tell you will disagree with that. It isn't audio lobotomy, it isn't listen to me because I know best. It is use your brain and look at the facts as they are known and make good decisions.

 

Look just start a new thread OK? This one is titled "Good Equipment and Not a Clue"

You have already made it clear to everyone on CA that you use monoprice cables. Why not call your new thread

 

"Bad Equipment and Not a Clue"

 

I will make sure not to post in it so as not to aggravate you any further.

[wwaldmanfan]

Actually there are good reasons why the risk free audition is bad advice and not risk free.

 

Nothwithstanding the fact that The Cable Co. charges you a small, non-refundable fee that can only be credited towards a purchase, please explain this statement.

[esldude]

Nothwithstanding the fact that The Cable Co. charges you a small, non-refundable fee that can only be credited towards a purchase, please explain this statement.

 

The thread would only go further off topic. This will be my only addressing of it in this thread.

 

I can give enough hints. People have tendencies to hear differences when there actually are none. Then get those labels stuck in their memory for whatever reason. So lets imagine a company with many dozens of brands lets you pick a few that for whatever reason you give credence to. Let you hear them for yourself. They certainly don't care which you choose. You by human nature are then very predisposed to hear something as different. So you order up some AQ, some Acoustic Zen, some MIT, some Tara Labs. You listen and are quite, quite likely to hear some difference. Further listening only solidifies it in your mind and you pick one.

 

Now do you think everyone is hearing the same thing with so many to choose from? Or do you believe in system synergy? Or different styles for different folks? Or like me, believe it doesn't matter, they sound the same without labels and are nearly certain not to sound the same to anyone doing informal long term uncontrolled sighted listening. Someone with no real opinion tries out their free sample offer thinking how can I lose? Well by convincing themselves of a myth that will be hard to dispel. Plus they sort of do have that non-refundable fee to pretty much make sure you do buy something from them. So convinced they forever worry over and spend considerable sums of money on something that really doesn't matter.

[esldude]

Look just start a new thread OK? This one is titled "Good Equipment and Not a Clue"

You have already made it clear to everyone on CA that you use monoprice cables. Why not call your new thread

 

"Bad Equipment and Not a Clue"

 

I will make sure not to post in it so as not to aggravate you any further.

 

You seem intent on controlling the rules of posting don't you? Chris allows pretty free discourse here, and you seem to be struggling with that.

[17629v2]

While not agreeing with Dennis for a couple of reasons, his opinions on this are the opposite of emotional. He's basing what he says on two things:

 

- Blind testing, including his own, failed to reveal differences (Dennis has purchased expensive cables, so this was not necessarily what he wanted to find).

 

- So far as he has been able to determine, electrical science and engineering don't appear to reveal reasons for cables to have different sonic qualities beyond resistance, inductance and capacitance.

 

Really? Have you read his posts? Maybe you should have another look. He's making so many false claims I had to stop myself from cutting and pasting examples because I'd be at the computer all night. Forget blind testing, Not only is he making claims on products he's never heard, he's making claims on the OP's cables without even knowing what he has. They were never listed. How is this not emotional? And lets not forget his comments that were completely fabricated. You remember when I said he's willing to say anything just to be right? This is exactly what he's doing, just read his posts.

[witchdoctor]

You seem intent on controlling the rules of posting don't you? Chris allows pretty free discourse here, and you seem to be struggling with that.

 

Yes. it seems I'm handicapped by a need to make sense:)

[Musicophile]

While people are busy in their usual Cable fight; let me suggest you have a look at the different software solutions for Mac:

 

My personal preferred option is Audirvana plus (A+), developed by a very motivated French developer. Best sound (to my ears), good database capabilities and iOS remote.

 

Alternatives are:JRiver for Mac, better remote but still looks a bit like a transfer from PC (which it is). Very good database features.

 

Roon: a more expensive software package with an annual licensing fee. Builds an impressive interface around your music and gives links to other similar music

 

All of the above have trial options, I personally would focus more time on this than on cable optimization.

[semente]

That's not always correct, especially when the cables/ gear isn't your own, and you have no expectations due to the amount of money spent on them, or have high expectations due to the name of the designer/manufacturer.

Still I wouldn't trust a reviewer like Srajan who has put his hands and touted all imaginable snake-oil rubbish possible and made a flowery, glittering text piece of their sonic properties, or better yet special effects.

I've been up that path before (6 loons), and even though I never fell for the audio accessories trap I ended up with a load of 47labs stuff and a pair of single drivers, and worse, convinced that my system was something special.

 

Learning how to interpret measurements has been a great help in separating the wheat from the chaff.

And I've stopped reading reviews, although I think that reading between the lines of some of them may reveal a few shortcomings amongst all of amazingness and expressions of character.

 

R

[semente]

Really? Have you read his posts? Maybe you should have another look. He's making so many false claims I had to stop myself from cutting and pasting examples because I'd be at the computer all night. Forget blind testing, Not only is he making claims on products he's never heard, he's making claims on the OP's cables without even knowing what he has. They were never listed. How is this not emotional? And lets not forget his comments that were completely fabricated. You remember when I said he's willing to say anything just to be right? This is exactly what he's doing, just read his posts.

From where I'm standing, it appears that you defend a tune-by-ear approach which finds good use for cables that affect the signal by acting as EQ mechanisms.

 

Dennis on the other hand relies on measurements and scientific knowledge to select components that are as accurate as possible (respecting the integrity of the recorded signal).

And he argues that even though some of the claims made by certain cable manufacturers can in fact be measured they're either are below the threshold of audibility or outside of the audible spectrum, which is why he defends blind listening and I could add no reading of reviews.

 

In my opinion both of your positions are valid for your own personal objectives but not for the other's.

And I'm sure there'll be many people lining up in both camps.

 

I situate myself somewhere in the middle though closer to Dennis' because my goal is to listen to the recording, not the system, and I find measurements quite helpful in that they provide relatively unbiased snapshots of certain aspects in equipment performance that usually have some correlation with what we hear.

But on the subject of cables I find that people have gone absolutely mad...

3 or at the most 5% of your budget spent on audio cables (the amount is dependent on the number and length of cables) is more than enough to get good looking, well built and more importantly effective cables.

I don't see any technical advantages in using power cables (though my knowledge is limited) and see little point in wasting the time but some people may believe otherwise or find comfort in using dedicated accessories.

What bugs me is the absurdity of the prices being asked for so many cables.

 

R

[witchdoctor]

Still I wouldn't trust a reviewer like Srajan who has put his hands and touted all imaginable snake-oil rubbish possible and made a flowery, glittering text piece of their sonic properties, or better yet special effects.

I've been up that path before (6 loons), and even though I never fell for the audio accessories trap I ended up with a load of 47labs stuff and a pair of single drivers, and worse, convinced that my system was something special.

 

Learning how to interpret measurements has been a great help in separating the wheat from the chaff.

And I've stopped reading reviews, although I think that reading between the lines of some of them may reveal a few shortcomings amongst all of amazingness and expressions of character.

 

R

 

OP, this is another example of someone who has 0 tolerance for anyone who disagrees with him. Notice the attack on Srajan with absolutely 0 support for his claims. He touts his wisdom at avoiding traps that everyone else was dumb enough to fall into. He caps it off by bragging how he has stopped reading reviews to confirm that he is smarter than all of the reviewers. Another poster with "no clue" just a lot of anger.

[witchdoctor]

From where I'm standing, it appears that you defend a tune-by-ear approach which finds good use for cables that affect the signal by acting as EQ mechanisms.

 

Dennis on the other hand relies on measurements and scientific knowledge to select components that are as accurate as possible (respecting the integrity of the recorded signal).

And he argues that even though some of the claims made by certain cable manufacturers can in fact be measured they're either are below the threshold of audibility or outside of the audible spectrum, which is why he defends blind listening and I could add no reading of reviews.

 

In my opinion both of your positions are valid for your own personal objectives but not for the other's.

And I'm sure there'll be many people lining up in both camps.

 

I situate myself somewhere in the middle though closer to Dennis' because my goal is to listen to the recording, not the system, and I find measurements quite helpful in that they provide relatively unbiased snapshots of certain aspects in equipment performance that usually have some correlation with what we hear.

But on the subject of cables I find that people have gone absolutely mad...

3 or at the most 5% of your budget spent on audio cables (the amount is dependent on the number and length of cables) is more than enough to get good looking, well built and more importantly effective cables.

I don't see any technical advantages in using power cables (though my knowledge is limited) and see little point in wasting the time but some people may believe otherwise or find comfort in using dedicated accessories.

What bugs me is the absurdity of the prices being asked for so many cables.

 

R

 

OP, isn't it funny how people who have gone "absolutely mad" as he puts it don't realize that everyone else is normal and they are the ones who are mad? I don't see how anything in this post has anything to do with the topic of this thread except to confirm that he has "no clue".

 

You can always tell when someone is "raving mad" by the broad generalizations of their claims, they lack the ability to make specific claims and offer specific support, and how they contsntly refer to their personal experience in a sense of absolute final truth. This is why I use the term "sad" for these types of posts.

[semente]

Why are you addressing the original poster when commenting my posts?

 

It would be more productive if instead of whining you tried to rebate whatever you disagree with...

 

R

[witchdoctor]

The thread would only go further off topic. This will be my only addressing of it in this thread.

 

I can give enough hints. People have tendencies to hear differences when there actually are none. Then get those labels stuck in their memory for whatever reason. So lets imagine a company with many dozens of brands lets you pick a few that for whatever reason you give credence to. Let you hear them for yourself. They certainly don't care which you choose. You by human nature are then very predisposed to hear something as different. So you order up some AQ, some Acoustic Zen, some MIT, some Tara Labs. You listen and are quite, quite likely to hear some difference. Further listening only solidifies it in your mind and you pick one.

 

Now do you think everyone is hearing the same thing with so many to choose from? Or do you believe in system synergy? Or different styles for different folks? Or like me, believe it doesn't matter, they sound the same without labels and are nearly certain not to sound the same to anyone doing informal long term uncontrolled sighted listening. Someone with no real opinion tries out their free sample offer thinking how can I lose? Well by convincing themselves of a myth that will be hard to dispel. Plus they sort of do have that non-refundable fee to pretty much make sure you do buy something from them. So convinced they forever worry over and spend considerable sums of money on something that really doesn't matter.

 

More sadness! Just more self aggrandizement.

[witchdoctor]

Why are you addressing the original poster when commenting my posts?

 

It would be more productive if instead of whining you tried to rebate whatever you disagree with...

 

R

 

OK, you seem to claim there is a universal formula of budgeting for cables that is always right for all systems of no more than 5%. You made a specific claim, now please offer a link to support it. Thanks

[witchdoctor]

OK, you seem to claim there is a universal formula of budgeting for cables that is always right for all systems of no more than 5%. You made a specific claim, now please offer a link to support it. Thanks

 

Here is a link on How to Choose Interconnects and Cables by Robert Harley, thought this might help. You can see his suggestions for a cable budget in the article.:

 

How to Choose Interconnects and Loudspeaker Cables (TAS 197) | The Absolute Sound

[17629v2]

Actually, my take on cables is different than most others. I believe that if you match your components properly, the cables will take care of themselves. I can still hear differences between cables easily, but I don't use band aid or eq cables. Also, differences in cables are usually not frequency response type of differences. (at least for me and the cable's I use.) And yes, I do listen to them. How else am I going to determine if they work for me? Also, one of the main reasons I have to listen, is that I don't like cables that make big changes in how the system sounds. There are no measurements for that type of thing.

 

If you look at what I normally use and/or recommend, its cables like AQ and Tara. These are considered fairly boring choices. They have a reputation for working in a broad range of systems with no problems. That's not the characteristics of an EQ type of cable. Synergistic, with all that crazy stuff they come up with, like tuning bullets, or ultra expensive mystery cables like NBS, are not the type of products I usually support or recommend. For proof, just look at the cables I recommend to the OP in this thread. I said to look for a good used pair of AQ Jaguar or Columbia. I use both of these cables in my own systems. Audiogon has a pair of new old stock Jaguars (1M) selling for $165. He just bought 10k worth of electronics and needs to use something of decent quality. I shouldn't have to defend a recommendation like that.

 

Now as for Dennis, I understand what you are saying in your post. But this is not how he acts. At least not recently. Most of his posts are mean spirited, fabricated and just plain senseless. He does the opposite of what you lay out in your post. And I don't care that he has different views than I do. I'm more than happy to acknowledge his position and have a healthy debate with him on stuff we don't agree on. But I won't stand for senseless, mindless attacks based on nothing tangible.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Enough of the arguments guys. This thread could gone so well and helped not only the OP, but also all the people finding this thread through a Google's searches.

 

if you want to continue this argument you must do it in another thread.

[semente]

Edit: Sorry, didn't see your message before I replied Chris.

[Jud]

So to the OP: Now that you've surely had your fill of the old unending cable argument, let's move on to something hopefully more productive.

 

Chris's suggestion of the QB-9 DAC is a very good one. There is an alternative, depending on how much you like or dislike working with software, that could save you some money.

 

So if you're still bothering to read this thread, how tech-y do you feel about software?

[wwaldmanfan]

Maybe I should spend more time at DIY audio, and pro sound forums.

 

Or, do what I have started doing. Waste less time here, and start contributing to the Dynamic Range Database. After all, having the best audio equipment only makes terribly mastered recordings sound worse. Let's help others avoid choosing inferior remasters over original CD's, which can still be had in the aftermarket.

[witchdoctor]

Or, do what I have started doing. Waste less time here, and start contributing to the Dynamic Range Database. After all, having the best audio equipment only makes terribly mastered recordings sound worse. Let's help others avoid choosing inferior remasters over original CD's, which can still be had in the aftermarket.

 

+1