Cables and the Peter Principle

[Phelonious Ponk]

Sorry everybody.

(What is the approved response to this thread?)

You really need to go back and re-read the original post before you apologize to these guys. The OP lays out a fairly involved theory regarding cable matching and cable quality, none of which is backed up by anything, and supposes, in no uncertain terms, that if you can't hear what he hears it's because you're system isn't good enough to reveal it. Thus the title "Cables and the Peter Principle." Your opinion is fine here. The OP layed down a challenge to those who disagree. Some might even say he offered an insult to those who disagree. He asked for the alternate POV. And you're doing a fine job of representing it.

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

Well here is my big revelation.

I have always had JPS Labs Aluminata in my system with the occasional Mogami Gold, Canare and Belden 1800F thrown in for good measure. A decade or so ago, I would always use Transparent Audio. Also, I've been using various Pro pieces instead of Consumer "Audiophile" equipment as well. I've always had the Pass Labs amps and since changing to the new Wilson Alexia speakers, I've always wondered what if I'm missing out on something.
Well a few months back, I had the opportunity to grab the Pass Labs XP-30 pre. I've always used the Pro pieces by Crane Song, Dangerous and even EMM Labs. Until I put the XP-30 in the system, I didn't know what I was missing. Oh man, it was on another level. Since then I've also added the Doshi tape pre unit.
I know that JPS Labs Aluminata are good (because Stereophile says so! ), but since I got the Alexia's, I know they are internally wired with Transparent. I always see Wilson showing with Transparent at shows as well. I called Brad O'Toole and asked him if I could try a pair. He said I would not get the total effect unless I replaced the whole chain. Transparent shipped Opus MM2 interconnects and speaker cable. Total cost was close to $100k. I put these in the system and the first thing I noticed was everything seemed attenuated. I actually had to turn the volume up a couple of notches to match was I was used to.
The cables sounded good. They didn't do anything wrong, but it felt like some of the life had been taken out of the music. Everything seemed a little homogenized. I was wondering if this was because they weren't broken-in or what. I've been listening to the system for a couple of months and Transparent asked if I wanted to keep them. I reluctantly packed them up today and put the Aluminata cables back into the system. Holy ****!!! It was like I had a wet blanket over the speakers! The Aluminata gave me back the detail, imaging, soundstage and everything that was missing.
Now normally I don't give too much creedance to cables and think a lot of it is Voo Doo, but going to the extreme of what is out there (Opus MM2), I can't agree with a lot that has been written about them. I don't know, maybe it was my system that didn't like them or something.

 

[microstrip]

Well here is my big revelation.

I have always had JPS Labs Aluminata in my system with the occasional Mogami Gold, Canare and Belden 1800F thrown in for good measure. A decade or so ago, I would always use Transparent Audio. Also, I've been using various Pro pieces instead of Consumer "Audiophile" equipment as well. I've always had the Pass Labs amps and since changing to the new Wilson Alexia speakers, I've always wondered what if I'm missing out on something.
Well a few months back, I had the opportunity to grab the Pass Labs XP-30 pre. I've always used the Pro pieces by Crane Song, Dangerous and even EMM Labs. Until I put the XP-30 in the system, I didn't know what I was missing. Oh man, it was on another level. Since then I've also added the Doshi tape pre unit.
I know that JPS Labs Aluminata are good (because Stereophile says so! ), but since I got the Alexia's, I know they are internally wired with Transparent. I always see Wilson showing with Transparent at shows as well. I called Brad O'Toole and asked him if I could try a pair. Well he said I would not get the total effect unless I replaced the whole chain. Well Transparent shipped Opus MM2 interconnects and speaker cable. Total cost was close to $100k. I put these in the system and the first thing I noticed was everything seemed attenuated. I actually had to turn the volume up a couple of notches to match was I was used to.
The cables sounded good. They didn't do anything wrong, but it felt like some of the life had been taken out of the music. Everything seemed a little homogenized. I was wondering if this was because they weren't broken-in or what. I've been listening to the system for a couple of months and Transparent asked if I wanted to keep them. I reluctantly packed them up today and put the Aluminata cables back into the system. Holy ****!!! It was like I had a wet blanket over the speakers! The Aluminata gave me back the detail, imaging, soundstage and everything that was missing.
Now normally I don't give too much creedance to cables and think a lot of it is Voo Doo, but going to the extreme of what is out there (Opus MM2), I can't agree with a lot that has been written about them. I don't know, maybe it was my system that didn't like them or something.

Cables are system dependent. I have TA Opus MM2 XLR ICs and Reference MM2 speaker cables, and I have tried recently some other top cables. In the proper system the Opus are sublime - but used in the wrong system they will ruin the recording, bringing the type of veiled and lifeless sound you suggest. But when they are adequate, they have a presence, a feeling of being there and an absence of artifacts that is unique. They manage to sound hyper detailed - you can count the voices in choral recordings - but never push detail in front of you.

Before people ask for measurements because they have networks we should remember that Opus MM2 are flat to over 100 KHz - their tuning boxes have almost null effect in the FR in the audio band.

 

[mauidan]

From the Pass Labs XA Owners Manual:

Interconnects and Speaker Cables
We have a general recommendation about interconnects, and speaker cables: They should cost less than the amplifier, and contain at least some conductive material. We have tried a lot of products and most work well, but as a practical matter we cannot make blanket recommendations.

The amplifier is not sensitive to source interconnects. It is also not sensitive to radio frequency pickup, which allows some flexibility in choosing source interconnects without shields, though shields are usually a very good idea. For long runs balanced cables are highly recommended for their inherent rejection of noise.

We prefer speaker cables that are short and stout. Oxygen-free copper and silver are the suggested materials. If you find any really exceptional cable made of gold, please gift us a couple hundred feet.

Fortunately this amplifier is not sensitive to the capacitive/inductive character of some of the specialty speaker cables, so feel free to experiment.

We have found that about 90 per cent of bad sounding cables are really bad sounding connections, and we recommend that attention be paid to cleanliness of electrical contact surfaces and proper connector fit.

 

[mep]

In terms of science, is there a fundamental difference between audible cable characteristics and astrology? Neither has any formal science behind it - as shown by complete lack of published papers.

The science is in the design and construction of the cable and not the adjectives used to describe its performance in a given system. The design of cables used in all facets of industry such as shipbuilding, power, fiber optic, telecommunications, high voltage, low voltage, etc., are all based on science. Call up Belden Cable for instance and ask them if they can just hire anybody off the streets to design the thousands of different cables they offer to industry or if you actually have to be an engineer. There is no science behind adjectives used by audiophiles, but there damn sure is science involved in the design of cables.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

From the Pass Labs XA Owners Manual:

Interconnects and Speaker Cables
We have a general recommendation about interconnects, and speaker cables: They should cost less than the amplifier, and contain at least some conductive material. We have tried a lot of products and most work well, but as a practical matter we cannot make blanket recommendations.

The amplifier is not sensitive to source interconnects. It is also not sensitive to radio frequency pickup, which allows some flexibility in choosing source interconnects without shields, though shields are usually a very good idea. For long runs balanced cables are highly recommended for their inherent rejection of noise.

We prefer speaker cables that are short and stout. Oxygen-free copper and silver are the suggested materials. If you find any really exceptional cable made of gold, please gift us a couple hundred feet.

Fortunately this amplifier is not sensitive to the capacitive/inductive character of some of the specialty speaker cables, so feel free to experiment.

We have found that about 90 per cent of bad sounding cables are really bad sounding connections, and we recommend that attention be paid to cleanliness of electrical contact surfaces and proper connector fit.

Clearly, Pass' amplifiers are not transparent enough to reveal the night and day differences in cables.

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

Clearly, Pass' amplifiers are not transparent enough to reveal the night and day differences in cables.

Tim

Clearly...... who in their right mind would want to own these monsters!

 

[JackD201]

True enough, but to return to the original premise of the thread, it's not the lack of science that is keeping you from hearing these night and day differences, it is the lack of transparency in your system that cannot reveal these profound improvements.

Tim

I just reread the OP and that is not what the author said. The "you can't hear it because your system isn't transparent and resolving enough" argument is arrogant, dismissive and nasty BUT that doesn't mean that there aren't any painful grains of truth there. What I find sorely lacking in the treatise, if we can call it that, is that it makes no mention of the actual tandem, that of the level of performance of the system AND arguably more important IMO, the actual level of acuity (experience included) of the individual. Throw in double blind, it makes no difference how the individual chooses to judge the latter. What the author said is that at some point there will be a limit to what differences can be portrayed and hence detected. I would add that this would only be true to the extent that it actual falls within the listener's actual abilities to discern differences.

Now I'll play a dirty trick and use an extreme case. To keep things simple lets stay within FR. On one end take a single driver speaker that will have bandwidth limitations: mechanical roll off on both ends. Think Auratone pro monitors. In such a case one would likely not hear any differences between two cables with large differences in resistance which is mostly audible and measurable in frequencies at the speaker's break up range and/or above the speaker's flat operating range.

With loudspeakers so diverse, ALL with their own limitations as well as their own colorations not to mention how these loudspeaker's performance is dependent on their respective rooms, it really stands to reason that at some point there really will be a point where the differences will no longer be of any practical consequence. Ironic that you are disagreeing with a post that actually supports your own views to what looks to me like a very high degree.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

You're right, Jack, he didn't actually say you can't hear it because your system is not resolving enough, he said this:

For the next part, let’s pretend we have 11 sound rooms. In the first we have real music: Jazz, classical, rock whatever.

In the next room let’s pretend we have your parent’s stereo, the one you grew up with. And in every succeeding room we have another stereo system that’s better until we get to the tenth and final room where we have the best sounding system available today.

Many people who have systems in the 5- 6-7 rooms sometimes don’t get that if they exchanged wires with the people in room 10 that their system won’t sound better or very different. This is because their system is not capable of sounding different. The wiring they have may be perfectly suited and priced for that sound. That is, I don’t think my bedroom Marantz 8002 will sound better with the top of the line MIT wires.

FWIW, I don't think his bedroom system will sound better with TOTL MIT wires, either.

Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

I just reread the OP and that is not what the author said. The "you can't hear it because your system isn't transparent and resolving enough" argument is arrogant, dismissive and nasty BUT that doesn't mean that there aren't any painful grains of truth there. What I find sorely lacking in the treatise, if we can call it that, is that it makes no mention of the actual tandem, that of the level of performance of the system AND arguably more important IMO, the actual level of acuity (experience included) of the individual. Throw in double blind, it makes no difference how the individual chooses to judge the latter. What the author said is that at some point there will be a limit to what differences can be portrayed and hence detected. I would add that this would only be true to the extent that it actual falls within the listener's actual abilities to discern differences.

Now I'll play a dirty trick and use an extreme case. To keep things simple lets stay within FR. On one end take a single driver speaker that will have bandwidth limitations: mechanical roll off on both ends. Think Auratone pro monitors. In such a case one would likely not hear any differences between two cables with large differences in resistance which is mostly audible and measurable in frequencies at the speaker's break up range and/or above the speaker's flat operating range.

With loudspeakers so diverse, ALL with their own limitations as well as their own colorations not to mention how these loudspeaker's performance is dependent on their respective rooms, it really stands to reason that at some point there really will be a point where the differences will no longer be of any practical consequence. Ironic that you are disagreeing with a post that actually supports your own views to what looks to me like a very high degree.

Not sure I agree or disagree but there's one thing that holds true. The Auratones are a case where you wish cables functioned as tone controls!

 

[JackD201]

Not sure I agree or disagree but there's one thing that holds true. The Auratones are a case where you wish cables functioned as tone controls!

Don't dis the horror-tones Myles

 

[JackD201]

You're right, Jack, he didn't actually say you can't hear it because your system is not resolving enough, he said this:



FWIW, I don't think his bedroom system will sound better with TOTL MIT wires, either.

Tim

I took it to mean that the systems mentioned were colored/have strong sonic signatures and these would mask small differences more than a neutral one would. As you say, YMMV

 

[rblnr]

Don't dis the horror-tones Myles

If we're talking about the small square Auratones you see in studios, those were designed to sound like the built-in speakers on a TV from the 70s and 80s so the mixer had an idea what the end result would sound like. Pretty horrifying obviously.

I really appreciate the caption from the Pass manual. It's a gift to the owner by dismissing some of the nonsense out there.

With loudspeakers so diverse, ALL with their own limitations as well as their own colorations not to mention how these loudspeaker's performance is dependent on their respective rooms, it really stands to reason that at some point there really will be a point where the differences will no longer be of any practical consequence.

Wholehearted agreement. At best to me, expensive cables are poor value.

 

[microstrip]

Clearly, Pass' amplifiers are not transparent enough to reveal the night and day differences in cables.

Tim

Tim
I can not understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Nelson Pass just states that most of the existing cables will sound good, and technically any type of interconnects can be used without dangerous consequences or changes in technical or sound performance of his amplifier. Perhaps he has his preferences, but naturally prefers not to write them.

IMHO you should read the whole XA owners manual before commenting this quote.

 

[rblnr]

Tim
I can not understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Nelson Pass just states that most of the existing cables will sound good, and technically any type of interconnects can be used without dangerous consequences or changes in technical or sound performance of his amplifier. Perhaps he has his preferences, but naturally prefers not to write them.

IMHO you should read the whole XA owners manual before commenting this quote.

Micro -- I think Tim was being sarcastic.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim
I can not understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Nelson Pass just states that most of the existing cables will sound good, and technically any type of interconnects can be used without dangerous consequences or changes in technical or sound performance of his amplifier. Perhaps he has his preferences, but naturally prefers not to write them.

IMHO you should read the whole XA owners manual before commenting this quote.

Mr. Pass -

We have a general recommendation about interconnects, and speaker cables: They should cost less than the amplifier, and contain at least some conductive material.

I believe he was patting the cable-religious on the head, with pretty thinly-veiled condescension. And I believe that was absolutely approptiate given the nonsense they believe in.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

Mr. Pass -

I believe he was patting the cable-religious on the head, with pretty thinly-veiled condescension. And I believe that was absolutely approptiate given the nonsense they believe in.

Tim

Condescension? From some one who writes "We prefer speaker cables that are short and stout. Oxygen-free copper and silver are the suggested materials."

IMHO he was just patting the anti-cable-religious on the head. Remember he is the guy who is using very expensive SS devices that behaves as a triode tube and manufactures high-end usd amplifiers costing near the 100k barrier. He should have an open mind!

 

[dingus]

there are only two potential outcomes in regards to wire and what it does to the signal. the signal is either changed or not, and any change will always be a degradation. imo prices for wire are determined by the consumer market being targeted.

 

[MylesBAstor]

there are only two potential outcomes in regards to wire and what it does to the signal. the signal is either changed or not, and any change will always be a degradation. imo prices for wire are determined by the consumer market being targeted.

Only degradation? Seriously? Change can't be good? Show me something in this world that doesn't have positive and negative regulation or outcomes?

A better cable can't let more information through than the cable it's replacing? Are you kidding?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Only degradation? Seriously? Change can't be good? Show me something in this world that doesn't have positive and negative regulation or outcomes?

A better cable can't let more information through than the cable it's replacing? Are you kidding?

I think what he's saying is that letting all the information through is the ideal, and if the signal is changed from the input, it is degraded. He's right, of course. The problem with his statement is that it sound as if perfect, unchanged transmission is possible. Audibly unchanged? Sure. Actually unchanged? Not in analog.

Tim