Cable

[Christian Klippel]

Agreed. One of the things I frequently have to explain to audiophiles is that studio equipment isn't supposed to sound good. It's supposed to sound accurate.

Indeed. I cringe every time i read sales-pitches for audiophile amplifiers. How they sound this and that. All these flowery descriptions about how they sound. In my book, any amplifier that "sounds" is pretty much broken.

There's also a fun-fact about a certain type of studio monitor. I guess that everyone has seen these Yamaha monitors with the white membranes. They exist for many decades by now. Most studios at least used to have a set of these. They are far away from "HiFi". Their frequency response is not that good at all. But there is a very good reason why they are so commonly used in addition to good monitors. Because what you mix down has to sound as good as possible on _any_ playback device. That includes simple car stereo's, ghetto-blaster style devices, heck, even mobile phones nowdays. So they already produce a compromise between best possible quality and most widely usable quality.

Of course that usually applies mostly to pop style music, afaik. But tell that some audiophile. They simply will not believe you.

Greetings,

Chris

ETA: I'm talking about the NS-10M from Yamaha.

 

[wardenclyffe]

Get,

I know you have gotten a lot of negative feedback (or "constructive criticism") here. But I, for one, would like to applaud you for doing a blindfolded test and reporting the honest results here. If you wish to continue testing, please do so, but I don't think the results will change. Again, I want to congratulate you for doing this test. Most people would never take that step. They would just walk through life happily pretending that their cables are better than everyone else's.

Now you've learned how to test cables, and you want to keep testing, I say that as long as you continue to have an honest test, you will get honest answers.

Good Luck,
Ward

 

[MRC_Hans]

I think that this is something that should be stated very carefully. I have seen quite some of these so-called audiophile amplifiers that did very strange things depending on the used cable. Most of them oscillated at frequencies way above the audible spectrum, like 80kHz or more. I even encountered one that happily oscillated at over 1MHz. This is of course a fault of the amplifier design in general.

Actually, if audiopholly was to make sense, cables, amplifiers, and speakers should be designed as a unit, never to be rearranged. In such a case, small improvements might be gained over the conventional set-up, because no corners needed to be cut to, e.g. make an amplifier stable over a wide range of loads.

The only workable solution to this is called active speakers....

Hans

 

[Ladewig]

Get,

I know you have gotten a lot of negative feedback (or "constructive criticism") here. But I, for one, would like to applaud you for doing a blindfolded test and reporting the honest results here. If you wish to continue testing, please do so, but I don't think the results will change. Again, I want to congratulate you for doing this test. Most people would never take that step. They would just walk through life happily pretending that their cables are better than everyone else's.

Now you've learned how to test cables, and you want to keep testing, I say that as long as you continue to have an honest test, you will get honest answers.

Good Luck,
Ward

Seconded. Even if you have gone from "I know there is a difference" to "proving a difference is more difficult than I thought" you are still way ahead of most of the other people who arrive at JREF with varied claims.


Thank you for sharing your initial testing results.

............................................

If you are ever interesting in seeing hard-core hostility, step over to the JREF general skepticism subforum and make a post saying that unicorns have granted you the power to bend steel bars with your mind, but it doesn't work when there are atheists present.

 

[Gr8wight]

The atmosphere here is like to be expected, but no less uncomfortable. Just to please you...I couldn't hear a difference between two cables blindfolded, so there's no difference. I haven't got a new amp yet, but did it with an old not so great amp, but that must do for now. If the story continues I won't share it here, unless it's worthwhile to share ( "I won some money!" or something along those lines). Maybe the only real conclusion I can draw now is that the "somewhat hostile" atmosphere among non-believers (which I haven't encountered only here) makes the knowers less interested to prove anything to the people causing that atmosphere. Score for the time being : non-believers-knowers: 1-0. halftime.

This is an interesting post. You report the results of a test in which you could tell no difference between cables, then you produce excuses for why that may be (the "not so great" amp). You have taken one step down a path that ultimately leads to a better understanding of the world, and oneself. I encourage you to continue. Test yourself again, under different circumstances. After each test, examine the results with an eye to asking the question, "why were these results different - or the same - as previous tests." Step back from your self-identifying as either "knower" or "believer." Seek only to discern the way things are.

I congratulate you for having the honesty and strength to post your negative result here, and hope you continue down the path of self-honesty. In the case of audio gear, it leads to better sound, and a fatter wallet at the same time. You may discover other benefits as you go.

 

[Coolhat]

I haven't got a new amp yet, but did it with an old not so great amp, but that must do for now.

You have received some good advice already, but I´d like to add my .02.

You say you can not hear the differences with your old amp and you suspect the outcome could be different with a better amp. This is, of course, how the high end scam business works:"Can not hear the difference? Spend more money!" It is a clever scheme:

Salesperson:"Buy these magnificent cables, they´ll make your system SO much better"
Customer:"OK"

A week passes, customer comes back

C:"I can not hear any difference"
SP:"That´s odd. What amp do you have"
C:"Brand X"
SP:"Well that explains it, that piece of junk can not possibly do justice to these magnificent cables. You must buy this magnificent amp"
C:"OK"

Another week passes.

C:"I still can not hear any difference"
SP:"Huh? What speakers do you have?"
C:"Brand Y"
SP:"Brand Y??? What were you thinking? You need at least these magnificent speakers, otherwise your system is worthless!"
C:"OK"

A month passes.

C:"OK, my system sounds pretty good now. But I wonder how I can make it even better."
SP:"Hmm... what cables do you have?"
C:"The magnificent ones you sold me"
SP:"OK, they are good beginner cables, but they do not do justice to your current system. After all, you are not a beginner, are you? Here, get these ultra-magnificent cables, they´ll make your system SO much better.
C:"OK"

And so on and so on. Now I am not saying every hi-fi expert is a crook, but you should always be aware of their motivation. If their solution for every problem is to throw more money at it... well, you do the math.

 

[MRC_Hans]

And so on and so on. Now I am not saying every hi-fi expert is a crook,

No, some are deluded themselves.

Really, I suppose that for many users, high-end hifi is much about impressing your friends and feel-good, but if you sell anything above decent equipment to home users, claiming or implying that they will get "deeper sound-stage" or similar nonsensical stuff, you are at least an accomplice in fraud. ...IMHO.

Hans

 

[Aitch]

ETA: I'm talking about the NS-10M from Yamaha.

Ah yes, the ol' taming the treble with loo paper trick.

 

[Cuddles]

You say you can not hear the differences with your old amp and you suspect the outcome could be different with a better amp.

Actually, this raises a rather interesting question. Get originally said that the differences were so big that he wouldn't even need to test it to know they were there, and that he would have to use his own system. Yet now he says that the problem might be with his amp and maybe he needs a new one. But if his old amp stops these differences being heard, how did he ever hear them in the first place?

This is actually something I've noticed quite a bit among believers in woo. They are convinced to believe by experiencing a single event or phenomenon, but for some reason even when they admit that that has been conclusively debunked they continue to believe anyway. This seems very strange to me. Being fooled into believing something is perfectly understandable and happens to people of all sorts all the time. But I just don't understand how someone can admit they were fooled into believing, yet continue to believe anyway.

 

[Get]

Some explaining is in order. The conclusion that there was no difference, because I couldn't hear it THEN was to get rid of discussion. It would be the conclusion drawn by people here, so I allready gave it. There were circumstances "not quite good" to perform the test, but I didn't tell them all, because I allready knew the reactions. I don't have 1 amp, but 2 and one is in repair. That's the much better one. When it can't be repaired or is too expensive I will buy another one.
@Coolhat: if I thought everything could be measured pricewise it would be very easy to buy hifi and also when everything sounded the same it would be very simple: just buy the cheapest there is. I'm very well aware of some ******** in the audioworld and of course am not falling for it.
When I will do another test I will tell the conclusions, but that can take some time (again: no rush whatsoever).

 

[Gr8wight]

Some explaining is in order. The conclusion that there was no difference, because I couldn't hear it THEN was to get rid of discussion. It would be the conclusion drawn by people here, so I allready gave it. There were circumstances "not quite good" to perform the test, but I didn't tell them all, because I allready knew the reactions. I don't have 1 amp, but 2 and one is in repair. That's the much better one. When it can't be repaired or is too expensive I will buy another one.
@Coolhat: if I thought everything could be measured pricewise it would be very easy to buy hifi and also when everything sounded the same it would be very simple: just buy the cheapest there is. I'm very well aware of some ******** in the audioworld and of course am not falling for it.
When I will do another test I will tell the conclusions, but that can take some time (again: no rush whatsoever).

So, did you actually do a test, or did you just tell us you did, hoping to shut us up?

 

[Get]

So, did you actually do a test, or did you just tell us you did, hoping to shut us up?

Of course I did a test. Why would I give a result if there wasn't one? To shut you up? I don't have to read it. No, the test was too short (something went wrong) and too hasty and with the wrong amp (yes, there is a considerable difference between amps), so it wasn't a good time to do one, but still I did it and failed. It seemed like the right thing to do to post the result here, but I didn't say all the bad circumstances, because I know what to expect in response. It was only to show I wasn't bailing out and also to tell you that there are circumstances where it isn't that easy. If I fail under good conditions I will of course also post it in all honesty.

 

[Gr8wight]

Of course I did a test. Why would I give a result if there wasn't one? To shut you up? I don't have to read it. No, the test was too short (something went wrong) and too hasty and with the wrong amp (yes, there is a considerable difference between amps), so it wasn't a good time to do one, but still I did it and failed. It seemed like the right thing to do to post the result here, but I didn't say all the bad circumstances, because I know what to expect in response. It was only to show I wasn't bailing out and also to tell you that there are circumstances where it isn't that easy. If I fail under good conditions I will of course also post it in all honesty.

Awesome! I stand by my previous post. Best of luck to you. I hope you do keep us updated.

 

[ojdude]

Actually, this raises a rather interesting question. Get originally said that the differences were so big that he wouldn't even need to test it to know they were there, and that he would have to use his own system. Yet now he says that the problem might be with his amp and maybe he needs a new one. But if his old amp stops these differences being heard, how did he ever hear them in the first place?

This is actually something I've noticed quite a bit among believers in woo. They are convinced to believe by experiencing a single event or phenomenon, but for some reason even when they admit that that has been conclusively debunked they continue to believe anyway. This seems very strange to me. Being fooled into believing something is perfectly understandable and happens to people of all sorts all the time. But I just don't understand how someone can admit they were fooled into believing, yet continue to believe anyway.

Everything sounds "slightly" different all the time. It's just a matter of degrees and most times we are never aware. As for cables? AWG is what you're "hearing". IE: AWG9 sounds good. AWG26 sounds awful. You're hearing current limiting with the thinner wire. Nothing more. $100.00 a pair of 8 foot AWG9 speaker cables is all anyone will ever need.

 

[ktesibios]

Ah yes, the ol' taming the treble with loo paper trick.

Back in the mid-80s there was a product (called, IIRC, the "NS-tenuator") which was a plastic frame that snapped over the protruding heads of the tweeter mounting screws on the NS-10 and held your favorite brand of biffy paper.

I never saw one IRL, and since I started working full-time in commercial recording studios in 1989 I have never seen an NS-10 with tissue paper over the tweeters. I suspect that once you've burned the top end out of your hearing tricks like that lose their appeal.

BTW, the phase anomaly Bob (who does the monitor tuning where I work) measured in the NS-10 is almost certainly due to the fact that the NS-10 uses a 2nd-order crossover with the old "flip the polarity of the tweeter to avoid a null in the summed pressure response at the crossover point" trick. While this works, it produces some violent phase shift at the crossover frequency- and you should see what it does to the time-domain response on a square wave.

If anyone cares, I'll post the math involved. Back in my live sound days, having discovered that the voltage (or pressure)-summed response of such a crossover was an all-pass filter, I spent quite a bit of time trying to design a compensating filter- only to find out that the required transfer function had a right-half-plane zero and was consequently unrealizable with analog methods.

 

[jj]

Everything sounds "slightly" different all the time.

May I please refer you to this slide deck http://www.aes.org/sections/pnw/ppt/jj/highlevelnobg.ppt and in particular the slides starting with the title "What does this imply?". It would be worthwhile to follow the whole deck, of course.

http://thewombforums.com/audio/jj_cns.mp3 is a lecture corresponding to that deck.

This may help you understand why everything sounds slightly different all the time, and what "sounds different" vs. "is actually different" might mean.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Let me also add a few very informative links about:

Cables
More Cables
Still more cable stuff

Greetings,

Chris

 

[Seymour Yoni]

Magic ! I think not.

If detecting the difference between two cables can be consistently and reliably achieved using human hearing then there is a physical difference between the two cables. The individual claiming to be able to detect the difference may well have extraordinary hearing but nothing supernatural is involved. If he can tell which cable is connected WITHOUT listening to the device then that's a different story and he may well be on his way to being awarded the MDC.

 

[Oualawouzou]

The whole point of this challenge is to tell apart cables that have no way of producing a different sound.

Look at it this way. Let's say I have a jug full of water. I have two funnels: one made of glass and one made of diamond. If I pour water in a glass using one of the funnels and have you drink it, it shouldn't matter weither I used the glass funnel or the diamond funnel: neither one changes or adds something to the water. If you can tell which one I used in a proper double-blind test, you don't have a very acute sense of taste: you can actually tell apart two glasses of water that are identical in every physical and chemical way. That is supernatural.

The cable challenge is the same thing. Audio cables transmit zeroes and ones. Either the transmission goes through, or it doesn't. There is no "quality" to it. With the above analogy in mind, consider the music/sound is the water, the cables are the funnels and the speakers are the glasses. It doesn't matter which funnel the water went through, once it's in the glass, it's the exact same matter. It doesn't matter which cables the zeroes and ones went through, once the music comes out of the speaker, it's the same music.

 

[Blue Mountain]

(snip)
The cable challenge is the same thing. Audio cables transmit zeroes and ones. Either the transmission goes through, or it doesn't. There is no "quality" to it. With the above analogy in mind, consider the music/sound is the water, the cables are the funnels and the speakers are the glasses. It doesn't matter which funnel the water went through, once it's in the glass, it's the exact same matter. It doesn't matter which cables the zeroes and ones went through, once the music comes out of the speaker, it's the same music.

Errr ... no. The only way your audio cable would be transmitting zeroes and ones is if you have a digital amp connected to digital speakers.

The information comes off your digital storage medium (CD, DVD, Blu-ray, SD card, USB flash drive, etc) as a stream of zeroes and ones. They are carried by a pair of wires from the CD /DVD / Blu-ray player to the system board of the amplifier where a chip known as a DAC (Digitial/Analog converter) changes that stream into an analog signal. After that it's analog through the amplifier and equalizer, and then to the speakers.

A really lousy audio cable could cause attenuation in the signal itself and possibly (audio engineers can correct me on this) at certain frequencies, and this could be heard by a person with good ears. But once you're using something better than wire coat hangars for your audio cable, the attenuation levels are probably noticeable only with special equipment.