High end speaker wire

[rek100]

I have heard a difference.

After I bought my vintage McIntosh 2100, I just plugged in some really ancient KimberCable. I'm not a big believer in wire.

However, out of curiosity, I dug out an extra set of Monster M1 that's been in storage for a couple of years and hooked it up. As he who is skeptical of money spent on unhearable differences, I heard an improvement. Bass was improved and the sound stage had more air.

I think this might have been the first time in my 40+ years in the hobby that I ever did an A-B comparison. Call me surprised!

I do, however, believe that there is a downward pointing exponential curve regarding spending more. I'm not sure my 60 year old ears could discriminate between the $1000 cable vs. the $2000 cable. BUT, there probably are people who can discern a difference. So, if they want to spend enormous bucks on wire, more power to them! ,

 

[cees]

That has to be the funniest argument against high end cables that I've ever read.


No ill feelings here. I have tried many types of cables in my rig. Some sound very alike, some sound very different, your mileage may vary though. Use whatever sounds best to you in YOUR rig. Cheers.

Thanks.
Indeed whatever sounds best to you in your rig is the best way to see it.

Herewith a better argument about so cold oxygen free copper.
The copper industry doesnt know these term as used in high end cable advertisments. Thera are a few industrys ho produce copper. The copper used for wire so called Contirod is elctrolytical pure and has a diam of about 8mm. These wire is used by cable manufacturers over the world and all these manufacturers use the same products.
Is oxygen free copper than bull **** ? No not at all. The normal cable has an oxygen of 140-160 ppm. Oxygen free copper has an oxygen of 3 ppm. Oxygen free copper is used in for example the wiring of conductors and the reasen why they used it is that the high temperatur can cause the problem that the little oxygen in the cable make a reaction with the hydrogen in the surounding. Both the types of copper has a pureness of more than 99,9% and both they have > 101,5% IACS.
When you take a silver cable the IACS is only a few % higher.
Oxygen free copper can be supplied to manufacturers ho are produce high end cables however there is no electrical argument why OFC is better than normal copper.
Statement: You can better make some trouble to change your living room because these has more affect on your sound than cables.

Someone mentioned that I have never openend high end products.
That is tru. But high end products are made by people who believe (or want you to believe) in these cables so i find this not objectif. A better argument is Why does your telecom or energy supplier uses normal copper cables ? When there would by energy lost on these cable it will cost the supplier tremendus money every year. Think about all the miles of cable in your country. It will bring them a fortune to change it to high end cables. So would you think that the few meters you have at home will bring you better sound.....

Oke maybe I have made some people angry. It is not the meaning of my post. I only want to say. Think twice before you buy. And when you hear the difference I am happy for you. I know that live is not only based on engineering facts and that a hobby gives you the yoy of live. Why loves one person Cola and the other Pepsi. Because taste is a personal thing. And high end is a hobby and a taste and a way of living so It is not my purpose to attack high end users.

 

[beans]

I' am sorry that my Englisch writing is not that good. I'am from the netherlands and my PC has no englisch spelling checker.

Sorry...just kidding.

 

[cees]

Well, yes, the vacuum cleaner may not be a good specific example.

However, the point can be taken to most any sort of laboratory and specialized testing equipment. Many of which are at least equally or more complex and resolving than audio equipment.

Exactly.

search on Google the following:
-The ten biggest lies in audio
- Urban audio legends
- The burn in legend

It is fun to read it

 

[Bigerik]

Cees, I understand your language barrier and all, but your posts are clearly violating the rules of this forum. The rules of AK state that people MUST post based on experience. I would allow your posts to stand if you were only discussing technical issues around wires, as there might be some interest in that.

However, you state that you do not speak from experience. You then state that others cannot be hearing what they say they are.

There will be no difference to hear.

For "evidence", you just show web pages that have brought nothing in the past but arguments to this board. You believe the articles of people like Peter Aczel (Ten Biggest Lies...) yet you dismiss the findings of fellow AK members who have actually taken the time try different cables in their own and post their own results in this forum.

I don't ask you to believe in cables or tweaks or anything. But just raising these issues in the way you have brings nothing but flame wars to this board and brings nothing new or interesting to the discussion.

 

[cees]

Cees, I understand your language barrier and all, but your posts are clearly violating the rules of this forum. The rules of AK state that people MUST post based on experience. I would allow your posts to stand if you were only discussing technical issues around wires, as there might be some interest in that.

However, you state that you do not speak from experience. You then state that others cannot be hearing what they say they are. For "evidence", you just show web pages that have brought nothing in the past but arguments to this board. You believe the articles of people like Peter Aczel (Ten Biggest Lies...) yet you dismiss the findings of fellow AK members who have actually taken the time try different cables in their own and post their own results in this forum.

I don't ask you to believe in cables or tweaks or anything. But just raising these issues in the way you have brings nothing but flame wars to this board and brings nothing new or interesting to the discussion.

Oke you are off course right.
As i have told earlier it was not my meaning to attack people. The articels as stated are only for fun to read and i dont have spoken of i believe them or not. I have give a explenation about oxygen free copper so i think that these item (partly) will be interesting. However I am out off the line and I appoligies.
So i shall not reply anymore on the thread and i will follow the rules.
Regards

 

[beans]

Thanks.
...The normal cable has an oxygen of 140-160 ppm. Oxygen free copper has an oxygen of 3 ppm. Oxygen free copper is used in for example the wiring of conductors and the reasen why they used it is that the high temperatur can cause the problem that the little oxygen in the cable make a reaction with the hydrogen in the surounding. Both the types of copper has a pureness of more than 99,9% and both they have > 101,5% IACS.
When you take a silver cable the IACS is only a few % higher.
Oxygen free copper can be supplied to manufacturers ho are produce high end cables however there is no electrical argument why OFC is better than normal copper.
Statement: You can better make some trouble to change your living room because these has more affect on your sound than cables.

Your english is still coming along, but you certainly know your copper!

Since Roger Russell weighed in describing Gordon Gow's listening test, I want to point out another of his observations, called "psychoacoustics", or "believing is hearing" (as opposed to "hearing is believing"). Simply, it is the statement that someone wanting or expecting to hear a difference in a listening comparison is far more likely to believe and to state they hear a difference than someone who is completely unbiased. I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

He reprints an Audio Quest ad for a six foot pair of cables that sells for $8900. Then he posits that after buying them by re-mortgaging his house, "you can bet I'd want to hear an improvement, real or not."

I'm not saying that this is definitely what's going on here in every case...what do I know? But you have to be aware of this psychoacoustic factor. It makes perfect sense.

 

[cees]

Your english is still coming along, but you certainly know your copper!

Since Roger Russell weighed in describing Gordon Gow's listening test, I want to point out another of his observations, called "psychoacoustics", or "believing is hearing" (as opposed to "hearing is believing"). Simply, it is the statement that someone wanting or expecting to hear a difference in a listening comparison is far more likely to believe and to state they hear a difference than someone who is completely unbiased. I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

He reprints an Audio Quest ad for a six foot pair of cables that sells for $8900. Then he posits that after buying them by re-mortgaging his house, "you can bet I'd want to hear an improvement, real or not."

I'm not saying that this is definitely what's going on here in every case...what do I know? But you have to be aware of this psychoacoustic factor. It makes perfect sense.

Thanks,
I will do my best.
And yes i agree that the psychoacoustic factor is essential.
I have the same problem. I had a Yamaha RDS496 5.1 channel amp and a Yamaha DCD520 DVD player. Two B&W 570 and JBL surround and center speaker. The psychoacoustic factor was playing me part because in my believing the sound was not right. But every body off my frends told me the sound was oke. However i hated the JBL's and the B&W where from the 90. The Yamaha sounded for me to flat. So i convinced myself to buy something new. First a new LCD with HDMI and full HD. Next an amp wich has a HDMI connection Onkyo SR501. Then a DVC player with HDMI Pioneer. But still i have the B&W and the JBL speakers. So my psychoacoustic wasn't still happy. Now i have bought two B&O CX50 (also from the 90 but i have modivied them) speakers as surround and two JBL L880 as front and a Sony center. But the DVD player is for me not a CD player so I have bought a broken Yamaha CDX 930 and i still try to make it running. I have post a thread of the Yamaha. I have also experiment with cables but I have gave my word that i will no longer bring discusion about cables.

So you are right about the psycho thing and on this moment i have both feets on the ground and look from the right perspectif to my components and love them.

 

[beans]

... I have gave my word that i will no longer bring discusion about cables.

bigerik said to follow the rules, not to stop talking about wire. Am I inciting flame wars by bringing up psychoacoustics?
Just don't invalidate others' statements and everything is okay.

 

[Mr. Lin]

Here's one on power cables.

By their own admission these are the problems with the test:

There were several acknowledged weaknesses to the test. The number of participants and trials was not very high. Most people sat far from the sweet spot. The ideal situation, which would have allowed participants to audition A and B more than once before trying to identify X, was not possible because the length of time it would have taken to do so would have burned everyone out. (Many members of the second group said they were fried by the time 3:30 PM rolled around.) Switchers failed to turn on both amps three times, and Baci Brown of canine renown further interrupted the flow twice with scratching and barking at outside sounds and a perceived need to pee it all out in the yard. Finally, and perhaps of greatest significance, the time it took to switch cords was longer than the generally accepted 5 second length of human auditory memory. This reduced what Manny terms “the differential sharpness of perception” of participants.

In my opinion the biggest of the ones they point out here are the small number of people involved, and the fact that not all of them sat in the "sweet spot," and, as they say, the time elapsed between installation of power cords. Another problem with this experiment that they don't acknowledge is that this is done with a limited number of components, and we know from what AKers have reported (and my limited experience) that AC power cords are very system dependent.

So, although some have tried to prove or disprove the differences between cables, I think they ultimately fall pretty short of providing definitive scientific evidence one way or the other. But again, I know what I hear, so I guess nothing needs to be proved or disproved to me anyway.

 

[whoaru99]

Of course, always problems with the tests when they don't go our way.

But, OTOH, it's a much greater attempt at really trying something than most people will ever do, and I think that lends some creedence in and of itself.

Then, there is always, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.".

 

[drknstrmyknight]

Roger's designing his own speakers now. When I asked the presenter at a recent Midwest exposition if they were wired internally with lamp cord, he said they were Nordost inside. When I asked if this wasn't at odds with Roger's stated position, he said "He wasn't trying to sell speakers when he wrote that."

 

[Bigerik]

But again, I know what I hear, so I guess nothing needs to be proved or disproved to me anyway.

Excellent!
A man who knows his own mind and his own ears and does not need to be told by anyone what he can or cannot hear.
:yes:

 

[240sx4u]

I definitely don't need anyone to tell me otherwise... I can hear a difference in POWER cables and POWER conditioners.

I still think I may be crazy. I A/B'ed my monster HTS-5100 and a 1k dollar flagship panamax unit. There was definitely a difference in sound.

I tried a different power cable on my phono stage, and noticed a difference.

I was hell bent on telling everyone this was BS, so I hardly think psychoacoustics was the reason. Seems more like the opposite, I went into it thinking there would be absolutely no differences.

Evan

 

[whoaru99]

Excellent!
A man who knows his own mind and his own ears and does not need to be told by anyone what he can or cannot hear.
:yes:

Solipsism? :scratch2:

 

[Urizen]

Solipsism? :scratch2:

Gesundheit!

I can hear the differences in my systems and my ears are the only ones I have to please. I can really hear a difference between copper and silver-coated copper wires. For instance, I recently replaced the Zebra Cables ICs between my cd player and pre with Nordost Blue Heaven. I won't expound on the differences, but they were immediately apparent.

 

[whoaru99]

Solipsism?

Gesundheit!

...my ears are the only ones I have to please.

Yes, this was exactly the point I was making. :thmbsp:

 

[Bigerik]

Yet again, I have to clean up troll posts in this thread. Next guy to take a shot at another member will be out of this forum.

 

[F1nut]

I simply don't buy into the psychoacoustics theory based on personal experiences and those of folks who's ears I trust. I think if you buy into it, you haven't yet learned how to listen and how to trust your own ears.

 

[ehoove]

My main rig has no tone controls to adjust, so differeces caused by interconnects and speaker wire are really the only "tone controls" I have. Bi wiring both my current and previous speakers, reversing the two types of wire from the bottom to the top makes a huge difference in the sound stage and response of them. That is proof enough for me, and it is my choice to use them how I feel produces the flatest response etc. FWIW
Regards,
Jim