Question about cable strategy!

[rbbert]

OK, these aren't really cables although it seems to me they are part of the amp/cable/speaker unit (if one uses them). This review is from "Myles' magazine"; does anyone here have any more useful information about this product?

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue61/stein_speaker.htm

 

[Groucho]

And I predict this one will too and it will probably be sooner rather than later. Get ready for a mugging from the 'double-blind everything sounds the same gang.'

Rather than try to prove that cables are a ripoff, the question to ask is, why woudn't they be?

The thing is, if I was a not-very-capable manufacturer looking to make money out of audiophiles, I would choose cables as my ripoff of choice:

(a) It's very hard to make one that doesn't work in the simplest sense (not shorted out, not broken)
(b) No one expects cables to meet any sort of technical specification beyond the simplest requirements
(c) It is well known that people 'hear what they want to hear', and respond to the look of equipment, claims of exotic materials, special 'weave', advertising and so on. Audiophiles seem not to believe this.
(d) There is no scientific rationale behind claims of the sonic properties of cables, and the audiophiles don't even expect there to be one.
(e) There is no requirement to provide any proof whatsoever that your cable sounds any different from a piece of ordinary wire. Chances are high that the punter will fool himself into liking it - so high, that you can even offer a money back guarantee, pretty safe in the knowledge that it won't be used. (You can even mention a 're-stocking fee' in the small print, but the customer won't care in his eagerness to take delivery of this small package that's going to change his world for only $500).
(e) Even if the punter fools himself into thinking he doesn't like the cable (these things can occasionally go either way dependent on the weather, traffic etc.), just tell him that it needs burning in. It's almost certain he will begin to like it, believing he has invested time, effort and creativity into shaping it to his own tastes.
(f) Real electronic equipment is hard to build, and involves safety approvals and so on. Unlike cables.

As you shell out real money on cables and other 'tweaks' you should be asking yourself why the manufacturer wouldn't be scamming you. Do you really think that they have magical powers that can imbue a cable with 'presence', 'soundstage', 'openness'? Why on earth would you think that? Do you really believe that the shiny-suited salesman, or the multi-doctorate proprietor of the company (they always are aren't they?), really can hear the difference between their cable and a bit of old screened cable? Of course not! What makes you think they can? Do you make a habit of giving your money away to anyone who makes up an imaginative story? When you've bought your cable, why wouldn't the manufacturer start laughing uncontrollably, rolling around naked in piles of your cash? Because he's got a really difficult problem to attend to? Turns out his next generation SPDIF cable has a lack of focus and bass rhythm? Of course not! His only problem is that other manufacturers also know the secret of audiophile cash. But hey, there's plenty of it to go round...

 

[MylesBAstor]

Rather than try to prove that cables are a ripoff, the question to ask is, why woudn't they be?

The thing is, if I was a not-very-capable manufacturer looking to make money out of audiophiles, I would choose cables as my ripoff of choice:

(a) It's very hard to make one that doesn't work in the simplest sense (not shorted out, not broken)
(b) No one expects cables to meet any sort of technical specification beyond the simplest requirements
(c) It is well known that people 'hear what they want to hear', and respond to the look of equipment, claims of exotic materials, special 'weave', advertising and so on. Audiophiles seem not to believe this.
(d) There is no scientific rationale behind claims of the sonic properties of cables, and the audiophiles don't even expect there to be one.
(e) There is no requirement to provide any proof whatsoever that your cable sounds any different from a piece of ordinary wire. Chances are high that the punter will fool himself into liking it - so high, that you can even offer a money back guarantee, pretty safe in the knowledge that it won't be used. (You can even mention a 're-stocking fee' in the small print, but the customer won't care in his eagerness to take delivery of this small package that's going to change his world for only $500).
(e) Even if the punter fools himself into thinking he doesn't like the cable (these things can occasionally go either way dependent on the weather, traffic etc.), just tell him that it needs burning in. It's almost certain he will begin to like it, believing he has invested time, effort and creativity into shaping it to his own tastes.
(f) Real electronic equipment is hard to build, and involves safety approvals and so on. Unlike cables.

As you shell out real money on cables and other 'tweaks' you should be asking yourself why the manufacturer wouldn't be scamming you. Do you really think that they have magical powers that can imbue a cable with 'presence', 'soundstage', 'openness'? Why on earth would you think that? Do you really believe that the shiny-suited salesman, or the multi-doctorate proprietor of the company (they always are aren't they?), really can hear the difference between their cable and a bit of old screened cable? Of course not! What makes you think they can? Do you make a habit of giving your money away to anyone who makes up an imaginative story? When you've bought your cable, why wouldn't the manufacturer start laughing uncontrollably, rolling around naked in piles of your cash? Because he's got a really difficult problem to attend to? Turns out his next generation SPDIF cable has a lack of focus and bass rhythm? Of course not! His only problem is that other manufacturers also know the secret of audiophile cash. But hey, there's plenty of it to go round...

Another audio conspiracy theory. Thin on facts, heavy on allegations.

I'm curious what cables you've listened to in your system to come to such a conclusion?

 

[Groucho]

Another audio conspiracy theory. Thin on facts, heavy on allegations.

I'm curious what cables you've listened to in your system to come to such a conclusion?

It's not for me to prove they're a ripoff, and my own engineering background would make me incapable of overcoming my scepticism when listening to them - even if they really did have magical properties of changing the sound to better than perfect.

But my questions are: how do you and your fellow audiophiles hold the manufacturers to account when you hand over your cash in such liberal quantities? Are you aware of your own susceptibility to suggestion? Again I ask, why wouldn't the manufacturer simply throw together a slightly unusual looking cable and make up a silly price, then double it?

 

[FrantzM]

Another audio conspiracy theory. Thin on facts, heavy on allegations.

I'm curious what cables you've listened to in your system to come to such a conclusion?

Not conspiracy theories IMHO. Interesting questions that would need to be asked again IMHO. If I have a captive market willing to substantiate my claims however tenuous and insubstantial they may be when confronted to tests, I would simply price things to the limits of my customers sensibilities.

OTOH the customer is not forced to buy expensive cables. Whatever legal and legit ways they derive their pleasure, I would say it is fair game. I know or haven't heard of anyone who went broke for buying an expensive cable .. Contrast that to a trip to a Casino where it is known that people have lost more than their shirt and fortunes...

 

[Groucho]

OTOH the customer is not forced to buy expensive cables. Whatever legal and legit ways they derive their pleasure, I would say it is fair game. I know or haven't heard of anyone who went broke for buying an expensive cable .. Contrast that to a trip to a Casino where it is known that people have lost more than their shirt and fortunes...

That's exactly right. And I actually think the analogy with gambling addiction is quite apt.

Have you noticed that the cable myth has spread to the high street? Try to buy a TV or a DVR these days, and they'll hardly let you out of the shop until you've spent £30 on a 'gold plated' HDMI cable.

 

[MylesBAstor]

It's not for me to prove they're a ripoff, and my own engineering background would make me incapable of overcoming my scepticism when listening to them - even if they really did have magical properties of changing the sound to better than perfect.

But my questions are: how do you and your fellow audiophiles hold the manufacturers to account when you hand over your cash in such liberal quantities? Are you aware of your own susceptibility to suggestion? Again I ask, why wouldn't the manufacturer simply throw together a slightly unusual looking cable and make up a silly price, then double it?

Who really cares but you? Let's see. We're all blithering idiots and need you to save us. C'mon this isn't a code blue but a hobby.

And why stop with cables? Aren't high-end electronics, speakers, cartridges, digital rip offs too?

The market is always the determining factor.

 

[Gregadd]

The thing is, if I was a not-very-capable manufacturer looking to make money out of audiophiles, I would choose cables as my ripoff of choice:

First of all thanks for the advice. I've benn searching for a get rich quick scheme and have no engineering background.
Secondly thanks for not calling us "Audiophools" or some other colorful terminology.
Lastly if you have not already you might want to read this. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue62/subjectivist.htm Have a cold one first. I'm sorry it's a warm pint in the UK?

 

[Groucho]

First of all thanks for the advice.

Don't mention it.

Lastly if you have not already you might want to read this. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue62/subjectivist.htm Have a cold one first. I'm sorry it's a warm pint in the UK?

Thanks. Not warm exactly - it's below room temperature, about 12 degrees C.

As I say, I'm not trying to prove a negative, just asking what it is that you think the manufacturers are doing that imbues their pieces of wire with sonic properties.

From the article:

Subjectivists know differences in sonics are real, whereas objectivists reject any differences they hear that does not have scientific proof as placebo effects. An attitude I will never understand as I trust what I hear. Hearing what I like is more enjoyable than trying to endure what I don't. Whatever makes music more enjoyable for anyone is fine by me, even if I don't understand the reasons why.

Yes, it's all completely harmless. As MylesBastor asked, who cares? Even if it's a placebo, and it makes you happy then fine.

But remember that the exact opposite can also be true: it is possible to get into your head a negative placebo, that convinces you that your system is deficient. If an objectivist switches on his system one day and it sounds dull and lacklustre he knows that it's more than likely just his mood, or his ears are tired, or he's got a cold. It'll sound good the next day, hopefully. The subjectivist cannot do this, as he trusts his ears, and it's a one way trip: once he thinks he has become aware of something bad in the system, he can never enjoy it again until he has fixed it. And he can never fix it.

I think that you can be a happy, contented objectivist more easily than a subjectivist. And more frugal (the subject of this section of the forum) as well. If you are currently a struggling, poor subjectivist, you can cure yourself by setting up your own blind experiments and proving that you really cannot hear the difference between cables. Join us!

 

[rbbert]

The thing is, in the used marketplace (where I think the vast majority of audiophiles buy their cables), you can pay almost anything you want. And "closeout" or other sales where new cables are 50% or less of "list price" are very common.

 

[Bill Hart]

......



If an objectivist switches on his system one day and it sounds dull and lacklustre he knows that it's more than likely just his mood, or his ears are tired, or he's got a cold. It'll sound good the next day, hopefully. The subjectivist cannot do this, as he trusts his ears, and it's a one way trip: once he thinks he has become aware of something bad in the system, he can never enjoy it again until he has fixed it. And he can never fix it.......

[Y]ou can cure yourself by setting up your own blind experiments and proving that you really cannot hear the difference between cables. Join us!

Groucho: You obviously have strongly held views, and I won't attempt to change them, but
you observed that a listener's mood or fatigue can influence his perceptions. That suggests that what the equipment is doing, and what the listener is hearing, may be two different phenomena.
I'm not sure you can fairly characterize those of us who 'measure by ear' as unable to enjoy our systems and bound to an endless quest to keep buying worthless tweaks. I know what's right about my current system and what can be 'fixed' or improved by gear or tweaks - based on my perception of what sounds 'right' to me. Yes, I will grant you there is an unending parade of stuff in the marketplace - some of which are simply 'me too' products in the area of cables or tweaks. But- and I can say this with some confidence in my own ears and experience- there are differences in the sound of different wires. Likewise, I hear differences in different tubes that are otherwise the same 'spec.' And I also hear differences in the various couplers and decouplers that my equipment rests on.
I started with a pair of speakers, Quad ESLs, in around 1974, that I continued to use, in one form or another, with improvements in tube amplification, turntables and associated equipment, for nearly 3 decades. Over that time, I did experiment with different speaker wire and interconnects. And my current system, using horns, is, with similar upgrades in turntable and electronics, the one I started building 6 years ago. Is it perfect? No. Can it ever be? Nope. Do I get enjoyment from it? Absolutely. Will I continue to judiciously try to improve it as time goes on? Yep.
I could also live with my old ESLs again and would do so happily, knowing what I'm trading off.
You obviously have some experience with this stuff, based on the views you have expressed. I'm not sure you can pigeonhole all enthusiasts who don't buy into the 'all wire sounds the same' as gullible or deluded. I, for one, am aiming for a level of aliveness and tonality with my system. That may be different than the objective of another listener, who treasures other attributes. Does that mean it's all voodoo and no science? Absolutely not. But while I'm willing to respect technical specifications and bench tests, the ultimate arbiter is my ears.

 

[amirm]

I think that you can be a happy, contented objectivist more easily than a subjectivist.

Only if you choose to NOT come on forums and try to convert the other side to your point of view . I have seen so many get angry, frustrated, and extremely non-civil in this process. I don't call that happiness at all. You can blame the subjectivists as you see fit. One thing I have found to be true about them: they love music and listen to a lot of it. We should keep that in mind as we argue. That if both sides listen to music, that should be the common theme that keeps us close, rather than enemies at the border.

If you are currently a struggling, poor subjectivist, you can cure yourself by setting up your own blind experiments and proving that you really cannot hear the difference between cables. Join us!

If you have done that, you also know that they are not fun at all. Doing such tests right takes a lot of energy and often good bit of resources. Take the cable test. Which gear do you have that accommodates fast switchover?

It should be a non-goal to convert anyone of their extreme point of view. All we can hope for us to advance our knowledge by sharing information. Chastising one camp or the other of their point of view simply does not work. If one is a man of science, that bit needs to be accepted as fact.

 

[treitz3]

...It should be a non-goal to convert anyone of their extreme point of view. All we can hope for us to advance our knowledge by sharing information. Chastising one camp or the other of their point of view simply does not work...

Ed Zachary. If the common goal is to enjoy the music?

Tom

 

[JackD201]

Join us!

No thanks. Practicing one religion is enough for me.

 

[Groucho]

Only if you choose to NOT come on forums and try to convert the other side to your point of view . I have seen so many get angry, frustrated, and extremely non-civil in this process. I don't call that happiness at all. You can blame the subjectivists as you see fit. One thing I have found to be true about them: they love music and listen to a lot of it. We should keep that in mind as we argue. That if both sides listen to music, that should be the common theme that keeps us close, rather than enemies at the border.


If you have done that, you also know that they are not fun at all. Doing such tests right takes a lot of energy and often good bit of resources. Take the cable test. Which gear do you have that accommodates fast switchover?

It should be a non-goal to convert anyone of their extreme point of view. All we can hope for us to advance our knowledge by sharing information. Chastising one camp or the other of their point of view simply does not work. If one is a man of science, that bit needs to be accepted as fact.

Hopefully you can tell I've got a sense of humour, and I'm not the sort of person to become non-civil when discussing this sort of thing!

This section of the forum is The Frugal Audiophile and the original post was about how much to spend on cables. Clearly I'd recommend a very small proportion of your system's budget, but another idea to save a small amount of money might be to buy the shortest cables that you can conveniently get away with. But here's a question: if I drew a graph of added sonic pleasure vs. cable length, what would it look like? A rising straight line passing through the origin (i.e. cable length 0m = zero added pleasure), or a Gaussian shape with the peak at about 0.5m? Or how about a token nod to objectivism by saying that maximum pleasure = 0m, with a logarithmic decline with increasing length ("Obviously no cable would be best, but seeing as we have to have one, this $1000 one will do the less damage than this $20 one, but more damage than this $3000 one")?

 

[Gregadd]

Groucho- Your screen name notwithstanding. Could you share your happiness with us. So far all you have done is well grouch(pun intended). We have an introduction forum. Come on spread a little objectivist sunshine on us.
gregadd

 

[Groucho]

Groucho- Your screen name notwithstanding. Could you share your happiness with us. So far all you have done is well grouch(pun intended). We have an introduction forum. Come on spread a little objectivist sunshine on us.
gregadd

No, I've lost you. A light hearted (but not completely pointless) question about the ideal length for a sonic-pleasure enhancing cable, and it's "grouchy"?

 

[Steve Williams]

A light hearted (but not completely pointless) question about the ideal length for a sonic-pleasure enhancing cable

IMO the ideal length of a cable is the distance from one component it connects to another component regardless of the cost of the cable. What's your point

 

[Groucho]

IMO the ideal length of a cable is the distance from one component it connects to another component regardless of the cost of the cable.

But if a cable has sonic properties, then zero length = zero sonic properties, and a long cable = strong sonic properties. Are the cable's sonic properties ('soudstage', 'warmth', 'focus', 'timing', 'presence', 'airiness') an improvement to the sound, or a deviation from perfection? Would a zero length cable be brimming with warmth and presence, or 'neutral' 'clinical' 'cold'? If the audiophile could only arrange his equipment so that cable length was 0.25m, would that be an improvement over 0.5m? Is the audiophile looking for maximum sonic properties from his cable, or minimum? Is the ideal length 0m, or 100m or, by handy coincidence 0.5m?

 

[Bill Hart]

But if a cable has sonic properties, then zero length = zero sonic properties, and a long cable = strong sonic properties. Are the cable's sonic properties ('soudstage', 'warmth', 'focus', 'timing', 'presence', 'airiness') an improvement to the sound, or a deviation from perfection? Would a zero length cable be brimming with warmth and presence, or 'neutral' 'clinical' 'cold'? If the audiophile could only arrange his equipment so that cable length was 0.25m, would that be an improvement over 0.5m? Is the audiophile looking for maximum sonic properties from his cable, or minimum? Is the ideal length 0m, or 100m or, by handy coincidence 0.5m?

There was an interesting piece in an old HiFi+ about the sonic differences among different kinds of set-ups: short interconnect/long speaker cable; long interconnect/short speaker cable and short cables all the way around. I think the conclusions about sonic differences had to do with impedance, but the author concluded that some components were better suited for one type of cable set-up over another.