may i know your favore audio cable to connect your dac to you amply? avoid please copper 99.9 cables

[Summit]

Supra and Cable Solutions makes good quality cables for a reasonable price.

 

https://www.cs1.net/products/canare/Cable_Solutions_Signature_Series_77_digital_audio_cea.htm

 

https://www.cs1.net/products/canare/LV-61S_precision_stereo.htm

[kilroy]

14 hours ago, gmgraves said:

Audio interconnect cables have no effect on sound quality. 

 

deleted, not worth the effort

[GUTB]

I don’t want to denigrate @gmgraves knowledge of cable physics because it’s way higher than mine.

 

But, here’s the thing — there’s an audible difference between interconnects. Not always with every cable /system, but differences do exist. For example, I auditioned some Anti-Cables 6.2 (thier highest model) RCAs, and fresh out of the box they were noticeably WORSE than my old pro cable with heavy gold-plated connectors. After burning in they improved and sounded IDENTICAL to my old cables. I tried hard and listened carefully to find a difference and if there was one it was so mild it may have just been in my head. So, back they went.

 

In another case, an Audio Sensability Statement XLR set clearly out-performed my Amazon-sourced Cables Matters set.

 

My experience is just a tiny data point in a huge ocean of cable experiences. There’s dozens of high end cable manufacturers, they appear in literally every show room, and they are reviewed both professionally and by end users all over the Internet. There’s a point of intersection between the physics of signal propagation over cables and the perception of sound that’s still not well understood.

 

[Allan F]

4 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

Yup my experience also - grounding and shielding method and impedance matching (or mis-match). I've learnt a lot about all that from John S along the way.

 

 

Whether it's due to grounding, shielding or impedance matching, the point is that the choice of interconnect cables can make an audible difference. It is important to distinguish "can" or "may" from "will" make a difference.

[asdf1000]

14 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

Whether it's due to grounding, shielding or impedance matching, the point is that the choice of interconnect cables can make an audible difference.

 

Yup that’s what I’m saying. If people are looking for technical mechanisms for how, it could be those 3 factors, as a starting point I think.

 

[pkane2001]

7 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

Yup that’s what I’m saying. If people are looking for technical mechanisms for how, it would be those 3 factors, as a starting point I think.

 

 

All of these factors can be taken into account in an inexpensive, well designed cable. No esoteric materials or novel designs are needed; this is something that the electrical/electronics industry has done well for many decades.

[asdf1000]

Just now, pkane2001 said:

 

All of these factors can be taken into account in an inexpensive, well designed cable. No esoteric materials or novel designs are needed; this is something that the electrical/electronics industry has done well for many decades.

 

Yah but an audiophile cable with an impedance mismatch or shield which allows groundloops through the shield could well sound different in a system.

 

Not saying better, just saying different.

 

[gmgraves]

5 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

George, did you test various levels of EMI surrounding the components? My impression given my own tests, is that audible differences between cables are largely due to shielding etc ie noise, but haven’t spent the time you have investigating this (I just use balanced XLR and don’t worry  

 

That's possible. After all, in unbalanced cables, the shield carries current (the signal) and is thus, er, unshielded. But all unbalanced cables would be equally susceptible. So-called quasi-balanced (which most "boutique" cables seem to be) might be a little better at that especially if a "star" grounding technique to used for all the shield ends. Frankly I've never had that problem, so I've never noticed differences in cables on that account. Now, I have heard what I thought were differences between the sound of a system with different interconnects, but alas, every time such a "revelation" was followed by a DBT of that cable against a more mundane example. The differences disappear. So, for many years now, I've just ignored cable "differences" when I think I hear them.

 

But as I've said, if you think that a new interconnect, or any other unlikely addition to your system makes it sound better to you, then it probably does. If it causes you to enjoy your system more, then it's probably worth it and I say go for it.

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

— there’s an audible difference between interconnects.

 

You think there's an audible difference. but I'll guarantee you that in a properly set-up and executed DBT, those audible differences will evaporate like morning dew in the desert. The phenomenon is caused by a combination of expectational and confirmation bias. Your brain is delivering the listening result that it believes you want. Remember, your ears are not dispassionate instruments. There is no hearing function without the brain and the brain continuously colors every sense. Unfortunately, we humans cannot easily control our brain's tendency to alter reality. That's why bias free testing procedures must be developed to separate sensory bias from reality.

In the audio hobby, it's really not that important. One should do whatever it takes to cause them to to enjoy their systems more. If that's a belief that cables can improve the sound of one's system, then so be it. 

 

I only brought up the reality of cable sound from a physics standpoint because the OP seemed to not have much money to spend on cables and I wanted to reassure him that his inability (or unwillingness) to spend a small fortune on boutique cables will not relegate him audio purgatory. That many accurate, fine sounding systems (including my own) exist without a single high-priced boutique brand interconnect in it anywhere. 

[GUTB]

2 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

You think there's an audible difference. but I'll guarantee you that in a properly set-up and executed DBT, those audible differences will evaporate like morning dew in the desert. The phenomenon is caused by a combination of expectational and confirmation bias. Your brain is delivering the listening result that it believes you want. Remember, your ears are not dispassionate instruments. There is no hearing function without the brain and the brain continuously colors every sense. Unfortunately, we humans cannot easily control our brain's tendency to alter reality. That's why bias free testing procedures must be developed to separate sensory bias from reality.

In the audio hobby, it's really not that important. One should do whatever it takes to cause them to to enjoy their systems more. If that's a belief that cables can improve the sound of one's system, then so be it. 

 

I only brought up the reality of cable sound from a physics standpoint because the OP seemed to not have much money to spend on cables and I wanted to reassure him that his inability (or unwillingness) to spend a small fortune on boutique cables will not relegate him audio purgatory. That many accurate, fine sounding systems (including my own) exist without a single high-priced boutique brand interconnect in it anywhere. 

 

Of course, a properly executed DBT takes far more resources than anyone can be reasonably expected to have. So, suggesting that DBTs evaporate differences between cables as if that is a common and expected outcome is misinformation.

 

Why did my expectation bias make a cable costing hundreds of dollars sound WORSE than some pair of $40 cables I dug up from the basement? Why did it improve over time to sounding no different? Of course you don't know, because the premise of "expectation bias" in relation to audio is at best a not well understood phenomena. Why is it that when some guy at Harman makes blog post about an experiment he did many years ago the result proves an immutable fact of reality forever?

[gmgraves]

15 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

No, the cheapest and most expensive cables don't sound exactly the same, George. Some interconnect cables sound the same, while others may sound noticeably different. That has certainly been my experience in the many years I have enjoyed this hobby. You have been beating this drum too long. The problem with most of these DBTs has been  discussed many times and need not be repeated.

 

Yeah, I have been beating this drum too long, and believe me, I did hesitate before posting, but as I've said elsewhere this morning, I only brought up the reality of cable sound from a physics standpoint because the OP seemed to not have much money to spend on cables and I wanted to reassure him that his inability (or unwillingness) to spend a small fortune on boutique cables will not relegate him to audio purgatory. I wanted him to know that many accurate, fine sounding systems (including my own) exist without a single high-priced "boutique" brand interconnect in it anywhere. 

Normally, my attitude has been that if it sounds good to you, do it, and to hell with the naysayers (and so called "subjectivists")me included. But this fellow seemed to think that without an expensive "boutique" interconnect between his DAC and his amplifier, that he was doomed to have to live with second-rate sound and that just ain't so! 

 

[gmgraves]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

Of course, a properly executed DBT takes far more resources than anyone can be reasonably expected to have. So, suggesting that DBTs evaporate differences between cables as if that is a common and expected outcome is misinformation.

 

Actually, effective cable DBTs are really easy to set up. It's DBTs with active components that are a bitch!

2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Why did my expectation bias make a cable costing hundreds of dollars sound WORSE than some pair of $40 cables I dug up from the basement? Why did it improve over time to sounding no different? Of course you don't know, because the premise of "expectation bias" in relation to audio is at best a not well understood phenomena. Why is it that when some guy at Harman makes blog post about an experiment he did many years ago the result proves an immutable fact of reality forever?

 

Better or worse are pure subjective differences (one man's fine wine is another man's poison, after all.) and not really relevant to this point of psychoacoustics. The relevant part is that two otherwise identical cables would sound different from one another on a casual audition, and then those differences would instantly disappear in a DBT. You're right, I have no idea why your experience unfolded as it did. And the part one's brain plays in listening is not anywhere nearly as well understood as it needs to be in order resolve some these issues. Perhaps someday it will be. 

[Allan F]

31 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

...I wanted to reassure him that his inability (or unwillingness) to spend a small fortune on boutique cables will not relegate him to audio purgatory. I wanted him to know that many accurate, fine sounding systems (including my own) exist without a single high-priced "boutique" brand interconnect in it anywhere.

 

I have no problem with this portion of your post, George.

[Ralf11]

the OP is in Italy and wants low-cost cables - any help for him?

 

are the Amazon ones above available there?

 

any good quality balanced cables should be just fine

 

also, in exchange for a few cases of Barolo & Brunell, I volunteer to send him some cables...

[pkane2001]

5 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

Yah but an audiophile cable with an impedance mismatch or shield which allows groundloops through the shield could well sound different in a system.

 

Not saying better, just saying different.

 

 

Are you saying that an audiophile cable might actually produce more distortion and introduce more noise than a standard, inexpensive, pro cable? Heresy! 

 

[Speedskater]

On 12/28/2017 at 5:23 PM, gmgraves said:

Audio interconnect cables have no effect on sound quality.

Now I won't go that far!!!

But all well chosen for the task at hand and of good quality should sound exactly the same.

Many boutique and many cheap cables don't meet those criteria.

 

For my interconnect cables, I use buck cable from major manufacturers like Belden, Canare and Mogami and finished cable providers like Blue Jeans Cable, Markertek and Redco.

[Speedskater]

9 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Are you saying that an audiophile cable might actually produce more distortion and introduce more noise than a standard, inexpensive, pro cable? Heresy! 

I would say that an audiophile cable might introduce more noise or interference than a well chosen cable,

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

I would say that an audiophile cable might introduce more noise or interference than a well chosen cable,

 

Heresy, I tell you! Although... I'd have to agree with you 

 

 

 

[gmgraves]

3 hours ago, Speedskater said:

I would say that an audiophile cable might introduce more noise or interference than a well chosen cable,

 

Yeah, if it's defective. Poor connections can actually form primitive diodes and act like them at some frequencies. This causes half of the waveform to not get conducted (back-biasing the diode), causing horrid distortion at those frequencies, while at other frequencies the connection acts fairly normal. Cold solder-joints can do this too. Good quality materials such as RG59U coax and well soldered RCA connectors on each end as well as an effective strain relief will insure that the interconnect is a reliable conductor over the entire audio spectrum. You can't really ask for more than that and expect to actually get it!

[GUTB]

BTW, what do you guys know about Belden 8402? It often comes up as an audiophile cable-killer.

[PeterSt]

@gmgraves, if you have nothing to do then read about this massive DBT :

Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superior SQ

All types of coax were tested (including RG58).

 

In the end that thread developed our Blaxius Interlink (75 Ohm Coax).

Here in that thread it was born.

 

Of course you don't need to believe any of those posts and people.

And of course this was an advertisement. But I can't stand people who are so charismatic about not being able to perceive something and thus state it as the truth.

 

PS: I am not sure it is in that thread but I recall spending more than half of a day finding differences from measurement. I couldn't. What will be in there for sure somewhere is my quest for affordable equipment (reflection etc., like Vector Network analyzers). Of course I failed on that.

I hate it when something can't be proven.

 

[Ralf11]

 

[asdf1000]

15 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

I've seen so many of these made, so know how the scene goes.

 

Most was predictable.  But the "did you try with the Russ Andrews Mains Zapperator?" caught me off guard. That was a good chuckle.

 

[PeterSt]

[beerandmusic]

8 hours ago, Speedskater said:

I would say that an audiophile cable might introduce more noise or interference than a well chosen cable,

 

I am more of a objectivist than a subjectivist and I don't believe cables will make much difference unless they do not meet spec in which case i believe they actually cause more harm than good, which is why i would never consider a "boutique" cable.  I do trust brand names like audioquest, or any legitimate cable manufacturer that has a respected name.....that said, I typically buy used audioquest cables for usually less than 50% of new price.