Cables, cables, cables...any tips? In the market (maybe)

I'm tired of taking the time to search out and post the links that refute this kind of absolutist stance, but the fact is that an DBX test properly designed--and by that I mean using trained listeners who are given the time to familiarize themselves with the music, the listening space, and the components under test--will, during the DBX test, produce a statistically meaningful result.

John K.

 

A meaningful result between what?

 

Better than 50/50 chance at identifying the difference.

John K.

 

I meant what difference? In many things there can be a theoretical difference, that doesn´t mean it can be proven audibly. By identifying a difference so it will be significant, there must be an audible difference that can be detected. So the test objects must be very specific, there must in fact be a difference that people can hear. I venture this is not likely normally the case choosing cables randomly.

 

I asked about speaker cables once on another forum, what a mistake that was. It's funny how we can talk about equipment
all day long but cables and interconnects, all of a sudden, there's a problem.. Cables/Interconnects = Can of Worms.

 

There's just nothing quite like a good cable argument. I try not to take part in them, but I'm drawn to them like a moth to a flame. Its really about the closest a secular argument can get to debating the existence of God.

 

Cables make a significant difference.

I couldn't hear any music whatsoever until I ran some speaker cable from my amp to the speakers.

 

The only I've found that I can tell what cables "work" is by isolating the variables in my system and getting to know its sound character as much as I possibly can. If I were starting over today, I'd probably wire my whole system with Blue Jeans cable (inexpensive but surprisingly good quality) to get a baseline...a whole Blue Jeans system will cost less than a single interconnect from some folks. I'd then find 8-10 tracks that are typical of my musical tastes and that run the gamut in terms of dynamics, timber, genre, etc. and listen to them critically on my baseline system until I knew exactly what to expect. THEN I'd swap out cables to understand what differences each makes to the overall sound of the system, and what the synergy among a family of like cables might do for my system. I see so many people check their cables with different recordings and different sources...how do you know what made the difference in the sound chain?

Lastly: I'd never buy a cable from a company that didn't offer 30-day returns....cables take a while to break in. There are enough quality options out there to limit your choices with impunity.

Good luck!

 

It isn’t like I came to this conclusion willingly. I have a box full of good DIY cables that far exceed the money I have put into my manufactured speaker cables and interconnects on my primary source. I can’t definitively attribute the increased detail and reduction in sibilance to technology A or B, but when I can get a multi-prong approach to managing a variety of issues for a couple hundred bucks, I have what I need. Ears first. Then, speculate about why you hear what you hear.

 

These kinds of cables, along with electrically biased dielectrics and cables with some sort of filter in them, violate my rule that simple and elegant solutions both save money and sound better.

Not that there aren't examples of good cables that use these more complicated designs, but there are also good cables that do not.

 

But I can't listen to inferior audio because of rules. I have DIY UPOCC cables where the components cost more than a bi-wire run of manufactured cables. There's nothing too complicated about Litz wire.

 

I'm a big fan of litz wire.

It's the electrically biased dielectrics, built in filters and magnetic propulsion that I feel are unnecessary.

 

So you can get Luna bulk for a few bucks a foot. I can overlook the dielectric if it sounds this good and costs this little. I never once didn't put on a record because I had an intellectual issue with the dielectric.

 

He uses these .....

 

The food appears nice though ?

 

I'm not talking about any particular dielectric. I'm talking about electrically biased dielectrics, where the cable has it's own power supply to apply a voltage across the dielectric... check it out:

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-234-audioquest-colorado-interconnects-pr.aspx

The last sentence wasn't necessary. I don't let intellectual biases keep me from having an open mind, it's just the general trend I've noticed. A very simple system like a SET amp with high efficiency speakers can sound amazing because it's simple and you can buy good quality parts for everything because there are so few parts, and it not hard to DIY. Getting good results is harder, but it's a hobby. More complicated systems can sound good too, but for the same caliber of system it costs a lot more money. My favorite system ever is made by TAD and it breaks all those biases, it just takes six figures to get there.

On cables, rather than spend money on stuff like biasing, filters in fancy housings, overly elaborate and costly designs, etc... I think the money is best spent on the quality of the wire and connectors, and good design and materials are enough to get a top quality cable, all the other stuff might not give you as much bang for the buck.

 

The cables I have now have a proprietary dielectric that is actually conductive, which according to the designer, is part of the design. If I thought my UPOCC cables were better, I would certainly have them plugged in. No intent to offend, but it isn't as if I read some marketing material and decided a certain cable sounded better. I bought some used, experimenting with Litz that I could afford, and worked my way up and then back down the brand to get what I needed.

 

This man receives no magnetic fields -- I'm sure of it:

 

When we listen to playback, we are not simply measuring the waveform amplitude at any given moment like a volt-meter. Our ears are linked to the most complex structure in the known universe (aside from the entire universe itself, perhaps). Our brains, by their giant neural-network nature, effectively perform highly detailed Fourier analysis to separate the waveform out into its constituent parts (phase relationships for an effectively infinite set of sine functions over all audible frequencies) and compares that to a lifetime of aural memories, allowing us to recognise the various elements and make sense of the sound (effortlessly).

Just because that system may be able to tell the difference between cables (the downside of the brain is the bias it is susceptible to - although, thanks to real science it can even work around that), there's no reason to assume that a dual core processor performing spectral analysis on the waveform captured through the cable will show you the difference.

The electrons are density modulated in ICs and SCs (alternating current) - they don't travel the length of the cable, the density wave does (even for direct current your description is not how the energy travels the length of the cable). As the electrons move to and fro (actually, distorted circular motion like water partcles in ocean waves - eddies, if electrons can have classical analogies), according to the a/c signal voltage, they undergo acceleration which causes photon emission. The electrons are communicating the signal to each other by a process of absorption and emission of photons. This is how the whole cable appears to have the correct signal voltage (aside from the nominal losses) at any given measured instant - the photons are rather quick to carry the message.

Photons, of course, can be considered as electro-magnetic waves - the electrons are radiating RF. Some is reabsorbed but some would escape if it weren't for the grounded shield (Faraday cage - effectively stops your cable being a radio transmitter/antenna). Furthermore, the insulation (di-electric) between the core and the outer shield interacts with the varying electro-magnetic field produced when the wire is carrying a signal (again, by photon interaction with electrons in the di-electric).

QED has been 'proven' (verified to measurement limits) more than any other scientific theory known to man.

Quantum Mechanics is not for everyone, it's true.

Trying something and deciding if you like it, on the other hand, is what our brains do for a living.

If cables make no difference to you, fine. For others that is not the case.

I believe (not too concerned about proving it to myself) I can hear small differences but not enough to get over excited about (that says more about me than the cables, I think).

Power cables: stock
Speaker cable: Romex (twin & earth)
Digital interconnects: Toslink, DIY co-ax, DIY AES/EBU
Analogue out: Grovers

 

Nobody ever ever ever? And you know that? My oh my...

 

Art Dudley really you objectivist folks down pat in his column in the new Stereophile (some of you, anyway).

 

But we all receive magnetic fields.

 

Buy an inexpensive one-i.e. blue jeans. If you hear a difference after allowing it to break in, go from there. As our host said, there's an active market for used cables. In my HT and 2 channel, I have a mix of new and used.

 

Too much gobbelygook!

 

They arrived today, they're awesome! I went with the pearl phono and optical cables, and Havana USB cable. Nice and thick with a firm connection