[Closed] One for the audio physics deniers

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.

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 - Member

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?

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.

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.

Ransos..

I have a good friend who earns a living reviewing cable (amongst other things) for a highly respected leading UK Hi-Fi magazine..

he's a good bloke.. very honest and enthusiastic about music and hi-fi and enjoys his work immensely..

aside from the fact that I've heard the differences myself time and again when he's reviewing kit back to back.. and ignoring the fact that this well meaning friend has made personal recommendations on the most cost effective ways to upgrade my own system.. I still simply cannot believe that he has just made all that stuff up off the top of his head each month when he submits his pieces to the editor..

as I said earlier in the thread.. ignorance is bliss.. or not, as the case may be..

Just for fun, can anyone explain (scientifically) why bi-wiring is better than single?

there is a technical reason why it is suppossedly better - that article above may allude to it - the guy who used to run Spendor explained it to me but I forgot it pretty quickly.

However he also pointed out that it is very unlikely that the speaker designer 'voiced' the speaker with it biwired, so it is probably best to use it single wired as he did, and just strip the wire back to it reaches between the terminals.

Once a cable isn't noticeably degrading the signal, that's your plateau

+1

the cable I went back to when I had problems was the blue Van Damme stuff, which is similar to the cheap studio cable mentioned above.

I actually use some Kef stuff which to my ears is the same, but it looks better against the floorboards as the jacket is brown whereas the Van Damme is blue.

Plus if used the white stuff it would stain badly when the cat decides to behind the speakers for a cr8p...

I still simply cannot believe that he has just made all that stuff up off the top of his head each month when he submits his pieces to the editor..

Just like high-end bike reviews for MTB mags? 😉

I still simply cannot believe that he has just made all that stuff up off the top of his head each month when he submits his pieces to the editor..

I'm sure he believes it. People also believe in homeopathy.

But the fundamental point is that no-one has ever demonstrated a difference under double-blind conditions. Speaker cable is a pretty odd thing to have faith in.

[i]Just like high-end bike reviews for MTB mags?[/i]

ooh, are audio mag forums rull of;

"What cable for Dark Side of the Moon"

type threads?

So, cheap cable inside speakers ... yet expensive speaker cable and interconnects make a noticeable difference. Riiiggght.

So you can't see any inherent difference between a couple of inches of wire inside a shielded chassis and a several metre cable run passing through who knows what?

I'm not disagreeing with you, incidentally; I've explained my views earlier. I just think that some of your arguments are a little tenuous.

Good for you. Are you going to try for the $1 million prize?

it would have to be with my cables, speakers and amplifier - and all it would demonstrate is that my amplifier is sensitive to the load on it. Something about those 4mm stranded cables causes it to perform badly.

I also spoke with the guy who used to run Spendor about this and he said that they used to have problems with Quad 606s being unstable into certain loads.

So you can't see any inherent difference between a couple of inches of wire inside a shielded chassis and a several metre cable run passing through who knows what?

Studios are electrically noisy environments, cables heaped in coils, passing over each other, close to power supplies and so on. Remind us what sort of cable they use?

ooh, are audio mag forums rull of;

"What cable for Dark Side of the Moon"

type threads?

I remember looking for some advice last year on audio forums about how to get my Linn audio multi room stuff hooked up in the house I moved into. Those guys take things quite seriously.

I ended up asking on here in the end, and got a better response 🙂

Is there anything that STW doesn't know? 😉

it would have to be with my cables, speakers and amplifier - and all it would demonstrate is that my amplifier is sensitive to the load on it. Something about those 4mm stranded cables causes it to perform badly.

I suggest you contact James Randi. Let us know how you get on.