Question on high-end interconnects

[DougMac]

Reality, What a Concept

I find it fascinating that in all this discussion about how there are or aren't audible differences between wires that nobody has thought to ask whether putting money into new speakers or room treatements wouldn't yield a greater improvement than what are apparently subtle differences between wires. Another possibility would be to replace the capacitors on the speakers and add dampening and reinforcement to the existing speakers. Any of these items would yield measureable differences that I suspect would be audibly greater than any difference between wires.

Please refrain from making sense.

 

[JBL GUY]

What sort(s) of manipulation are you referring to?

It would be a rare recording that does not have at least some "manipulation" that is EQ, compression, the characteristics of a particular microphone or other things that actually change the shape of the envelope of the musical energy produced by any given instrument.

If in fact cables change the way a system sounds then they must by definition change the envelope of the waveform of the music.

Is this change actually changing the sound of the system so that is it closer to the original waveform envelope or changing it in a way that the listener finds more enjoyable, although not necessarily more "accurate"?

And of course the other side of the coin is the changes may actually be correcting, at least to a certain extent, a deficit in the listeners system.

This is one of the reasons that it is hard to "nail down" the differences in cables. One has to take a complete systems approach.

In our hobby this is often called synergy. A simple or not so simple all encompassing term used to describe in non-technical terms the compatibility of various items in the audio system.

 

[JBL GUY]

I find it fascinating that in all this discussion about how there are or aren't audible differences between wires that nobody has thought to ask whether putting money into new speakers or room treatements wouldn't yield a greater improvement than what are apparently subtle differences between wires. Another possibility would be to replace the capacitors on the speakers and add dampening and reinforcement to the existing speakers. Any of these items would yield measureable differences that I suspect would be audibly greater than any difference between wires.

It may be part and parcel of our hobby that we want to tweak what we have.

It is the same in other hobbies as well.

Your local muscle car enthusiast will try various things to lower his ET.
Of course he could just replace his engine with a larger engine with more HP and torque or even replace the entire car.

But part of the fun of the hobby is in tweaking what you have.

And changing cables is a plug and play change with (hopefully) instant gratification. And changing cables does not, for the most part, require any technical expertise.

Putterman, that said you do make a very valid point.

 

[kirk57]

Two words pronounce, Raadio and Lampa in Russian....(Avatar) or Radio and Lamp. Nice picture.

Thanks. It's a cleaned-up scan of the box my Russian NOS 6H23N tubes came in. Not sure of the tube's vintage, but the artwork looks pretty old to me.

 

[kirk57]

I find it fascinating that in all this discussion about how there are or aren't audible differences between wires that nobody has thought to ask whether putting money into new speakers or room treatements wouldn't yield a greater improvement than what are apparently subtle differences between wires. Another possibility would be to replace the capacitors on the speakers and add dampening and reinforcement to the existing speakers. Any of these items would yield measureable differences that I suspect would be audibly greater than any difference between wires.

You could make that argument about any number of adjustment/tweaks that improve a system in incremental ways (VTA for example). That doesn't invalidate the discussion IMO.

It's not that nobody thought to ask the question, it's simply not the subject of this thread.

 

[Anubis]

If you have not done so, I would re-cap the xovers in your speakers B4 messing with wire. After 25 years they need it. :yes:

Well, my question was more general and curiosity, not that I'm thrilled with the sound of my Kenwoods. Since you briought it up though: First, your absolutely correct about re-capping the x-overs. Any speaker with that many years on it will do well with a re-cap as the electronics in todays speakers are totally different, not to mention improved.
However, I went one better on that, I replaced the speakers all together!
After saving and sacrificing for a year, I ended up getting a pair of high-end speakers.

 

[Anubis]

I find it fascinating that in all this discussion about how there are or aren't audible differences between wires that nobody has thought to ask whether putting money into new speakers or room treatements wouldn't yield a greater improvement than what are apparently subtle differences between wires. Another possibility would be to replace the capacitors on the speakers and add dampening and reinforcement to the existing speakers. Any of these items would yield measureable differences that I suspect would be audibly greater than any difference between wires.

This was the purpose. I have seen a lot of fights and people getting beat up in forums over interconnects. Everything from the snob who says he would not let a good EQ near his system or refuses to try adjusting his x-overs and swears that he gets the best results from using $3500 interconnects to adjust his system to the guy who just made a trip to the dollar store for his interconnects and can't figure out why he is getting RF interference.
Putterman, you have it correct I believe. Unless it's to solve some RF interference or whatever, any claim of hearing the differences in using expensive inter-connects vs decent less expensive ones is perceptive at best. Not that there is anything wrong with using uber expensive ICs if that's what makes you happy. I just failed to see the hype and wanted to find scientific data without trying to come up with thousands of dollars to do my own experimenting.
I'm happy with the Monoprice Premium ICs I use as they are far and away better than the ones that come with the gear when you buy it. However, the difference for me was the RF interference. The better shielded and superior built Monoprice cables eliminated the problem. As for SQ? No difference which led me to conclude that SQ improvements come more from improving speakers, x-over changes, EQs, placement and room acoustical changes or a combo therein. Just changing an IC by itself will not yield overall results, if anything. Many others who have been in the industry for years agree and are much better at explaining it all than I am.

 

[whoaru99]

It would be a rare recording that does not have at least some "manipulation" that is EQ, compression, the characteristics of a particular microphone or other things that actually change the shape of the envelope of the musical energy produced by any given instrument.

TThose are the sorts of things I thought you meant but I figured I better ask before made any other comments.

Personally, I don't see how any of those sorts of manipulations would affect how any given cable carrys the signal but that's just me.

 

[TerryO]

I'm of the opinion that room treatment is probably the most important expediture for upgrading any system.

However, if you have to have good cables, here's one that's certainly very good, from a company that's been around for many years and enjoys an outstanding reputation.
I'm speaking of Cardas G-Master Reference which are marked down to $107.10 at www.diycable.com.

The specific link to the above is at:
http://www.diycable.com/main/product_info.php?products_id=594

Best Regards,
TerryO

 

[Anubis]

I'm of the opinion that room treatment is probably the most important expediture for upgrading any system.

However, if you have to have good cables, here's one that's certainly very good, from a company that's been around for many years and enjoys an outstanding reputation.
I'm speaking of Cardas G-Master Reference which are marked down to $107.10 at www.diycable.com.

The specific link to the above is at:
http://www.diycable.com/main/product_info.php?products_id=594

Best Regards,
TerryO

Yes absolutely and I would add speakers as well if needed. Yes, if one has to have expensive ICs, the diycable product would be the way to go. BlueJean also makes a good cable. Personally, I find the Monoprice premium ICs to be more than adequate.

 

[kirk57]

Unless it's to solve some RF interference or whatever, any claim of hearing the differences in using expensive inter-connects vs decent less expensive ones is perceptive at best. Not that there is anything wrong with using uber expensive ICs if that's what makes you happy. I just failed to see the hype and wanted to find scientific data without trying to come up with thousands of dollars to do my own experimenting.

Just to be clear, you are basing this statement upon your experience with cables between your Onkyo receiver and your CD player, is that right?

 

[JohnVF]

Just to be clear, you are basing this statement upon your experience with cables between your Onkyo receiver and your CD player, is that right?

C'mon, its a perfectly legit way to come up with a thoroughly assumptive blanket statement.

 

[JBL GUY]

TThose are the sorts of things I thought you meant but I figured I better ask before made any other comments.

Personally, I don't see how any of those sorts of manipulations would affect how any given cable carrys the signal but that's just me.

You have completely missed my point.

It is not that the "manipulations" done in the recording process will affect the transfer function of the cables, it it the other way around.

The cables may affect the signal in a small way, much smaller than the changes that may be done during during the recording process.

A certain cable may actually be detrimental to the sound quality. It may be noisy or have extremely high capacitance and cause attenuation of the higher frequencies.

But given cables of high quality and a decent recording, the small changes that may be induced by the cables may actually help to correct deficits in the overall system or in the original recording, extremely small though the changes may be.

This "correction" whether it causes the waveform envelope to more closely resemble the waveform envelope of the source driving the cable or not, may still in fact cause the system to sound more enjoyable to the listener.

 

[DougMac]

Just to be clear, you are basing this statement upon your experience with cables between your Onkyo receiver and your CD player, is that right?

Just to be clear, how do think that affects his experience?

 

[whoaru99]

You have completely missed my point.

It is not that the "manipulations" done in the recording process will affect the transfer function of the cables, it it the other way around.

The cables may affect the signal in a small way, much smaller than the changes that may be done during during the recording process.

A certain cable may actually be detrimental to the sound quality. It may be noisy or have extremely high capacitance and cause attenuation of the higher frequencies.

But given cables of high quality and a decent recording, the small changes that may be induced by the cables may actually help to correct deficits in the overall system or in the original recording, extremely small though the changes may be.

This "correction" whether it causes the waveform envelope to more closely resemble the waveform envelope of the source driving the cable or not, may still in fact cause the system to sound more enjoyable to the listener.

Thanks for the clarification.

Allthough it's probably just semantics, I don't view any cable as improving/correcting the signal. In my mind cables can only cause degredation to the signal inasmuch as with a "perfect" cable exactly the same thing comes out as went in.

 

[Anubis]

Just to be clear, you are basing this statement upon your experience with cables between your Onkyo receiver and your CD player, is that right?

Not exactly, since I have my CD player connected to my receiver via fiber optic.
That said, I am basing it on the other gear that I do have connected via RCA ICs and what I used to have connected that way where some RF trouble came into play. (My area just has a bit heavier RF stuff going on than normal at times. Not major, but just enough to make you wonder what the heck your hearing "sometimes" when it's not what you turned on. Not as bad as my previous area though, that was a whole other story). I also have the gear right next to the flat panel TV (LCD), but that should not effect anything...I think.
That's my experience (and budget), everyone else's mileage may vary. I already know that PBJ cables won't work for me simply due to the RF in my area.

A lot of what has been said here makes sense and has merit.

I just refuse to get into a fight over ICs, it's ludicris. I was just looking for data that could prove any advantages of uber expensive IC's out of curiosity since I could never use them anyway. Just trying to cut through the commercials and hype and get to the bare bones. I just got tired of the fights over the hype and wanted some logic.
I just don't understand and never will understand how a brand can arrive at thousand bucks for a little cable or what have you. That's what I was trying to understand. I have nothing against those who have the money and want to buy those for whatever reason. The only thing I'm against is those folks telling others that their systems are junk because they don't use the same cables or whatever. There's no call for it.

 

[JohnVF]

Just to be clear, how do think that affects his experience?

I'll answer for Kirk, if he doesn't mind. That one experience is not universal, it is one instance, and does not in any way indicate that anybody else who chooses to buy expensive cables won't hear a difference in a more revealing system. And some systems are more revealing than others.

 

[Anubis]

Thanks for the clarification.

Allthough it's probably just semantics, I don't view any cable as improving/correcting the signal. In my mind cables can only cause degredation to the signal inasmuch as with a "perfect" cable exactly the same thing comes out as went in.

Like a computer: Garbage In/Garbage Out. Think about it, if the source is no good no amount of any kind of ICs, speakers, or electronics will make it sound any better. I agree, if one has a shorted IC what good is it? I know that's an extreme example, but you get my point.

 

[Anubis]

I'll answer for Kirk, if he doesn't mind. That one experience is not universal, it is one instance, and does not in any way indicate that anybody else who chooses to buy expensive cables won't hear a difference in a more revealing system. And some systems are more revealing than others.

Exactly! Perceived or not perceived. My system electronic-wise is not supre revealing, however, it is about to be hooked up to revealing speakers so I could hear differently than before.
Example: Two people can be listening to the same pair of uber expensive speakers hooked up to the same gear and playing the same source and one person might think they found speaker nirvana while the other person may think the same speakers sound like garbage or are too harsh or too laid back or what ever the case may be.
I think the whole debate is just going to have to remain one of life's mysteries.

 

[JohnVF]

Exactly! Perceived or not perceived.

I have a Sony Preceiver. Is that related? Maybe its also a perceiver if I put my fancy cables between it and an amp. Either way, yes- you hear it or you don't. The world spins regardless of which one it is.