MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
I bet that's because they had the directional Monster cable pointing in the wrong direction 😛
Coathangers is genius! 😀
Woppit will be along soon and explain it to you - so just hang 🙂 on in there
where can I get some of these high-grade coathangers?
Spoof.
where can I get some of these high-grade coathangers?
I have a barely used pair you can have for £350. email in profile.
Good quote from Roger Russell – a former engineer and speaker designer for McIntosh Labs – that works quite well with MTBs too:-
"The strategy in selling these products is, in part, to appeal to those who are looking to impress others with something unique and expensive."
Spoof
Possibly; but there was a similar 'test' done with wet string at an audio fair a few years ago, with similar results.
I once swapped some Q.E.D. speaker cable for ordinary electrical wiring just to see what difference it would make.
The difference was as obvious as chalk and cheese, no "magic ears" required.
Q.E.D - musical, sound-staging, clarity etc. Electrical cabling - harsh, flat. The visual analogy would be between watching a HD flat screen digital TV and an old black and white analogue set.
The system was Thorens TD160/A&R A60/Mordaunt Short. Not even reference HiFi.
the sound would have been even better if they'd had the coat hangers pointing into the wardrobe instead of out, amateurs 😆
I once swapped some Q.E.D. speaker cable for ordinary electrical wiring just to see what difference it would make.The difference was as obvious as chalk and cheese, no "magic ears" required.
You go ahead and believe that 😉
Monster are a bunch of aunts anyway.
Thankyou, but I don't need your permission. Or mis-direction as to what I typed.
God told me there's no difference. And let's face it, he's a much higher authority on this sort of thing.
In fairness, electrical cable is getting the most area into the smallest space, thus you're going to get interferance. I tried maplins cheep cable Vs some chunky expensive looking stuff, there was a difference, chunky expensive looking stuff Vs actual expensive stuff, no difference.
If you like this sort of inverese snobbery read 'elephants on acid', they did a similar test on wine buffs. Cheep plonk red, Vs expensive Red, Vs white wine with food colouring. They all thought they were drinking whatever they were told they were drinking.
For those who are actually interested in the technical aspect of this argument, there's a good article here on the subject
Does a bit of modelling of various wierd and wonderful wires.
Mr Woppit - What property of the QED cable makes it so much better than the mains cable?
Do you agree that two cables with the same L,C,R meausurements will perform identically?
Do you agree that two cables with the same L,C,R meausurements will perform identically?
Are we also measuring the signal in the imaginary plane where $,£,€ can predominate?
if you've dropped enough cash, you can probably hear anything you want
the placebo effect innit - very powerful thing
Do you agree that two cables with the same L,C,R meausurements will perform identically?
I am sure he does but I have also tried main cable and found that it is lacking compared to my other, modestly priced, speaker cables.
We all know the premise that speaker cables should make no difference, but it seems to me that they become a non-trivial part of the 'circuit' between your amp and speakers.
I have some Quad power-amps, which shoud be decently engineered, but if I use 4mm stranded speaker cable and certain speaker loads they sound like an HF filter has been added, swap back to some 2.5mm stranded cable and everything is back to normal with the amps acting like a 'straight-wire-with-gain', as they are suppossed to.
Those that want to believe will...
what if you don't want to believe but have experienced these differences?
what if you want to use the cheaper cabling, but find you can't?
Surely the placebo effect only works properly if you are 'wanting' a change.
I have some Quad power-amps, which shoud be decently engineered, but if I use 4mm stranded speaker cable and certain speaker loads they sound like an HF filter has been added, swap back to some 2.5mm stranded cable and everything is back to normal with the amps acting like a 'straight-wire-with-gain', as they are suppossed to.
If you can prove that with a properly calibrated mic etc under proper test conditions, I will believe you.
Mr Woppit - What property of the QED cable makes it so much better than the mains cable?
Clearly, though you can write, you seem unable to read.
For those who are actually interested in the technical aspect of this argument, there's a good article here on the subject
Was an interesting article that, if you have long runs of speaker cable then spend enough to get low impedence. If you have a short run then it just doesn't matter. So coat hangers probably would sound the same as Monster cable over 1 metre
I think the cable business is real - there is a difference but you get into diminishing returns very quickly.
I could hear the difference between bell wire and 2&E and then £3 a metre speaker cable was better again. I doubt however that £30 a m speaker cable is noticeably better again
I think the 10% rule is a pretty reasonable one for sensibly priced kit
If you got £600 worth of seperates then spend £20 on an interconnect and £40 on speaker cable (or a variation thereof) is pretty sensible.
Once you get to £10,000 of hi-fi kit then spending £1000 on cables starts to look a bit daft (but then most people would think that spending that on hi-fi was daft in the first place)
I'll declare my interest and let you know I have a collection of much loved Audiolab kit (the made in England stuff) and I'm probably a bit below the 10% rule
If you can prove that with a properly calibrated mic etc under proper test conditions, I will believe you.
Don't think I can be bothered.
At the time I was installing some expensive external crossovers into my system so 3 runs of cable per side.
I choose some Quad speaker cable I had in my collection, primarily as I had Quad power amps. 4mm stranded.
Plugged it all in and thought that it sounded very odd.
Spent ages, in a state of annoyance, switching stuff around, checking phases, etc.
Ended up using a much cheaper cable or 2.5mm diameter and it all sounded good again.
Differences were quite clear to be heard. I have also heard them using other setups, with that 4mm cable and always with some LS3/5as. Much larger than the differences I 'think' I might be able to hear between my Kef and Nordost cables, for which I would need a DBT to be sure of.
With larger (easier to drive/less complicated crossovers) speakers I haven't heard these differences. Also not with tube amps.
£30 per meter - hmmm. I regularly go into a shop selling these:
http://www.mitcables.com/available-online/speaker-interfaces.html
8ft for $37,000 does sound quite expensive, but if you want 20ft it's only $41,000 so not too bad
🙂
Anything over £8 a metre and I would have a DBT at home.
[url= http://www.frozensolid.co.uk/audio-hifi-c-22.html ]Used to supply this guy with his liquid nitrogen...[/url] a / b demo on treated / not treated pairs of interconnects was an 'ear opener' - being a cynic though, i asked him to run it again and not tell me which was which - still, it was evident which the treated pair were...
I'd still want to do a full blind listening though, to be convinced.... 🙂
FWIW - i'm with TJ - my 2 bit system is connected with home made (not by me) silver and gold interconnect and QED Silver speaker stuff - beyond that i'd struggle to be convinced of added value....
On the flip side, a mate of mine was instrumental in the design + development of the digital amplifier in the [url= http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers/M2-Direct-Digital-Amplifier ]NAD M2[/url] - £5k of amplifier.... His own system is considerably more modest, worth a little less than just an M2 alone and he does not use any form of fancy interconnect.
He was able to bring an early production version of the M2 home one weekend - truly and amazing piece of kit - and that's from a cynic... 🙂
It's limited by simple physics. There's some basic features a good cable will have that will make notable differences in sound, these are all available on £5 a metre cable as far as I'm aware, beyond that you'll see no difference other than a) if you're looking for it or b) if you're pumping kW down tiny cables. It's common sense and when it's something that's open to subjective judgement it's like shooting "'philes" in a barrel - some monkey will give you hundreds for cables thinking they're great. I'd like to see research as to what was a measurable perceptible difference for human hearing and how these cables make at least that difference. Without it I am quite happy to chuckle about it.
You can chuckle all you want but if I do a DBT and the result is that something actually sounds better, then I am going to ignore the physics behind it and buy it, or investigate why it sounded better and whether I can get the same effects at a cheaper price.
So Woppit just 'believes' that the cables are better despite the lack of any objective evidence - just like people 'believe' they have spoken to God etc 😆
Why not go and claim James Randi's $1 million if you are so confident?
There's not really much point in debating whether it'll make a difference or not, when there's an easy way to tell for yourself.
Most shops will lend cables for home demo as long as you leave a deposit.
My thoughts are that cables in the analogue domain make a huge difference (not always in line with dearer=better).
Cables in the digital domain make very little difference. As long as they are of sufficient quality to transmit the data at the speed/volume required.
Anyway - cables are child's play.
When you go to a hifi show and they replace a stand shelf with one of a different shape (square vs guitar shaped) and do an A/B test - that's when you can start the debate proper.
You can chuckle all you want but if I do a DBT and the result is that something actually sounds better, then I am going to ignore the physics behind it and buy it, or investigate why it sounded better and whether I can get the same effects at a cheaper price.
Good for you. Are you going to try for the $1 million prize?
grum - Member
So Woppit just 'believes' that the cables are better despite the lack of any objective evidence
No I don't. Although I do admire your ability to misrepresent me without evidently having read what I typed, convinced that what you are doing is somehow meaningfull.
Well done.
You can chuckle all you want but if I do a DBT and the result is that something actually sounds better, then I am going to ignore the physics behind it and buy it, or investigate why it sounded better and whether I can get the same effects at a cheaper price.
No-one ever seems to do independant tests to show these things though, without it it's just pointless discussion.
I once swapped some Q.E.D. speaker cable for ordinary electrical wiring just to see what difference it would make.The difference was as obvious as chalk and cheese, no "magic ears" required.
Quad once demonstrated their new speakers at a trade show, using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q. Still, I'm sure you know better than the hifi engineers.
I've no way of knowing, I didn't attend that particular demo.
Your "surety" is misplaced.
I expect it was the same as any other demo: the speaker cable has no effect on the sound quality, which is why they went for something tough and cheap.
I use studio cable for speakers and interconnects. If it's good enough for recording, it's good enough for listening.
Did they switch to something more expensive during the demo?
Don't think [s]I can be bothered.[/s]it will support my argument
😛
I use studio cable for speakers and interconnects. If it's good enough for recording, it's good enough for listening.
Really? Why aren't you using hedge-trimmer cable from B&Q?
Come to that, why aren't recording studios using it?
Did they switch to something more expensive during the demo?
Are you suggesting that designers of expensive speakers are missing an opportunity to show off their product at its best?
Expensive watches don't tell the time any better than a £5 casio, but most people think they look nicer. Expensive cable doesn't even have that going for it.
because they can write it off to tax?
It works up to a point. That point is some way below what audiophiles will pay and what they believe
I find your faith admirable though 😉
Quad once demonstrated their new speakers at a trade show, using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q. Still, I'm sure you know better than the hifi engineers.
I prefer Wickes basic cable. B&Q is overpriced and a little brash sounding.
If you're willing to pay a little extra, Homebase do a lovely Power Drill cable, which makes vocals come right at you from the speakers.
Really? Why aren't you using hedge-trimmer cable from B&Q?Come to that, why aren't recording studios using it?
Because at the time I bought the studio cable, I had no idea that hedge-trimmer cable would work properly. I've no intention of throwing out perfectly good cable that sounds identical to hedge trimmer cable and identical to your cable.
I've been saying this for ****in years. I even once sent a signal through a radiator to prove a point. IMO over short distances of a few metres the best speaker cable is 15amp mains cable. But then what would I know? I've just been a sound engineer for like the last 17years.
If you're willing to pay a little extra, Homebase do a lovely Power Drill cable, which makes vocals come right at you from the speakers.
Actually, if you go for the professional series from Screwfix, it really opens up a 3D soundstage, with a tight rhythm, sparkling vocals and greater authority to the bass than the standard Screwfix cable.
ransos - MemberDid they switch to something more expensive during the demo?
Are you suggesting that designers of expensive speakers are missing an opportunity to show off their product at its best?
No. I'm suggesting that the demo quoted, didn't demonstrate the difference between cheap and HiFi cable, only what the equipment sounded like using cheap cable, on the day.
My relatively cheap, but specifically designed cable is of two 3-meter lengths, BTW. As it was for the Q.E.D. cable I mentioned before, so the "no difference for 1-meter length" cable clearly doesn't apply.
Why AREN'T recording studios using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, by the way?
Perhaps you'll now buy some and install it yourself and then tell us you can't hear any difference...
Why AREN'T recording studios using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, by the way?
They can get it cheaper from Cromwell's.
Why AREN'T recording studios using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, by the way?
Because the egos of musicians need pandering to as much as the audiophiles!
Look, that article is 4 years old- I'm sure the technology has moved on, so the test isn't really still valid, is it?
Think how much better bikes are than they were 4 years ago- there's no comparison, is there?
No. I'm suggesting that the demo quoted, didn't demonstrate the difference between cheap and HiFi cable, only what the equipment sounded like using cheap cable, on the day.
If expensive cable made the speakers sound better, the engineers from Quad would use it. What with them being professionals who work on this stuff every day...
I'm sure the technology has moved on...
Which technology? How is modern electricity different to that from four years ago?
Perhaps you'll now buy some and install it yourself and then tell us you can't hear any difference...
Lacking gullibility, I'll know that any difference I perceive is purely a figment of my imagination.
Which technology? How is modern electricity different to that from four years ago?
Modern wires, not modern electricity.
Why AREN'T recording studios using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, by the way?
Most recording studios use significantly cheaper cabling than your average hi-fi nerd though, strangely. They don't tend to use stuff claiming to contain magic pixie dust that makes it sound amazing either for some reason.
In what ways did old wires stop electricity doing its job?Modern wires, not modern electricity.
Is that the african or the european old electricity and /or cables?
Modern wires, not modern electricity.
It's copper strands wrapped in plastic. I suspect that there's really very little to change, except for marketing purposes ("new and improved!")
Is that the african or the european old electricity and /or cables?
Racist!
You'd think if cable was that important they'd use 'decent' stuff inside amplifiers and speakers, not the cheapo rubbish they seem too.
Just for fun, can anyone explain (scientifically) why bi-wiring is better than single?
Now I'm not an engineer - but this is utter, [i]utter[/i] bullshit isn't it?
VALHALLA Reference Power Cord from Nordost redefines the standards of performance in this category. The Valhalla offers a dramatic sound stage, tremendous dynamic range and superb articulation of the musical event. When used with video components; clarity, detail, and the natural depth of colors are revealed. Valhalla Power Cord uses our new proprietary 'Dual Micro Mono-filament' technology to enhance audio and video performance.
A [i]power[/i] cable? Plugged into a standard mains circuit? Really?
Still, it's only £2249.95 for a 2 metre cable so I guess it's worth buying one to see if I can hear/see the difference. I'm sure at that price I would be able to persuade myself it was amazing. Not as good as the Nordost Odin Supreme Reference Power Cord for £20k though.
My thoughts are that cables in the analogue domain make a huge difference (not always in line with dearer=better).Cables in the digital domain make very little difference. As long as they are of sufficient quality to transmit the data at the speed/volume required.
Apples and oranges. Certainly this is the case with interconnects, but I've yet to come across digital speakers. (-:
Anecdotally, cheap interconnects will make analogue AV look and sound rubbish. I know this - I've tested it fairly extensively with my own kit. It's diminishing returns though; that's not just physics, it's common sense. Once a cable isn't noticeably degrading the signal, that's your plateau - once there's no perceptible noise being introduced through the cabling, you can't then use a 'better' cable to have less than no noise.
With digital interconnects (ie, HDMI) they either work or they don't. You might as well argue that your digital photographs look better stored on a more expensive hard disk. It's perhaps worth paying a couple of quid extra for build quality, but that's it.
When I built my first home cinema setup using full-sized kit, it was all held together with high quality SCART leads which cost (IIRC) about £20 twelve years ago, and similar quality phono leads. I refreshed it all to move to HD a year or two back, and it's now held together with (literally) Tesco Value HDMI leads. And looks and sounds better than it ever did.
Speaker cable, I'm still using my original stuff which was the cheaper end of the "real" speaker cable market (as opposed to bell wire). I don't know, but I suspect that any well-constructed cable of a similar gauge would sound fairly indistinguishable (perhaps crosstalk might be become a minor issue but I doubt it). I suspect that getting more expensive cable wouldn't make a fig of difference (see my second paragraph) but dropping to bell wire would.
</anecdotes>
Just for fun, can anyone explain (scientifically) why bi-wiring is better than single?
[url= http://www.sonicdesign.se/biwire.html ]This seems interesting enough....[/url]
I struggle with long sentences but I'm sure that 'ignorance is bliss' should cover most things here..
Just for fun, can anyone explain (scientifically) why bi-wiring is better than single?
I don't know about scientifically, but isn't the point to use a crossover to send two sets of frequencies separately?
So essentially you've got double the 'bandwidth' to send the same amount of data. I think there's also some hokum about low frequencies swamping high ones, or something, but how much of that is BS (or indeed, how much of anything I've just typed) I don't know.
I never really bought into bi-wiring. Thinking about it, I guess it might make a difference over really long cable runs where attenuation becomes a problem, but when running a few feet from your average TV / amp to a living room speaker it sounds more like snake oil to me.
This seems interesting enough....
That's funny. The TL;DR version is: "bi-wiring sounds initially better because it introduces more errors into the system."
If expensive cable made the speakers sound better
It doesn't. It makes the HiFi better able to reproduce music by providing a good transfer of information ,as opposed to using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, which doesn't.
I don't use "expensive cable", by the way. As I've already said. Twice. Baffles me why you think I do.
[b]I'll know[/b] that any difference I perceive
A ha. No actual demonstration, then.
IRMC.
I don't know about scientifically, but isn't the point to use a crossover to send two sets of frequencies separately?
If you bi-wire there's no crossover, just two filters. You remove a piece of the crossover network in the shape of a little gold plated bar between the two sets of speaker terminals.
This means that.. er.. well.. not sure.
I did it, and there was a small difference perhaps. However I progressed to bi-amping and there was a big difference. Although when I last posted this I got slammed for it.
If expensive cable made the speakers sound better
That's the distinction I was trying to make earlier. It doesn't make them sound better, it makes them sound less worse.
If you bi-wire there's no crossover, just two filters. You remove a piece of the crossover network in the shape of a little gold plated bar between the two sets of speaker terminals.
I assumed that in a bi-wired system there would be an active crossover in the amp. What you're saying is, typically the amp sends the same signal down both pairs of cables, with each driver then passively filtering the presented signal? Wow, if so, that's... special.
I was once considering spending a lot on cables to my monitors (like maybe £20 even) until I took one apart to change the tweeter and saw the pieces of thin cheese connecting everything together inside. I bet its the same inside 'audiophile' kit.
It doesn't. It makes the HiFi better able to reproduce music by providing a good transfer of information ,as opposed to using hedge trimmer cable from B&Q, which doesn't.
The cable makes no difference whatsoever. If you believe otherwise, by all means try to win the $1 million on offer.
The cable makes no difference whatsoever. If you believe otherwise, by all means try to win the $1 million on offer.
*unplugs cable*
Where do I get my money?
The cable makes no difference whatsoever.
Says ransos. Again. Despite absolutely no direct experience of such. Perhaps you think that if you keep saying the same thing over and over again, you'll convince.
If you believe
... and again...
You'd think if cable was that important they'd use 'decent' stuff inside amplifiers and speakers, not the cheapo rubbish they seem too.
So, cheap cable inside speakers and amplifiers, cheap cable in recording studios, yet expensive speaker cable and interconnects make a noticeable difference. Riiiggght.
Says ransos. Again. Despite absolutely no direct experience of such. Perhaps you think that if you keep saying the same thing over and over again, you'll convince.
Says the people who have done double-blind trials. If you believe you can show otherwise, there's a $1 million prize on offer.
I'm not interested in convincing you - I just pity the gullible.