Are High-End Cables a Scam?
- Thread starter Robert
- Start date
We had an in-depth discussion of their testing here: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?2199-Objective-measurements-for-power-cables
If you pretend to use cables as tone controls your are not using the proper device. For this purpose you should buy an equalizer or a preamplifier with proper tone controls, such as the Mark Levinson Audio Palette or the old Quad units.
The electrical minimal changes that cables inflict on the signal affect sound perception much more than you can expect. My experiences are made mainly with classical music, including symphonic and chamber. IMHO, cables inflict in sound the type of changes you get from different rooms acoustics, not those operated by equalizers. In classical symphonies reproduction, there are moments when the orchestra plays loud and you feel the spaciousness and power of the sound in the hall. Some cables will help you in recreating this feeling. Making the speakers disappear is another audiophile task where cables participate.
I have moved several times, and each time I found that the system that I had carefully assembled and optimized in a listening environment suffered from the change. Happily changing cables sometimes could help balancing the system.
BTW, I dislike the use of the word "scam" in this thread. Also, the implicit suggestion that hundred dollars is an acceptable and honorable price for cables and thousands is a "scam" is meaningless for this discussion and drives us away of what could be a nice and interesting debate.
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Tom, cables cannot be used as tone controls (unless they are heroically badly designed) because the FR will be flat to the limits of audibility and the phase shift will also not be audible. They do something else. If you want to continue to use this argument, I suggest that you come and participate in my Cable Dialectic. I promise you that you will spend no more than $80 for speaker cables, and they will be the most perfect ones you can buy.
You answered in a way I can not quote you
Anyway I just want to say is that I used the words "balancing the system" in the common way, not with the meaning "adjusting the frequency response".
Curious world - if some one sells thousands of decent cables at 500 USD, he is a an honorable manufacturer, independently of the value of manufacture. But any one selling a few cables at over 1000 USD is taking part in a scam ...
BTW, should we consider every cable made outside China a scam? Their factories can replicate any good hifi cable with one electrically similar that will last forever for one tenth the cost of US and European products.
Apologies for the provocative style - but the thread tittle is also provocative ...
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
highly priced cables — a scam ?
It's interesting to see that most of these posts dwell in theoretical/technical mumbo-jumbo and seem to ignore the end-result of signal transfer — music. I have tested you speakers with a variety of cables ranging in price from "reasonable" (around $1500) to ridiculous ($22k) and will soon reveal the listening experience. I can't afford the high-end cables, but if I had the disposable income, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment and buy them. The difference they made can't be described in technical terms — only in musical impact on the listener. In the end, it boils down to awareness and money to spare. If you have both you can buy the best and not worry about 0.5dB (I dare anyone to hear this) and tone controls. However, there is the matter of system synergy, one of the subjects that seems to have been ignored by those who love to discuss sound.
It's interesting to see that most of these posts dwell in theoretical/technical mumbo-jumbo and seem to ignore the end-result of signal transfer — music. I have tested you speakers with a variety of cables ranging in price from "reasonable" (around $1500) to ridiculous ($22k) and will soon reveal the listening experience. I can't afford the high-end cables, but if I had the disposable income, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment and buy them. The difference they made can't be described in technical terms — only in musical impact on the listener. In the end, it boils down to awareness and money to spare. If you have both you can buy the best and not worry about 0.5dB (I dare anyone to hear this) and tone controls. However, there is the matter of system synergy, one of the subjects that seems to have been ignored by those who love to discuss sound.
I agree there's too much emphasis on "theoretical/technical mumbo-jumbo" and baseless skepticism on forums including this one. We should be centering discussions on what we actually hear when we listen to audio gear. There's also far too much emphasis in review magazines and forums on new gear rather than discussions regarding how a solid system foundation (room acoustics, system setup, power conditioning, synergistic cabling, resonance control) is crucial to optimizing the audio listening experience.
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Ernest & Len, Welcome to the forum.
Your points are well taken - and that is precisely why there't the thread here: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?2963-The-Cable-Dialectic
Ernest, if you have tried various cables from other manufacturers with my speakers (Which model are they?) I'm sure you'll find the exercise (or experiment) interesting.
Your points are well taken - and that is precisely why there't the thread here: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?2963-The-Cable-Dialectic
Ernest, if you have tried various cables from other manufacturers with my speakers (Which model are they?) I'm sure you'll find the exercise (or experiment) interesting.
Thumbs up
Hey LenWhite, I have been experimenting with resonance control since the 80s when Modsquad introduced the TipToes. Since then, many more tweaks came onto the market — and I think I tried them all. Found that to "control" vibrations/resonance one must evaluate the performance and sonic signature of all components in a system. Most of the tweaks I found channel or change resonance energy, which, of course, changes the sound, but doesn't guaranty true reproduction, the organic nature of music and the instruments' unique tonal complexion. The laest gadgets I tried in my system are Nordost's Sort Kone and Black Ravioli pads. Both work, but introduce "altered" sound. The Nordost will "elevate" the sound stage and highlight "inner detail. Upon listing carefully, I thought that liked the effects; however, after a few hours, I decided that, though attractive to my ears, a lot of instruments lost what I value most — the organic nature of things (sound). The Black Raviolies diminshed the sound stage dimensions by a few notches, but did bring the "organic" part closer to realism. Both design are not perfect, but will perform quite well. These test showed that high-end audio has come a long way and has never been better, but that its consumers still have to learn NOT to listen to the electronics, the speakers, the source components, etc, but pay attention to the system combination.
And those who think that cables under $100 are as good as the ones for many thousands of $ should know that they are not audiophiles — or maybe they are — but haven't "tasted" the good stuff out there — HA
Hey LenWhite, I have been experimenting with resonance control since the 80s when Modsquad introduced the TipToes. Since then, many more tweaks came onto the market — and I think I tried them all. Found that to "control" vibrations/resonance one must evaluate the performance and sonic signature of all components in a system. Most of the tweaks I found channel or change resonance energy, which, of course, changes the sound, but doesn't guaranty true reproduction, the organic nature of music and the instruments' unique tonal complexion. The laest gadgets I tried in my system are Nordost's Sort Kone and Black Ravioli pads. Both work, but introduce "altered" sound. The Nordost will "elevate" the sound stage and highlight "inner detail. Upon listing carefully, I thought that liked the effects; however, after a few hours, I decided that, though attractive to my ears, a lot of instruments lost what I value most — the organic nature of things (sound). The Black Raviolies diminshed the sound stage dimensions by a few notches, but did bring the "organic" part closer to realism. Both design are not perfect, but will perform quite well. These test showed that high-end audio has come a long way and has never been better, but that its consumers still have to learn NOT to listen to the electronics, the speakers, the source components, etc, but pay attention to the system combination.
And those who think that cables under $100 are as good as the ones for many thousands of $ should know that they are not audiophiles — or maybe they are — but haven't "tasted" the good stuff out there — HA
Nice to read you post about resonance control - another audiophile challenging subject. As my equipment is mainly tube I also have some interesting findings to report. May be we should start a thread on it that does not carry the tittle "scam"?
Welcome to WBF!
Resonance Control and other TWEAKS
Hey, good idea! Start telling us about your "TWEAKS". System synergy is another subject. And how about "burning in"? I also feel that reference made regarding any audio components, should include how it relates to the art-form, the music the equipment is asked to REPRODUCE (as opposed to produce). Call me old-fashioned, but after years of trying to understand all the technical progress — the science as some would or wouldn't call it — I am content to use it and love what it can do for my musical soul and my mental health. I like wine women and song. When I was young, it would have been women, wine and song. Nowadays, its song, wine and women — see what good audio can do!
Nice to read you post about resonance control - another audiophile challenging subject. As my equipment is mainly tube I also have some interesting findings to report. May be we should start a thread on it that does not carry the tittle "scam"?
Welcome to WBF!
Hey, good idea! Start telling us about your "TWEAKS". System synergy is another subject. And how about "burning in"? I also feel that reference made regarding any audio components, should include how it relates to the art-form, the music the equipment is asked to REPRODUCE (as opposed to produce). Call me old-fashioned, but after years of trying to understand all the technical progress — the science as some would or wouldn't call it — I am content to use it and love what it can do for my musical soul and my mental health. I like wine women and song. When I was young, it would have been women, wine and song. Nowadays, its song, wine and women — see what good audio can do!
If you guys start a thread under "Tweaks" which is were the subject of resonance control has been discussed, I'll be happy to post my experiences there.
Music V Audio
Hi,
I am not denying that technology is an important part of audio or any other business, for that matter. Is it science based? Of course, but does it matter ... I view the tech part as the medium that allows me to hear music, and music — live or reproduced by the gear — is important and for a lot of people the very reason why they but audio components. I mentioned the 0.5dB only to point at some folks' preoccupation with specifications that are meaningless and won't diminish the listening experience or enjoyment. As you said, one can't hear 0.5dB (except the genius you mentioned in your post), in fact most people can't detect much more than 3dB, and then only after they had their morning coffee. Concerning the awareness part, I disagree with your take as being a preference. Though personal taste is an issue, awareness comes with experience — experience of both extremes; the good and the bad. To acquire/gain listening experience, one must begin to appreciate and recognize the organic nature of music. After a few years, you'll know that audio gear invariably introduces changes. You could call these distortion, noise, etc. It is than that you'll find that technology gets in the way, if you let it. Some of the audio industry's players know this and try to correct as much as they can — and I have auditioned many systems that come ever-so-close to the real thing
.
When I said mumbo-jumbo, it was not meant to offend; rather. it was a light-hearted remark aimed at those who like music more than specification. Again — I like technology, because I can take advantage of it and enjoy the music. And I like music (better now than ever before), because I have an audio system that can deliver it to my ears ‚ aware ears, that is
Hi,
I am not denying that technology is an important part of audio or any other business, for that matter. Is it science based? Of course, but does it matter ... I view the tech part as the medium that allows me to hear music, and music — live or reproduced by the gear — is important and for a lot of people the very reason why they but audio components. I mentioned the 0.5dB only to point at some folks' preoccupation with specifications that are meaningless and won't diminish the listening experience or enjoyment. As you said, one can't hear 0.5dB (except the genius you mentioned in your post), in fact most people can't detect much more than 3dB, and then only after they had their morning coffee. Concerning the awareness part, I disagree with your take as being a preference. Though personal taste is an issue, awareness comes with experience — experience of both extremes; the good and the bad. To acquire/gain listening experience, one must begin to appreciate and recognize the organic nature of music. After a few years, you'll know that audio gear invariably introduces changes. You could call these distortion, noise, etc. It is than that you'll find that technology gets in the way, if you let it. Some of the audio industry's players know this and try to correct as much as they can — and I have auditioned many systems that come ever-so-close to the real thing
.
When I said mumbo-jumbo, it was not meant to offend; rather. it was a light-hearted remark aimed at those who like music more than specification. Again — I like technology, because I can take advantage of it and enjoy the music. And I like music (better now than ever before), because I have an audio system that can deliver it to my ears ‚ aware ears, that is
Hi
Just speaking for myself here . Your last statement is provocative t (the thread itself is so) .. How do you define an audiophile? It would be interesting for me to understand your definition before embarking in a discussion about the merits of expensive cables ... The answer would not be OT since you seem to equate an audiophile with someone who can find increasing value in cable with increasing price .. Can you elaborate on this please ?
For the record I have been for many years in Audio, more than 40 years, started in my early teens and have gone through the best cables up to when I changed my opinion on the subject of cables about 4~5 years ago ...
Waiting for your reply
I'm not an electrical engineer but I do believe in engineering --- and so did John Dunlavy. I am attaching a post John made when he was alive (this was posted almost 15 years ago) on "Cable Nonsense". You can choose to read or not and believe it or not. So that my position is clear, I'm on John's side. He does NOT say all cables sound the same, but what he does say is fairly competent science.
Read at your own risk:
Read at your own risk:
Cable ramble
Hi,
My ramblings are not about audiophiles — they are about the industry's attempt to marry technology with music, and there are a number of player out there who take this very seriously. My definition of an audiophile is simple: One who loves/appreciates the (audio) gear more than music it is asked to reproduce. While this is quite allright — to each his own — I prefer to use the audio gear, play with it to find "the right system combination(s)" and find the amps, speakers, etc. that will allow me to hear the sonic signature of, say, a Streinway Grand, or an Amati cello. Of course, that is easier said than done since one has to know a little about live music. I too have been around audio for over 40 years, noticed its advances and its setbacks. I have tried many highly-praised cables (interconnects, digital, speaker) and heard a difference, not only between the cables (all have a sonic signature) but also between the equipment connected. The best cables showed off the equipment's signature, the worst were indeed tone controls as they changed the sound, thus influenced the quality of the back-up system. I am not trying to say that expensive cables are always good and everyone should spend the money, BUT I am saying that almost all the expensive cable I have auditioned worked better with all my in-house components (I have three systems). However, I don't think that a high price guarantees better performance. As in any business there are many poor cable designs in the high-end categories, but there will be some reviewers that — to protect their a — will not say so. I noted that many reviewers often evaluate cables as "best they have come across", but they forget to mention" for the money". If I would know who provides the best "bang for the buck", I'd tell you. So far the "best I have heard" has been the most expensive ones (oh, about 5 brands). Maybe, just maybe the old saying is right on the mark : If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Long live high-end, which I love and can't afford...it's something to which to aspire, nevertheless.
Hi,
My ramblings are not about audiophiles — they are about the industry's attempt to marry technology with music, and there are a number of player out there who take this very seriously. My definition of an audiophile is simple: One who loves/appreciates the (audio) gear more than music it is asked to reproduce. While this is quite allright — to each his own — I prefer to use the audio gear, play with it to find "the right system combination(s)" and find the amps, speakers, etc. that will allow me to hear the sonic signature of, say, a Streinway Grand, or an Amati cello. Of course, that is easier said than done since one has to know a little about live music. I too have been around audio for over 40 years, noticed its advances and its setbacks. I have tried many highly-praised cables (interconnects, digital, speaker) and heard a difference, not only between the cables (all have a sonic signature) but also between the equipment connected. The best cables showed off the equipment's signature, the worst were indeed tone controls as they changed the sound, thus influenced the quality of the back-up system. I am not trying to say that expensive cables are always good and everyone should spend the money, BUT I am saying that almost all the expensive cable I have auditioned worked better with all my in-house components (I have three systems). However, I don't think that a high price guarantees better performance. As in any business there are many poor cable designs in the high-end categories, but there will be some reviewers that — to protect their a — will not say so. I noted that many reviewers often evaluate cables as "best they have come across", but they forget to mention" for the money". If I would know who provides the best "bang for the buck", I'd tell you. So far the "best I have heard" has been the most expensive ones (oh, about 5 brands). Maybe, just maybe the old saying is right on the mark : If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. Long live high-end, which I love and can't afford...it's something to which to aspire, nevertheless.
Hey Audioguy,
When Dunlavy wrote the stuff 15 years ago, many speaker and amp manufacturers had the same opinion and many have changed their minds since. I auditioned a pair of his speakers years ago, thought they were OK, but not outstanding — and I remember trying them with three cable brands that did nothing to improve the loudspeakers' performance. Maybe that's the reason for his cable nonsense paper. As well, there weren't cable measurement and there was a lot of cable BS at the time. Some measurements are now available, although they will not reveal what a good cable can do for the consumer. By the way, back in the early eighties, Hitachi engineers in Japan found that copper purity and crystal structure greatly influences signal flow — and they made cables that few philes had a chance to hear. I did — and became a believer. Now, I simply smile when the subject becomes too intense. High-end cables have found their way into loads of amplifier and speaker wiring , which would indicate that some engineers are believers too. Oh it's all good fun, I am going for a beer.
When Dunlavy wrote the stuff 15 years ago, many speaker and amp manufacturers had the same opinion and many have changed their minds since. I auditioned a pair of his speakers years ago, thought they were OK, but not outstanding — and I remember trying them with three cable brands that did nothing to improve the loudspeakers' performance. Maybe that's the reason for his cable nonsense paper. As well, there weren't cable measurement and there was a lot of cable BS at the time. Some measurements are now available, although they will not reveal what a good cable can do for the consumer. By the way, back in the early eighties, Hitachi engineers in Japan found that copper purity and crystal structure greatly influences signal flow — and they made cables that few philes had a chance to hear. I did — and became a believer. Now, I simply smile when the subject becomes too intense. High-end cables have found their way into loads of amplifier and speaker wiring , which would indicate that some engineers are believers too. Oh it's all good fun, I am going for a beer.
Similar threads
