Paskinn, I'm still waiting for reliable, repeatable proof as well. But I agree with Mr. T ... I don't believe we will find it here. Frankly, after all these years, I doubt we will find it anywhere.
Reflections on cable pricing insanity
- Thread starter edorr
- Start date
I wouldn't sit on a picket fence waiting for the evidence to come in Ron. How do you measure more fullness and clarity to a bass line that is being played in a live venue for example?
We do not have proof of audibility of cables exactly by the same reason we do not have reliable, repeatable proof of differences between amplifiers, digital sources, digital formats and even between active and passive speakers. No one is interested in spending a lot of time, resources and money to prove something that seems well known for many people just to please a few people we like to debate these matters.
IMH unproven O, differences between cables are audible. Although I never carried proper blind tests I sometimes ask non audiophile friends about opinions about sound quality of different cables in my system, sometimes just to control my opinions. And with some cables the consensus of opinions about the differences has a high correlation. It is enough for me, surely not for any one not participating in these sessions.
Recently I wanted to compare a 1m XLR with a 8m XLR of the same type and brand at the output of the CD player. The difference in frequency response was less than 0.1 dB at 20 kHz due the the increase in capacity. As both cables were connected to the preamplifier it as a fast test and listeners did not know which was which. Curiously two of three listeners used the same words - the sound of the longer cable sounded less natural and more hifi.
BTW, I never have more than one victim per session.
IMH unproven O, differences between cables are audible. Although I never carried proper blind tests I sometimes ask non audiophile friends about opinions about sound quality of different cables in my system, sometimes just to control my opinions. And with some cables the consensus of opinions about the differences has a high correlation. It is enough for me, surely not for any one not participating in these sessions.
Recently I wanted to compare a 1m XLR with a 8m XLR of the same type and brand at the output of the CD player. The difference in frequency response was less than 0.1 dB at 20 kHz due the the increase in capacity. As both cables were connected to the preamplifier it as a fast test and listeners did not know which was which. Curiously two of three listeners used the same words - the sound of the longer cable sounded less natural and more hifi.
BTW, I never have more than one victim per session.
Hello, Ron! Good to see you still around. 
Have you read this yet? http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257.pdf
Now, with the PDF aforementioned? If you didn't accept this as proof and even if you didn't read the whole thing, No problem. You may want to try taking a 1 ohm resistor and place it in line with the positive terminal of the tweeter of both of your speakers. It won't hurt a thing and you would have your proof. Notice I didn't say to place a resistor on the IC. That is for a good reason. One, you would ruin your IC and two, it's easy to place a temporary resistor in line with the leads to the tweeter and place back to a stock condition afterwards. It yields the same end result though. That being a change in the sound.
Changing resistance changes the sound. Well, that's a very layman's way of saying it as it affects much more than that but you get the gist. Cables have resistance, inductance and capacitive qualities, all of which change the sound. The resistance is only one aspect.
Tom
Have you read this yet? http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257.pdf
Now, with the PDF aforementioned? If you didn't accept this as proof and even if you didn't read the whole thing, No problem. You may want to try taking a 1 ohm resistor and place it in line with the positive terminal of the tweeter of both of your speakers. It won't hurt a thing and you would have your proof. Notice I didn't say to place a resistor on the IC. That is for a good reason. One, you would ruin your IC and two, it's easy to place a temporary resistor in line with the leads to the tweeter and place back to a stock condition afterwards. It yields the same end result though. That being a change in the sound.
Changing resistance changes the sound. Well, that's a very layman's way of saying it as it affects much more than that but you get the gist. Cables have resistance, inductance and capacitive qualities, all of which change the sound. The resistance is only one aspect.
Tom
Hello, Ron! Good to see you still around.
Have you read this yet? http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257.pdf
(...)
Tom,
This thesis says that using just frequency response, THD, IMD and noise typical criteria for audibility all decent cables sound the same. Nothing new. The guy learned how to make audio measurements and carry simulations - good for him.
I wonder how many metres of cable the signal had passed through in the studio.
This is an old and tired argument, that does not ad anything new. It was used against high-end electronics - how many cheap ICs have the mixers?, power cables - how long are the power lines that connect your house to the power station, and so on. Audio signatures of components (including cables) are very complex and the way the brain understands them in stereo systems is a problem that can not be solved just using the Audio Precision analyzer and the superposition theorem. I needs a lot of audio and psychoacoustics knowledge.
One think I admire in cable designers is how some of them can create a cable, that independently of the very different systems, has some consistent sonic attributes. For those who know about cables, think about the Valhala or the Kubala Sosna Elation.
Probably one of the best papers out there but very restricted in focus (as it should be otherwise scope on such subject is impossibly large) is that by Jim Brown and Bill Whitlock, looking at Shield Current Induced Noise and showing some considerations affecting cabling structure.
Which concluded with the most important points:
We know audio systems can and do comfortably have wide bandwidth to around 300khz.
Anyway this does not answer or even cover all the questions and aspects, just that there may be more to this than some realise, especially when you then also consider technical/reference ground and its critical use within audio electronics.
Anyway I do feel that whatever is shown for differences in cables is automatically replied with that said measurement/spec of cables is negligable and so inaudible.
Same is always said about jitter even though it has many types such as what is introduced by PSU mains harmonics and not just white noise-random jitter; using this just as an example that the fallback position of negligable spec-measurements are sometimes oversimplified.
Cheers
Orb
Which concluded with the most important points:
We know audio systems can and do comfortably have wide bandwidth to around 300khz.
Anyway this does not answer or even cover all the questions and aspects, just that there may be more to this than some realise, especially when you then also consider technical/reference ground and its critical use within audio electronics.
Anyway I do feel that whatever is shown for differences in cables is automatically replied with that said measurement/spec of cables is negligable and so inaudible.
Same is always said about jitter even though it has many types such as what is introduced by PSU mains harmonics and not just white noise-random jitter; using this just as an example that the fallback position of negligable spec-measurements are sometimes oversimplified.
Cheers
Orb
I'd still like to drill down into whether the best cable is no cable at all - if 1m sounds better than 8m (as was stated earlier), does 0m sound best of all? In many cases a person could connect his source to his ampifier with a 0.1-0.2m cable - which would automatically be cheaper than a longer cable, too.
Or is the very presence of the cable adding something to the signal e.g. effectively filtering interference, or re-synthesising missing information or performing some sort of 'aural exciter' role? In which case the cable might need some optimum length in order to do its work. If so, can the cable's beneficial characteristics be analysed and duplicated for less than the price of a car?
The problem is Groucho a cable in reality has to be judged as part of an active system, case in point look back at some major points Jim Brown and Bill Whitlock said (which I quoted from one AES paper) and that is focused just on one small aspect with considerations for both cable and electronics.
If one blames cables for actively filtering/changing traits, then one also needs to drill down to component/circuity of an audio product as some such as John Curl have strong views how this also affects the sound.
Simple exercise look at how some cables implement the shield and also ground, then wonder if they are all equal in terms of results.
Cheers
Orb
Looked at this a few days ago myself. Pretty compelling. The page with measurements is here:
http://www.shunyata.com/Content/DTCD.html
At first glance of the Shunyata page, I did not read of the existence of reliable, repeatable evidence to prove Shunyata cables can be distinguished from other cables WRT audibility. Did I miss it?
No, you did not. Shunyata show a lot of technical details, but no correlation with sound quality. They probably know that their listening tests are not carried in conditions that could not be considered as proves and prefer not to expose them. IMHO, a wise decision. We can learn more about technical aspects of their products from interviews and contributions of Shunyata people in forums than from their site.
Not the point. Ron is questioning whether there is an audible difference. It's kind of amazing that this continues to be "unknown".
They claim measurable differences which they have published in ads and videos. I am hesitant to call it a white paper.However one could obtain the cables,duplicate the measurements. The results would either be confirmed or disputed.A discussion whether the differences would have any theoretical effect could then be had.Listening evaluations could follow. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Of course one could continue to hold on to their previously held skepticism.
.
Of course one could continue to hold on to their previously held skepticism.
.
Assuming even it would be measurable , is it audible???
there are many kinds of electro magnetic radiation for example,visible light is one of them. Infrared radiation we cannot see but if its there we can measure it.
Light (wkipedia )
Visible light (commonly referred to simply as light) is electromagnetic radiation that is visible to the human eye, and is responsible for the sense of sight.[1] Visible light has a wavelength in the range of about 380 nanometres to about 740 nm – between the invisible infrared, with longer wavelengths and the invisible ultraviolet, with shorter wavelengths.
there are many kinds of electro magnetic radiation for example,visible light is one of them. Infrared radiation we cannot see but if its there we can measure it.
Light (wkipedia )
Visible light (commonly referred to simply as light) is electromagnetic radiation that is visible to the human eye, and is responsible for the sense of sight.[1] Visible light has a wavelength in the range of about 380 nanometres to about 740 nm – between the invisible infrared, with longer wavelengths and the invisible ultraviolet, with shorter wavelengths.
Last edited:
The charts can tell you whether there is a difference - never what sounds better. The only way to ascertain that is through repeated double blind listening test, not staring at some chart. If I recall correctly that is not acceptable proof either. These guys can't win.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |