Are the WhatHiFi Experts right? Are Expensive Accessories worth it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
maybe it's because I am a qualified Engineer I have interest with the why's and how's of the debate. Maybe my frustration with often finding no answers has softened my enthusiasm for the need.

My early background was in electrical engineering and micro electronics. I think part of the frustration in seeking answers is the availability of the appropriate facilities, tools and expertise to conduct detailed objective testing at home. :)

AVI
 
it's interesting as well to dismiss the applicable measurement numbers and say they have little bearing. IWC, i agree with you, THD is not the be all and end all of performance numbers. However, rest assured, from experience, if you go to a very high end audio equipment manufacturer to convince them to use one of your ics in their new equipment, they will want to hear it. but tey will also want to hear the specs for that part. if your THD number is only a few db down on the competitor that was in before you you can get your coat. at the end of the day you could probably get as good a sound from the lower number, but to get the design in you will have to have all the numbers , so if the high end manufacturers use them, personally i don't dismiss them as irrelevant

and THD isn't the only figure. people say about different cables clearing up the low end or the high end, if so then a frequency sweep using those cables should show up a difference.

honestly, i don't care if people spend a fortune on cables or not. i think as long as a cable is well made it is more important than any fancy materials and processes. personally i wouldn't spend hte money. i used get into these arguements with the high end cable guys and there is never a winner. the techies believe science(right or wrong), the cable guys believe their ears(right or wrong). who really cares as long as you are happy.

but the engineer in me cries out that for there to be an audible difference then there has to be a measurable difference in the cable, hence my post above about measuring them. but the fact that this would be so simple for a cable manufacturer to do and prove a difference, and the fact that none of them have, probably makes it pointless, because surely if they could measure a difference they would have shown it by now.

which sets us back to square one. techies believeing science, cable guys believeing their ears. the techy guys will never hear a difference because they don't want to, the cable guys will always hear a difference because they do want to..this debate will go on for years
 
it's interesting as well to dismiss the applicable measurement numbers and say they have little bearing. IWC, i agree with you, THD is not the be all and end all of performance numbers. However, rest assured, from experience, if you go to a very high end audio equipment manufacturer to convince them to use one of your ics in their new equipment, they will want to hear it. but tey will also want to hear the specs for that part. if your THD number is only a few db down on the competitor that was in before you you can get your coat. at the end of the day you could probably get as good a sound from the lower number, but to get the design in you will have to have all the numbers , so if the high end manufacturers use them, personally i don't dismiss them as irrelevant

and THD isn't the only figure. people say about different cables clearing up the low end or the high end, if so then a frequency sweep using those cables should show up a difference.

honestly, i don't care if people spend a fortune on cables or not. i think as long as a cable is well made it is more important than any fancy materials and processes. personally i wouldn't spend hte money. i used get into these arguements with the high end cable guys and there is never a winner. the techies believe science(right or wrong), the cable guys believe their ears(right or wrong). who really cares as long as you are happy.

but the engineer in me cries out that for there to be an audible difference then there has to be a measurable difference in the cable, hence my post above about measuring them. but the fact that this would be so simple for a cable manufacturer to do and prove a difference, and the fact that none of them have, probably makes it pointless, because surely if they could measure a difference they would have shown it by now.

which sets us back to square one. techies believeing science, cable guys believeing their ears. the techy guys will never hear a difference because they don't want to, the cable guys will always hear a difference because they do want to..this debate will go on for years

I am pretty much in full agreement here. There is also the reality of the cottage industry side to the high end, that means evolution is based on a lot of imperical experimentation together with (one hopes !) Some strong science based design.

I really don't think I would ever spend a lot on cables even if they sounded better than another piece of equipment at the same price. I guess I personally think of cheap being less than £5/m moderate at £10 and expensive £15 plus.
I like to feel as though my money has bought something tangible and of value. Probably why I bought meters and probes to calibrate my own projector as opposed to paying an expert to do a better job !

My concern would be synergy as well as hard value (as opposed to performance value).This sounds like a weakness in my points of principle and to a degree it is. But lots of expensive cables I have tried at home have simply not done anything magical. They also perform sufficiently differently in different systems to make the ownership proposition very risky.

For me experimentation in the sub £10-15/m bracket is however interesting. But I still remain open minded :smashin:
 
Sorry if my previous post offended. I was refering more to why I think they sell despite using subjective claims of improved performance. Not why you choose your particular accessories. Without readlily compariable meaningful specs everyone should see for themselves, as you do.

But I fear many people may not have such obliging shops that let them home trial accessories, so instead have to rely on reviewers and manufactures claims rather than their own eyes and ears. In this situation I would like to have specs as an objective guide, at least to start from.


I have carried on slowly reading what hifi forum. They believe in speaker cable directionality, burn in and equal lengths. Cable manufacturers also proclaim these to be fact, but offer little explaination of how or why. They claim even non-directional speaker cables become directional after being used for along time. Since they make claims that seem to be on the face of it pure nonsence I find it difficult to take their other claims of improved performance seriously, without specs to back them up.

Alternatively my very limited understanding of how these things work maybe very flawed. If so any links to info that could re-educate me as to how speaker cables can be directional, need burning in and need to be the same length, would be welcome.

Oh and I have just had a post deleted from What hifi forum without a trace. So no one will know what my reply was to someone who questioned how their reviewers could see different hdmi cables improving picture quality. So the threads over there must be somewhat misleading as a guide to opinions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmmm....

"Worth it".... a can of worms on the forums.

Personally I find that upgrading the cables has worked for me both two channel and 5.1. I use Chord nearly all the way through (QED XT for the rears though) and you can't fault either the cable performance or the company.

Customer service is excellent - they are currently upgrading a cable for me and comms have been brilliant - I dropped off the cable last week, had a cup of coffee, which was made by the owner, and given a tour of the factory (and demo room).

The best thing to do is to demo/borrow cables from your dealer and see if they make a difference in your system at home - then you can decide if they are "worth it".

As always though after a certain level there are probably decreasing returns. A £30 cable will be way better than the freebie audio interconnect, but is a £60 cable twice as good again??? Well if anyone went to the demo sessions run by Chord at the Bristol show they might think you can get such improvements and keep getting them as you spend more as they ran through most of the range up to the £1,000 Indigo interconnect.

These improvements are subtle and the music just sounds better, tighter with more detail. The "worth it" part really depends on how into your music you are and your budget/available money to spend.

I am doing some blind testing of cables at a friends house today (Signature analogue and prodac coax) for his system and it will be interesting to see what affect there is on his "interesting" system.

Anthony

PS I don't work for Chord BTW!!!
 
Sorry if my previous post offended. I was refering more to why I think they sell despite using subjective claims of improved performance. Not why you choose your particular accessories. Without readlily compariable meaningful specs everyone should see for themselves, as you do.

But I fear many people may not have such obliging shops that let them home trial accessories, so instead have to rely on reviewers and manufactures claims rather than their own eyes and ears. In this situation I would like to have specs as an objective guide, at least to start from.


I have carried on slowly reading what hifi forum. They believe in speaker cable directionality, burn in and equal lengths. Cable manufacturers also proclaim these to be fact, but offer little explaination of how or why. They claim even non-directional speaker cables become directional after being used for along time. Since they make claims that seem to be on the face of it pure nonsence I find it difficult to take their other claims of improved performance seriously, without specs to back them up.

Alternatively my very limited understanding of how these things work maybe very flawed. If so any links to info that could re-educate me as to how speaker cables can be directional, need burning in and need to be the same length, would be welcome.

Oh and I have just had a post deleted from What hifi forum without a trace. So no one will know what my reply was to someone who questioned how their reviewers could see different hdmi cables improving picture quality. So the threads over there must be somewhat misleading as a guide to opinions.

Dovercat,

Thanks for the kind words :) If I came across as defensive, apologies too

Okay a few thoughts on the matter. Well one thing I think everyone is in agreement with is the fact that there is a lot of hype and very, very overpriced wire that is marketed inappropriately. I picked up the rest of my Naim cables yesterday and plugged them in last night, as I watched a film I had not seen before I actually have no clue whether they are better or worse, but the track sounded quite weighty and if anything a little overblown in the bass. So at the moment I have no clue if the sound differences I found by testing two cables will be the same (but more on this later)

Well back to the point of overpriced 'rubbish' or at least marketing hype to sell overpriced products...

I had a good chat with the dealer, mainly about my 2 channel system and he had grown up listening too and buying and had used at home a lot of similar equipment. His favorites were my favorites of the past, Naim Nait (original) Naim 42/110 Roberston power amp. Krell KSA 50 oh and horn speakers. When I mentioned the debate on this forum he was kind enough to walk around his dem room and fill my boot with 'stuff' to borrow. Soem old, some new, some traded in covered in dust. What was his view ? Well careful experimentation can bring worthwhile gains but he has never found anything magical with overpriced stuff. He did suggest I tried some Chord Odyssey (been mentioned before) as he liked this cable, but I declined as there was not a long enough dem pair, it's £20 per meter and I had just paid for Naim NACA5 (did a deal at £11/m)

The bits I will comment on, they will all go back, I suspect especially as there are three very overpriced (IMO) interconnects ($2,000 , £650 and £450 a pair........) The $2,000 pair are from a customer - who clearly doesn't use them any more and these are covered in dust !...... The dealer has never used them, I bet if it was a pre-amp or cartridge he would of tried.......

All of this I will cover after the weekend :rolleyes: I also have a £400 mains cable...... I struggle with this idea, but today remain open minded.

Regarding cable burn in and directionality. Well I personally have no clue as to why cables do sound better one way against the other, but they can...
Burn in is very easy to witness. Cables and new equipment seem to take a few weeks to burn in. The sound changes sometimes quite dramatically form often a little bright and harsh in the high frequencies and lean or weak in the lower frequencies to a weightier more dynamic and more fluid sound.

I really don't know why this is, I wonder if something is going on in a similar way to magnetism and orientation of something, again I don't know. I have certainly heard this with cables, amps and other products. But TBO I was surprised how much the sound of the Denon changed in the first 3 weeks or so.

I don't worry about this I simply leave things playing with the door closed for a few days (Miles Davies is playing as I write downstairs)

Regarding links and debate I have seen strong opinions backed up by some explanations (RF interference, surface interaction with coatings, skin effect issues, linearity, non linearity and heaps of complete gobbledegook). I think the point is no-one really knows exactly what is going on. I think a real issue with sound at the subtler end of differences is that if you look at a track on an oscilloscope yo would be terrified about how you might underdstand those sounds. Our ears and brains are awesome at differentiating tones that make voice recognition possible and so on.

One problems with the cable industry is there is a LOT of rubbish and a lot of expensive rubbish. Magazines don't deal with the fact that a £20 interconnect might actually perform nearly as good or even better than a £1000 interconnect. I will let you all know how these dusty old things perform over the weekend.

There is however IMO some good stuff out there at reasonable money that in the right circumstances provides value......

Maybe the reason I have found Naim cable to be good in the past is the fact that it has been developed by an equipment manufacturer. Either to add to the sales of each customer's buy. Or to ensure their equipment performs at it's best. Knowing Naim, probably and hopefully the latter. Don't forget cabling has been around for a long time the upgrade from 'bell' wire was recognised a very, very long time ago (pre 1970 I think)
 
Have fun trying out all the cables, I am suprised your dealer has not ebayed the ultra expensive cables rather than having them gathering dust, he must not be suffering too badly from the econmic downturn.

The thing that gets me about what hifi is that it attributes massive differences in sound and image quality to the accesories without giving any measurements to back up what they hear/see or rationalization as to how these effects are caused. Why does one make the bass tighter while another opens up the sound stage, or one make the image sharper while another makes motion more smooth on the screen? It gives the impression they are experts at seeing and hearing things but not at understanding why.

I can see burn in having an effect on CD players, amplifiers and especially speakers, due to lots of electronic components and mechanical parts. But on wire I find it a bit harder to rationalize.

If speaker cable is AC I find the idea of directional speaker cables even harder to rationalize.

Sound travels relatively slowly and delays are used to determine spatial clues or if very close together cause a muddying of the sound so equal speaker distance to my ears makes sense. But electricty travels almost as fast as light, so I find it hard to believe my ears - brain could distinguish the delay between cable lengths.


Different speaker cables I can see having an effect up to the point you have good quality cable that is not lossing any audible quality. I would expect this to be cheap to do by increasing the gauge and making better connections, copper is not extremely expensive. Going higher quality or exotic metals just stikes me as odd.

Analogue interconnectors I can see having differences due to signal loss and noise entering a poorly shielded cable, the shielding and connectors having the biggest effect.


The follow lot of accessories I can not understand how what hifi can see subtle to blantant differences in the image and sound quality. Like better colours, sharper cleaner image, smother motion, tighter deeper bass, cleaner treble, wider sound stage, etc...

Digital cables particularly those with error correction I would expect to either work perfectly or go horribly wrong.

Power cable, shielding if it is poor and effecting other cables, I can see making a difference, but I would assume different cable routing or adequate shielding on interconnetors to be a better solution. RF shielding to protect the power cable strikes me as odd, unless a power conditioner is also being used.

Audiophile quality fuses just strike me as a bizzare idea.

Power conditioners I can see making a diffference if I had problems on my power supply. If it also had a surge protector and I suffered from power surges I can see it being worth while, but would expect it to be cheap.

Equipment racks as long as they are stable and well built I can not see having different effects on sound quality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had a good chat with the dealer, mainly about my 2 channel system and he had grown up listening too and buying and had used at home a lot of similar equipment. His favorites were my favorites of the past, Naim Nait (original) Naim 42/110 Roberston power amp. Krell KSA 50 oh and horn speakers. When I mentioned the debate on this forum he was kind enough to walk around his dem room and fill my boot with 'stuff' to borrow.

Did he mention any way to measure the difference the cable makes to the end audio or was listenting to them and deciding yourself the only guide ?

I guess just like the manufacturers it would make the dealers life much easier with regard to cable selling if objective evidence could be provided.

I'm genuinely think if dropping a line to Mythbusters but I suspect the subject matter isn't bizzar enough to warrant air time.

AVI
 
Last edited:
AVi,

No he certainly doesn't measure anything. Miles Davis is still playing in the background I will be playing a few film clips to the girlfriend today to see if she can hear any differences (I have not tried the cables back to QED yet on the full system).

If anyone lives in Herts pls PM me I'll be brave enough to have another independent opinion over a coffee ;)
 
I have just been browsing this thread and remember seeing a range of 'kettle cables' priced at £150 - £300 in whfi with all sorts of 'exotic' claims.

Are these really worth more than my CD player? Perhaps they are - I don't know but I would not buy one.

Try it with your kettle it makes your brew taste alot better:D
 
Did he mention any way to measure the difference the cable makes to the end audio or was listenting to them and deciding yourself the only guide ?

I guess just like the manufacturers it would make the dealers life much easier with regard to cable selling if objective evidence could be provided.

You make a very reasonable point :smashin:. The problem is that cables are only a part of the whole of the hifi system.

With the two systems I have in use at present swapping cables in one system makes a subtle but important difference in the way violins are presented in their upper registers, but in the other system the equivalent swap makes no difference (to my ears). Both systems use the same CD player and both use Martin Logan speakers (but different models), the main difference is that one uses one Quad 909 amp whilst the other uses a Balanced Audio Technology VK6200 amp with four channels for (sort of!) bi-amping. The BAT amp reveals more nuances in the music but by the same token not all revelations enhance listening pleasure. Using a VDH cable after the CD player ameliorates a problem but makes no audible difference to the set-up with the Quad.

Going back to the What Hifi reviews I find the problem is that they will describe a product as having a particular effect and implying that that will be the case whatever it is used with :rolleyes:. I personally find that rather simplistic approach of very limited value. To review with reference to all the possible associated equipment on the market, however, would obviously be impractical.

Whilst measurements would be of interest to many contributors of this forum I doubt that they would be make any sense to the majority of potential purchasers, and could even confuse them and restrict sales.

In the end it comes down to the integrity of the salesman. I sometimes buy second-hand from a dealer who is happy to deliver the equipment and leave it for week to evaluate without any pressure to complete the sale :cool:. Whilst he will advise on things to try, if asked what the differences between equipment is he will always say that that is for me to decide. Then there are salesmen chasing a quick profit, whose "advice" is based solely on their commission. Funny enough they tend not to want you to have equipment on trial with either no deposit or full refund if not happy :mad:.

One thing I would be interested in understanding more about is the methodology and resolution of objective measurements and how they compare with the resolution and sensitivity of the human ear (of which of course there are millions of variations). Is anyone aware of any research into this, as so many of these debates come down to whether the ear or measurement has greater resolution.
 
Okay guys, first review.......

The very expensive Naim mains cable. I have been playing background music to burn the speaker cables in and get things warm. Having Miles Davis playing in the basement is no bad thing :smashin:

Well I played a track to my girlfriend, who has a bit of a cold and is anything but an AV holic. The first run was with the Naim cable, we listened then time for a change (Jane had no clue what I was changing)

We went back and forward and the sound was actually alarmingly apparent. Jane's comments on first and second (fist being Naim, second std kettle lead) both into the Oppo playing CD -We are hardly pushing the boat out here this is a £380 DVD machine playing CD.....

Jane's comments :

First :

More natural and realistic, better bass, trumpet is more in the room. More depth, much more believable.

Second :

More higher frequencies and more 'hiss' and shimmer on the cymbols, sounds more like a recording. Bass not as good, don't like it as much.

Well for me it was genuinely quite a surprise, the sound was much more natural in tone and texture more body in the mid but no softening of notes or clarity. The clarity and sense of 'blackness' in the background improved noticeably. There was something surprisingly correct about the Naim cable.

If this was £60 I would buy it no question at £400 it makes no sense for the scenario we were listening to.

I asked Jane the question. If you had spent £10,000 on system would this be worth £400 and she said absolutely yes. Then She said could you buy one of these and spend less !

Will I keep it highly unlikely, I had no intention of doing so and I have only plugged it in to a DVD player that costs less than the cable, but the sonic differences are there no question :rolleyes:

For me this has taught me to consider mains leads, maybe a £50 lead will be nearly as good ? I suspect not and I have been told by a number of people that this cable is good. I didn't expect anything in the scenario here.

You know what given the debate here I was actually hoping to say it made no difference and stick to the known differences (to me anyway) of speaker cables. But I am surprised TBO at just how good this is.

It's not life changing my system without does not sound rubbish but the step forward is noticeable and the darn thing works......

Wish it was considerably less. Because it is definitely NOT £400 worth of parts
 
One thing I would be interested in understanding more about is the methodology and resolution of objective measurements and how they compare with the resolution and sensitivity of the human ear (of which of course there are millions of variations). Is anyone aware of any research into this, as so many of these debates come down to whether the ear or measurement has greater resolution.

To briefly deal with this...

The ear is spectacularly INsensitive as a measuring device and even the most basic of signal measuring tools are more accurate. Particularly at either end of the frequency spectrum, it requires really quite huge differences in material to be identifiable by the ear (see articles on equal-loudness contours / dBA).

Even in terms of SPL, an average person can only identify changes in level of ~1dB or more (in normal listening environments) which again is far less sensitive than other equipment.
 
Okay another series of tests. This time the Naim lead into the Denon vs standard Kettle. Playing scene 1 of Closer... (strong music backing the scene) no picture playing

Jane primed again for option 1 and option 2.

Well, a bit more difficult but the conclusion was the same as mine..... I only shared my view after writing down Jane's view .....

This time the situation was very different. Option 1 was more 'emotive' to use Jane's words. It was fuller with more projection.

Option 2 was a little duller and restrained, somehow a little bland in comparison. The difference was there but not as clear as before. Jane preferred option 1 and so did I :thumbsup: There was consistnancy between us.

For me option 1 was a little clearer with more dynamics and more tangible than option 2.

Now wait for this - option 1 was the standard lead, option 2 the Naim lead......:eek:

Very, very intriguing. I'm so glad I said nothing and asked Jane for comments. I came the same conclusion but kept silent. For whatever reason the lead was better with the Oppo and worse with the Denon....

I would say the difference was 50% or more with the Oppo than the Denon. Two things are clear to me. They DO make a difference, but you MUST try them at home, this lead reduced the performance with my Denon 3800.......


:confused::confused::confused:
 
To briefly deal with this...

The ear is spectacularly INsensitive as a measuring device and even the most basic of signal measuring tools are more accurate. Particularly at either end of the frequency spectrum, it requires really quite huge differences in material to be identifiable by the ear (see articles on equal-loudness contours / dBA).

Even in terms of SPL, an average person can only identify changes in level of ~1dB or more (in normal listening environments) which again is far less sensitive than other equipment.

Many thanks for the reply Ben, but you don't refer to the research upon which you base your statement, or does your reply come into the area of common knowledge? If the ear is not so sensitive in the areas you mention, what is it sensitive to, that makes for the differences that people hear between different cables when listening to music?

I have often wondered whether the integrity of the connectors may be responsible for altering (for better or worse) the quality of signal. would this account for differences heard, at least between cheap and mid range cables? I don't know the answer and wonder if anyone has seen results of research into this.
 
Fascinating stuff IWC, and thanks for taking the time and trouble to share. I think you highlight the problem of discussing or reviewing cables, which is that the result is very dependant upon what they are used with.

You are quite right to emphasise that these components must be tried at home.
 
If the ear is not so sensitive in the areas you mention, what is it sensitive to, that makes for the differences that people hear between different cables when listening to music?

The human auditory system is sensitive to frequencies from about 20 Hz to a maximum of around 20,000 Hz, although the upper hearing limit decreases with age. Within this range, the human ear is most sensitive between 1 and 5 kHz, largely due to the resonance of the ear canal and the transfer function of the ossicles of the middle ear.

The perception of difference may be due to physiological reasons, psychological reasons or actual differences in the electrical properties of the cable etc. I guess the last point (electrical properties) can be objectively measured in addition to measuring the actual end audio for detailed analysis using different cables in a controlled test. If the sound measures the same and the cables electrical properties measure the same what does that leave?

AVI
 
Last edited:
Many thanks for the reply Ben, but you don't refer to the research upon which you base your statement, or does your reply come into the area of common knowledge? If the ear is not so sensitive in the areas you mention, what is it sensitive to, that makes for the differences that people hear between different cables when listening to music?

I have often wondered whether the integrity of the connectors may be responsible for altering (for better or worse) the quality of signal. would this account for differences heard, at least between cheap and mid range cables? I don't know the answer and wonder if anyone has seen results of research into this.

Hi again.

It's fairly common knowledge really, and pretty old research too so has stood the test of time. See articles on equal-loudness contours, Fletcher-Munson curves, dB(A) weighting etc. etc.

As for connectors, they absolutely matter for higher bandwidth signals, but again we return to the fact that in electrical terms, audio signals are very low bandwidth and can put up with a lot of punishment before becoming audibly different.

Neutrik, for example, spec that the contact resistance of their XLR connectors be less then 0.003ohms. This compares with 0.0835ohms per metre for a good quality interconnect cable which would need to be at least 100m long before its own resistance caused an audible signal loss.
 
Okay, final summary for the Naim mains cable .....

Worked well and made a very repeatable audible difference with the Oppo DVD player as noted.

It was worse with the Denon 3800, I was unable to try with the P7 as the connector was different.

Final time with the AV8 was interesting overall better with out the Naim cable and a normal IEC mains lead but there was some winners and losers.

The Naim lead does seem to improve the higher frequencies, probably on all components. But it also reduces them and can sound a little flat and lifeless. A definite rolling off at the top end. There is a little more upper mid texture and tangibility to the sound with the AV8 and definately the Oppo but I was unable to hear this with the Denon.

The bad news is there is an apparent reduction in dynamics with the AV8 and the Denon. But the Oppo really sang with the lead in complete contrast...

If the cable had performed consistently as it did with the oppo it would have got a :smashin: if it had performed as it did with the Denon it would of got a :thumbsdow ....... The AV8 was a bit of both but overall worse.

My gut on this is that it MAY be a very useful addition BUT you will have to try at home. At £400 it's a silly price at £60-100 I would say borrow one and you might be very pleased. If I used the Oppo for CD replay (which I don't) and it was £60 I would definately keep it.

If it made this much difference to a top end CD player at £400 it would be a very good buy (not withstanding the lack of components for that money)

If I had never tried it with the Oppo I would say :thumbsdow load of ******

No wonder reviewers are vague. One thing is for sure these things make some dfference, my Girlie confirmed I am not deaf :thumbsup: or suffering from delusions :rolleyes:
 
The human auditory system is sensitive to frequencies from about 20 Hz to a maximum of around 20,000 Hz, although the upper hearing limit decreases with age. Within this range, the human ear is most sensitive between 1 and 5 kHz, largely due to the resonance of the ear canal and the transfer function of the ossicles of the middle ear.

I wasn't thinking so much about the range but the resolution within. My apologies if my terminology is askew.

As an example and without too much boring background; I found myself comparing and swapping interconnects a couple of years ago. For some reason I had the feeling that a techlink (fairly cheap) cable was not giving me such a convincing musical experience as a QED cable (roughly low to middle price). Listening to the overall sound (Rachmaninov 1st Symphony IIRC) didn't really help me so I concentrated on a very short passage where against the full orchestra playing full bore there was what sounded like a splashy shoosh which I assumed to be a cymbal. Listening with the QED cable revealed a tap before the shooshy sound (do excuse my description). Intrigued I substituted a home built cable and lo and behold the instrument was revealed to be, I think, a tambourine with a tap and the sound of the bells. I spent some time swapping back and forth and found that my initial hearings were repeatable in that the instrument was defined and recognisable with one cable but indistinct and unrecognisable with another. It is that distinction that I refer to as resolution and it is in the recognition of such nuances where I wonder how the ear might differ from "mechanical" measurements.

I have come to think that it is the resolution of such subtle nuances that makes for a more convincing illusion of reality from hifi. My question is can such subtleties which the ear can detect be measured and what do they look like? I must emphasise that these distinctions are audible when using a Quad II forty and BAT amp but that the resolution (as I refer to it) was not detectable (at least by me) with a Quad 909 amp. (The retail price of the Quad II forty is three the 909 and the BAT nine times - all bought second-hand in case you think I might be completely bonkers or very rich!)

This is why I think that in comparing cables the associated equipment matters and makes me ask questions about the methodology and resolution of test equipment used to substantiate claims that there is no difference.
 
Last edited:
Interesting stuff...

The mains cable result (works well and then not so well with other kit) doesn't surprise me - I have had some tests on compnents where the single power cable upgrade has seemed to minimise the soundstage compared to standard IEC cable. Best way is to try and have upgraded mains across the entire system IMHO and of course dedicated spur and/or power conditioner.

Was interesting today as we played with my friend's kit and a selection of Chord and non Chord (Cambridge Audio) cables. He has a CD and external dac and we swapped out the cables progressively and boy did the upgraded Coax cable make a difference to start with!!! This was the Prodac Pro at around £80-90. I didn't have my Signature Coax cable with me - that would have been very interesting!:eek:

When then coupled with the Signature Anlogue cables the difference from the standard CD was immense (one Kooks track was so different it made you scratch you head in disbelief). We then degraded the cables on the DAC to Cambridge Audio and then changed the analogue cable from CD to amp (wasn't orginally CA cable - around £50) with some Chameleon Silvers and did back to back tests. With this configuration the sound was still slightly better with the external DAC but it was a lot closer.....

It just shows you need to demo play with cables with your kit at home.

Anthony
 
I wasn't thinking so much about the range but the resolution within. My apologies if my terminology is askew.

As an example and without too much boring background; I found myself comparing and swapping interconnects a couple of years ago. For some reason I had the feeling that a techlink (fairly cheap) cable was not giving me such a convincing musical experience as a QED cable (roughly low to middle price). Listening to the overall sound (Rachmaninov 1st Symphony IIRC) didn't really help me so I concentrated on a very short passage where against the full orchestra playing full bore there was what sounded like a splashy shoosh which I assumed to be a cymbal. Listening with the QED cable revealed a tap before the shooshy sound (do excuse my description). Intrigued I substituted a home built cable and lo and behold the instrument was revealed to be, I think, a tambourine with a tap and the sound of the bells. I spent some time swapping back and forth and found that my initial hearings were repeatable in that the instrument was defined and recognisable with one cable but indistinct and unrecognisable with another. It is that distinction that I refer to as resolution and it is in the recognition of such nuances where I wonder how the ear might differ from "mechanical" measurements.

I have come to think that it is the resolution of such subtle nuances that makes for a more convincing illusion of reality from hifi. My question is can such subtleties which the ear can detect be measured and what do they look like? I must emphasise that these distinctions are audible when using a Quad II forty and BAT amp but that the resolution (as I refer to it) was not detectable (at least by me) with a Quad 909 amp. (The retail price of the Quad II forty is three the 909 and the BAT nine times - all bought second-hand in case you think I might be completely bonkers or very rich!)

This is why I think that in comparing cables the associated equipment matters and makes me ask questions about the methodology and resolution of test equipment used to substantiate claims that there is no difference.

I am with you on this one. ;)

I wish someone could tell me which cable or interconnect to buy by simple measurements. TBH I am not sure amplifier specs do that either, they do differentiate performance but lab criteria is only part of the story.....

Sure if you have as pair of apogee's with their legendary sub 1 ohm load. You know most amps simply won't drive them. But with an easy 8 ohm load why buy Krell power amp on spec alone ? - oops sorry running off topic again :suicide:
 
Listening to the overall sound (Rachmaninov 1st Symphony IIRC)

Ah. I can stop you there. I'm afraid despite the best efforts of engineers around the globe, there isn't an interconnect yet discovered that will make Rach sound good ;) :rotfl:
 
Ah. I can stop you there. I'm afraid despite the best efforts of engineers around the globe, there isn't an interconnect yet discovered that will make Rach sound good ;) :rotfl:

Oh very droll :D. I have to admit that he's not my favourite composer, but just occasionally I like a good wallow and he does remind me, by comparison, just how great the likes of Beethoven, Bach and Shostakovich (some of the time) are.
 
This is why I think that in comparing cables the associated equipment matters and makes me ask questions about the methodology and resolution of test equipment used to substantiate claims that there is no difference.

Here's some info on auditory theory that is used at college. Section 2.4.3 discusses complex sound and the affect of fatigue and adaptation (Excerpt from Music Sound and Sensation by Fritz Winkl)

Due to physiological effects we may subjectively perceive a difference even when non exists. Also our attention to elements of sound can influence what differences we believe we hear when listening to complex sound. The loudness and duration of sound can also affect how we perceive the following sounds.

That's why I believe it's important to objectively measure the electrical properties of the cables and the effect on audio output. The differences people hear may have more to do with physiology than electrical science.

For a bit of fun try this test - Click here

Do you observe a difference and does that mean there is "real" difference ? Would using an objective measuring device produce the same answer as the human brain ? I think this is why we talk about the placebo effect because it's known that physiology can conspire against us when subjectively attempting to "objectively" determine a difference.

Lecture 007 Hearing II

AVI
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom