$10,000/ft Cable burn-in ! Wasted $500 a watt on an amp! Why the war?

[STC]

I've never really thought of monster as a top quality brand either. Good point and reality check.

 

:-)

 

Actually, at one point of time they made $1000 Cables.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arcman]

Read up and you will hear about the old "Monster Challenge" displays in stores. Monster makes quality cables, but they are overpriced (like many others) with marketing Hype. If a studio wanted to go "all out" with cable quality, not one would choose Monster unless there were some marketing $$$ involved.

 

A studio/label advertising they use Monster (which would work fine for their applications) is like saying they use BOSE speakers for monitoring. Audiophiles would laugh....but general public, the ones who buy Crosley Turntables because vinyl sounds better, may take notice.

[arcman]

I've been in most major studios in Nashville, many, including Capital, in LA tons of independent studios. In some I do not know what cables they are wired with. Most studios, however, have a spec sheet (sometimes online as well) and Beldon or "high quality" stood out as Cable specs (not all studios go that specific).

 

Mapleshade and Chesky do not produce majority of the music thats out there (more and more produced at home). Mapleshade is an audio dealer/manufacturer that uses its high quality recordings as a tool to promote its component business.

[Jud]

I've been in most major studios in Nashville, many, including Capital, in LA tons of independent studios. In some I do not know what cables they are wired with. Most studios, however, have a spec sheet (sometimes online as well) and Beldon or "high quality" stood out as Cable specs (not all studios go that specific).

 

Mapleshade and Chesky do not produce majority of the music thats out there (more and more produced at home). Mapleshade is an audio dealer/manufacturer that uses its high quality recordings as a tool to promote its component business.

 

Re Mapleshade, that's slightly inaccurate. Pierre started out in recording (as far as audio is concerned- he was an aeronautical engineer with the Pentagon prior to that), and branched out into an equipment business from there.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Jud]

Teresa, just wanted to note that it's good to see you posting more actively again.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[Teresa]

So Monster is the new gold standard in cabling? Is Telarc using Bose monitors as well?

 

I've never really thought of monster as a top quality brand either. Good point and reality check.

 

:-)

 

I don't think Monster is a gold standard in cabling, there are many megabuck cable companies that would be competing for that title, most whose entry-level cables I could never afford.

 

However, it is the Monster Cable Pro 1000 microphone cable that is listed in the booklet of my newest Telarc SACD from 2008 "Gandolfi - The Garden of Cosmic Speculation"

 

Telarc lists MIT (Music Interface Technologies) Proline with balanced terminators for interconnect cables. For speaker monitors Telarc lists ATC SCM-150. Sorry, no Bose.

 

The Monster Cable Pro 1000 microphone cable was $79 retail and got rave reviews, its now discontinued replaced by the Monster Studio Pro 2000 Microphone Cable.

[r_w]

Lol

 

actually, at one point of time they made $1000 cables.

 

 

Sent from my iphone using tapatalk

[r_w]

They got that bit right on the money.

 

For speaker monitors Telarc lists ATC SCM-150.

[arcman]

I wonder if any studios are using this

 

Brilliant Pebbles Advanced Audio Video Tweak

[gmgraves]

I am saddened by the closed-minded know-it-alls who attempt to speak venom against those companies which provide the benefits of better sounding and better constructed audio cables that makes our music more enjoyable.

 

And I am likewise saddened by those who approach audio with mysticism rather than physics, charlatanism rather than engineering, and mythology rather than hard facts. Why some people believe that an audio signal is somehow "special" and doesn't have to obey the laws of physics and neither does the equipment that carries and processes that audio signal is beyond me. Being fully knowledgeable of the fact that human hearing is subject to all sorts of psychological factors and biases, these people still prefer to believe that their hearing is infallible and prefer to rely on that rather than all the science and physics in the world telling them that their ears are lying to them under certain condition, and that various unscrupulous vendors are all too ready to take advantage of the unwary, the naive and the stubborn...

[gmgraves]

Yes.

And Cristiano Ronaldo uses CLEAR dandruff shampoo, so he can hit more goals per match...

Did Einstein really drink Coca-Cola?

Miles Davis used a pair of Acoustic Research speakers.

And Santa drives around in a Chrisler.

 

Actually, Richard Feynman once noted that Einstein was a Coca-Cola addict and his house had coke bottles everywhere (to be gathered-up and returned by his house keeper). Can't speak to the others, but I get your point and I agree.

[gmgraves]

I am a big fan of recordings on the Telarc label made prior to their purchase by Concord Music around 2009, especially their pure DSD SACDs. And I have no doubt that the use of superior sounding microphone cables is important to the amazing sound quality they achieve, especially in the SACDs.

Good idea as superior internally wiring apparently does made a sonic improvement. Read about a comparison of Telarc's Neotek console internally wired with Monster Cable versus a stock Neotek console with standard wiring.

 

I was under the impression that Telarc is no more (but some manufacturer is still, apparently, producing their CDs). I know for a fact that Jack Renner isn't at Telarc any more. I spoke with him at the last AES Convention that I attended, and he said that he wasn't "doing anything at the moment."

[gmgraves]

I wonder if any studios are using this

 

Brilliant Pebbles Advanced Audio Video Tweak

 

They also put Myrtlewood blocks on top of every piece of equipment and drape their cables on ceramic standoffs (that look like inverted coffee cups with the handles broken off) to keep them up off the floor!

[gmgraves]

Teresa: You seem to think a lot of Telarc recordings (which I always thought imaged terribly because Jack Renner believed in slavishly following Bob Fine's three-spaced-omni microphone setup, which, while it worked OK with those old Telefunken omnis that Fine used, won't work with the modern calibration mikes that Renner liked to employ), what is your opinion of Reference Recordings? Now, Keith Johnson KNOWS how to record an orchestra and for my money, RR recordings sound more like the Mercury, RCA Victor and Everest Recordings of the "golden age of stereo" than do any other modern recordings. Your thoughts?

[GUTB]

My own experience with anaolog cables have been mixed. My old no-name RCAs made from pro cable stock, thick insulation and heavy plugs clearly out-performed a low-end Kimber (well under $100). A pair of $600 AntiCables 6.2 ABSOLUTE Signatures, their top of the line, performed the same as the no-names.

 

A set of $300 Audio Sensibility Statement SE XLRs out-performed $16 Better Cables XLRs by a small amount (a thin veil being lifted) -- which might even be explained the difference in length for all I know.

 

Although not a very good test due to the large level difference when dealing with balanced vs unbalanced -- as far as I could tell, discounting the gain difference, switching back and forth between the Statement SEs and 6.2s I really couldn't identify any differences that couldn't be easily attributed to volume. Also, the Mjolnir 2 is a balanced topology so again, not the best test in the world...

 

AC cables, however, are different story -- although not cut-and-dry.

 

My first foray into AC cables was an Audio Sensibility Testament. In my last home, in an older neighborhood, house built in the 80s, the difference between that and standard AC cables was profound -- it really was if my entire system was upgraded. However, taking the same cable into a new home that is a recent build in the suburbs, the difference is much less pronounced, suggesting that there was alot of garbage getting into my mains, such as EMI/RFI everywhere, that the Audio Sensibility was able to reject, but with much less of it in the new home the difference was therefore diminished. I also bought a Lessloss Original, which purports to be a filtering cable -- again the difference is noticeable but small in my new home...but when I plug my DAC into a Tripp-Lite Isobar (with filter banks built into it) using a standard cable, the sound degradation is immense.

[Ralf11]

Theresa,

 

I asked politely for your listening test methodology. I did not see that you answered that. We know for certain that expectation bias (placebo effect) is very strong and occurs in not just humans but other mammals and birds. It crosses to different types of senses too (i.e. vision and hearing).

 

I believe you are honestly convinced you perceived a difference in interconnects. But perception is NOT hearing. you would have to remove the visual effect of looking at big, fancy gear (cables) and of expectation bias to show that the perception was due to hearing.

 

Also, George is correct that interconnect cable technology and design has no effect on low frequency signals - nor can it given our understanding of physics and electronics. Now, it is always (slightly) possible that the thousands of scientists and engineers who have worked in this field for over two centuries are wrong, and that something was left out.

 

If so, the way to demonstrate it would be to perform a scientifically valid test of interconnects that shows a difference. I have never seen one.

 

Old men would not be the best test subjects to use. One would want a younger person and likely a woman (or several of them). Women can hear better than men at higher frequencies and are superior in other sensory tests (wine for example). I assume from your screen name that you are a woman, hence my interest in your tests. But without real tests I cannot give your opinion any credence due ot the very strong effects of expectation bias.

 

Finally, people sometimes say "who cares? let me spend my money on visual stimuli if I want to" That is fine, but you already said your funds were somewhat limited. Not to mention that consumers are being cheated by pricy interconnects. So, I suggest you do careful testing on anything you buy and return anything that does not distinguish itself.

[witchdoctor]

So Monster is the new gold standard in cabling? Is Telarc using Bose monitors as well?

 

The Monster HTPS 7000 power conditioner kicks ass. I think there cables are fine, not a gold standard but they don't charge those types of prices either. (Gold standard is like a $7500 1 meter interconnect in my book, not $750).

Too many people hating on monster IMO.

[witchdoctor]

I've been in most major studios in Nashville, many, including Capital, in LA tons of independent studios. In some I do not know what cables they are wired with. Most studios, however, have a spec sheet (sometimes online as well) and Beldon or "high quality" stood out as Cable specs (not all studios go that specific).

 

Mapleshade and Chesky do not produce majority of the music thats out there (more and more produced at home). Mapleshade is an audio dealer/manufacturer that uses its high quality recordings as a tool to promote its component business.

 

Rolls Royce doesn't produce the majority of the cars out there so they must suck too right?

[Teresa]

And I am likewise saddened by those who approach audio with mysticism rather than physics, charlatanism rather than engineering, and mythology rather than hard facts. Why some people believe that an audio signal is somehow "special" and doesn't have to obey the laws of physics and neither does the equipment that carries and processes that audio signal is beyond me. Being fully knowledgeable of the fact that human hearing is subject to all sorts of psychological factors and biases, these people still prefer to believe that their hearing is infallible and prefer to rely on that rather than all the science and physics in the world telling them that their ears are lying to them under certain condition, and that various unscrupulous vendors are all too ready to take advantage of the unwary, the naive and the stubborn...

 

Nothing to do with mysticism but reality. All I’m saying is wire is an imperfect medium for music to travel on. Some cables by use of things such as pure copper and other metals such as silver, well-made tight fitting RCA connectors, shields and insulation material handle the inevitable sonic losses better than others.

 

Those sonic losses are real and you can hear the losses yourself doing the comparison of quality headphones plugged directly in your preamp headphone jack versus headphones being plugged into a headphone extension cable and then into your preamp headphone jack as I described in post 243.

 

My friend audio designer John Curl says we can only measure a small percent of what we hear. Once we are able to measure audio differences of cables to your requirements in a audible range perhaps you will then admit you hear those differences too and will no longer be such be such a naysayer.

[Teresa]

I wonder if any studios are using this

 

Brilliant Pebbles Advanced Audio Video Tweak

 

I doubt it, I can't imagine how they work. However, since I have never tried them I am not in a position to condemn them. I did a google search and it is less expensive to buy crystal pebbles from a gem or art store. Some of them are also sold for medicinal purposes. Most of the listed prices are less than $10 for 10 or more crystals.

[Ralf11]

 

Those sonic losses are real ...

 

 

What makes you think that?

[Teresa]

I was under the impression that Telarc is no more (but some manufacturer is still, apparently, producing their CDs). I know for a fact that Jack Renner isn't at Telarc any more. I spoke with him at the last AES Convention that I attended, and he said that he wasn't "doing anything at the moment."

 

Jack Renner retired after Concord Music's purchase of Telarc in 2009. The Telarc production and engineering teams were fired and Telarc now outsources production and engineering for each recording project.

 

Former Telarc producers Robert Woods and Elaine Martone started their own company called Sonarc.

 

Former Telarc engineers Michael Bishop, Robert Friedrich, and Thomas Moore formed Five/Four Productions.

 

Telarc still releases recordings after their purchase by Concord Music Group in 2009, however the release schedule is greatly decreased. See this Amazon Telarc search by release date.

 

The newest Telarc SACD I own is from 2008. I also have a Telarc 24/96 download from 2014 and it sounds nothing whatsoever like a Telarc. As far as I know only the new Hiromi recordings are engineered by the original Telarc crew.

 

I have two 24/96 Fanfare Cincinnati recordings I purchased from HDTracks. Both engineered in DSD by Five/Four Productions / Sonarc. So far not available in the original DSD.

 

Carnival of the Animals (2013)

Superheroes (2012)

 

Copied from the PDF of the program notes:

 

Recorded in Music Hall, Cincinnati, Ohio

Recording Producer: Elaine Martone for SonarcMusic

Recording, Mix, and Mastering Engineer: Michael Bishop, Five/Four Productions, Ltd.

Microphones: Sanken CO-100K, Neumann KU-100, AEA A-840; Royer SF-24

Microphone Preamplifiers: UpState Audio Sonic Lens 20/20, AEA RPQ, Millennia Media HV3D

Recording Console: Studer 962, Custom Modified

Recording and Editing System: Sonoma DSD Workstation from Gus Skinas, Super Audio Center, LLC with EMM Labs DSD Converters

Monitored through: ATC SCM-150 Professional Monitors and EMMLabs Switchman Monitor Controller

Interconnects: MIT Oracle MA-X and MIT Proline with Terminators from Music Interface Technologies CD mastered on the SADiE 6 PCM Workstation from Prism Sound

 

Teresa: You seem to think a lot of Telarc recordings (which I always thought imaged terribly because Jack Renner believed in slavishly following Bob Fine's three-spaced-omni microphone setup, which, while it worked OK with those old Telefunken omnis that Fine used, won't work with the modern calibration mikes that Renner liked to employ), what is your opinion of Reference Recordings? Now, Keith Johnson KNOWS how to record an orchestra and for my money, RR recordings sound more like the Mercury, RCA Victor and Everest Recordings of the "golden age of stereo" than do any other modern recordings. Your thoughts?

 

I like Telarc recordings made prior to 2009, especially on SACD. Might be system depended. As on my system in 2-channel stereo Telarc’s image is very wide, deep with very good layering, a superb soundstage and has great impact and power in the low frequencies among other positive sonic attributes. Pre 2009 Telarc SACDs are my favorite recordings. Have you heard any of Telarc's SACDs?

 

Reference Recordings is my second favorite label, they sound excellent and their low frequencies have the weight and impact that Telarc has. By contrast Telarc SACDs and Reference Recordings 24/176.4 HRx’s reveal what is wrong with major label recordings.

 

Here is a screen shot of how many recordings I have on each label, in which I have two or more albums.

 

[Teresa]

Teresa,

 

I asked politely for your listening test methodology. I did not see that you answered that.

 

I politely answered that in post 245.

 

“Below my name I list the only methodology I know that works.

"Crede Auribus or believe your ears with honest long-term listening."

In my humble opinion it is not good to rush to judgement on anything audio related. Take your time and listen to a wide variety of your favorite music before making any decisions.

 

Try the headphone extension cable comparison from

post 243

that should convince you that analog interconnect cables are not perfect and all have losses by varying degrees."

 

We know for certain that expectation bias (placebo effect) is very strong and occurs in not just humans but other mammals and birds. It crosses to different types of senses too (i.e. vision and hearing).

 

I believe you are honestly convinced you perceived a difference in interconnects. But perception is NOT hearing. you would have to remove the visual effect of looking at big, fancy gear (cables) and of expectation bias to show that the perception was due to hearing.

 

This is why long-term listening is so important. One might be fooled short-term, but the real sound of anything will be revealed in long-term listening. Expectation bias is only one of the problems with back and forth AB comparisons, there are many others.

 

From an earlier post of mine: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/why-do-objectivists-get-so-upset-28978/index53.html#post563279

 

I'm fine with blind listening as long as it is under normal long-term listening to music for pleasure. I'm totally against AB'ing, sighted or blind as it fails to reveal important sonic differences IMHO.

 

It’s the instantaneous part of AB’ing that very seldom works with human beings, even with large differences in sound.

 

I do single item comparisons, using music of my choice. I listen for how

realistic

and

comfortable

the music sounds, not one against the other.

 

Five "human" things ensure why

sighted

or

blind

A/B testing fails to reveal statistical differences between nearly everything:

• Cognitive bias - your brain will fill in missing information thus making both samples sound the same on repeated listening.
  
  
• Listener Fatigue - switch back and forth too often and both music files will sound like crap.
  
  
• Accumulative effects are hidden - Accumulative effects on sound quality increase over time and remain hidden when switching back and forth between two music files, especially things such as strident/smooth, cold/warm sound, etc.
  
  
• Soundstage and instrument placement - it takes anywhere between 30 seconds to several minutes for my brain to map the soundstage and hear the instrument and vocal placement before I can judge anything. A/B'ing insures this never happens.
  
  
• Confirmation Bias - In addition sighted A/B testing has to fight confirmation bias, as some people think the major brand or more expensive item must sound better. This is not always true as sometimes the unknown brand or the least expensive item sounds the best.
  
  

 

The only way I’ve discovered to get a handle on how something sounds is listening to it using a few select complete uninterrupted songs from my music collection with the lights turned out. Or if at a dealer with with lights turned low, if they can’t turn them out, and the salesman must leave the room while I listen in comfort.

 

I don’t believe echoic memory works with music. Echoic memory is too short and music is too complex. One single-item at a time using long-term listening and comparing against ideal and not each other is the only way I have discovered differences I like.

 

Here are some links, the first three were written by me before I had dementia. The forth is by Robert Harley.

 

Why ABX Testing Usually Produces Null Results with Human Subjects

 

Problem of cognitive bias in AB Testing Post 33

 

Aural recovery and why you can’t A-B something by flipping a switch Post 68

 

Audio McCarthyism

Also, George is correct that interconnect cable technology and design has no effect on low frequency signals - nor can it given our understanding of physics and electronics. Now, it is always (slightly) possible that the thousands of scientists and engineers who have worked in this field for over two centuries are wrong, and that something was left out.

 

George is not correct and you can prove it to yourself by comparing the sound of a quality headphone with and without an extension cable, you will hear losses in the audible range. No cable is perfect IMHO.

[Teresa]

The Monster HTPS 7000 power conditioner kicks ass. I think there cables are fine, not a gold standard but they don't charge those types of prices either. (Gold standard is like a $7500 1 meter interconnect in my book, not $750).

Too many people hating on monster IMO.

 

I have the Monster HDP1800 High Definition PowerCenter I purchased at a pawn shop for $60.

[Allan F]

Those sonic losses are real...

What makes you think that?

The sound, dummy!