What annoys me today in marketing and media that too often today then talking on hi-fi, science is replaced by bizarre belief structures and marketing fluff, leading to a decades-long stagnation of the audiophile domain. Science makes progress, pseudo-science doesn’t. Hi-fi world is filled by pseudoscience, dogma and fruitloopery to the extent that it resembles a fundamentalist religion. Loudspeaker performance hasn’t tangibly improved in forty years and vast sums are spent addressing the wrong problems.
Business for Engineers: Marketers Lie article points tout that marketing tells lies — falsehoods — things that serve to convey a false impression. Marketing’s purpose is to determining how the product will be branded, positioned, and sold. It seems that there too many snake oil rubbish products marketed in the name of hifi. It is irritating to watch the stupid people in the world be fooled.
In EEVblog #29 – Audiophile Audiophoolery video David L. Jones (from EEVBlog) cuts loose on the Golden Ear Audiophiles and all their Audiophoolery snake oil rubbish. The information presented in Dave’s unique non-scripted overly enthusiastic style! He’s an enthusiastic chap, but couldn’t agree more with many of the opinions he expressed: Directional cables, thousand dollar IEC power cables, and all that rubbish. Monster Cable gets mostered. Note what he says right at the end: “If you pay ridiculous money for these cable you will hear a difference, but don’t expect your friends to”. If you want to believe, you will.
My points on hifi-nonsense:
One of the tenets of audiophile systems is that they are assembled from components, allegedly so that the user can “choose” the best combination. This is pretty largely a myth. The main advantage of component systems is that the dealer can sell ridiculously expensive cables, hand-knitted by Peruvian virgins and soaked in snake oil, to connect it all up. Say goodbye to the noughties: Yesterday’s hi-fi biz is BUSTED, bro article asks are the days of floorstanders and separates numbered? If traditional two-channel audio does have a future, then it could be as the preserve of high resolution audio. Sony has taken the industry lead in High-Res Audio.
HIFI Cable Humbug and Snake oil etc. blog posting rightly points out that there is too much emphasis placed on spending huge sums of money on HIFI cables. Most of what is written about this subject is complete tripe. HIFI magazines promote myths about the benefits of all sorts of equipment. I am as amazed as the writer that that so called audiophiles and HIFI journalists can be fooled into thinking that very expensive speaker cables etc. improve performance. I generally agree – most of this expensive interconnect cable stuff is just plain overpriced.
I can agree that in analogue interconnect cables there are few cases where better cables can really result in cleaner sound, but usually getting any noticeable difference needs that the one you compare with was very bad yo start with (clearly too thin speaker wires with resistance, interconnect that picks interference etc..) or the equipment in the systems are so that they are overly-sensitive to cable characteristics (generally bad equipment designs can make for example cable capacitance affect 100 times or more than it should). Definitely too much snake oil. Good solid engineering is all that is required (like keep LCR low, Teflon or other good insulation, shielding if required, proper gauge for application and the distance traveled). Geometry is a factor but not in the same sense these yahoos preach and deceive.
In digital interconnect cables story is different than on those analogue interconnect cables. Generally in digital interconnect cables the communication either works, does not work or sometimes work unreliably. The digital cable either gets the bits to the other end or not, it does not magically alter the sound that goes through the cable. You need to have active electronics like digital signal processor to change the tone of the audio signal traveling on the digital cable, cable will just not do that.
But this digital interconnect cables characteristics has not stopped hifi marketers to make very expensive cable products that are marketed with unbelievable claims. Ethernet has come to audio world, so there are hifi Ethernet cables. How about 500 dollar Ethernet cable? That’s ridiculous. And it’s only 1.5 meters. Then how about $10,000 audiophile ethernet cable? Bias your dielectrics with the Dielectric-Bias ethernet cable from AudioQuest: “When insulation is unbiased, it slows down parts of the signal differently, a big problem for very time-sensitive multi-octave audio.” I see this as complete marketing crap speak. It seems that they’re made for gullible idiots. No professional would EVER waste money on those cables. Audioquest even produces iPhone sync cables in similar price ranges.
HIFI Cable insulators/supports (expensive blocks that keep cables few centimeters off the floor) are a product category I don’t get. They typically claim to offer incredible performance as well as appealing appearance. Conventional cable isolation theory holds that optimal cable performance can be achieved by elevating cables from the floor in an attempt to control vibrations and manage static fields. Typical cable elevators are made from electrically insulating materials such as wood, glass, plastic or ceramics. Most of these products claim superior performance based upon the materials or methods of elevation. I don’t get those claims.
Along with green magic markers on CDs and audio bricks is another item called the wire conditioner. The claim is that unused wires do not sound the same as wires that have been used for a period of time. I don’t get this product category. And I don’t believe claims in the line like “Natural Quartz crystals along with proprietary materials cause a molecular restructuring of the media, which reduces stress, and significantly improves its mechanical, acoustic, electric, and optical characteristics.” All sounds like just pure marketing with no real benefits.
CD no evil, hear no evil. But the key thing about the CD was that it represented an obvious leap from earlier recording media that simply weren’t good enough for delivery of post-produced material to the consumer to one that was. Once you have made that leap, there is no requirement to go further. The 16 bits of CD were effectively extended to 18 bits by the development of noise shaping, which allows over 100dB signal to noise ratio. That falls a bit short of the 140dB maximum range of human hearing, but that has never been a real goal. If you improve the digital media, the sound quality limiting problem became the transducers; the headphones and the speakers.
We need to talk about SPEAKERS: Soz, ‘audiophiles’, only IT will break the sound barrier article says that today’s loudspeakers are nowhere near as good as they could be, due in no small measure to the presence of “traditional” audiophile products. that today’s loudspeakers are nowhere near as good as they could be, due in no small measure to the presence of “traditional” audiophile products. I can agree with this. Loudspeaker performance hasn’t tangibly improved in forty years and vast sums are spent addressing the wrong problems.
We need to talk about SPEAKERS: Soz, ‘audiophiles’, only IT will break the sound barrier article makes good points on design, DSPs and the debunking of traditional hi-fi. Science makes progress, pseudo-science doesn’t. Legacy loudspeakers are omni-directional at low frequencies, but as frequency rises, the radiation becomes more directional until at the highest frequencies the sound only emerges directly forwards. Thus to enjoy the full frequency range, the listener has to sit in the so-called sweet spot. As a result legacy loudspeakers with sweet spots need extensive room treatment to soak up the deficient off-axis sound. New tools that can change speaker system designs in the future are omni-directional speakers and DSP-based room correction. It’s a scenario ripe for “disruption”.
Computers have become an integrated part of many audio setups. Back in the day integrated audio solutions in PCs had trouble earning respect. Ode To Sound Blaster: Are Discrete Audio Cards Still Worth the Investment? posting tells that it’s been 25 years since the first Sound Blaster card was introduced (a pretty remarkable feat considering the diminished reliance on discrete audio in PCs) and many enthusiasts still consider a sound card an essential piece to the PC building puzzle. It seems that in general onboard sound is finally “Good Enough”, and has been “Good Enough” for a long time now. For most users it is hard to justify the high price of special sound card on PC anymore. There are still some PCs with bad sound hardware on motherboard and buttload of cheap USB adapters with very poor performance. However, what if you want the best sound possible, the lowest noise possible, and don’t really game or use the various audio enhancements? You just want a plain-vanilla sound card, but with the highest quality audio (products typically made for music makers). You can find some really good USB solutions that will blow on-board audio out of the water for about $100 or so.
Although solid-state technology overwhelmingly dominates today’s world of electronics, vacuum tubes are holding out in two small but vibrant areas. Some people like the sound of tubes. The Cool Sound of Tubes article says that a commercially viable number of people find that they prefer the sound produced by tubed equipment in three areas: musical-instrument (MI) amplifiers (mainly guitar amps), some processing devices used in recording studios, and a small but growing percentage of high-fidelity equipment at the high end of the audiophile market. Keep those filaments lit, Design your own Vacuum Tube Audio Equipment article claims that vacuum tubes do sound better than transistors (before you hate in the comments check out this scholarly article on the topic). The difficulty is cost; tube gear is very expensive because it uses lots of copper, iron, often point-to-point wired by hand, and requires a heavy metal chassis to support all of these parts. With this high cost and relative simplicity of circuitry (compared to modern electronics) comes good justification for building your own gear. Maybe this is one of the last frontiers of do-it-yourself that is actually worth doing.
1,575 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/DIYAudio/permalink/5919075754824888/
“Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines.” -Nelson Pass.
What are others point of view? I’m a firm believer in there should be no apologies given for enjoying what you like how you like it; whether audio, steak, wine or bourbon. I’m also one of the first to point out that there are many audiophile zealot crazies out there with some hare brained opinions, but none of us realize what we like “better” until one day we taste it. Don’t ever stop tasting!
Tomi Engdahl says:
Rules being about how much load and capacitance is required. Both are adjusted from the preamp but if you have a 400pf cable and optimal is around 100pf then you’re out of luck because you can’t dial in minus something.
Shielding from interference is also more important than elsewhere in the chain especially with very low signal level of MC cartridges (and therefore high gain of preamp).
Tomi Engdahl says:
There you go:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audioquest-go-4-speaker-cable-review.37308/
They have quite many measurements of amps, speakers, dacs and headphones. Cables and power conditioners are occasionally measured just for fun… because… Yeah. But the tests are still as seriously made as any other stuff there.
Tomi Engdahl says:
One place where cabling makes a difference is from turntable to preamp. But that’s different as there actually are clear rules how that works and why.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Braided cable can mean two different things in hifi discussion:
1. Braiding (twisting) cables is primarily to reduce both susceptibility and emission of E-M fields.
Headphone cables are most commonly made of strands of very thin braided/twisted copper wires, as it is more flexible, better resists damage due to twisting/vibration, and has essentially the same conductivity as a single strand conductor.
Braiding (twisting) cables is primarily to reduce both susceptibility and emission of E-M fields. Each adjacent twist has the magnetic field in the opposite direction so you get some level of local cancellation. This should be possible without spending crazy money for a power cable
2. Braided wire is a type of shielding that gets built into a cable for two reasons: To protect the cable from electromagnetic interference (EMI).
Are braided audio cables better?
The more noise they pick up, the more it gets amplified when boosted by a preamp, which is why you see manufacturers promote braided shielding in these cables. The braid provides more complete coverage of the conductor, minimizing noise that would degrade the sound.
Braided cables are types of cables that are constructed from several protective material strands that have been braided together. Wires inside the cable are individually insulated, and the exterior layer is also protected by additional insulation. This is to protect the wires inside from damage.
Braided cables are durable and have a longer lifespan because they are more resistant to tearing and cracking. This is because they have wire insulations inside out. The braiding also creates an additional stronger strand to the cable.
Nylon braided cables last longer than plastic braided cables due to their durability and in comparison are cheaper to purchase. When it comes to choosing a nylon braided cable, there is a lot of choice out there.
What is the advantage of a braided cable?
Braided cable sleeves are durable and dependable, and they often have unique constructions that optimize them for specific purposes, such as fire resistance or rodent resistance. They provide excellent protection for the cables used in even the toughest, most heavy-duty industrial environments.
Tomi Engdahl says:
There is no one “best” audio cable, as the best cable for a particular situation will depend on a variety of factors, such as the type of equipment being used, the length of the cable, and the quality of sound that is desired. In general, high-quality audio cables are made from materials such as oxygen-free copper or silver, and are shielded to prevent interference from external sources. Some common types of audio cables include RCA cables, XLR cables, and TRS cables. When choosing an audio cable, it is important to consider the specific needs of your setup and select a cable that is suitable for those needs.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The best audio cable for a given application depends on several factors, such as the type of equipment being used, the length of the cable, and the quality of the audio signal that is desired. In general, high-quality audio cables are made of materials that are designed to minimize signal loss and interference. For example, shielded cables with high-quality connectors are often recommended for use with professional audio equipment. Some common types of audio cables include coaxial cables, optical cables, and balanced XLR cables. It is always a good idea to consult with an audio professional or do some research to determine the best audio cable for your specific needs.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Shaving Compact Discs to improve the sound (?!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-QxLAxwxkM
Today I’m using a special lathe that cuts a 36º edge into a CD to improve the sound quality. Is this madness…I aim to find out. You might also like this video about demagnetising CDs https://youtu.be/mH4v8b1tGSQ
Tomi Engdahl says:
Line-out ≠ Headphone-out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rLwqQE3DJA
A video to explain why a line output is not the same thing as a headphone output.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/avdisasters/permalink/5514555862006213/
I don’t think anybody will have an opinion on this. Nobody has ever asked this before but What’s better vinyl or digital sound quality.
Where are we in 2022? Asking for a friend.
If you are a scientist, the answer is “digital”. If you are an artist, the answer is “vinyl”. If you are an artistic scientist, the answer is “it depends”. If you are a scientific artist, there is no answer.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Bob Bludau CDs have a dynamic range of 90dB (same as human hearing) and a frequency response of 20Hz to 20K Hz. Vinyl has a dynamic range of 75dB at the beginning of the record dropping to under 60 dB towards the end, but has a possible response of 7ish Hz to 50K Hz (5 to 20k at the end).
Some engineers planned for this and mixed their albums accordingly. The perfect album for vinyl might be Dark Side of the Moon, 2 distinct sides that are arranged for the change of groove speed as the record plays..
CDs have a bad rap because when they first came out they weren’t remastered for the difference in media and sounded overly shrill, but alas, they really are more accurate with the right mastering.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The main reason someone would use unipolar transistor (mosfet) over a bipolar transistor is it’s inherent distortion which is dominated by even harmonics (warmer, more pleasant sound) compared to BJT’s odd harmonics (harsher, cleaner sound). This distortion originates from the operating principle of each device and can be minimized with topology but never completely annihilated. As unipolar transistors are very similar to tubes in how they operate, you get similar sound (traditional tube amplifiers also have coupling capacitors and transformers which colour the sound in their way)
Tomi Engdahl says:
When are expensive cables worth it?
https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/when-are-expensive-cables-worth-it/
Commentary: It’s almost always a waste of money to spend more on HDMI, USB, optical digital and speaker cables, not to mention DisplayPort, DVI, Ethernet and VGA. But are there any exceptions to the rule? Maybe.
There are few things that come in as wide a variety of prices as cables and interconnects. HDMI cables, for instance, can run from $1 to over $1,000 for the same length. USB cables can be similarly cheap or high-end. Speaker cable is even more extreme, from pennies per foot, to hundreds of dollars for the same 12 inches.
We’ve written about cables a lot, and — for the most part — we recommend spending as little as possible.
But there are rare times where spending a bit more is actually a good idea. Here are when those occasional exceptions to the rule occur — along with the 99 percent of the time they don’t.
Despite millions of dollars in marketing money devoted to convincing people otherwise, it’s not possible for different HDMI cables to deliver different video and audio quality. Expensive High Speed HDMI cables don’t provide better resolution, better framerates, better color, or anything else. A High Speed HDMI cable is just a dumb tube. Get the cheapest dumb tube you can.
However, there are some cases where spending a bit more makes sense. Active cables, such as those that use Redmere technology, have chips built into them that help boost the signal. (They siphon a bit of power from the connected devices to power the chip.) As a result, they make it far more likely that you’ll get a signal over long-distance runs. We’re talking 20 feet (6 meters) or more. Many times, depending on the display (TV or projector) and/or the source, a cheap passive cable will work fine. Other times, it won’t. There’s no way to tell until you try it. Thicker gauge HDMI cables may also do the trick, or you may need an active cable.
Occasionally you might want thinner cables, and again, active cables allow that, too. Plugs at angles can place less stress on the connection if you use a thinner cable. And if you’re doing an in-wall installation be sure to use cables rated for in-wall use.
But, to repeat: no expensive HDMI cable will make your TV’s image look better, unless your previous HDMI cable was faulty or otherwise massively messed-up. If that’s the case, replace it with a cheap one.
USB (and Lightning)
It seems the cable manufacturers, finding that you, dear readers, are too smart to buy their mumbo-jumbo about HDMI cables, have moved on to fleecing audiophiles on USB cables. Yep, USB cables.
Ahhh, expectation bias.
I’m also including Lightning because they’re effectively just USB cables
As far as the data going across it, USB is also a dumb tube. It won’t improve video or audio quality.
The exception is with USB cables used to charge devices. Not all USB cables can charge devices at the same rate.
If there’s something wrong with your USB cable, or you’re trying to pass more data than that cable can handle, you can get dropouts or pops in the audio when using a USB DAC. A different, working, cheap cable is all you need.
But, to repeat: an expensive USB cable isn’t going to make your audio sound better, your pictures look better, or your printouts look sharper.
Speaker cables
Some audiophiles will swear up and down that expensive speaker cables radically change the sound of audio systems, really “opening up” the music, offering “improved clarity,” letting them “see God,” blah blah blah.
In the case of speaker cable, however, there’s actually science and objective testing to back up a little of the notion that cable quality affects sound quality. The speaker, receiver/amplifier, and cable all create an electrical circuit. Changing the resistance and capacitance of the cable can slightly change how the amplifier and speakers interact. I’ve done blind A/B testing that proves this, and audio guru Brent Butterworth has done objective tests of a wide range of speaker cables that reveal subtle audible differences.
CNET audio reviewer Steve Guttenberg says speaker cables are important.
Does this mean you should spend more on speaker cables? Not really. Which cables offer the “best” sound for your system (and to your ears) is impossible to predict and has nothing to do with price.
The important thing to remember is that even if it does sound better, it’s such a minuscule improvement that pretty much anything else you can do will have a greater effect on the sound. Moving the speakers, for example, or getting a different DAC, or a different receiver. Heck, even getting a bookcase and some curtains will do more to affect the sound than new speaker cable.
This is a different scenario from USB and HDMI. Speaker cables are analog, USB and HDMI (and most of the other cables you use today) are digital
Optical cables
Most of what you’ll be transmitting over optical cables is digital, namely audio in PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) or Dolby Digital format. All Dolby Digital decoders are designed to cut out completely if they don’t get a perfect signal. If bits are missing or wrong, the decoder transmits silence before it risks sending something that might damage your speakers. So if you’re getting a Dolby Digital signal, and it’s not cutting out, your optical cable is fine.
If you’re transmitting PCM, the audiophile answer is that different optical cables can cause different amounts of jitter. The reality is, the digital-to-analog converter in your gear has vastly more effect on the sound. Could a “better” optical cable result in audibly better PCM sound? Doubtful.
Ethernet
Category 6/6a cables have a more robust specification than Category 5/5e. There probably won’t be much of a speed difference on your home network (Cat5 is still really fast), but the extra shielding can’t hurt. Since Cat6 cables are only fractionally more expensive, there’s no reason not to go with them.
As far as different Ethernet cables looking or sounding better with A/V gear… nope. If it works, it works.
DVI and DisplayPort
The digital video portion of DVI is effectively the same as that of HDMI, so if you’re running digital, and it works, then you’re good to go. The same goes for DVI’s replacement, DisplayPort.
VGA (RGB-15)
Not sure if anyone still uses these ancient cables, and even if you do, I’m not sure you can even find “good” ones. But since they’re analog, in theory better-made cables might allow you to run higher-resolution images without problems.
Power Cables
High-end power cables are seriously a thing. I’m not kidding. If you believe changing the power cable in your gear will improve the audio or video…I have an island I want to sell you.
In short (so to speak), power cables have no effect on audio, video or any other kind of fidelity.
Lifespan
There also isn’t much sense to the idea of buying more expensive cables because they last longer. There’s no proof of this, for one, and it doesn’t make economic sense either.
Everything else
Obviously I’ve left out a few other types of cables, but this article has already turned into quite a tome so I’ll just stop already. In the failed efforts of pith, I’ll try to cover everything else with these overriding, if simplistic, pieces of advice:
If the cable transmits digital information, then with few exceptions, if it works, it works. Go cheap.
If the cable transmits analog information, then it’s possible it might have some impact on the sound or video. However, such impact is likely exceptionally slight. Enough so that it you shouldn’t spend much money on them.
Lastly, every cable article I’ve written has attracted its fair share of unbelievers: Anonymous posters claiming they’ve seen/heard differences and therefore expensive cables are awesome.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/optical-or-coax-cheap-or-expensive.30926/
Tomi Engdahl says:
At 194 dB, the energy in the sound waves starts distorting and they create a complete vacuum between themselves.
https://www.bksv.com/en/knowledge/blog/perspectives/krakatoa-eruption-sound
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://pe2bz.philpem.me.uk/Misc/-%20Audio/-%20Amp/-%20AudioAmpDesignInfo%20$$$/-%20AmpDesign-001/Info-906-LinearPowerSupplyDesign/power-supplies.htm
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/amplifier/mosfet-amplifier.html
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://audiovideo.fi/opas/rakennusohje-esivahvistin-kahdella-transistorilla/
Tomi Engdahl says:
The shocking SOUND DIFFERENCE Between Speaker Stands
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC96O99wAAg
Tomi Engdahl says:
Worlds 10 most expensive speakers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q9cFq7Q64M
Tomi Engdahl says:
right, well in that case, it makes no difference. Also your cables won’t make a difference, a digital source of reasonable quality won’t make a difference, and unless you have an amplifier that intentionally adds distortion (i.e. tubes), then your amp won’t make a difference either. The loudspeakers and the room will make a huge difference. It’s actually quite freeing to understand what makes a difference and what doesn’t because it avoids worrying about irrelevant things.
Tomi Engdahl says:
This is exactly what you discover when you start doing blind ABX testing:
Reasonably modern amplifiers (with the exception of broken ones, tubes, low power class-A amps, and class D amps that audibly hiss) all sound the same, as do all half-decent DACs and all cables.
Anyone who wants to can jump up and down and argue with this all they like based on experience with sighted listening. That’s just not how human hearing works. Hearing and bias are two very different things.
Loudspeakers and the room make a big difference, but it’s not at all surprising that two different speakers of reasonably competent design and similar size would sound similar enough to not be obviously different. It’s likely they would be ABX-able, and measurements might show different distortion or frequency response effects, but if you aren’t specifically listening for a difference in a very short changeover time window (like less than 0.5s) then not being able to pick differences isn’t at all surprising.
There are plenty of reasons to want and own nice expensive DACs and amps, but better sound isn’t one. Just like there are plenty of reasons to own a nice watch, but better timekeeping also isn’t one.
Tomi Engdahl says:
harmonics are distortion: the H in THD. Easily measured, and the audible threshold is much higher than what properly functioning amps contribute. The T in THD includes the second, third, fourth, etc. Phase and time alignment aren’t affected by amplification. Like physically, by definition, they can’t be. There’s IMD, but again, amps don’t contribute audible amounts. Damping factor can make a difference, but this is why I excluded a few amp types in my initial comment. The physics of analog signals are well understood. If you believe that a particular brand of amp sounds different, you would have to explain why it is purposely introducing audible amounts of distortion, i.e. very badly messing up the signal, when designing a relatively distortion free and audibly indistinguishable amplifier is not at all a difficult thing to do.
Talk to Nelson Pass about designing amplifiers WITH distortion….Or Bob Carver…..or McIntosh….This is why they all sound different.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Phase and time alignment aren’t affected by amplification. Yes pure amplification does not affect them, and modern solid state amplifiers do that well. But some amplifiers have parts that can cause phase and time issues, most typical examples for those are tone control circuits and audio transformers (especially on tube amplifiers).
Tomi Engdahl says:
Inter Connects from China – crap or grab?
Grab. Try decent ones, it is likely they are decent if not very good.
do the products genuinely adhere to the standards which manufacturers claim like ofc copper etc?
Even western cables often don’t adhere to what is claimed, let alone Chinese finds and oddities. Chinese manufactures are aware that western hifi is full of crap and voodoo so they probably don’t miss the chance as well
“do the products genuinely adhere to the standards which manufacturers claim like ofc copper etc?”
It depends. Depending where and what brand you buy, you could get what promised or not.
“Even western cables often don’t adhere to what is claimed,”
There are many Western brands are run by marketers that buy stuff from China and just add their own logos to then.
“manufactures are aware that western hifi is full of crap and voodoo”
Tomi Engdahl says:
on my experience with almost all audio cables there is no difference depending on the direction they are connected. Especially with speaker cables no difference. With some special interconnects I have noticed difference on how easily they pick up noise depending on direction (due the way the shield is connected).
My own experiences and cable physics does not support the commonly advertised cable direction affects sounds story.
Tomi Engdahl says:
for RCA or guitar cables the direction affecting background noise level is supported by physics on cables that have shields wired differently on different ends. Tested, heard and measured difference. Differences especially on electrically noisy environments.
With normal RCA cables built using coax type cable terminated exactly same on both ends, I have not heard differences or found physics explanation for direction based differences if there were any. Same for guitar cables. And for speaker cables.
Tomi Engdahl says:
So….many “audiophiles” believe that an expensive piece of wire can change the sound of a HiFi system. That a $1000 power cord can change the sound of a HiFi system. That raising speaker wires off the floor can change the sound of a HiFi system…etc,etc,etc…..but how wires are routed, type of wires, circuit board design, transistor placement, interconnect quality
Tomi Engdahl says:
Do long RCA cables degrade sound?
Yes, cable length does matter when it comes to sound quality, and it is something you will need to consider. However, the extent to which this is true varies from situation to situation. The good news is the cables you already have are probably fine even if they are long.
https://producerhive.com/ask-the-hive/does-audio-cable-length-matter/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Does RCA sound better than XLR?
Our many years of experience is that there are source system components, whether they be CD players or AV Pre-amplifiers where the XLR connection produces a better sound than the RCA connection. There are also system source components where the opposite is true, producing a better sound from the RCA connection.
https://mjacoustics.co.uk/support/xlr-or-rca-which-is-better/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Is RCA worse than XLR?
XLR cables are balanced audio cables, while RCA cables are unbalanced. This means that XLR is better for long distances, high outputs, and noisy environments. RCA cables can be better for short distances, and they are cheaper, but as a general rule, XLR cables are better audio cables than RCA.
https://stampsound.com/are-xlr-cables-better-than-rca-2-minute-read/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://playbutton.co/myths-about-high-end-audio-cables/
https://pwbelectronics.co.uk/cable-controversy
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.empiricalaudio.com/computer-audio/technical-papers/myths-and-snake-oil
Tomi Engdahl says:
Does raising speaker cables off the floor really make a big difference?
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/does-raising-speaker-cables-off-the-floor-really-make-a-big-difference
My cables are laying on the floor (in a mess), would raising them off the floor really make much of a difference?
I couldn’t hear any difference. YMMV.
Nor could I.
Love to see a blind test of this.
Can’t hear it.
Theoretically there should be a difference due to transmission line affect with the floor acting as a dielectric, and if the cables lie on the ground, there is a asymmetric affect – the ground act as a dielectric on the bottom half of the cable, but the top half of the cable only has the air as the dielectric. By lifting the cable up, things are more symmetric as the cable will “see” the bottom and top the same. But of course as with anything that has to do with audiophiles, your ears make the final judgement, theories not withstanding.
Does raising speaker cables off the floor really make a big difference?
Not a whit, in my experience. More illusory audio magic for highly suggestible audiophiles.
Hi spoutmouzert
I am the original “Cable Ground” designer. We starter the industry on raising cables in the early 80’s. Anything that a cable touches and the environment the cable is in affects the sound. There are lots of generations of cable risers to explore from lots of people.
It’s a well worth while journey whether you DIY or trying existing products.
good luck, have fun
Michael Green
Suspended by a series of monofilaments attached to eye-hooks in the ceiling is the only way to go. Tests show no difference in the gauge of fishing-line used.
It also makes vacuuming a breeze.
It is us that holds the charge when we get shocked, not the carpet. If your humidity is really low, that could be having a real effect on the sound (more attenuation at high frequencies). Get a humidifier. Cable elevators can’t fix humidity.
We all know that signal is flowing through the cables and that most carpeting can develop an electrostatic charge that can zap us (discharge) when we shuffle across the floor when the weather is cool and humidity is low
Absolutely not. It is just a way of showing off your over priced cables. The best way to deal with speaker wires is put your balanced mono amp right behind the speaker keeping your speaker wire as short as possible then run long balanced cables to the amps. If you want to put them on cable elevators knock yourself out.
Geoffkait go to Wikipedia and read about static electricity. Then look up triboelectric series. But, you are right. Cable elevators can not fix static electricity nor can they fix anything else other than the finances of people selling them. I would never buy anything from a store or web site selling cable elevators or any other patently obvious BS.
I do not believe it makes a difference. Just expectation bias.
But my cousin swears by them.
He has tested quite a few different types. He likes those porcelain ceramic insulators. They can be found for a lot less money than the ones made for audio.
I tried raising cables off the floor for about a year. Tried them back on the floor and heard no difference. Michael Greene seems to believe in risers, but he also told me the type of metal the screws are made of which hold down circuit boards in components would also affect the sound. YMMV.
You have to ask yourself, do you really think the sound stage, which is almost all a factor of recording and speaker/room interaction, would magically collapse due to some exceedingly low level interaction between a cable and the floor?
Exactly. And funny how such a dramatic “change” is something no one (TMK) has ever demonstrated in a blind test.
It might serve to balance things to do a little googling on some of the controversies that have arisen with…*ahem*….certain tweak-selling and cable-producing company’s show demos.
(Somewhat along those lines: One engineer on an audio site talked about how, upon seeing a demo and the associated claims from one of these manufacturers at a show, he started asking simple technical questions and proposing how the claimed phenomenon could be tested. He was greeted not with the type of exchange one might expect between engineers, but with suggestions that lawyers may get involved if he wants to pursue that line of questioning).
But…there are audiophiles who want to believe….so there’s a market that will sell to them.
’ve just read through this thread and it would appear there are people in both camps.
I am not surprised some people hear a difference and others do not, because we are all using different cables
The one omission throughout the thread was
- NO ONE in either camp has identified the cables they are using.
What difference does it make? you ask…
- due to cable geometry, some cables carry so much internal noise that hearing the difference cable risers make is next to impossible
- others geometries reduce the amount of noise, so using cable risers with those would demonstrate the improvements.
- Also the insulation used in cables has an impact on the amount of noise generated internally.
Many years ago I tried cable risers with one of my older speaker cables and they made no difference, but with the cables I now have, lifting them off of the floor did improve the sound.
So – how much benefit is heard depends on the “geometry” of the cables and the insulation used.
- If you use simple geometries i.e. two wires side by side such as Van den Hul CS-122 or the NAIM speaker cables the improvement would be difficult to detect
- with geometries like the Planus III cables used by the OP, I believe they would benefit from the use of cable risers.
—- those big flat cables sitting on carpet or wood would have more internal noise than if suspended on cable risers
—- As one of the other posters mentions it’s all about dielectric influences of the floor on the cable/signal
—- Man Made Fibre Carpet is especially bad – wool would be better
For myself – I use a HELIX geometry in all my cables
- the signal wire is suspended in the center of a Helix Neutral coil by spaced wood beads, so a high percentage of the dielectric between the signal and the neutral is actually air
- also the coil acts like a faraday cage, so external RFI/EMI in the signal wire is very low
- the resulting signal that reaches the speaker is almost noise free
- hearing the improvement was quite discernible
I use DIY wood risers with a ceramic base that lift the cable up about 3/4″. I did try lifting the cables higher, but there was no improvement.
Regards – steve
As to soundstages collapsing due to cables not being treated as if they were unicorns: I have friends and acquaintances who are audio reviewers. I regularly hear whatever gear they have in, from expensive amps, to all sorts of speakers, all of them hooked up to super high end cabling.
Every time I come home from listening at their place I play the same tracks on my own system and…somehow….with my 35 foot long generic cables running under floors and over a rug….I experience glorious soundstaging and imaging (and clarity) of at least the equal if not more to what I’ve heard there. I guess I’m just lucky.
Speaker set up/room acoustics/listener position will in all likelihood influence imaging/soundstaging far more than raising the average cable off the floor.
mijostyn
audiozenology, this is a good example of why you should never trust anyone’s hearing. I have also seen instances in which these “AB” comparisons were rigged by someone switching EQ curves or phasing.
If you can not think of a reasonable reason why something should work it usually does not. Cable elevators are a good example of this. There is no reason and they don’t work, not even a little except in the minds of the easily influenced.
>>>I nominate that post for the most hilarious post of the week. That’s gold, Jerry, gold!!
Writing something down does not make it true. Sound-stage is predominantly from large scale effects in the recording, the speakers (namely dispersion, smoothness of frequency response, and lack of significant phase irregularities), and how that interacts with the room. Don’t need to trust me on that, we know that sound-stages comes from directional / distance cues, and they are dominated by the currently loudest signals.
Very subtle things, 100db down, heck even 60-70db down from the signal have little impact on any perception of sound-stage. Anything that “collapses” the sound-stage is a gross significant change, and that is never going to come from cable elevators. Far more likely is what prof alluded to.
Slew rate is defined by volume and bandwidth, as is complexity. No miracles there.
Not a big deal, but not all audiophiles have endless funds, and they read forums like these to find out where to spend them. Most never post. Reading of forums far exceeds participation.
Wouldn’t you rather people who are interested in audio have the best experience they can with the money they have? Why do all these claims breaks down so quickly when eyes are removed from the equation?
The best cable riser demonstration was at a show several years ago, perhaps RMAF. As I entered the room the demonstrator was using a foam-ish cable riser, I believe of Shunyata make, and rubbing it against the top of a CD. It was being used as an anti-static device. It worked to some degree, better than as a cable riser.
These are the type of subjects that self-reputed “Golden Ears” love.To them, it only re-enforces that they have Golden Ears, which is a psychologically-comfortable status.
I’m not talking simply about any audiophile who tries something out in his system, “hears” something he likes and goes with it. Cool stuff!Rather, I’m talking about a certain attitude, or defense-mechanism, found among some portion in the audiophile community.
It’s like psychics or spiritualists: “Oh, you can’t hear the voices of the spirits like I can? Poor thing, it must be hard to be so deficient in spiritual sensitivity!”
So the Golden Ear does some tweak “test” in the usual subjective manner, believes he hears a difference and…well…that’s that! Truth Has Been Found!
If YOU listen to the same thing and don’t hear a difference then, no it can’t be contrary evidence, it can’t be the Golden Ear could possibly be fooling himself; no, the Golden Ear’s subjective impressions method is inviolable so it MUST be some deficiency in you who “can not hear what I hear.”
That’s why this always plays out with snipes against the hearing acuity of anyone skeptical of a Golden Ear claim. The Golden Eared Subjectivist assumes his own method as veridical. And since the Golden Ear usually won’t truly put his Golden Ears to controlled testing – e.g. with controls for “not peeking” to really see if he can actually distinguish what he claims. – then the Golden Ear is never faced with a true challenge to his claims.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Six Common Audio Cable Problems And Solutions
https://www.prosoundweb.com/six-common-audio-cable-problems-and-solutions/
A problem with an audio cable isn’t always solved by running a new cable. Sometimes you’ve got to look under the driveway.
There are six common cable problems you’ll find when working with audio. All but two of these show themselves by not passing audio through to the mixer.
1) A bad cable. This is usually an easy one to spot and resolve. If no sound is coming through from the sound source and everything else checks out OK, then swapping in a different cable usually solves the problem. This goes for all cable types, from XLR to TRS cables.
2) Wrong cable in use. A TS might have been used instead of a TRS or vice versa. Make sure you use the right cables and check the user manuals for audio equipment if you don’t know which to use. An easy way to avoid this with stage cabling is by keeping cables bundled with their appropriate equipment whenever it’s taken off the stage. You can also label inputs/output, if they aren’t already labeled, by using a bit of tape and a Sharpie to put on the bottom or back of the electronic equipment with a note as to the cable type.
3) Plugged into the wrong place. This typically happens when you plug an input into an output jack or vice-versa. It’s easy to do this with DI boxes if you don’t pay attention to what you’re doing. I’ve probably set up DI boxes a thousand+ times and it’s easy to zone out. I’m just sayin’…
4) Seating. You might not hear any sound because the cable was not properly seating in a piece of equipment. This usually happens with guitars/basses when they plug the instrument cable into their ax. Whenever I’m not getting a signal from a guitarist/bassist, this is the problem. I’ll ask the musician to re-seat the cable.
5) Hum in the channel. This can happen for a variety of reasons. If it’s because of the cable, it’s likely an unbalanced cable that’s running parallel to another unbalanced cable or electrical cord. Cross those cables at a 90-degree angle and secure the angle with a little gaffer tape.
6) Cable used incorrectly. You’ll see this problem occur more in the booth than on the stage. A perfect example is connecting an iPod to the mixer. You can’t just plug a stereo TRS cable signal into the mixer. The mixer is expecting a balanced signal via the TRS cable but you’re giving it a stereo signal. This can cause intermittent audio or generally poor audio. Fix by using a task-appropriate direct box or other transformer.
Tomi Engdahl says:
7 things that make your hi-fi system sound bad (and how to improve them)
By Ketan Bharadia
published January 28, 2021
Got talented hi-fi components but your system just doesn’t sing? This could be why…
https://www.whathifi.com/advice/things-that-make-your-hi-fi-system-sound-bad-and-how-to-improve-them
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/cable-damage/
I often speak in terms that make a few people nervous. Take for example the notion that speaker cables damage sound quality.
To me, this is a fairly obvious notion. Since cables are passive they cannot add anything, but they sure can subtract.
When a conduit of sound subtracts from that which was intended to be delivered to the speakers we can with some confidence suggest the music has been damaged.
The problem with this language seems to be focused on one word.
Damaged.
Folks read that single word and come away with the idea speaker cables can damage a power amplifier and thus they should be careful.
Some cables rob from the high frequencies while others steal from the lower extremes.
Perhaps this is a better way to describe how cables can only subtract rather than add.
Tomi Engdahl says:
10 Ways to Hide Speaker Wire and Audio Cables
https://www.svsound.com/blogs/speaker-setup-and-tuning/10-ways-to-hide-speaker-wire-and-audio-cables
Best Ways to Hide Speaker Wire and Audio Cables
Use existing room décor. If you have posters or other artwork on the walls, you can route speaker cables to surround speakers behind them. One of our SVS colleagues uses foam fingers from sporting events for just this purpose.
Use cable clips with integrated nails to affix speaker cables to the baseboards in the room. The cables are not entirely out of sight in this case, but they are completely out of the way. If the room has wall-to-wall carpeting, you can tuck the cables between the carpet and baseboards, which makes them more or less invisible.
Take advantage of light strips. If you have light strips in your room, you can route speaker cables next to them, rendering them completely unobtrusive.
Route the cables under throw rugs or even the carpet in the room. Flat cables such as Sewell Ghost Wire are best for this.
Stick speaker wire to the wall. Speaking of Sewell Ghost Wire, it includes an adhesive on one side, allowing you to affix it to the baseboards or even up a wall. Also, you can paint it any color to blend in, making it essentially invisible.
Use painted raceways or conduits. Several companies make long cable conduits, ducts, and raceways that hide cables in hollow structures placed along baseboards or in corners where walls meet. They can even run up the middle of a wall to surround speakers, and you can paint them to match the wall color. Examples include CableOrganizer surface raceways and the Wiremold CornerMate Cord Organizer.
Leverage crown molding or architectural features. If you plan to install crown or baseboard molding in the room, you can get hollow moldings that allow cables to be routed through them, rendering the cables completely invisible. Orac Decor offers a variety of hollow polyurethane crown molding and baseboard molding styles with hollow channels. Some of the company’s crown molding is also designed for indirect LED uplighting, which adds a nice touch to any room.
Explore alternative panel molding. Chair-rail molding is installed horizontally around mid-height on the walls, and it can also be used to hide speaker cables. Orac Decor offers a variety of what it calls panel molding styles with hollow channels.
Hide speaker cables and wires in the wall. For the ultimate in cable invisibility, you can route speaker and other cables inside the walls of the room. You can even mount wall plates with terminals for various types of connections next to speakers and other equipment. Of course, this requires the most work, and unless you’re a serious DIYer, it’s often best to hire a professional installer to do it.
Go Wireless (when possible). You can avoid some cables altogether by going wireless. SVS offers the SoundPath Wireless Audio Adaptor that sends uncompressed 48/16 audio wirelessly from a source device to a powered subwoofer or pair of powered speakers. The SoundPath Wireless Audio Adaptor includes a transmitter that connects to a line-level audio output on an AVR or other source device and a receiver that connects to the audio input of a subwoofer or pair of powered speakers, eliminating the cable altogether.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.ricable.com/en/la-direzionalita-nei-cavi-hi-fi-ricable/
How is the directionality of a Hi-Fi cable indicated?
The topic of Hi-Fi cable directionality Ricable is also one of the most popular topics in our chat. All the more reason for this article to take shape. Let’s start with the first question that arises spontaneously: how is a directional cable recognisable? That’s easy to answer. First of all, let’s reiterate that not all Ricable cables are directional. Those that are, however, have an arrow clearly marked on the connection points. Having identified this arrow, we can now show you how to use the cables Ricable correctly. The arrow simply follows the direction of the signal from the source to the speakers. Let’s take the two most classic examples: if we take a CD player connected to an amplifier, the arrows will start from the player and end up in the amplifier. If, on the other hand, we take an amplifier and loudspeakers as an example, the arrows will start from the amplifier and end up in the loudspeakers, as the signal follows this path.
It is good to know that these rules are shared by most manufacturers of Hi-Fi and Hi-End cables. But we are not talking about a real standard, standardised at international level. So you should not be surprised if you find yourself reading instructions that are different or even completely opposite to those we have just described. But what specifically is meant by “cable direction”? Cables are cables which, for reasons of constructional geometry or configuration characteristics, are not bi-directional. This means that they must be used in a specific direction, as illustrated by the two examples above.
Why is it important to respect cable directionality?
Why, then, is it important to respect the directionality of cables Ricable? The reason, as we have seen, varies according to the cable in question. Generally speaking, however, we can say that installing Hi-Fi cables with the correct directionality is important for the optimisation and coherence of your Hi-Fi system. The cables Ricable, in any case, work even if the directionality is not respected, with the exception of the Supreme AI MKII.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Cable Connections: use end sleeves or tinning?
https://www.hifi-advice.com/blog/audiophile-insights/cables-insights/cable-connections-use-end-sleeves-or-tinning/
There is no harm in soldering plugs directly to cables, even if the contact transition creates a slightly higher resistance than a tightly crimped connection would. In any case, when soldering, make sure that the soldering joint is smooth and shiny. This is an indication of a proper weld.
However, using solder at the end of cable litze in order to fit them into screw connectors is a bad idea. This might sound odd, but solder actually flows under pressure. It is a slow process but a very real one. After a few months of use, the connection gets looser and looser. This is bad for the sound and also potentially dangerous and this is why you should never use solder in this fashion, especially not for power cable connections.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Do Hi-Fi interconnect cables affect the sound?
https://www.quora.com/Do-Hi-Fi-interconnect-cables-affect-the-sound
Do Hi-Fi interconnect cables affect the sound? Yes, but you are unlikely to hear the difference. The listening environment is far and away the variable that has the most effect on hearing. Audio cables should be upgraded commensurate with the quality of your inputs, preamp and amp.
Cables will affect the sound but not quite in the way the salesman would have you believe.
Inadequately shielded cables can pick up noise and in some cases even AM radio, though most often it’ll be RF induction from nearby mobile phones. Also speaker cables can suffer from stray capacitance or inductance if too thin and/or too long. This phenomenon particularly affects vacuum tube amplifiers.
Your basic $5 interconnect with the red and white plastic phono connectors for analog connections will in most cases give a completely indistinguishable result from something costing much more (and the sky really is the limit with how much you can spend on interconnect)
Many of the hyper-expensive hi-fi cables you can buy make spectacular claims as to their performance, but these claims if examined turn out to be based on pseudoscience. Typically they don’t offer statistical data based on double-blind listening tests to determine how many critical listeners can discern the difference in effect from one cable to another.
There is a reason for this – these cables are sold not to satisfy the buyer’s ears, but instead his ego (and excuse the gender-specific pronoun, but in my experience women are generally far too intelligent to fall for these types of scam!). The reasoning is that the buyer is buying bragging rights about how much they spent on their system, rather than any kind of measurable improved performance.
Also in the hi-fi store, the salespeople are part of this psychological mind-warp. “Since you’ve just spent [insert sum here] on a good [insert component here], surely you will want to spend just a few more dollars and get some decent interconnect for it?!”… it’s called persuasion by implied guilt, and it works very well. Don’t fall for it! Cables are the easiest to sell and highest margin item in the store!
There are places now where you can spend $2000 on a power cord
. Seriously.
If you’re interested, this is the statement I include with every tube amplifier I sell. So far I’ve had 100% satisfied customers:
The approach to the design and construction of our amplifiers is entirely pragmatic. The designer’s philosophy soundly rejects all manifestations of occult audiophile-ism as nothing more than pseudoscience and sorcery; an expensive placebo effect for those whose desire to show off how much money they spent on their equipment exceeds their ability to discern quality sound reproduction.
The 0.01% gain in subjective quality by using audiophile-grade cables and components pales into complete insignificance in comparison with the quality gains made from application of best-practice principles in design and construction, backed up by a robust measurement and analysis technique. In other words, our amplifiers are built and tested using science, not faith and sorcery.
Accordingly, we use appropriately specified materials of a grade available at sensible prices from regular electronics suppliers.
Sorry. Long answer to a short question. My speciality
[Edited for typo correction]
Yes, but you are unlikely to hear the difference. The listening environment is far and away the variable that has the most effect on hearing. Audio cables should be upgraded commensurate with the quality of your inputs, preamp and amp. Start with the speakers, listening environment and work backwards to the audio cables in order to hear any difference at all.
Yes, to a certain degree and for a very small amount, unless you have very bad cables.
As long as the cables are of a decent basic quality (heavy enough gauge for speaker cables) and the contacts between the cables and equipment are clean you should be good.
The right choice of speakers and a well designed listening spot have the biggest impact on your sound quality.
Tomi Engdahl says:
What makes vinyl sound a true hi-fi audio experience?
It probably has little to do with the sound and more to do with the associations of the activity.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Do interconnects affect sound?
Generally speaking, all properly (sensibly) designed and well made interconnects will sound the same – excluding noise pickup which is common with unshielded designs.
Are expensive interconnects worth it?
Expensive Audio Cables Are A Lie!
The difference comes from the quality of the build (not the quality of the audio that pops out the other end) and perhaps the cost of the packaging and some of the marketing budget. And of course you’ll pay more for a longer cable because it requires more material to make it.
Tomi Engdahl says:
It’s only a “scam” if you can’t hear an improvement or if you do and don’t think it’s worth it. But if you rule out the possibility of a difference out of hand for whatever reasons that have nothing to do with experienced listening, e.g., for theoretical reasons or money envy, then that’s a different matter.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.psaudio.com/askpaulvideo/expensive-audio-cables-are-they-worth-it/
I have certainly been chided for my acquisition of over-priced cable for the system I put together. I have studied the qualities of the conductors and wire geometry and have gone as far as to make my own to see if I could do it the same for cheaper. The answer becomes, “no” it isn’t that simple. You can certainly get the parts and put your own cable together, but it won’t be as cheap as you’d want it to be, and it won’t sound quite as good.
What is never taken into account with premium and expensive cables, is the effort it takes to get all the materials and put them together. Cable geometry isn’t as simple as getting a couple of strands of wire and connecting them to a connector and wa-la. They have to be twisted at specific and exacting intervals. That’s very hard to do by hand. Most companies use a machine that weaves the cables at an exact rate. Also, the conductors are purchased at bulk rates and many of them are custom made. You can’t just waltz over to Belkin and purchase solid core silver wire in FEP hollow tubes. No, this has to be ordered from whatever company.
It boils to this. If you knew how to build a cable…and you realized that people wanted to buy those cables from you….you’re telling me you WOULDN’T increase the price to earn a profit over the materials you spent to make it? OF course you would. Now, what if you had to spend $100,000 on spools of custom made wire and custom molded copper connectors that are plated in gold or rhodium. Now, someone wants 1000 cables made. Now you have to hire people to build these cables. What about boxes to put them in? You’re not going to feel you got your money’s worth if it shows up in a plastic zip lock bag from the super market. So you spend a few more thousand dollars getting a custom box created and graphics.
In the end, I can certainly see why the cables are “over priced.” You’re paying a premium for convenience not having to make the cable yourself. That said, $21,000 seems like gouging. There is no amount of materials that cost that much or amount of hours needed to make it that would cost that much in labor. It’s about ego at that point.
Log in to Reply
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.psaudio.com/askpaulvideo/expensive-audio-cables-are-they-worth-it/
I view it this way: if the cable is actually capable of achieving a sufficient improvement to the system’s performance over multitudes of audiophile systems, then the value added by the cable is worth it to those who discern the audible improvements, so the companies maximize their profit margins based on that: it is how many are willing to spend that amount for the improvements. The cables are probably worth a lot less factoring only the materials/machining/labor/etc., but the improvements are such for a large segment of the audiophile world that the companies can charge way more than what is really justified. Such is Capitalism.
Yes, I concur. If you want the improvements bad enough, you’ll pay their price because they know you can’t get it anywhere else cheaper.
Although, I have discovered that some of what they offer can be made in a DIY situation for much cheaper. For example, I was not going to fork out $500 – $2000 for an Earth-Ground box to stabilize the electric current going to my speakers/equipment. So, I built my own for around $89.00 USD. I also built my own ground cables and one IEC C7 power cable. I know that with these level of parts, there is only so far I can go in achieving audiophile fidelity. I would need to get better materials, like pure silver wire and teflon/FEP dielectrics, pure, solid copper core connectors, etc.
Yeah, I have a lot of Audioquest. They use solid core copper wire….but….they also do some shifty things like using what they call, “purple copper.” This is copper that has been mixed with Sulfur. Sulfur is not a good conductor of electricity. Therefore, this type of material is designed to purposely reduce the performance of audio. Audioquest uses “purple copper” connectors in lower model wire to ensure that this wire does not exceed the performance of models that are above it. Especially when the lower model uses the same geometry and solid core copper wire.
That doesn’t mean Audioquest is bad or “snake oil.” It does mean that you will get what you pay for within their line. Their higher end does have impressive materials and geometry; but they charge a very high premium for it.
Mine is ‘Furukawa’ (Japan) 7N Super-PCOCC solid core.
0.85mm diameter interconnect & 1.5mm diameter loudspeaker wire (cable)
In nearly thirty years I haven’t heard anything better for the price.
Don’t bother Brandon, as the high-end audio cable arm of Furukawa Corp. ceased over ten years ago.
You may be lucky enough to find some of their pre-loved cables for sale around the world.
Put simply, it depends upon:
a) how much you are willing to spend on wires (Cables) &
b) whether your home-audio rig is resolving enough to warrant such expense.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Hi-Fi cables: the different types and their role
Phono cables.
Interconnect cables.
Speaker cables.
Power cables.
Digital cables.
https://www.maplatine.com/en/content/351-hifi-cables-different-types-and-role
Tomi Engdahl says:
Truth, Lies and Fraud in the Audiophile World
https://medium.com/@skikirkwood/truth-lies-and-fraud-in-the-audiophile-world-a365e56c97c4
Tomi Engdahl says:
Articles
The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio
Don’t be fooled by audiophiles with golden ears when shopping for high-end audio equipment.
https://www.ecoustics.com/articles/ten-biggest-lies-audio/
The punch line of Lincoln’s famous bon mot, that you cannot fool all the people all of the time, appears to be just barely applicable to high-end audio. What follows here is an attempt to make it stick.
I strongly suspect that people are more gullible today than they were in my younger years. Back then we didn’t put magnets in our shoes, the police didn’t use psychics to search for missing persons, and no head of state since Hitler had consulted astrologers. Most of us believed in science without any reservations. When the hi-fi era dawned, engineers like Paul Klipsch, Lincoln Walsh, Stew Hegeman, Dave Hafler, Ed Villchur, and C. G. McProud were our fountainhead of audio information. The untutored tweako/weirdo pundits who don’t know the integral of ex were still in the benighted future.
Don’t misunderstand me. In terms of the existing spectrum of knowledge, the audio scene today is clearly ahead of the early years; at one end of the spectrum there are brilliant practitioners who far outshine the founding fathers.
1. The Cable Lie
Logically this is not the lie to start with because cables are accessories, not primary audio components. But it is the hugest, dirtiest, most cynical, most intelligence-insulting and, above all, most fraudulently profitable lie in audio, and therefore must go to the head of the list.
The lie is that high-priced speaker cables and interconnects sound better than the standard, run-of-the-mill (say, Radio Shack) ones. It is a lie that has been exposed, shamed, and refuted over and over again by every genuine authority under the sun, but the tweako audio cultists hate authority and the innocents can’t distinguish it from self-serving charlatanry.
The simple truth is that resistance, inductance, and capacitance (R, L, and C) are the only cable parameters that affect performance in the range below radio frequencies. The signal has no idea whether it is being transmitted through cheap or expensive RLC. Yes, you have to pay a little more than rock bottom for decent plugs, shielding, insulation, etc., to avoid reliability problems, and you have to pay attention to resistance in longer connections. In basic electrical performance, however, a nice pair of straightened-out wire coat hangers with the ends scraped is not a whit inferior to a $2000 gee-whiz miracle cable. Nor is 16-gauge lamp cord at 18-cents a foot. Ultrahigh-priced cables are the biggest scam in consumer electronics, and the cowardly surrender of nearly all audio publications to the pressures of the cable marketers is truly depressing to behold.
2. The Vacuum-Tube Lie
This lie is also, in a sense, about a peripheral matter, since vacuum tubes are hardly mainstream in the age of silicon. It’s an all-pervasive lie, however, in the high-end audio market; just count the tube-equipment ads as a percentage of total ad pages in the typical high-end magazine. Unbelievable! And so is, of course, the claim that vacuum tubes are inherently superior to transistors in audio applications–don’t you believe it.
Tubes are great for high-powered RF transmitters and microwave ovens but not, at the turn of the century, for amplifiers, preamps, or (good grief!) digital components like CD and DVD players. What’s wrong with tubes? Nothing, really.
Whatever vacuum tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment, solid-state devices can do better, at lower cost, with greater reliability. Even the world’s best-designed tube amplifier will have higher distortion than an equally well-designed transistor amplifier and will almost certainly need more servicing (tube replacements, rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic designs such as 8-watt single-ended triode amplifiers are of course exempt, by default, from such comparisons since they have no solid-state counterpart.)
As for the “tube sound,” there are two possibilities: (1) It’s a figment of the deluded audiophile’s imagination, or (2) it’s a deliberate coloration introduced by the manufacturer to appeal to corrupted tastes, in which case a solid-state design could easily mimic the sound if the designer were perverse enough to want it that way.
Yes, there exist very special situations where a sophisticated designer of hi-fi electronics might consider using a tube (e.g., the RF stage of an FM tuner), but those rare and narrowly qualified exceptions cannot redeem the common, garden-variety lies of the tube marketers, who want you to buy into an obsolete technology.
3. The Anti-Digital Lie
You have heard this one often, in one form or another. To wit: Digital sound is vastly inferior to analog. Digitized audio is a like a crude newspaper photograph made up of dots. The Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem is all wet. The 44.1 kHz sampling rate of the compact disc cannot resolve the highest audio frequencies where there are only two or three sampling points. Digital sound, even in the best cases, is hard and edgy. And so on and so forth–all of it, without exception, ignorant drivel or deliberate misrepresentation. Once again, the lie has little bearing on the mainstream, where the digital technology has gained complete acceptance; but in the byways and tributaries of the audio world, in unregenerate high-end audio salons and the listening rooms of various tweako mandarins, it remains the party line.
The most ludicrous manifestation of the antidigital fallacy is the preference for the obsolete LP over the CD. Not the analog master tape over the digital master tape, which remains a semirespectable controversy, but the clicks, crackles and pops of the vinyl over the digital data pits’ background silence, which is a perverse rejection of reality.
Here are the scientific facts any second-year E.E. student can verify for you: Digital audio is bulletproof in a way analog audio never was and never can be.
The “how can two sampling points resolve 20 kHz?” argument is an untutored misinterpretation of the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem. (Doubters are advised to take an elementary course in digital systems.)
The reason why certain analog recordings sound better than certain digital recordings is that the engineers did a better job with microphone placement, levels, balance, and equalization, or that the recording venue was acoustically superior. Some early digital recordings were indeed hard and edgy, not because they were digital but because the engineers were still thinking analog, compensating for anticipated losses that did not exist.
Today’s best digital recordings are the best recordings ever made. To be fair, it must be admitted that a state-of the-art analog recording and a state-of-the-art digital recording, at this stage of their respective technologies, will probably be of comparable quality.
4. The Listening Test Lie
Regular readers of The Audio Critic know how to refute the various lies invoked by the high-end cultists in opposition to double-blind listening tests at matched levels (ABX testing), but a brief overview is in order here.
The ABX methodology requires device A and device B to be levelmatched within ±0.1 dB, after which you can listen to fully identified A and fully identified B for as long as you like. If you then think they sound different, you are asked to identify X, which may be either A or B (as determined by a double-blind randomization process). You are allowed to make an A/X or B/X comparison at any time, as many times as you like, to decide whether X=A or X=B. Since sheer guessing will yield the correct answer 50% of the time, a minimum of 12 trials is needed for statistical validity (16 is better, 20 better yet). There is no better way to determine scientifically whether you are just claiming to hear a difference or can actually hear one.
The tweako cultists will tell you that ABX tests are completely invalid. Everybody knows that a Krell sounds better than a Pioneer, so if they are indistinguishable from each other in an ABX test, then the ABX method is all wet–that’s their logic.
The standard tweako objections to ABX tests are too much pressure (as in “let’s see how well you really hear”), too little time (as in “get on with it, we need to do 16 trials”), too many devices inserted in the signal path (viz., relays, switches, attenuators, etc.), and of course assorted psychobabble on the subject of aural perception. None of that amounts to anything more than a red herring, of one flavor or another, to divert attention from the basics of controlled testing. The truth is that you can perform an ABX test all by yourself without any pressure from other participants, that you can take as much time as wish (how about 16 trials over 16 weeks?), and that you can verify the transparency of the inserted control devices with a straight-wire bypass. The objections are totally bogus and hypocritical.
Here’s how you smoke out a lying, weaseling, obfuscating anti-ABX hypocrite. Ask him if he believes in any kind of A/B testing at all. He will probably say yes. Then ask him what special insights he gains by (1) not matching levels and (2) peeking at the nameplates. Watch him squirm and fume.
5. The Feedback Lie
Negative feedback, in an amplifier or preamplifier, is baaaad. No feedback at all is gooood. So goes this widely invoked untruth.
The fact is that negative feedback is one of the most useful tools available to the circuit designer. It reduces distortion and increases stability. Only in the Bronze Age of solid-state amplifier design, back in the late ’60s and early ’70s, was feedback applied so recklessly and indiscriminately by certain practitioners that the circuit could get into various kinds of trouble. That was the origin of the no-feedback fetish.
6. The Burn-In Lie
This widely reiterated piece of B.S. would have you believe that audio electronics, and even cables, will “sound better” after a burn-in period of days or weeks or months (yes, months). Pure garbage. Capacitors will “form” in a matter of seconds after power-on. Bias will stabilize in a matter of minutes (and shouldn’t be all that critical in well-designed equipment, to begin with). There is absolutely no difference in performance between a correctly designed amplifier’s (or preamp’s or CD player’s) first-hour and 1000th-hour performance. As for cables, yecch… We’re dealing with audiophile voodoo here rather than science.
Loudspeakers, however, may require a break-in period of a few hours, perhaps even a day or two, before reaching optimum performance. That’s because they are mechanical devices with moving parts under stress that need to settle in.
7. The Biwiring Lie
Even fairly sophisticated audiophiles fall for this hocus-pocus. What’s more, loudspeaker manufacturers participate in the sham when they tell you that those two pairs of terminals on the back of the speaker are for biwiring as well as biamping. Some of the most highly respected names in loudspeakers are guilty of this hypocritical genuflection to the tweako sacraments — they are in effect surrendering to the “realities” of the market.
The truth is that biamping makes sense in certain cases, even with a passive crossover, but biwiring is pure voodoo.
8. The Power Conditioner Lie
Just about all that needs to be said on this subject has been said by Bryston in their owner’s manuals:
“All Bryston amplifiers contain high-quality, dedicated circuitry in the power supplies to reject RF, line spikes and other power-line problems. Bryston power amplifiers do not require specialized power line conditioners. Plug the amplifier directly into its own wall socket.”
What they don’t say is that the same is true, more or less, of all well-designed amplifiers. They may not all be the Brystons’ equal in regulation and PSRR, but if they are any good they can be plugged directly into a wall socket. If you can afford a fancy power conditioner you can also afford a well-designed amplifier, in which case you don’t need the fancy power conditioner.
9. The CD Treatment Lie
This goes back to the vinyl days, when treating the LP surface with various magic liquids and sprays sometimes (but far from always) resulted in improved playback, especially when the pressing process left some residue in the grooves. Commercial logic then brought forth, in the 1980s and ’90s, similarly magical products for the treatment of CDs. The trouble is that the only thing a CD has in common with an LP is that it has a surface you can put gunk on. The CD surface, however, is very different.
Just say no to CD treatments, from green markers to spray-ons and rub-ons. The idiophiles who claim to hear the improvement can never, never identify the treated CD blind. (Needless to say, all of the above also goes for DVDs.)
10. The Golden-Ear Lie
This is the catchall lie that should perhaps go to the head of the list as No. 1 but will also do nicely as a wrap-up. The Golden Ears want you to believe that their hearing is so keen, so exquisite, that they can hear tiny nuances of reproduced sound too elusive for the rest of us. Absolutely not true. Anyone without actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but only those with training and experience know what to make of it, how to interpret it.
Thus, if a loudspeaker has a huge dip at 3 kHz, it will not sound like one with flat response to any ear, golden or tin, but only the experienced ear will quickly identify the problem.
Now here comes the really bad part. The self-appointed Golden Ears–tweako subjective reviewers, high-end audio-salon salesmen, audioclub ringleaders, etc.–often use their falsely assumed superior hearing to intimidate you. “Can’t you hear that?” they say when comparing two amplifiers. You are supposed to hear huge differences between the two when in reality there are none
The best defense against the Golden Ear lie is of course the double-blind ABX test (see No. 4 above). That separates those who claim to hear something from those who really do. It is amazing how few, if any, GE’s are left in the room once the ABX results are tallied.
There are of course more Big Lies in audio than these ten,
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Whole Thing Is A Fraud: High-End Cables
https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5565
Never have so many been so confused and misled by so few. To hear people who call themselves audiophiles and those who market products to them tell it, you’d think wire is a complete mystery, a black art. But the truth is that of all the things scientists and engineers understand about electricity, wire has to be at or near the top of the list. Does wire matter in an electrical circuit? You bet it does. That’s why industry has created so many kinds for different applications. What is its legitimate purpose. To connect circuit point A to circuit point B with an acceptable minimum of loss, induced noise, and radiated noise. What is the standard by which wire can be judged? A shunt, no wire at all, just a direct adjacent connection. What is not a legitimate function of wire? To act as a control to deliberately alter a signal. In that function it is absolutely awful, we have far better tools for that. So the first thing audiophile wire manufacturers have to do to sell you their product is to convince you not to use those tools and they have largely succeeded. That’s when the games begin and the money starts to flow from their customers’ bank accounts into theirs.
How then do wires actually work. Scientists understand electrical conductivity right down to the quantum mechanics level of how electrons escape the pull of nuclei and flow under the influence of an applied electrical field. They also know how to shield wire effectively both electrically and where necessary in rare occasions magnetically. Electrical engineers know how to model wire mathematically by creating equivalent lump sum filter parameters circuits from what is actually a distributed parameter filter. They also know how to integrate that model into network equations connecting the source to the load to accurately predict exactly how wire will function in any given circuit.
Mainstream wire manufacturers are not ignorant or stupid either. Then know how to design wire using various geometries, insulation and conducting materials and manufacturing processes such as annealing to create wire that is optimal for any conceivable electrical function at the lowest possible cost. They offer a staggering array of product for every application or problem they can think of. The products created for both professional and consumer audio systems are child’s play for them compared to really challenging problems.
The success of the audiophile wire industry is based entirely on the utter ignorance of the market.