Cables can make a huge difference...

[Iamrael]

I may be completely overlooking something obvious but I believe the only cable that it is absolutely mandatory for a system to “work” is the Power Cable, unless of course there is internal battery.
Speaking in terms of streaming (Qobuz, et al) I know some actually prefer a wireless “break” somewhere in the chain, so why not elsewhere?
I think many want to (myself included) adhere to the “acceptable” norm, but let’s see where we’re at as things progress.

All cable comparisons are relative as cables are required for the system to work. However, you can listen to determine some aspects of neutrality.

 

[thedudeabides]

You shouldn't be hearing differences between cables; what that means is the cables you heard in such a comparison were both wrong.

Are all the cable manufacturers aware of this?

I see it as a matter of education and I'm not in a position to educate audiophiles on this matter.

Sure doesn't come across that way to me.

So I expect this issue, this discussion, will never go away and we'll continue to hear all the absurd claims and the like.

Absurd to whom? You bring back fond memories of Ethan Winer.

 

[DaveC]

I may be completely overlooking something obvious but I believe the only cable that it is absolutely mandatory for a system to “work” is the Power Cable, unless of course there is internal battery.
Speaking in terms of streaming (Qobuz, et al) I know some actually prefer a wireless “break” somewhere in the chain, so why not elsewhere?
I think many want to (myself included) adhere to the “acceptable” norm, but let’s see where we’re at as things progress.

You do need interconnects and speaker cables in a conventional audio system. You can potentially eliminate them using a digital source along with wireless speakers, but that's not an apples to apples comparison to a system that does require cables. It would be impossible to tell where differences in sound are coming from.

Even moving from AC power to battery power, which I've done, means the battery is now audible, and it actually requires filters and storage caps to optimize power delivery. For better or worse, any change you make to an audio system is usually audible, even the surfaces the components sit on can make a difference.

 

[Vinylfan]

AI has an opinion on this.

1. Basics of Signal Transmission:

Audio cables are responsible for transmitting electrical signals between components, such as from an amplifier to speakers. Ideally, a cable should transmit the signal without alteration, but in practice, various factors can introduce subtle changes to the sound.

2. Key Electrical Properties:

Several electrical characteristics of a cable can influence how sound is transmitted:

• Resistance, Capacitance, and Inductance:
• Resistance: The resistance of a cable can cause a loss of signal strength, particularly over longer distances. Higher resistance can slightly attenuate the signal, potentially affecting dynamics and detail.
• Capacitance: Higher capacitance in a cable can lead to a loss of high-frequency information, which might make the sound less bright or detailed.
• Inductance: Inductance primarily affects low-frequency signals, and while its impact is generally minimal, in some systems, it could influence the bass response.
• Shielding:
Proper shielding is vital to prevent electromagnetic interference (EMI) from affecting the signal. Without adequate shielding, you might hear unwanted noise or hum, particularly in environments with a lot of electronic equipment.

3. Copper vs. Silver Conductors:

• Copper:
Copper is the most common conductor used in audio cables due to its excellent electrical conductivity and relatively low cost. High-purity copper, such as Oxygen-Free Copper (OFC) or even Ultra-Pure Ohno Continuous Cast (UP-OCC) copper, is often used in premium cables. These forms of copper reduce the impurities that can cause signal degradation, resulting in clearer sound reproduction.
• Silver:
Silver is a better conductor than copper, with about 5-10% lower resistance, which means it can transmit signals with slightly less loss. In audio applications, silver cables are often described as delivering more detailed and brighter sound, particularly in the high frequencies. However, silver is also more expensive, and its impact on sound quality can be subtle and system-dependent. In some systems, silver might accentuate brightness too much, leading to a sound that is perceived as harsh.
• Silver-Plated Copper:
Some cables use silver-plated copper, aiming to combine the conductivity of silver with the warmth and cost-effectiveness of copper. These cables can offer a compromise, providing some of the detail retrieval of silver while retaining the fuller sound signature of copper.

4. Construction Quality:

Beyond the conductor material, the overall construction quality of the cable—such as the precision of the manufacturing process, the quality of the insulation, and the durability of the connectors—can affect the cable’s performance. Well-constructed cables ensure better signal transmission, lower noise, and longer lifespan.

5. Subjective Experience:

Audiophiles often report differences in sound when using different cables, and the conductor material can play a significant role in this. Silver cables might be preferred in systems where clarity and detail are desired, while copper cables might be chosen for their warmer, more balanced sound. It’s also important to acknowledge that psychological factors—such as expectations, brand reputation, or even the price of the cable—can influence how these differences are perceived.

6. Diminishing Returns:

While there can be noticeable differences between a poorly constructed cable and a high-quality one, the improvements often diminish as you invest in more expensive options. Beyond a certain price point, the differences may become more about personal taste than objective improvements in sound quality.

7. System Matching:

The interaction between cables and audio components is crucial. A silver cable that sounds bright and detailed in one system might sound overly harsh in another. Similarly, a copper cable that provides warmth in one setup might lack detail in a different context. This is why many audiophiles experiment with different cables to find the best match for their particular system.

8. Conclusion:

Different audio cables can indeed sound different, influenced by factors such as the material of the conductor, electrical properties, and overall construction quality. Copper and silver both have their strengths, and the choice between them often comes down to the specific sound characteristics desired in a system. While some differences are measurable, others are subtle and subjective, highlighting the importance of personal preference and system synergy in the world of high-fidelity audio.

 

[Holmz]

You're a cable denier that shouldn't be posting in the cable forum. I don't think anyone wants to revisit this again.

It might be easier to be a denier when the equipment is more immune to the cable or IC.

The best is equipment for IC immunity seems to be using balanced lines.
The worst offenders to this seem to be the passive preamps with falling output impedance as the volume goes down.

….
I design cables on objective terms and have found the better I make the cable the better it sounds to me. I often do not know how something will sound until I make an objective improvement and then listen to the result. The result of objective improvements is ALWAYS better resolution and less colorations.
…

What is objectively better?
The resistance/conductance should not matter a whole lot in an IC… so I am assuming that the capacitance and the inductance are kept low.

Or is it some measured objective thing with noise immunity?

AI has an opinion on this.

1. Basics of Signal Transmission:

Audio cables are responsible for transmitting electrical signals between components, such as from an amplifier to speakers. Ideally, a cable should transmit the signal without alteration, but in practice, various factors can introduce subtle changes to the sound.

2. Key Electrical Properties:

Several electrical characteristics of a cable can influence how sound is transmitted:

• Resistance, Capacitance, and Inductance:
• Resistance: The resistance of a cable can cause a loss of signal strength, particularly over longer distances. Higher resistance can slightly attenuate the signal, potentially affecting dynamics and detail.
• Capacitance: Higher capacitance in a cable can lead to a loss of high-frequency information, which might make the sound less bright or detailed.
• Inductance: Inductance primarily affects low-frequency signals, and while its impact is generally minimal, in some systems, it could influence the bass response.
• Shielding:
Proper shielding is vital to prevent electromagnetic interference (EMI) from affecting the signal. Without adequate shielding, you might hear unwanted noise or hum, particularly in environments with a lot of electronic equipment.

3. Copper vs. Silver Conductors:

• Copper:
Copper is the most common conductor used in audio cables due to its excellent electrical conductivity and relatively low cost. High-purity copper, such as Oxygen-Free Copper (OFC) or even Ultra-Pure Ohno Continuous Cast (UP-OCC) copper, is often used in premium cables. These forms of copper reduce the impurities that can cause signal degradation, resulting in clearer sound reproduction.
• Silver:
Silver is a better conductor than copper, with about 5-10% lower resistance, which means it can transmit signals with slightly less loss. In audio applications, silver cables are often described as delivering more detailed and brighter sound, particularly in the high frequencies. However, silver is also more expensive, and its impact on sound quality can be subtle and system-dependent. In some systems, silver might accentuate brightness too much, leading to a sound that is perceived as harsh.
• Silver-Plated Copper:
Some cables use silver-plated copper, aiming to combine the conductivity of silver with the warmth and cost-effectiveness of copper. These cables can offer a compromise, providing some of the detail retrieval of silver while retaining the fuller sound signature of copper.

Seriously?
The resistance is vanishingly low.
One could have a rusty piece of barbed wire, and it woul dlikely also be very low.

Then the input impedance of the next component is super high, so high that there is effectively almost no current flowing..
So there are no losses from a “power” perspective .
If anything is happening it is not likely tied to DC resistance.

…
4. Construction Quality:

Beyond the conductor material, the overall construction quality of the cable—such as the precision of the manufacturing process, the quality of the insulation, and the durability of the connectors—can affect the cable’s performance.

I can see how the choice of dielectric can affect things.
But that is more the “type” than the “quality”… and really most of this stuff is extruded out so it is pretty much constant.
Or are you refering to solid versus stranded?

Well-constructed cables ensure better signal transmission, lower noise, and longer lifespan.

Why?
I can see longer, but are we talking “good soldering vs poor…” ,or “welding versus soldering”? Or ???

 

[audiopro92]

Which cables are these?

Glad you're interested. I'll send you a message with a photo and a link to buy them. I have completed many successful transactions with the seller.

 

[audiopro92]

Which cables are these?

I've sent you a message with a link and some more details.

For anyone else who is interested, reach out to me directly via message here. I will send you the same info.

My justification for this request is to honor the work that all cable manufacturers are doing. Many are certainly doing their best out there.
We all have preferences, so there is no one-size fits all. These cables are extremely revealing and may not be everyone's cup of tea.

 

[audiopro92]

This problem was solved back in the early 1950s. A series of standards associated with balanced line operation were used: low impedance operation, along with making sure that the equipment didn't reference ground. In this way the shield was ignored and only used for shielding, not completing the audio circuit as seen in a lot of RCA cables.

Most 'high end audio' products ignore the standards for balanced line. Not only are they high impedance but they also reference ground. When the ground is part of the signal chain, it leaves the circuit open to ground loops.

Most studio gear supports the connection standard (AES48) and also the low impedance aspect. As a result, the line level output of studio gear is measured in dBm, which is to say a certain amount of Watts (actually 1 milliWatt) into a 600 Ohm load which is zero VU.

Very little of high end audio supports this. As a result, you hear differences between cables, which isn't supposed to happen. When you see engineers talking about how audio cables don't mess with the sound, its a good idea to keep in mind that they are usually talking about balanced lines in a studio situation.

The thing is, back in the 1950s when tubes were the only game in town, it wasn't practical to make consumer gear with the input and output transformers needed to send a balanced line signal properly. So the consumer gear has mostly been using single-ended connections. They have no termination standard and no standard for driving the cable so its unsurprising that the construction of the cable can mess with the sound.

This is a bad thing. You shouldn't be hearing differences between cables; what that means is the cables you heard in such a comparison were both wrong. Sure one sounds better than the other, but its a sure bet that a more expensive or newer cable from that manufacturer or a competitor will come along to knock it off its perch.

That is why balanced lines. When we first started building balanced line equipment in the 1980s, it didn't occur to us to not support the standards that made it work. We figured out a way to direct couple to the balanced output (for which we now have 2 patents) so we got rid of the output transformer problem. But it seems that no-one cares. It was my thinking that audiophiles would love to not have to change out their cables annually and spend more on the cables than components cost. Boy was I wrong on that and its been amazing to me that I get pushback on the balanced line thing. I see it as a matter of education and I'm not in a position to educate audiophiles on this matter.

So I expect this issue, this discussion, will never go away and we'll continue to hear all the absurd claims and the like.

The answer is recordings they made themselves or perhaps live microphone feeds that could be compared to the real thing. That's how we did it. I recommend anyone that wants to really know how things should sound get some decent recording equipment and start doing on location recordings so they have a personal reference. It can be really eye-opening. One thing you learn real quick is that there are excellent microphones, mic preamps and headphones such that you might are likely to be fooled by how real they sound quite often. Its when you record that most of that experience is lost. But at least you know how it was supposed to sound and knowing that you can point to system weaknesses with such a tool quite quickly.

I appreciate the write-up with some historical facts and thanks for your perspective on this subject.

This is a bad thing. You shouldn't be hearing differences between cables; what that means is the cables you heard in such a comparison were both wrong. Sure one sounds better than the other, but its a sure bet that a more expensive or newer cable from that manufacturer or a competitor will come along to knock it off its perch.

I don't think it's a bad thing. Ruling out both cables as wrong means we may as well just listen to music on our smartphone speakers at full blast. I don't believe in superfluous claims from cable manufacturers where they suggest performance-specific improvements to YOUR audio system. How do they know? Well, they don't. It would be better if some would include a list of the system chain along with their description of what the cables should sound like in that given configuration.

With very short signal paths, high gain stage amplifiers, revealing source components, speakers and/or headphones that are designed to be reference-grade, and lossless source material, hearing differences between cables is an easy task.

If you are missing any of the above, it will be difficult, if not impossible to hear a difference. This is where a denier might suggest that nobody on planet earth can tell the difference between 320 Kbps mp3s and 1411 kbps .wav files ripped directly from the original CD-R, irrespective of the system being used. This is obviously untrue and is at its root, a baseless and primitive suggestion that many people today still believe!

No machine on earth is a match for the sensitivity of human ears: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Sound/earsens.html

 

[Holmz]

…
No machine on earth is a match for the sensitivity of human ears: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Sound/earsens.html

That 130 dB in the paper includes the tympanic muscle.
But one either has the muscle tightening the ear drum for coping with loud sounds, or it is relaxed for quiet sounds.
It said something about 15x, so we can call that about 25dB.
And, bang, we are back to about 100 dB, which is either 0-100 dB, or 30-100 dB.


24 bits of dynamic range is greater than that 100dB of the ear, so it is a bit untrue to say that the ear is more sensitive than some good machines.
Then add in all the processing that is possible, and it gets pretty compelling.

Yeah bats and whales can also do sonar type of things, and the blind can get around pretty well.
The ability to measure things has gotten pretty good. And we can do it well below 20 Hz and well above 20kHz,

 

[Hear Here]

You're a cable denier that shouldn't be posting in the cable forum. I don't think anyone wants to revisit this again.

But equally, are you not a cable vendor and therefore biased, so perhaps you should not be posting on this subject?

Luckily, it's free world (well most of it) and we are all entitled to express our views and experiences. I personally try to avoid using cables wherever possible for the reasons I've given above, but I'm convinced that a well-constructed cable with "good" component parts should be as good as any other.

If the music we listen to can be recorded using miles of competent but not costly microphone cable and studio interconnects to the extent we may praise the recording quality, why do we go to such expense in using "audiophile" cables at home? I'd suggest that we are often persuaded to do so by dealers selling the stuff, reinforced by those who have parted with their cash on crazy-priced cables and feel the need to justify this outlay. But thankfully, we are all free to spend however much we want on whatever we like to spend it on, including your no doubt excellent cables.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Glad you're interested. I'll send you a message with a photo and a link to buy them. I have completed many successful transactions with the seller.

Why not just post the link? Really is it a state secret…

 

[Maril555]

Why not just pot the link? Really is it a state secret…

Second that

 

[audiobomber]

I am assuming that the capacitance and the inductance are kept low.

The complicating factor is that lowering capacitance increases inductance and vice versa. What is the ideal specification? That is a huge source of contention and accounts for sonic differences. I don't believe there is an accepted standard for perfection. If there is, I have never heard it.

 

[audiobomber]

@audiopro92 sent me an eBay link to his favourite cables. I won't post it, because it was sent via PM, but I believe it is fair to comment.

The linked eBay cables remind me very much of my Impact Acoustics SonicWave cables. The SonicWave cables are silver plated high purity copper and triple shielded. The grippy RCA connectors look identical to the ones used on the eBay cables..

I own 1-ft, 3-ft and 6-ft sets of the SonicWave RCA interconnects and three of their subwoofer cables. I bought sets of three for each of my three adult children because they were such great value. It's a shame they're no longer being manufactured, but here's a review of their subwoofer cable.

Impact Acoustics SonicWave Subwoofer Cable Review

The Impact Acoustics SonicWave Subwoofer cable will transport content from your receiver to your subwoofer without alteration and without inducing such nasties as RFI/EMI. What more do you need?

www.audioholics.com

Audioholics said SonicWave is "over-designed to handle its intended job" and they show incredibly detailed measurements to prove it. Clearly they believe the SonicWave cable is ideal: "While your audiophile friends are rediscovering themselves with their high-priced cables, you can rest comfortably knowing you spent much less and received a better performing product."

I consider the SonicWave cable tone to be completely neutral. The only criticism I have is that they compress the soundstage slightly compared to my favourite cables. This becomes more noticeable when using more than one set in the chain.

I only use SonicWave in my secondary systems. In my main system, I prefer my Cardas cables, which provide a slightly warmer tone, larger soundstage and better PRaT. I use Meitner Cryogenic cables in my subwoofer chain for their leaner, tighter bass. In one of the reviews below the linked eBay cables, someone said he prefers his Kimber cables and will use the new cables in his home theater.

I'm not saying the eBay cables are the same as the SonicWave cables, they are not, but they have similar specs and goals. I don't believe there is any cable that is perfectly suited to every audiophile's system, personal tastes and budget. I predict that the cable wars will never end.

 

[audiopro92]

The grippy RCA connectors look identical to the ones used on the eBay cables..

They're not identical ...at all. Just wanted to point that out.

My reference cables RCA interconnects (all of which are made by the same seller/business, use Rean Neutrik NYS373s.
In terms of fit and performance, I've not found better. And I've tried dozens. They can be easily adjusted (around the outer conductor with a small set of pliers) to ensure a perfectly tight/secure fit, without any excessive strain on the RCA inputs themselves. Some high-end RCA cables and those that use locking connectors, won't typically play nice.

 

[audiopro92]

Why not just post the link? Really is it a state secret…

Very well.

Security Measure

www.ebay.com

See attached photo. I keep all interconnects and all other cables as short as possible. Custom lengths.
This is to keep things looking neat and also for a technical benefit, which may not even be perceptible to human ears.
Rest assured that even in longer runs, they will not sound different. Yes, they're that good!

I know there are very costly cables out there that claim to do the same thing. There's no denying that.
Based on my personal experience with over 16 years in this hobby and tons of money spent, I've not found more revealing RCAs.
They add / subtract nothing! No additional brightness. Overall presentation ranges from analytical to confused for tracks that were poorly mixed/mastered. On a revealing system, they will also help you discern the PRAT of the track being played effortlessly.

Take from this what you will. And dare I say, to anyone who might suggest that something else is "better" I would advise trying these out before reaching a conclusion. Let's not (anyone here) step into a flame-war about which RCA cables are "superior." Otherwise, it'll be conjecture galore like ASR. Members here are much more intellectually capable. That I gathered after my first few posts!

Thanks for asking again. And I appreciate the sense of humor. "a state secret" made me laugh, in a good way.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

@audiopro92 sent me an eBay link to his favourite cables. I won't post it, because it was sent via PM, but I believe it is fair to comment.

The linked eBay cables remind me very much of my Impact Acoustics SonicWave cables. The SonicWave cables are silver plated high purity copper and triple shielded. The grippy RCA connectors look identical to the ones used on the eBay cables..

I own 1-ft, 3-ft and 6-ft sets of the SonicWave RCA interconnects and three of their subwoofer cables. I bought sets of three for each of my three adult children because they were such great value. It's a shame they're no longer being manufactured, but here's a review of their subwoofer cable.

Impact Acoustics SonicWave Subwoofer Cable Review

The Impact Acoustics SonicWave Subwoofer cable will transport content from your receiver to your subwoofer without alteration and without inducing such nasties as RFI/EMI. What more do you need?

www.audioholics.com

Audioholics said SonicWave is "over-designed to handle its intended job" and they show incredibly detailed measurements to prove it. Clearly they believe the SonicWave cable is ideal: "While your audiophile friends are rediscovering themselves with their high-priced cables, you can rest comfortably knowing you spent much less and received a better performing product."

I consider the SonicWave cable tone to be completely neutral. The only criticism I have is that they compress the soundstage slightly compared to my favourite cables. This becomes more noticeable when using more than one set in the chain.

I only use SonicWave in my secondary systems. In my main system, I prefer my Cardas cables, which provide a slightly warmer tone, larger soundstage and better PRaT. I use Meitner Cryogenic cables in my subwoofer chain for their leaner, tighter bass. In one of the reviews below the linked eBay cables, someone said he prefers his Kimber cables and will use the new cables in his home theater.

I'm not saying the eBay cables are the same as the SonicWave cables, they are not, but they have similar specs and goals. I don't believe there is any cable that is perfectly suited to every audiophile's system, personal tastes and budget. I predict that the cable wars will never end.

Well I will pass. If this guy is not sharing information then why even mention it.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Very well.

Security Measure

www.ebay.com

See attached photo. I keep all interconnects and all other cables as short as possible. Custom lengths.
This is to keep things looking neat and also for a technical benefit, which may not even be perceptible to human ears.
Rest assured that even in longer runs, they will not sound different. Yes, they're that good!

I know there are very costly cables out there that claim to do the same thing. There's no denying that.
Based on my personal experience with over 16 years in this hobby and tons of money spent, I've not found more revealing RCAs.
They add / subtract nothing! No additional brightness. Overall presentation ranges from analytical to confused for tracks that were poorly mixed/mastered. On a revealing system, they will also help you discern the PRAT of the track being played with great ease.

Take from this what you will. And dare I say, to anyone who might suggest that something else is "better" I would advise trying these out before reaching a conclusion. Let's not (anyone here) step into a flame-war about which RCA cables are "superior." Otherwise, it'll be conjecture galore like ASR. members here are much more intellectually capable. That I gathered after my first few posts!

Thanks for asking again. And I appreciate the sense of humor. "a state secret" made me laugh, in a good way.

Pass...

Very well.

Security Measure

www.ebay.com

See attached photo. I keep all interconnects and all other cables as short as possible. Custom lengths.
This is to keep things looking neat and also for a technical benefit, which may not even be perceptible to human ears.
Rest assured that even in longer runs, they will not sound different. Yes, they're that good!

I know there are very costly cables out there that claim to do the same thing. There's no denying that.
Based on my personal experience with over 16 years in this hobby and tons of money spent, I've not found more revealing RCAs.
They add / subtract nothing! No additional brightness. Overall presentation ranges from analytical to confused for tracks that were poorly mixed/mastered. On a revealing system, they will also help you discern the PRAT of the track being played effortlessly.

Take from this what you will. And dare I say, to anyone who might suggest that something else is "better" I would advise trying these out before reaching a conclusion. Let's not (anyone here) step into a flame-war about which RCA cables are "superior." Otherwise, it'll be conjecture galore like ASR. members here are much more intellectually capable. That I gathered after my first few posts!

Thanks for asking again. And I appreciate the sense of humor. "a state secret" made me laugh, in a good way.

Will stick with what I have. Not seeing the big deal about sharing a product you feel is quality...

 

[TonyW]

Cable deniers go back to the mid 19th Century. The first electrical data transmission system was digital- the telegraph. A project ensued in the 1850s to connect Europe to North America with a telegraph cable. A physicist and mathematician had developed some early equations regarding transmission of electricity. He argued that the cable planned for crossing the Atlantic would not work because it would have too much retardation. That term would later be replaced with inductance and capacitance. He was ignored (the first cable deniers) and the first transatlantic cable was counted a success (for a few weeks) but so slow that it took hours to transmit a single word. Consider that the telegraph was a simple DC circuit using a small solenoid and breaker. The problem was not resistance. Increasing the voltage can overcome that for a telegraph- until the dielectric breaks down. The problem turned out to be capacitance and inductance. Through the last half of the 19th century they made a lot of progress on wire and dielectric design- and that was for a simple DC circuit.

Fast forward to the 21st Century. We have decades of R&D into power cords, speaker cables, interconnects and high frequency digital communications cables (USB, AES, Ethernet,...) but still no standard computer model or measurement technique that can completely and competently predict the sound qualities of a cable as perceived by the human ear. It is an interesting challenge and the reason audio has a history of progression and regression- eg. the early Solid State years, early vinyl vs reel to reel, and the early digital years were clearly steps backwards in HiFi audio.

I see the beginnings of Hifi being when Thomas A. Edison started marketing his new phonograph (when he finally gave up on his recording rolls and changed to flat discs like everyone else) at the beginning of the 20th Century. He would rent halls and put his new phonograph on stage behind a thin veil. Hiring a live singer he would challenge the audience to tell him if the song was live, or a recording playing back on his phonograph. He sold a lot of expensive record players that way. He also sent his salesmen out door to door selling his phonograph. They were quite expensive for the time. After 125 years the question of HiFi is still an open issue- is it really worth it?

We all see value in a speaker, amp, preamp, turntable or DAC- and music server these days, but it's hard to put any appreciable money into cables. To me buying cables is almost as bad as paying for insurance. I went from, this has to be a joke in the 1980s to spending more than I care to say on cables these past few years for my recent system. I was even more disturbed when I decided to try a $50, Ag plated ethernet cable to go into my music server and heard quite an improvement in sound. The choices we have today in audio are wonderful but also bewildering. These posts, these debates, the transfer of information and knowledge are a key aspect of this hobby. The effort and agony of choice is what makes it fun and interesting.

It's worth it to me. I love music.

 

[audiopro92]

Cable deniers go back to the mid 19th Century. The first electrical data transmission system was digital- the telegraph. A project ensued in the 1850s to connect Europe to North America with a telegraph cable. A physicist and mathematician had developed some early equations regarding transmission of electricity. He argued that the cable planned for crossing the Atlantic would not work because it would have too much retardation. That term would later be replaced with inductance and capacitance. He was ignored (the first cable deniers) and the first transatlantic cable was counted a success (for a few weeks) but so slow that it took hours to transmit a single word. Consider that the telegraph was a simple DC circuit using a small solenoid and breaker. The problem was not resistance. Increasing the voltage can overcome that for a telegraph- until the dielectric breaks down. The problem turned out to be capacitance and inductance. Through the last half of the 19th century they made a lot of progress on wire and dielectric design- and that was for a simple DC circuit.

Fast forward to the 21st Century. We have decades of R&D into power cords, speaker cables, interconnects and high frequency digital communications cables (USB, AES, Ethernet,...) but still no standard computer model or measurement technique that can completely and competently predict the sound qualities of a cable as perceived by the human ear. It is an interesting challenge and the reason audio has a history of progression and regression- eg. the early Solid State years, early vinyl vs reel to reel, and the early digital years were clearly steps backwards in HiFi audio.

I see the beginnings of Hifi being when Thomas A. Edison started marketing his new phonograph (when he finally gave up on his recording rolls and changed to flat discs like everyone else) at the beginning of the 20th Century. He would rent halls and put his new phonograph on stage behind a thin veil. Hiring a live singer he would challenge the audience to tell him if the song was live, or a recording playing back on his phonograph. He sold a lot of expensive record players that way. He also sent his salesmen out door to door selling his phonograph. They were quite expensive for the time. After 125 years the question of HiFi is still an open issue- is it really worth it?

We all see value in a speaker, amp, preamp, turntable or DAC- and music server these days, but it's hard to put any appreciable money into cables. To me buying cables is almost as bad as paying for insurance. I went from, this has to be a joke in the 1980s to spending more than I care to say on cables these past few years for my recent system. I was even more disturbed when I decided to try a $50, Ag plated ethernet cable to go into my music server and heard quite an improvement in sound. The choices we have today in audio are wonderful but also bewildering. These posts, these debates, the transfer of information and knowledge are a key aspect of this hobby. The effort and agony of choice is what makes it fun and interesting.

It's worth it to me. I love music.

First-Class post! I read it twice.