Regarding the above and all your other inquires on Vinylfan's post (24), you will have to ask AI for clarification.
Last edited:
Cables can make a huge difference...
- Thread starter audiopro92
- Start date
- Status
FWIW, if you don't want to start a "flame war", I'd refrain from posting statements similar to the above. Isn't "better" somewhat synonymous with "superior" from a subjective perspective?
And yes IMHO, WBF folks are, amongst other things, far more sophisticated than their ASR counterparts. On the other hand, I am confident that some ASR folks think some WBF folks are insane and have lost touch with reality.
Last edited:
1st, "IC immunity" is not real.
I already explained what objectively better means in terms of how to evaluate neutrality. Some aspects of making a cable objectively better:
- For ics, superior noise rejection without excessive capacitance. I use a geometry that has about the same noise rejection of star quad but with much less capacitance. It might be used a lot more if it was easy to manufacture, but it's fairly obscure and unintuitive. Star quad, twisted pair and coax cables are far easier to manufacture.
- Spacing ic and pc shields away from wires to reduce capacitance, which is much more expensive and laborious than you'd think, and rarely done.
- Low resistance... it matters. For all cables, a heavier gauge seems to be either the same or better than lighter gauge. For ic cables, I admit I don't know why and it seems really odd that it matters at all.
- Balanced LCR that makes sense for the application.
- Using a quality damping layer and jacket.
- Quality design and construction that can withstand many cycles of bending and connections being made and unmade. I've seen cables made of 12g solid-core wire more than once on here, that gauge wire will crack with very few bending cycles. I've seen unprotected wire subject to corrosion. I've seen inadequate strain relief. I see lots of friction-fit connectors like push-on RCA and banana plugs. The plating wears off due to friction, and the connection isn't as good as a quality locking connector or spade lug. I've repaired wide ribbon conductor cables where the ribbons are stacked and place excessive strain on the connectors and insulation when bent.
- Superior material quality.
The difference in sound between 4N silver and 6N+ UPOCC silver (100x less contaminants and no grain boundaries) is night and day. UPOCC metals are about 3-4% more conductive vs conventionally drawn wire too.
Pure copper or silver connectors instead of a copper alloy like brass and bronze. Commodity connectors like Neutrik, Switchcraft, etc. can be good for nearly free vs top-end parts, but the lower material quality makes for colorations like grain, harshness, lack of clarity...
Solder quality is important, and so is using a top-quality contact enhancer, nano-particle oil, etc. to improve set-screw and crimp connections as well as protect the connection from corrosion.
Beyond that, you can get into the dielectric and triboelectric noise. A new cable that will be coming out soon improves on teflon in terms of dielectric absorption and triboelectric noise, reducing both significantly. Teflon is the best conventional dielectric overall, but silver and teflon are on opposite ends of the triboelectric scale, their interaction creates static, which then forms triboelectric noise. Unfortunately, the process I use to coat and insulate the wire makes for some very costly wire, but it could be automated one day.
The result of replacing teflon is less noise. It's impossible to identify the conductor as silver or copper because any cues that may have been recognizable as "the sound of silver" are just gone. So you may think it's copper but it's not warm. At the same time those colorations are eliminated the resolution increases. The new Furutech NCF gear is designed to mitigate exactly this kind of noise, and is incredible quality, so I use the NCF connectors. This new ic cable is objectively better than any other cable on the market I'm aware of, and just like every other improvement I've ever made it results in increased resolution and less coloration.
There's even more like the size and composition of the EMF around the cable and how it interacts with a shield,. and on and on... I mean, this is a real subject that isn't nearly as trivial as you may think it is. Cables also have much more of an effect than many seem to think, in terms of an otherwise neutral and high fidelity system, cables and AC power can make or break that system.
True, but I didn't say my cables were better than everyone else's. Better for me, sure. Do I recommend them? Absolutely. Are people going to disagree with me? Perhaps. It's not a big deal.
I absolutely agree with the above. Far more sophisticated sounds right! Most ASR members are out of touch with reality. SINAD and those standard measurements are insufficient.
If we used an ADC and an audio file comparator program to truly scrutinize the output from our source components (for example) the results would not be identical, as ASR members often suggest. Imagine if you will, looking at the waveform in wavepad, acoustica, or sound forge pro.
I've been told on ASR - It will sound the same and the only difference is features. Wonderful. Many moons ago, I remember reading many posts where their founder disparaged and discredited others here. As usual, he was unsuccessful and banned, just like on every other forum he's been on.
Wow. Arrogance and intolerance to the extreme, which happens here and on ASR. Neglecting the sound is as bad as neglecting the science IMO, and the only common denominator is that if you do not agree with the prevailing world (forum) viewpoint you are to be attacked and denigrated. I dare say it is not so black and white on either forum.
Last edited:
Point well taken. We should all strive to be tolerant and respectful of others irrespective of our personal views and biases. Tribalism, in any form, is a self destructive force and something to be avoided, not encouraged.
FWIW, by sophisticated, I meant a greater exposure to and experience with hi end audio gear. If not true, my bad. No intention to judge or disparage anyone.
Also, briefly glanced at some of your material posted on WBF and ASR. All Greek to me but nonetheless, extremely impressive volume of work.
FWIW, by sophisticated, I meant a greater exposure to and experience with hi end audio gear. If not true, my bad. No intention to judge or disparage anyone.
Also, briefly glanced at some of your material posted on WBF and ASR. All Greek to me but nonetheless, extremely impressive volume of work.
Last edited:
I agree, but I also think it's a major issue if folks that think X doesn't matter and everyone who thinks X matters is simply a fool or has poor equipment in a forum dedicated to discussing X.
It's like going on ASR and trying to tell everyone there they are fools for thinking X doesn't matter and berating them for their lack of hearing acuity and inferior equipment.
Nothing good is going to come of either situation and imo it's the height of arrogance and intolerance to do so. Personally, I don't go on ASR or Audioholics and try to reform cable deniers. I don't think cable deniers should come on this forum and try to tell everyone here they are idiots and have inferior equipment. They may not be so blunt about it, but that's really what it comes down to.
It goes both ways, imo we don't have to tolerate cable deniers and have every thread on a cable forum devolve into the old, tired cable debate. It's not arrogant or intolerant to ask for that. If you want a cable debate, start your own thread and maybe some will choose to participate. I am absolutely sure I will not, I don't want to be around it and I don't want to participate in that.
You've clearly never been in a band or a recording studio let alone know their objectives. Noone in a band playing gigs give or in the vast majority of studios give a cra*p about how a cable sounds, they care about reliability to get the job done. Studio time is not cheap, they have a job to get done on time and within budget.
I used to use audiophile cables and power cords in my system. I auditioned different brands and owned different brands and then settled on pretty expensive Transparent Audio cables and cords. I enjoyed them for many years.
I now use industrial grade wires in the walls, vintage industrial power cords, and a variety of commercial non-audiophile ICs. Wires and cords absolutely matter and the wrong ones can ruin the sound of the system. They certainly do matter and their design matters. As hobbyists, we listen and make our choices based on what we hear.
I now use industrial grade wires in the walls, vintage industrial power cords, and a variety of commercial non-audiophile ICs. Wires and cords absolutely matter and the wrong ones can ruin the sound of the system. They certainly do matter and their design matters. As hobbyists, we listen and make our choices based on what we hear.
Last edited:
Irrelevant to my case, though in fact I've often been in recording studios
We're not in disagreement here - band / orchestra members don't get involved in cable choice - all they want is for the recording to be faithful to their performance.
And quality cable is important - but it needed be hugely costly, as "audiophile" cables often are.
I have not been in a recording studio. I imagine that the bulk of the effort in designing and building a recording studio goes into acoustics and isolation. I also imagine that microphones and pickups must be of excellent quality, durability and reliability. But as far as power cords and cables go'- no hum, no ground loops and no static are likely the priority. And finally the mixing board and recording equipment I imagine receive a lot of scrutiny. And so how is it almost incidental that recordings are made but take so much effort and expense to playback- an almost endless effort to playback a recording well? How does that infinitesimal small detail get into a recording that only the most resolving and pure playback systems seem to be able to pry out of those digital words or vinyl grooves- or magnetic tape for those stubborn, well healed holdovers. And I have to say, today's digital playback has as much or more detail as I have ever heard in vinyl.
Think about this: Ever notice that early in our hifi journey how we liked to play those, what I call high contrast music tracks? These are "audiophile" tracks that typically have a single singer and one instrument, or maybe two instruments. They make our system sound really good. We can hear the separation and detail. It is as easy to hear as it is for our systems to playback. Now play some music with lots of instruments and singers, like an orchestral piece or a large rock band. Our novel stereo system starts to break down, ie the music gets blurred, imaging breaks down and we find ourselves either turning down the volume or getting up from our chair to start doing other things leaving the music to play in the background..
For the more dedicated audiophiles, we develop our stereos into something more- especially classical listeners to have a system that can hold up to complex musical passages. That's the ultimate goal, at least for me is being able to feel the images, hear the detail even in those complex passages hold up as crisp and clear as during a one singer/one or two instrument recording. I want to hear each and every singer in a choir, not a cloud of sound. I want to hear each and every instrument in the orchestra and know their positions. And what I found is cables play an important role in achieving this goal. Sure, the room, the amp, the speakers and the source are all key but cables and power cords- the links to each of these components make or break resolution, noise and coherency. I'll use that term, coherency to describe the complex passages coming through the system with clarity, resolution and focus. That is the magic we pay for in higher end cables.
Now consider this: A recording studio has multiple microphones and pickups. Each of those devices has their own cable. Each of those cables has one task, so to speak. Each cable transmits one instrument, one voice, one sound to the mixing board. Multiple channels are mixed down to two channels. Each cable needs to have a level of clarity, and resolution but coherence is not so critical since it is a single signal- and single singer, or instrument. Now the mixer board combines all of those various tracks down to two. Coherence becomes very important. I'm betting the mixing boards and two channel recorders are pretty expensive. They are the final outcome of a recording and therefore are the most important link in the recording studio chain.
Those are my thoughts- the ramblings of an old engineer who likely hasn't a clue.
Think about this: Ever notice that early in our hifi journey how we liked to play those, what I call high contrast music tracks? These are "audiophile" tracks that typically have a single singer and one instrument, or maybe two instruments. They make our system sound really good. We can hear the separation and detail. It is as easy to hear as it is for our systems to playback. Now play some music with lots of instruments and singers, like an orchestral piece or a large rock band. Our novel stereo system starts to break down, ie the music gets blurred, imaging breaks down and we find ourselves either turning down the volume or getting up from our chair to start doing other things leaving the music to play in the background..
For the more dedicated audiophiles, we develop our stereos into something more- especially classical listeners to have a system that can hold up to complex musical passages. That's the ultimate goal, at least for me is being able to feel the images, hear the detail even in those complex passages hold up as crisp and clear as during a one singer/one or two instrument recording. I want to hear each and every singer in a choir, not a cloud of sound. I want to hear each and every instrument in the orchestra and know their positions. And what I found is cables play an important role in achieving this goal. Sure, the room, the amp, the speakers and the source are all key but cables and power cords- the links to each of these components make or break resolution, noise and coherency. I'll use that term, coherency to describe the complex passages coming through the system with clarity, resolution and focus. That is the magic we pay for in higher end cables.
Now consider this: A recording studio has multiple microphones and pickups. Each of those devices has their own cable. Each of those cables has one task, so to speak. Each cable transmits one instrument, one voice, one sound to the mixing board. Multiple channels are mixed down to two channels. Each cable needs to have a level of clarity, and resolution but coherence is not so critical since it is a single signal- and single singer, or instrument. Now the mixer board combines all of those various tracks down to two. Coherence becomes very important. I'm betting the mixing boards and two channel recorders are pretty expensive. They are the final outcome of a recording and therefore are the most important link in the recording studio chain.
Those are my thoughts- the ramblings of an old engineer who likely hasn't a clue.
Lots to agree with there. Your profile sates you use "PAD Cables", but I'm confused as to what these are. Could you enlighten us please? Thanks
Certainly. PAD is the abbreviation for Purist Audio Design. They are a long time cable maker with a good, strong pedigree. I have Purist Audio cables throughout my system save for the Hurricane PC on the Niagara 5000 and AQ Ethernet cables. The USB, all power cords, ICs and speaker cables are all PAD's upper level line of cables. I dipped my toe into PAD cables some years back with the Museaus line and was so impressed that I dove into the deep end. Their cables will not win any beauty contests but they sound pretty amazing good to me. (Well, their top of the line cables do sport some carbon fiber looks). Here is a shot of the back of one of my amps to give you an idea of their "Industrial" all business look. That is a Corvus speaker cable, Corvus power cord and a Dominus XLR. If I could bring myself to spend the money I would have Dominus throughout. Very impressive.
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
You have more of a clue than you give yourself credit for.
One thing that I've thought about more than once is - there very well may be more to gain in playback equipment quality versus recording equipment quality. I think much has to do with mixing / mastering as virgin band playback in the control room sounds virtually identical to what the band played. Once you add effects, blend tracks, mix down, etc. it's more challenging to extract the details IMO.
Not all recording studios use inexpensive commodity cables. More and more are moving towards using better cables. In fact, I currently have a recording studio demo'ing some cables.
I do think playback systems can retrieve detail the recording studio may not even recognize though.
Yes, this is true, however many recordings from the 50s and 60s are some of the best sounding media, and there was no such thing as "audiophile cables" back then, just cheapo patch cables.
Vintage Western Electric wire is often far superior to modern copper wire. It makes especially good speaker and power cables. Certified Audiophile Grade, assuming good design and connectors for sure. So I disagree with your characterization of the cables used in that time period as "chedapo", but it's true they were not "voiced" to sound a certain way, or cost more than they believed was necessary. The recording process is of course lossy to some degree, but good cables can minimize losses and thus enable superior reproduction of the recording on a capable system.
Playback is different in that we want to simply extract the most information from the recording as we can. Of course recording quality varies, we take what we can get as often the music is more important. It's true that really poor recordings are a turn-off, but won't keep me from listening to something I want to hear. In any case, for better or worse, high fidelity means reproduce what's on the recording. Like recording is lossy, so is playback, and we can minimize losses by using quality cables.
There's no doubt you can get decent cables at any price point. As you spend more, everything else being equal, you increase resolution and decrease coloration. The laws of diminishing returns apply just as much as anything else, for example a Porsche GT3 RS at $300k isn't 10x as fast as a Mazda Miata, and it's easy to argue a Miata is the worlds best sports car, yet for some reason, some people go for the GT3 RS. Personally, I think it's snake oil. The GT3 isn't faster, it's just propaganda. They both burn gas and have tires!
And the different Mogami models all sound different, correct often depends on what your system and equipment was tuned with. I hate the sound of silver cables, a lot of tube guys love the sound.
- Status
Similar threads
