Taralabs grandmaster evolution: new top of the line cables from Taralabs

[KeithR]

I disagree generally with Keith, Frantz and Roger on the significance of cables, interconnect and speaker, in a system. I think they can make the difference between a 'good' sounding system, a 'very good' sounding system, and a 'superb' sounding system. and they can change the character of a system and bring it into or out of balance.

MikeL- I'm not saying cables don't make a difference, but that your system won't suck if I bring over my $800 Zu Event cables and swap them out for your Evo Acoustics- the "make or break" moment. If I get a chance to visit your room, perhaps we can do this for fun. I'm always happy to admit I'm wrong.

Asiufy- I will never buy a $6k power cord in the first place

Let me reword my contention- any basic audiophile copper cable (Zu, Kimber, Audience, AQ etc) is not going to make or break a system. Sure, there are performance increases to be had. If you start throwing networked cables, silver, etc. all sorts of weird stuff can occur.

In addition to the Cardas example used above, Transparent tamed the old Wilson tweeters back in the day and hence why it was considered "synergy" when the real issue was the speaker in the first place (imo). Using cables as tone controls doesn't make any sense to me generally speaking.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

MikeL- I'm not saying cables don't make a difference, but that your system won't suck if I bring over my $800 Zu Event cables and swap them out for your Evo Acoustics- the "make or break" moment. If I get a chance to visit your room, perhaps we can do this for fun. I'm always happy to admit I'm wrong.

Asiufy- I will never buy a $6k power cord in the first place

Let me reword my contention- any basic audiophile copper cable (Zu, Kimber, Audience, AQ etc) is not going to make or break a system. Sure, there are performance increases to be had. If you start throwing networked cables, silver, etc. all sorts of weird stuff can occur.

In addition to the Cardas example used above, Transparent tamed the old Wilson tweeters back in the day and hence why it was considered "synergy" when the real issue was the speaker in the first place (imo). Using cables as tone controls doesn't make any sense to me generally speaking.

i agree that competent modestly priced cables generally 'don't suck' and their sins are of ommision and not commision. but that is also true for speakers and electronics too. so we agree on that.

the question becomes just how important the very top tier of cable performance (not cable price) is?

and that wholly depends on the effort and resources one wants to throw at it and the system context it's used in. i think that cables are an essential part of any overall approach and expection for performance and as one desires higher and higher system performance that the limitation of the cables must be dealt with.

but there is no 'wrong' level of cable performance.

i do think that some cables provide more bang for the buck than other cables. and that question is the right one to investigate. we don't all choose or can choose to dedicate the same resources to cables.

 

[DonH50]

I think I have my answer, thanks. My interpretation is the "make or break" comment applies in the context of the 0.0001% listeners.

Wires are in series, so if you have 0.5 ohms in the run and 1 ohm inside the box, you are still better off if you switch to 0.1 ohm cables. How much better off is a debate well over my little pea brain and ears. And of course the situation could be reversed (0.1 ohms in the box, 0.5 ohms in the run, so switching to 0.1 ohms is a much bigger improvement). Using percentages can really be used to obfuscate reality in some of the cable (and other) adverts. I imagine most of us remember the Monster Cable advert showing huge advantages on a plot with no dimensions. When the dimensions were revealed the differences were obviously (well, to me and my ilk) in the mud. To use an example outside this thread (trying not to dig myself in deeper), few of us would hear the difference between 0.001% THD and 0.002% THD even though the former is "100% better" than the latter. At some point going to bigger wires becomes insignificant.

I have no idea the actual impedance of these, or most any other, high-end cable. Resistance and inductance generally decreases with larger size while capacitance increases. The usual assumption is that for practical length runs in audiophile systems (rooms) L and C are out of the picture for speaker runs and only R matters. A quick reference for AWG (which is NOT a universal standard, but I am in the U.S.A. so it's the one I use) is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge Here are a few numbers from that article (1 m-ohm = 0.001 ohm):

18 AWG = 0.0403" diameter, 6.4 m-ohms/ft
12 AWG = 0.0808" diameter, 1.6 m-ohms/ft (this is about 1/4 the area of the 18 AWG wire; resistance scales by area)
10 AWG = 0.1019" diameter, 1.0 m-ohms/ft
08 AWG = 0.1285" diameter, 0.63 m-ohms/ft
04 AWG = 0.2043" diameter, 0.25 m-ohms/ft
000 (3/0) AWG = 0.4096" diameter, 0.062 m-ohms/ft

• At some point the connections will start to be significant, sooner if they are not good (not tight and/or corroded).
• Adding two identical wires in parallel will cut the resistance in half. Putting four identical wires in parallel will reduce it to 1/4 the resistance of a single wire.
• Amplifier output impedances tend to be ~0.1 ohms or less at LF, rising a bit at HF, for SS amps. Tube amps may be 1 - 5 ohms or more, again rising at HF.
• Speaker impedances are complex and the resistance of the voice coil is often not a good indicator of its actual dynamic impedance. Because the drive is distributed saying "the voice coil is 8 ohms so a 4-ohm cable is fine" is not really valid. There is more than just loss at play in controlling the speaker's movement.
• Shielding is not generally used for speaker cables on the assumption that the amplifier's output impedance is low, signals are large, and bandwidth limited relative to RF so that shielding is not required. Long runs or high-noise environments may require shielding. How much EMI/RFI affects a given system I could not say without measuring. The sound of your neighbor's "10-4 good buddy!" coming out the speakers is an indication of an RFI problem but it may not be the speaker cable.

I've decided I have no idea what it all means. Ten feet of 12 AWG wire is less than 20 m-ohms and would seem to be enough for most systems. This thread is not about "most systems". Speakers with very low impedance dips coupled with very low output impedance amplifiers might benefit from lower cable resistance. Whether a pair of battery cables sounds better than a $40k speaker cable I cannot say. Of course I have my doubts, but I have not heard the $40k cables in your system. I have documented the study undertaken ages ago that showed where the line was drawn for various speaker cables but all that did was generate a plethora of posts about how much better cables are now and my old tests were invalid so I shan't repeat it here.

Having seen pictures of the rooms in which some of the reviewers evaluate things, it's hard to believe the room is not dominating their perceptions. However, the counter argument (and one I can agree with) is that they know their room and thus are qualified to comment upon differences among components and speakers. That does not mean what they like will sound good in your room. Most folk know that,or learn it young.

I still think a system so sensitive to cables is at best a sub-optimal design, but I am certainly not in the 0.0001% crowd. When I was younger I felt I could hear all sorts of differences, but testing and age seem to have beat that out of me. My first few DBT's were humbling, when I "knew" I could instantly pick out differences but alas... OTOH, a couple of years ago I walked into a room with a friend to demo some speakers and asked them to switch to a SS amp to match what my friend had. The salesman was astounded as there was no way to tell which amp was actually running the speakers and it only took me seconds to make my request. Some things are obvious even to we of the clay ears.

As for the cables under discussion, having never heard them I cannot say if they are worth the money. Given my bias and income I am unlikely to find out unless I happen to visit somebody using them and have the opportunity to compare them to other cables. From a technical standpoint I'd love to measure them and compare but life is short and it would be only for me anyway -- measurements will never convince a listener.

Sorry for the lengthy diversion, I shall do my best to post no more in this thread. It is clearly outside my experience. Thanks for the comments! - Don

 

[TBone]

I imagine most of us remember the Monster Cable advert showing huge advantages on a plot with no dimensions.

that's typical Noel ... hilarious.

 

[DonH50]

Yah, IIRC the units were actually like hundredths of a dB and MHz bandwidth per division. I suppose some speakers might benefit from an extra 0.01 dB at 1 MHz but mine (and my ears) won't.

 

[TBone]

Yah, IIRC the units were actually like hundredths of a dB and MHz bandwidth per division. I suppose some speakers might benefit from an extra 0.01 dB at 1 MHz but mine (and my ears) won't.

LOL, in audiophilia, every last minutia must be analyzed, so very important ... and let's give 'em audiophile labels that only we understand ...

 

[DonH50]

That reminds me, still need to find out what that reviewer meant by "liquidity". I sort of thought I had it from context until he compared it to some other term and I realized I had no real idea what he was talking about.

Back to topic: Are these cables silver, or maybe gold-plated silver? That would provide the lowest resistance and at least partly explain the cost.

 

[TBone]

That reminds me, still need to find out what that reviewer meant by "liquidity". I sort of thought I had it from context until he compared it to some other term and I realized I had no real idea what he was talking about.

well ... the first product I heard in which the term liquid seem appropriate, was with the Linn CD12. But given that I was auditioning by my lonesome (I don't have 39 friends), I couldn't ask anyone if they also thought it "liquid". The term also confuses me from a weather perspective ... because when they forecast 40% chance of liquid, and yet, I get 100% wet, well ... I'm conflicted ...

Back to topic: Are these cables silver, or maybe gold-plated silver? That would provide the lowest resistance and at least partly explain the cost.

Funny you ask, because I know some who consider silver as offering a "faster" type sound, whatever that means.

(gulp, I've actually used that term to describe some silver cables myself)

 

[microstrip]

That reminds me, still need to find out what that reviewer meant by "liquidity". I sort of thought I had it from context until he compared it to some other term and I realized I had no real idea what he was talking about.(...)

Don,

Perhaps you are thinking about a thick oil, you should think about fresh, shinning pure water ...

Curiously I always associated the use of this term in audiophile jargon with "fluidity of sound", often used in music and audio as opposite to "brittle sound" . I hope you are not going to ask me to define "brittle sound", we can find many definitions of it in the net.

Anyone having owned a conrad johnson ART preamplifier properly matched must have an idea of what "liquidity" can mean in audio language. I remember that HP of TAS once referred it, but needed a full page to explain what he was meaning with the word.

 

[TBone]

Perhaps you are thinking about a thick oil, you should think about fresh, shinning pure water ...

LOL, I'm going fishing ...

 

[microstrip]

(...) Let me reword my contention- any basic audiophile copper cable (Zu, Kimber, Audience, AQ etc) is not going to make or break a system. Sure, there are performance increases to be had. If you start throwing networked cables, silver, etc. all sorts of weird stuff can occur.

In addition to the Cardas example used above, Transparent tamed the old Wilson tweeters back in the day and hence why it was considered "synergy" when the real issue was the speaker in the first place (imo). Using cables as tone controls doesn't make any sense to me generally speaking.

Keith,
Why, in your opinion, copper cable is not going to make or break a system and with silver all sorts of weird stuff can occur?

 

[TBone]

Having seen pictures of the rooms in which some of the reviewers evaluate things, it's hard to believe the room is not dominating their perceptions. However, the counter argument (and one I can agree with) is that they know their room and thus are qualified to comment upon differences among components and speakers. That does not mean what they like will sound good in your room. Most folk know that,or learn it young.

Sometimes even moving a single component from one system/room to another, can provide a very different sonic perspective. We've probably all moved, having to re-locate our systems in the process, I recently moved from a wood based older house, with dedicated room, dedicated circuit, dedicated ground, dedicated hobby, to a concrete condo ... with none of the above.

To say that my system sounded "different" would be an understatement.

But we adapt ...

 

[treitz3]

Also, I will disagree with Myles in that I can't remember a cable "make or break" a system. This would never happen imo if you use good, basic copper cabling from a host of audiophile companies- won't break the bank either.

Hello, KeithR. We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I have heard first hand on way more than a single occasion just one pair of cables make or break a system. The difference was at most from unlistenable IMO to outstanding......and everything in between when switching out just the cable in one location. In my experience, cost means nothing. Synergy means everything.

Tom

I would like to surmise that you have most likely seen rather than heard such. I would soften my position with cables with networks such as MIT or Transparent on very specific electronics such as Spectral. Else for the most part if you don't know what cable is there ... the system is usually not broken. A great system does not break .. I am willing fo example to test this with superlative systems such as those of Jack 101, Steve or MikeL. I am even willing to grant that there would be differences when heard sighted but break such systems?!? Not possible unless a real jack hammer is being used in and (perish that thought) on the same room

The term "Synergy" has become an audiophile favorite. Component "matching" is more precise but we tend to navigate in imprecision when it comes to audiophile vocabulary ...

As for the "Price brigade" slant, if it is meant to be derogatory it cannot stick/. We are on what I perceive to be a Discussion Forum not an echo chamber. Any claim can and should be discussed. Extraordinary claims should elicit and deserve appropriate, proportional scrutiny and so does extraordinary price for what is after a piece of wire. Endeavors that are far more complex than Audio reproduction do not use these extravagantly priced cables yet when it comes to audio ...
And there is no end in sight. Cables is where the most money is likely made in High End Audio. I don't see this ending since the whole industry seem to be fixated on the "more expensive" = "Better" . From time to time there are some intonations of "System dependent" and everybody's favorite "Synergy"but for the most part it seems that an expensive cable is replaced by a similarly priced or most likely a more expensive cable. The most interesting thing is that the same cble companies do also dabble in video a much more difficult market segment to penetrate since there are standards and where rigorous testing is prevalent and almost universally accepted. Still Cable companies make a dabble at it from time to ime. i am willing to bet that they don't manage to sell these to the hardcore videophile. OTOH the audiophile who swears by said brand of audiophile cable is likely to use these stupendously expensive HDMI or video cables in their video system and likely note the "increase"clarity ... and better overall video reproduction. And of course there are the Audiophile Ethernet cables .. for better digital ..

I will grant the owner of this cable that it makes a difference to his ears. I believe it is fair to question the brutal price of this piece of wire. I would also like the defender of Expensive Audio Things to stop trying to make of those designers godlike creatures that walk on air and are above questioning so vast their knowledge is. it comes out false and strained and make of these people what I don't think they aspire to be.
On a lighter note the race toward the $100k speaker cable is officially on... who will be there first and how will the audiophile community react to that?

Hello again, Frantz. I had mentioned this morning that I did believe that you took my original statement the wrong way. As I read through this thread (many, many posts still to go since this morning) I believe Mr. Mike Lavigne portrayed what I was trying to relay better in his post (#184 on this thread). He mentioned that;

I disagree generally with Keith, Frantz and Roger on the significance of cables, interconnect and speaker, in a system. I think they can make the difference between a 'good' sounding system, a 'very good' sounding system, and a 'superb' sounding system. and they can change the character of a system and bring it into or out of balance.

and even though I don't think this is strickly an issue of more $$$'s equates to higher performance, higher priced cables do sound better. however; I have found that 'uber' priced cables ($10k+ for a set interconnects, $20k+ for speaker cables), while sounding excellent every time I've heard them in systems, are not necessarily better than the lower rungs of cables at maybe half to one third that price. so looking at a price and expecting some sort of predictable performance is not correct. lots more money does not equal lots more performance. it may bring certain nuance that is unique to a particular cable..... <snip> .....

if you want to go the generic modestly priced cables then good for you, but unless you do the work to investigate you are simply guessing about how much performance expensive cables can deliver.

Thank you, Mr. Lavigne. You put my words into your post. One big difference is that my "unlistenable" is what you relayed as "good sounding". I believe that we would both be in agreement that this is not we are trying to achieve with our respective systems. We just chose different words.....I can't see you accepting "good sounding" as something you would want in your rig, therefore I believe "unlistenable" wouldn't be too far off.....even though both you and I would STILL enjoy the music. Perhaps "unacceptable to me" would have been better.

I would like to surmise that you have most likely seen rather than heard such. I would soften my position with cables with networks such as MIT or Transparent on very specific electronics such as Spectral. Else for the most part if you don't know what cable is there ... the system is usually not broken. A great system does not break .. I am willing fo example to test this with superlative systems such as those of Jack 101, Steve or MikeL. I am even willing to grant that there would be differences when heard sighted but break such systems?!? Not possible unless a real jack hammer is being used in and (perish that thought) on the same room

Mr. Frantz, I don't "see" music. I listen to it...very critically. You would be incorrect in the assumption that I have have most likely seen rather than heard such. I heard it first hand, in my own system and others and it wasn't subtle at all. At least to me, especially in my own system I am very familiar with. I can't recall just how many sets of cables I have but I do distinctly remember trying every single pair out I had when I got a new SS amplifier a couple of years ago. The changes I heard ranged from grainy sound to a tinny top end. Bloated bass or a mid bass hump. Missing frequencies to exaggerated frequencies, highly detailed audio perception on certain instruments to almost a complete deletion of any perception on others. Natural tone to something you couldn't pay me to listen too. Natural rolloff and decay to very sharp and annoying (to these ears) instruments that normally flow with the greatest of ease like a reproduction can be capable of. From a tilted balance of everything to something that sounded like it went through an EQ to a very linear presentation. Tight and narrow sound stages to vastly expansive or "warped" (read not natural) sound stages. Precise imaging perception to something slightly North of what a boombox would offer.

....and everything in between with each of the cables introduced.

As for the "Price brigade" slant, if it is meant to be derogatory it cannot stick/. We are on what I perceive to be a Discussion Forum not an echo chamber. Any claim can and should be discussed.

My apologies if I seemed like part of the "price brigade". I was simply offering *my own personal* experience with this hobby. With the above statement, not all of the cables were in the same price class. Some of the cables that one would consider rather expensive failed miserably in that application. In fact, I settled on a reasonably priced cable until I could afford to try out something that I could audition for that application. Why? That cable had the best of all of the criteria I was looking for at a substantial fraction of the price of some of the other cables tried. If the thread cables could be tried out in my rig, I would be more than happy to listen to them to find out how they sound. If they brought me with all of my criteria to where I want to be? I would find a way to afford them, much like the cables I eventually tried in that location which fit the bill perfectly (albeit *unfortunately for me* at a substantially higher price than the reasonably priced cable). To me, it was worth every penny spent.

Basically, I am no part of any brigade. I was simply stating that based upon my experience, the price of a cable doesn't equate to performance. Listening to a cable in one's system is the only way IMO to justify worth. Again, IMO.

The term "Synergy" has become an audiophile favorite. Component "matching" is more precise but we tend to navigate in imprecision when it comes to audiophile vocabulary ...

I am game with both and will not dispute or throw out any argument either way. I just so happened to use the term "synergy". If I were to go with component "matching", even though some may not consider a cable a component, I would guess there would be some to say I mean synergy. I have no dog in this fight and I will raise my white flag. No harm meant and no foul intended.

I agree completely with your last paragraph. I hope this clarifies my thoughts a tad bit more and thanks for your patience with the lapse of time with my response. With all due respect,

Tom

 

[asiufy]

MikeL- I'm not saying cables don't make a difference, but that your system won't suck if I bring over my $800 Zu Event cables and swap them out for your Evo Acoustics- the "make or break" moment. If I get a chance to visit your room, perhaps we can do this for fun. I'm always happy to admit I'm wrong.

Asiufy- I will never buy a $6k power cord in the first place

Let me reword my contention- any basic audiophile copper cable (Zu, Kimber, Audience, AQ etc) is not going to make or break a system. Sure, there are performance increases to be had. If you start throwing networked cables, silver, etc. all sorts of weird stuff can occur.

In addition to the Cardas example used above, Transparent tamed the old Wilson tweeters back in the day and hence why it was considered "synergy" when the real issue was the speaker in the first place (imo). Using cables as tone controls doesn't make any sense to me generally speaking.

Is it $6k now? Jeez... Anyway, I said "loan", not buy

And now that you've qualified your statement, I kinda agree with you. You won't "break" Mike's system (or anyone's). But if you go for a listen, and forget for a minute how much each cable cost, I doubt you wouldn't leave there preferring his cables instead. But once you factor the costs in, it's perfectly understandable why people prefer to upgrade a piece of gear instead of upgrading their cables...


alexandre

 

[TBone]

OTOH, a couple of years ago I walked into a room with a friend to demo some speakers and asked them to switch to a SS amp to match what my friend had. The salesman was astounded as there was no way to tell which amp was actually running the speakers and it only took me seconds to make my request. Some things are obvious even to we of the clay ears.

a clay-eye story ...

~ 2 decades ago, I wasn't into CD much back then, however, I was considering, based on early reviews, buying the original "analog-sounding" Rega Planet. I checked our local Rega dealer, IIRC~$899 Canadian. Then came SP glowing review, so, I decided to pull the trigger.

I arrive at the dealer, and notice the latest Stereophile (w/planet) glittering around all over the place. I approach the same saleman who quoted me the initial price, and ask for a purchase. Suddenly, the price >400. The store busy, I reminded him of our prior deal in a tone others could earshot, so to appease me quickly, he'd suggested selling a demo model for the original cost. Given that I'd come this far, I agreed.

Towards the back room he ventured, bringing out two Planets. He placed them on the counter, giving me the choice. I looked at each top loader, and ask to see each powered, while still on the counter. He did, they spun, I asked him to exchange the CDs from one to another, he did, then within seconds, I picked one.

w/Surprised look, he said; "Wow, that's my favorite sounding of the two, how did you know that without listening to it?". I told him to look closely at the puck/top loader mechanisms, one rotating slightly out of balance, the other perfect.

He smiled, I walked away with the better demo ...

 

[DonH50]

Yah. http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...ponses-into-Speaker-Loads&p=139289#post139289 The cable is part of the driving impedance. The (one) caveat is that speakers also act as generators and a simple FR may not show time-domain artifacts due to transient (non-LTI) signals from things like "back EMF".

 

[BruceD]

In addition to the Cardas example used above, Transparent tamed the old Wilson tweeters back in the day and hence why it was considered "synergy" when the real issue was the speaker in the first place (imo). Using cables as tone controls doesn't make any sense to me generally speaking.

Hmmm Interesting observation KR--I thought the Tube trap on the old Focal Tweets was supposed to do that?

Sorry to burst the bubble--but Cables are tone controls whether we admit it or not--some just do more than others

Nice to meet you at Steve's--hope you enjoyed the Show.

Best

BruceD

 

[GaryProtein]

Hmmm Interesting observation KR--I thought the Tube trap on the old Focal Tweets was supposed to do that?

Sorry to burst the bubble--but Cables are tone controls whether we admit it or not--some just do more than others

BruceD

+1


With flame proof suit donned, as I have said in the past, if you need to select cables so your system sounds right to you, you probably selected the wrong components.

 

[still-one]

+1


With flame proof suit donned, as I have said in the past, if you need to select cables so your system sounds right to you, you probably selected the wrong components.

Gary, I have to disagree with you here. IMO you choose the speaker that you feel you will get you closet to the sound you are looking for and that fit your budget. Everything else in your system should be selected to get the most out of those speakers and closer to what you seek. That goes for amps, speaker cable, power cords and interconnects. When I am looking to upgrade I try something in my set-up and ask myself, does this get me closer than my current piece of gear. If so then I have a cost benefit decision to make.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Gary, I have to disagree with you here. IMO you choose the speaker that you feel you will get you closet to the sound you are looking for and that fit your budget. Everything else in your system should be selected to get the most out of those speakers and closer to what you seek. That goes for amps, speaker cable, power cords and interconnects. When I am looking to upgrade I try something in my set-up and ask myself, does this get me closer than my current piece of gear. If so then I have a cost benefit decision to make.

Gary already said he does not really see cables as significant to performance beyond their basic function.

You need well shielded, well constructed cables with good connecting plugs, but like Don, I am not in the cable camp.

you are speaking to deaf ears on this issue.