The ultimate cables can/can't - only $80,000

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, sdolezalek said:

 Thank you.  Useful input.  As someone with large Magnepan speakers that are notorious for having fairly complex impedance curves, I was wondering whether a network like this might present an amplifier with an easier load to drive.  Question is, what sonic benefits are derived from "easier to drive loads"?

 

What Maggies would these be, if you don't mind me asking? In my considerable experience with Magnepans (I've owned, probably 10 pairs over the years) I have always been impressed by how un-complex the impedance curve was (compared to other types of speakers). Every Maggie that I have owned have been, essentially, purely resistive, and usually somewhere between 4 and 6Ω. That's about as simple as one can get.

[CuteStudio]

18 minutes ago, psjug said:

Yep.  People spend crazy amounts of money for all kinds of stuff: http://www.theinertia.com/surf/worlds-most-expensive-surfboard-sells-for-1-5-million/

(sorry if off topic!)

 

That's very true, even diamond encrusted iPhones, Rembrandts etc.

 

However would you mind if I pointed out that none of those pretend to do something that requires a new, hitherto unknown (and still unexplained and unproven) branch of physics?

 

 

Most hifi accessories make that surfboard look great value

https://highend-electronics.com/products/shun-mook-lp-clamp

 

 

BTW if you want to play with speaker cables then adding a ferrite ring next to the amplifier (over both wires) can sometimes help with amps that were mistakenly designed with GNFB loops (never a good idea IMO).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/10-Pcs-Toroid-Ring-Ferrite-Cores-22-14-10MM-U3P5/282653602811

 

It reduces the RF going back in and around the amp, chances are it'll make no difference but it won't do any harm and will save you about $79,998 which is nice. You can then use this money to buy a new car, RV, a world tour, 3 years earlier retirement, house extension, your own studio, hiring the Rolling Stones to play in your living room, a box at the opera, new foundations for sub-bass horns etc.

 

So my advice is to go for the $3 ferrites if you must and save the $80k for something real. You'll thank me later   

[psjug]

1 minute ago, CuteStudio said:

However would you mind if I pointed out that none of those pretend to do something that requires a new, hitherto unknown (and still unexplained and unproven) branch of physics?

Point taken.  But I have a hard time feeling too sorry for a buyer who parts with tens of thousands of dollars or more without doing the least bit of fact checking.

[gmgraves]

2 hours ago, Albrecht said:

A knowledgeable buyer who is someone who does investigative comparative analysis.

Electrical Engineering knowledge often hampers knowledge, - because the EE makes judgments outside of the scope of the device without conducting investigative tests. Commenting on anything based on price is just another form of speculation, - where little to no knowledge is gleaned. Your unqualified opinion and bias has little value to the potential purchaser of the device. The only way to know is to compare two similarly priced devices in a system that is appropriate and commensurate to the device being tested.

No one will EVER buy a $10K cable if they have $800 speakers.

If you haven't done any comparative testing, - you have no knowledge of the efficacy of the product: period.

 

The efficacy of the product is pretty irrelevant as far as I can see. What is relevant is that given the nature of passive filter circuitry, there is nothing that these "cables" can do that is (1) worth $80K or (2) can't be done much more efficiently and effectively by active components inserted before the power amplifier. At best, these cables are "bling" for rich audiophools and at worst, they are pure charlatanism. Again, I would love to see what's inside that box, and I would love to see the breakdown on the manufacturing costs. If those "cables" cost more than about $5K/pair to make (and 2K is probably more like it), I'll eat my hat - if somebody will supply me with a hat (a straw skimmer, if you please! )!

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Every Maggie that I have owned have been, essentially, purely resistive, and usually somewhere between 4 and 6Ω. That's about as simple as one can get.

That's a direct consequence of their design. There's no coil to produce any inductance.

[gmgraves]

9 minutes ago, CuteStudio said:

 

That's very true, even diamond encrusted iPhones, Rembrandts etc.

 

However would you mind if I pointed out that none of those pretend to do something that requires a new, hitherto unknown (and still unexplained and unproven) branch of physics?

 

 

Most hifi accessories make that surfboard look great value

https://highend-electronics.com/products/shun-mook-lp-clamp

 

 

BTW if you want to play with speaker cables then adding a ferrite ring next to the amplifier (over both wires) can sometimes help with amps that were mistakenly designed with GNFB loops (never a good idea IMO).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/10-Pcs-Toroid-Ring-Ferrite-Cores-22-14-10MM-U3P5/282653602811

 

It reduces the RF going back in and around the amp, chances are it'll make no difference but it won't do any harm and will save you about $79,998 which is nice. You can then use this money to buy a new car, RV, a world tour, 3 years earlier retirement, house extension, your own studio, hiring the Rolling Stones to play in your living room, a box at the opera, new foundations for sub-bass horns etc.

 

So my advice is to go for the $3 ferrites if you must and save the $80k for something real. You'll thank me later   

 

Absolutely. For that kind of money, one could buy a new Alfa Giulia Quadrifoglio (505 BHP 2.9 liter Ferrari engine; 0-62 Mph (0-100Kph) in 3.8 seconds, top speed - 191 MPH, Motor Trend's Car of the Year) and still have $7000 left over for gas! On the other hand, anyone who has the money to throw away on a pair of these cables, can probably afford a fleet of Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglios too. Oh well!

[gmgraves]

6 minutes ago, mansr said:

That's a direct consequence of their design. There's no coil to produce any inductance.

 

Yes, it is. That includes no voice coils either and relatively simple cross-overs as well.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, sdolezalek said:

 Thank you.  Useful input.  As someone with large Magnepan speakers that are notorious for having fairly complex impedance curves, I was wondering whether a network like this might present an amplifier with an easier load to drive.  Question is, what sonic benefits are derived from "easier to drive loads"?

Someone has mislead you.  Magnepans have some of the easiest impedance curves of all speakers in the world.  They are sometimes moderately low impedance at 4 ohms or a bit under.  But they are very nearly purely resistive having no appreciable capacitance or inductance.  

 

Here is the impedance plot of a 3.6 R.  It is typically like this for Maggies.  A little bump around the crossover, and not too much else. 

 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

 

Thank for the timely truth drop on the thread.

 

None of us here are Bruce Brisson, who's been conducting research and experimentation into these topics since the 70s. Electrical Engineers have very little knowledge of advanced audio -- their knowledge is basic, and that leads to basic opinions on advanced technologies. I'm also just as ignorant, so I have to rely on my ears to notice any benefits, and until I can listen to this product in a meaningful way I can't say yea or nay, and nor can I really judge the efficacy of the technology.

 

Another example would be Bybee purifiers. "Quantum" speak is throughout the marketing, but it was revealed in a 6moons interview with Bybee that he, himself, doesn't know why conducting currents through certain rare-earth metal oxide resistors lowers 1/f noise -- it just does. The Bybee products aren't scams, and several reputable amp, speaker, and cable manufacturers continue to offer them as options in their products. Literally every single review I've ever come across of Bybee DIY products report improvement.

You continue to bat for zero with another couple of swing and misses.  

 

You can find a long DIY Audio forum thread where these filters from Bybee were measured with some highly precise instrumentation.  They do not reduce 1/f noise or do anything else except act like the little cheap goofy resistor they have embedded inside them.  You fall for every scam product and lap it up.  And then argue everyone is the mis-informed.  

[esldude]

2 hours ago, Albrecht said:

A knowledgeable buyer who is someone who does investigative comparative analysis.

Electrical Engineering knowledge often hampers knowledge, - because the EE makes judgments outside of the scope of the device without conducting investigative tests. Commenting on anything based on price is just another form of speculation, - where little to no knowledge is gleaned. Your unqualified opinion and bias has little value to the potential purchaser of the device. The only way to know is to compare two similarly priced devices in a system that is appropriate and commensurate to the device being tested.

No one will EVER buy a $10K cable if they have $800 speakers.

If you haven't done any comparative testing, - you have no knowledge of the efficacy of the product: period.

A cute tell you have made up.  

 

Knowledge is ignorance perhaps?

 

 

[GUTB]

4 minutes ago, esldude said:

You continue to bat for zero with another couple of swing and misses.  

 

You can find a long DIY Audio forum thread where these filters from Bybee were measured with some highly precise instrumentation.  They do not reduce 1/f noise or do anything else except act like the little cheap goofy resistor they have embedded inside them.  You fall for every scam product and lap it up.  And then argue everyone is the mis-informed.  

 

Sigh. I will go find this thread.

[Albrecht]

31 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

The efficacy of the product is pretty irrelevant as far as I can see. What is relevant is that given the nature of passive filter circuitry, there is nothing that these "cables" can do that is (1) worth $80K or (2) can't be done much more efficiently and effectively by active components inserted before the power amplifier. At best, these cables are "bling" for rich audiophools and at worst, they are pure charlatanism. Again, I would love to see what's inside that box, and I would love to see the breakdown on the manufacturing costs. If those "cables" cost more than about $5K/pair to make (and 2K is probably more like it), I'll eat my hat - if somebody will supply me with a hat (a straw skimmer, if you please! )!

Well clearly they are not for Foolish EEs who eschew reason and science and preach their naysaying. Of course, - you wouldn't know if something is charlatanism as you're refusing to conduct any tests, - or garner any knowledge whatsoever. The best that you can say: is "i don't know" , - yet instead you choose to speculate.

[Ralf11]

15 hours ago, wgscott said:

If these were Cal Tech cables, I would be more impressed.

 

 

ow!!

[gmgraves]

16 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Well clearly they are not for Foolish EEs who eschew reason and science and preach their naysaying. Of course, - you wouldn't know if something is charlatanism as you're refusing to conduct any tests, - or garner any knowledge whatsoever. The best that you can say: is "i don't know" , - yet instead you choose to speculate.

 

I don't refuse to run any tests, I just don't happen to have a spare $80K at the moment to spend on obtaining a pair of these things to test. Now, if you can send me a pair, I will happily test them and return them to you when the test is finished. And publish the results in TAV. I'm sure my editor would jump at the chance to have an MIT review; especially on such an expensive product.

 

And my comments are far from idle speculation. As I said in an earlier post on this thread, I have played with MIT's "Articulation Controls" before on cheaper MIT products (only $10,000) and, yes, the do subtly change the sound of the speakers to which they are connected. However, again, I reiterate, that passive filter circuitry is extremely limited in what it can do. That's just physics, and there is nothing that passive filters between the amp and the speaker can do, that an active 1/3 octave equalizer between the preamp and amp can't do better and cheaper and with less phase distortion. If you don't choose to believe that, well, that's up to you, isn't it? 

[Ralf11]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That's partly why the OP said he wasn't conducting an opinion poll. He is looking for expertise. 

 

Telling someone to study "electronics, acoustics, biology and psychology" rather than offer some knowledge doesn't help anyone.

 

plenty of knowledge has been offered here from people with expertise in the above areas - AS USUAL, it was rejected by the anti-vaxer types

 

how long can ignorant citizens maintain an advanced civilization  <---- that is the larger issue beyond cables

[pkane2001]

9 minutes ago, esldude said:

Knowledge is ignorance perhaps?

 

"Trust your senses, ignore science and logic." Wasn't this line of reasoning debunked right after the middle ages? Do we really have to redo the scientific revolution all over again?

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, Ralf11 said:

 

plenty of knowledge has been offered here from people with expertise in the above areas - AS USUAL, it was rejected by the anti-vaxer types

 

how long can ignorant citizens maintain an advanced civilization  <---- that is the larger issue beyond cables

You are painting with the broadest brush possible. The OP said nothing that should lead you to believe he is an anti-vaxer type. He asked for real information and said opinions really didn't matter. I don't know what more he could do. It seems like you are locked into a belief and if someone mentions a product such as a cable, your auto-reply kicks in with a comment that isn't helpful. 

 

Asking how a product could work and excluding opinions, is about as close as you can get to someone who should be in your camp.

[GUTB]

23 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

Sigh. I will go find this thread.

 

And, as usual, I had to go pry a layer of deception off the discussion. In fact, no one in that thread was able to design and conduct a meaningful test of the Bybees. Furthermore, in a separate ABX test thread, the tester conducted some simple electrical analysis -- found nothing except a very small drop in upper harmonics -- and proceeded to find he could subjectively identify the difference in high frequency sounds, and ended up scoring 60% in two ABX runs when using quality sources, which is better-than-chance certainty. That was with the bullet plugs, devices to be hooked up between your amp and speakers, while the filters are supposed to be connected as close as possible to the transducers for best results. 

[Speed Racer]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You are painting with the broadest brush possible. The OP said nothing that should lead you to believe he is an anti-vaxer type. He asked for real information and said opinions really didn't matter. I don't know what more he could do. It seems like you are locked into a belief and if someone mentions a product such as a cable, your auto-reply kicks in with a comment that isn't helpful. 

 

Asking how a product could work and excluding opinions, is about as close as you can get to someone who should be in your camp.

 

I am sorry, but nobody that has posted here has posted anything other than an opinion. Some of them better educated than others, but just opinions nonetheless. 

 

That’s why I commented initially that the scope was too restrictive. But hey, this is the only forum I know that gives that much power and control to the thread starter. All it does is allow the OP to prevent post that don’t agree with what they want to hear. 

 

Laughable......

[Ralf11]

47 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

Absolutely. For that kind of money, one could buy a new Alfa Giulia Quadrifoglio (505 BHP 2.9 liter Ferrari engine; 0-62 Mph (0-100Kph) in 3.8 seconds, top speed - 191 MPH, Motor Trend's Car of the Year) and still have $7000 left over for gas! On the other hand, anyone who has the money to throw away on a pair of these cables, can probably afford a fleet of Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglios too. Oh well!

 

what a horrible waste of money just to get an imbalance form a V-6 !!!

[Ralf11]

re: Magnepans - I think sdol... is thinking about the relatively high current requirements they have (at 4 ohms)

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

I am sorry, but nobody that has posted here has posted anything other than an opinion. Some of them better educated than others, but just opinions nonetheless. 

 

That’s why I commented initially that the scope was too restrictive. But hey, this is the only forum I know that gives that much power and control to the thread starter. All it does is allow the OP to prevent post that don’t agree with what they want to hear. 

 

Laughable......

 

You are free to go to any other forum you'd like. I will disable your account if you'd like as well. Don't like the freedom we provide? Feel free to walk away. If it bugs you that we allow both unlimited threads and threads in which the OP can keep the conversation on a specific topic, you are free to walk away.

 

P.S. I'll refund you 100% of your purchase price of browsing CA. 

[Ralf11]

32 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Well clearly they are not for Foolish EEs who eschew reason and science and preach their naysaying. Of course, - you wouldn't know if something is charlatanism as you're refusing to conduct any tests, - or garner any knowledge whatsoever. The best that you can say: is "i don't know" , - yet instead you choose to speculate.

 

Electrical Engineering knowledge often hampers knowledge, - because the EE makes judgments outside of the scope of the actual physics and math.  This is because the lowly engineering majors took simple, cook-book course in math & physics as undergrads, instead of the full bore physics major physics and math major math that REAL MEN took....

 

Alb - the rest of your post is completely wrong: 

1. it is not speculation if a mechanistic understanding is adequate to explain the behavior of a device or other phenomenon. 

2. No listening tests are needed if condition [1] is true

3. The Probability that [1] is false is vanishingly small.

 

4. The main problem with your entire thesis is that the affirmative bears the burden of proof.  Otherwise, we could maintain that the moon is constructed of unripe cheese (as some dud did back in the 1500s) and you would personally have to travel there to experience it for yourself to disprove that notion.

 

[Ralf11]

17 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You are painting with the broadest brush possible. The OP said nothing that should lead you to believe he is an anti-vaxer type. He asked for real information and said opinions really didn't matter. I don't know what more he could do. It seems like you are locked into a belief and if someone mentions a product such as a cable, your auto-reply kicks in with a comment that isn't helpful. 

 

Asking how a product could work and excluding opinions, is about as close as you can get to someone who should be in your camp.

 

I don't see how you can make this characterization.  Opinions are conflated with engineering knowledge, and it is rejected in this thread.  Rimbaud was an ok poet but it doesn't work in technology.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

I don't see how you can make this characterization.  Opinions are conflated with engineering knowledge, and it is rejected in this thread.  Rimbaud was an ok poet but it doesn't work in technology.

Your rude response was to the third post in the thread. No such rejection of science had occurred by then.