Does Everything Make a Difference?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
I never implied it was a great analogy, just an analogy using other performance-oriented industries.
The fact that high-end audio is a hugely subjective industry is irrelevant. It’s still intended to be performance-oriented (as opposed to preference-oriented) and since there are no hard and fast measurements for determining sound quality, that ought only to imply we need to be a bit more diligent to ensure we’re on the right track with whatever we do.
Besides, as Karen Sumner said in one of her threads… “We already possess the most sensitive measuring instruments and that’s our ears. Our ears can easily discern more natural sound from a less natural sound.” Paraphrased.
I don’t agree with much of anything Karen says, but I agree 100% with this. In fact, our ears and our brain’s interpretations of the quality of natural/unnatural sound we hear works so well that when we hear a more natural alarming sound, our bodies will react instinctively and instantaneously. And when we hear a more unnatural alarming sound our bodies will often times have little or no reaction.
But I actually think the Formula 1 and Top Fuel racing teams analogy is perhaps as good as any because clearly those are two balls-to-the-walls pedal-to-the-metal performance-oriented industries where everything absolutely matters. Which just so happens to be the subject matter of your OP.
@Folsum , Just so , As an aside I came across a thought provoking article a litttle while back should anyone be interested. .
Dielectric Absorption in Cables Debunked
This article explores the claim by some cable vendors that cables exhibit dielectric absorption like a capacitor. We discuss the purpose of a cable dielecric and whether it can affect sound.www.audioholics.com
Interesting. I had not seen that article. The thrust of it seems aimed at "debunking" and telling certan manufacturer's "you know better." Graphs and math. The main (or one of the) conclusions seems to be: "Thus the dielectric losses at audio frequencies where the cable is terminated into a low impedance load such as a loudpeaker are insignificant."
What is unclear to me is whether "dielectric loss" -- dissapation of energy as heat -- relates to what the audiophile cable manufacturers are addressing in attempts to reduce or mitigate signal contamination. i.e. the additive electrical energy put on the audio signal. The article was written before such efforts were made and does not discuss in those terms. Maybe the article is relevant, maybe not -- I'm not in a position to judge but the author seems to thrive on addressing "confusion clouded by industry snake oil." On the other hand the article makes no connection between its conclusions and what people hear from different cables. It does not seem to address sound other than to say "you can't here this" , nor does it present itself relating to specific claims made by audiophile cable manufacturers. It does not contain the word 'sound' although it does talk about the limits of human hearing.
Audiophile cables set out to differentiate themselves from one another and presumably differences in construction and materials may explain differences in sonic effect. All of which is not to say that certain claims made by certain cable sellers do not warrant scrutiny.
There are over 20,000 FDA approved drugs. The majority of them will do nothing, some will have adverse side affects, and some can be life altering. Audio tweaks are the same, it depends on the patient/system. .
Karen Sumner has a wonderful way of summarizing the essentials. When making comparisons and adjustments and experimenting with components and set up, I always ask myself one question: does it sound more natural?
A better question is "Does it sound more natural in blind listening tests?".
https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html
And I thought you would quibble with the word “natural”.
I see the word "natural" as being synonymous to "accurate", one of my favorite descriptive words when it comes to audio reproduction.
it is one of my favorite words also because it is so comprehensive. I find it synonymous with the word “accurate” if the goal is the sound of real instruments. If the goal is to present through a system the same information one thinks is on the original recording, then I do not think “natural” is synonymous with “accurate”.
Assuming tweaks do alter the sound, my question is: How do you know if the tweak is altering the sound via addition (coloration) rather than subtraction (reducing noise)?
More specifically -- let's assume you have found a great amp for your particular speakers, have addressed the speaker/room interface and chosen low-distortion gear. You add a tweak. Let's say footers under one or more pieces of gear. The effect is enjoyable and while the sound is different it is not a lesser simulation of live sound. The result is "natural" and doesn't distract from your engagement with the music.
Did the tweak: 1) add a pleasant sound effect to your existing setup or 2) removed noise that previously masked the ability of your gear to sound its best?
More specifically -- let's assume you have found a great amp for your particular speakers, have addressed the speaker/room interface and chosen low-distortion gear. You add a tweak. Let's say footers under one or more pieces of gear. The effect is enjoyable and while the sound is different it is not a lesser simulation of live sound. The result is "natural" and doesn't distract from your engagement with the music.
Did the tweak: 1) add a pleasant sound effect to your existing setup or 2) removed noise that previously masked the ability of your gear to sound its best?
But you also have no proof that what you hear is because of dielectric differences specifically.
I would rather hear about cable engineering from someone like Dave or Garth. People directly involved who can measure, listen, then make changes, measure, and listen again.
There is a recent interview of Blue Jeans Cables on Audiophile Junkies website. They go into some of what they look at engineering wise when making a cable. I am going to stop by their shop soon to get some cables for my PAP speakers. The cables that go between the crossover and the drivers. Those have a very pronounced sonic signature. I would like to get something that is engineered correct for the application.
There is a recent interview of Blue Jeans Cables on Audiophile Junkies website. They go into some of what they look at engineering wise when making a cable. I am going to stop by their shop soon to get some cables for my PAP speakers. The cables that go between the crossover and the drivers. Those have a very pronounced sonic signature. I would like to get something that is engineered correct for the application.
I've spoken to extent with Galen (ICONOCLAST) in the not so distant past and was very informative and helpful. He's the one who finally convinced me into switching from balanced to single ended going to my Stratos monoblocks, and I have to say, he was 100% correct.
And speaking of ICONOLAST cables which are sold through Blue Jeans Cables, I purchased my Stratos amps from Bob Howard, the sales director of BJC/ICONOCLAST. Another great guy to talk with. I wish we had more time to sit and chat for a while, but they had other plans for the rest of the day so I just picked up the amps and came back home.
I have a Stratos, they are single ended. While there is an XLR in, pin 3 is left completely disconnected. IMO, XLR in should be an extra cost option with an input trafo used, but since that's not the case RCA in is better.
Also, if you look at Iconoclast pricing, you can just buy a single cable that's as long as you need all of your cables, cut it up and reterminate it with higher quality connectors. The per ft price for additional length gives you a good idea of the actual cost of the cable.
You're better off buying Neotech UPOCC copper or silver wire.
Same as anything else... how do you buy cars, TVs, appliances, etc?
The more you educate yourself the better off you are. You can find reviewers you share taste with and agree on other things. Maybe you can test it out yourself?
@Folsum , Just so , As an aside I came across a thought provoking article a litttle while back should anyone be interested. .
Dielectric Absorption in Cables Debunked
This article explores the claim by some cable vendors that cables exhibit dielectric absorption like a capacitor. We discuss the purpose of a cable dielecric and whether it can affect sound.
Audioholics debunks everything. In particular, they think a lot of things are below the level of our perception that are not.
Whether you correctly attribute dielectric absorption to what you hear is another story though.
Like “smearing” of the audio signal for instance then DaveWhether you correctly attribute dielectric absorption to what you hear is another story though.
Similar threads
