Objectivist or Subjectivist? Give Me a Break

[Shaffer]

I don't think you have to walk into your high-end shop with a buch of testing equipment. I think it is much simpler than that -- Don't buy crap. Buy quality cable from reputable manufacturers. Don't buy the cheapest stuff. Belden wouldn't be a bad baseline. Even then you'll probably end up paying too much, as the cheapo RCA cable in the bubble pack on the peg sounds the same as long as its not broken, but the quality cable will last longer and look better, and that's all good. The real danger here is not in getting a cable that sounds bad; I suspect that's pretty rare. The danger, in the high end, is paying an absurd amount of money for a cable that doesn't sound any different than the one you could have picked up at Radio Shack for a few bucks.

Tim

At the risk of sounding too frank, you really haven't thought this through.

 

[Atmasphere]

There are several points here:

1) Some cables deliberately add an R/C rolloff. Of course this is audible, but this is not doing what a cable should do, it's what an equalizer or tone control is for.
2) You ***MUST*** test cables in-situ, or you have zero idea how they will interact with other equipment, like driving impedence, current sourcing, etc. While those should not be a problem, the word "should" is there for a reason.
3) As somebody pointed out, the phone company has worked on this a lot. If the tomfoolery about quantum effects, "grain rectification" and the like were true, cross-town telephony would have never worked, let alone cross-continent telephony. It does, ergo silly tomfoolery is tomfoolery.

Agreed.

Now, I have heard cables make a difference in several ways. The first was when somebody got one of the first audiophile speaker cables (that had mind-boggling capacitance), and connected them to a high-end amplifier. The "pop" as the output transistors died (the amp was not stable into such a huge capacitive load, please feel free to point fingers at whichever you like, I'm not going to even name the components) was quite audible as was the "dead silence" that resulted, followed by the sound of windows opening to let out the smell of burning resistor.

Sounds to me like that old Polk Audio speaker cable. Braided litz. I saw a few amps take a dive on that one too.

The second was in a lab, a very carefully set up lab that thanks to equipment design required some RCA single-ended connections. Ok, something sounds wrong. Hm. I did some measurements, and sure enough something was center-clipping. Removed cables, etc. No evidence. Put them back in, no center clipping. Examining some of the connectors (tin on gold bad) showed some corrosion, and removing and reinserting the connectors scraped through it. So MOVING the cable made a difference. The cables should never have been tin on gold (jacks) to begin with, and you may be confident that was resolved promptly, of course.

I wonder some days if that isn't the cause of "improvements" attributed to cables, and if reseating all cables would have a similar effect.

Connectors do matter, there is no real doubt, but all they have to do is get it right. RCA connectors, by their design, kind of suck, but it's hard to get around them.

I use XLRs.

The history of the RCA connection is that the consumer electronics industry saw a market for hifi in the early 50s, but also saw price as a problem. So no output transformers and 600 ohm balanced lines for the preamps... and RCA had this cheap connector with very good bandwidth that they were using to move the tuner signal to the IF circuit in their early televisions. It was rapidly accepted.

It seems to me that you are then introducing a lot of additional acoustical phenomena, which can be hard to measure precisely, into what at heart should be a simple question of signal modification by the cable itself. If two cables give rise to different sounds, then this means that the signal voltages at the output ends of the two cables, for a given signal at the input end, must be different. A natural first step would be to set up a measurement where one subtracts the signal voltage at the output end from the signal voltage at the input end, and looks at the difference signal. It should be easy enough then to see how well this correlates with the theoretical predictions based on the basic resistance, capacitance and inductance parameters of the cable. By such means, one can get to grips with establishing exactly what a particular cable is doing to the signal.

If the two different cables do give rise to different perceived sounds, then it should be possible to correlate these effects with the measurements. As always, though, claims of perceived audible differences only really have value in the context of double-blind tests.

Chris

Yes- you do have to be careful that such a measurement can only be made in the room and on the system where the difference is also perceived. I am suggesting that the actual cable differences may otherwise be hard to measure without some really sophisticated equipment (TDR that I referred to earlier, and at least one poster has confirmed what we found- that what you can see on a TDR can be correlated to audio frequencies). Otherwise its all out to lunch.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

At the risk of sounding too frank, you really haven't thought this through.

At the risk of sounding too frank, I actually have. I haven't just thought it through, I've lived it through. I've got 40 years as a musician behind me and have used more cable, in more critical applications, than most audiophiles would experience in three lifetimes. I have heard audible differences between quality cables; it's called noise or silence. It's called a malfunction.

Tim

 

[Shaffer]

At the risk of sounding too frank, I actually have.

OK, fair enough. Then please answer the questions I asked directly and on point.

 

[Groucho]

As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same. How is a perspective buyer going to know these values? By carrying his testbench to the shop and entertaining the troops by meter-reading, while their costumers leave the store? What are the logistics of choosing cables "scientifically?" Best I can tell, it's a process of walking into a hardware store and choosing something that looks "right," whatever that may be. Very scientific, indeed, or more accurately, the choice is based on a belief system. That pretty much defines the concept of religion. Please remind us, where does the science come into this exercise?

I think it is very simple. The cable sceptic thinks of cables like you think of paper towels or carpet tacks i.e. a purely utilitarian item that does a very simple job perfectly well as long as it has been designed and manufactured to a minimum standard. He thinks he knows how a cable works. If someone, anyone, could show him he was wrong about this, he would take notice, but because no one has any evidence whatsoever, he carries on blissfully spending the money on better speakers, holidays, fine wines, cars and motor boats. The rest he saves for a rainy day.

 

[rbbert]

At the risk of sounding too frank, I actually have. I haven't just thought it through, I've lived it through. I've got 40 years as a musician behind me and have used more cable, in more critical applications, than most audiophiles would experience in three lifetimes. I have heard audible differences between quality cables; it's called noise or silence. It's called a malfunction.

Tim

When I have disassembled most Radio Shack cables, their construction (attachment to connector) is not what I would consider "quality", and I have no idea of the cable quality itself. For better quality cables like Belden, Mogami or Canare, the attachment to connector may still be less than "quality", depending on who is assembling the cable. Those same problems may exist in some "audiophile" cables as well, of course.

 

[cnpope]

I think it is very simple. The cable sceptic thinks of cables like you think of paper towels or carpet tacks i.e. a purely utilitarian item that does a very simple job perfectly well as long as it has been designed and manufactured to a minimum standard. He thinks he knows how a cable works. If someone, anyone, could show him he was wrong about this, he would take notice, but because no one has any evidence whatsoever, he carries on blissfully spending the money on better speakers, holidays, fine wines, cars and motor boats. The rest he saves for a rainy day.

Very well put!

Chris

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

When I have disassembled most Radio Shack cables, their construction (attachment to connector) is not what I would consider "quality", and I have no idea of the cable quality itself. For better quality cables like Belden, Mogami or Canare, the attachment to connector may still be less than "quality", depending on who is assembling the cable. Those same problems may exist in some "audiophile" cables as well, of course.

When you disassemble a Radio Shack cable (because....?), how do you judge the quality of the connection?

Tim

 

[Shaffer]

I think it is very simple. The cable sceptic thinks of cables like you think of paper towels or carpet tacks i.e. a purely utilitarian item that does a very simple job perfectly well as long as it has been designed and manufactured to a minimum standard. He thinks he knows how a cable works. If someone, anyone, could show him he was wrong about this, he would take notice, but because no one has any evidence whatsoever, he carries on blissfully spending the money on better speakers, holidays, fine wines, cars and motor boats. The rest he saves for a rainy day.

Again, you did not respond to my questions on-point, instead, essentially, regurgitated the much-rehearsed mantra. Arguing religion is pointless. I'm out.

 

[Robh3606]

When I have disassembled most Radio Shack cables, their construction (attachment to connector) is not what I would consider "quality"

Do you mean solder or crimp connectors?? Either one if done right may not look pretty but will work just fine under the passive environment of a home stereo. Cables that get broken down on a regular basis like in a band need to be well terminated or they will fail rather quickly.

Rob

 

[nirodha]

Free Consulting? Really? This is a discussion forum where we openly share ideas. I'm actually embarrassed having to say this.

+ 1

 

[j_j]

Free Consulting? Really? This is a discussion forum where we openly share ideas. I'm actually embarrassed having to say this.

Well, I'm glad you feel that way. You may have a nice day, secure in the fact that you again insulted someone and attempted to derail a discussion. Your reply doesn't even rise to the level of logical fallacy.

 

[j_j]

Start a thread on how to measure somewhere, and we can talk.

This might even be a good thread to start. Where I came in was when you proposed a square-wave null test. There are many problems, aside from the issue of defining what kind of null is good enough (because it can never be perfect), but that really doesn't enter into the subjectivist/objectivist/scientist argument. (Which is really 3 sided, I've seen a good quantity of what I call "fantasy audiophiles", I've seen a similar quantity of "SNR gurus" (I have a talk I give repeatedly pointing out that SNR is "mostly harmless"), and I've seen more than one scientist (other than myself) simply shake their head and walk away, or retire, or go into landscaping (I'm barely exaggerating there).

But a thread on "how to measure", "hwat to measure" and "what does it mean" is interesting. But you're never, EVER going to get '1 number' as an answer.

 

[j_j]

I use XLRs.

As would I prefer to do. I'm aware of the history of RCA connectors, and I would be much happier with self-wiping connectors of some sort.

 

[Groucho]

As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same. How is a perspective buyer going to know these values? By carrying his testbench to the shop and entertaining the troops by meter-reading, while their costumers leave the store? What are the logistics of choosing cables "scientifically?" Best I can tell, it's a process of walking into a hardware store and choosing something that looks "right," whatever that may be. Very scientific, indeed, or more accurately, the choice is based on a belief system. That pretty much defines the concept of religion. Please remind us, where does the science come into this exercise?

Again, you did not respond to my questions on-point, instead, essentially, regurgitated the much-rehearsed mantra. Arguing religion is pointless. I'm out.

Forgive me, but I don't know how else to say it: for the cable sceptic, choosing a cable does not consciously involve science, so there can be no response to the question "where is the science"? To the cable sceptic, the cable is just an extension of the copper tracks and fibreglass that lie within the amp or CD player, and as long as it meets a minimum standard there is no point in expending energy and cash on worrying further.

As I understand, the objectivist position asserts that all cables with similar/identical LCR characteristics sound the same.

Even this, I believe goes further than warranted. A true objectivist would quantify the differences that the likely range of LCR values would make to a signal in an ordinary line source -> amp situation and, if it was so small and of a character likely to be inaudible, he would not worry further. He would not go into a shop with a meter to read the LCR, because he wouldn't be worrying about it. If there was evidence that some cables possessed some characteristic that was not just LCR, but something nonlinear, he would of course take notice.

 

[cnpope]

Again, you did not respond to my questions on-point, instead, essentially, regurgitated the much-rehearsed mantra. Arguing religion is pointless. I'm out.

It seems to me that what you are dismissing as a "much-rehearsed mantra" was actually a rather nice summary of how one should approach claims or assertions made in almost any walk of life, if one is not to fall prey to every scam, every con-artist or every charlatan who is out there. Whenever one encounters a claim or assertion, whether it be in audio, or investments that can't fail, or belief systems, or whatever, it makes sense to subject it to some sort of plausibility tests before accepting it.

In the case of cables connecting pieces of audio equipment this is rather easy. We understand all the physical principles of operation of the various components, and we can easily make order-of-magnitude estimates of the likely influence of cable characteristics, by considering the resistance, capacitance and inductance of the cable versus the output and input impedances of the devices at its two ends, and so on. These estimates make it pretty clear that unless the cable is grossly defective, it is likely to have at most only a very tiny effect on the sound. In this sense, it is already looking likely that it is in the "paper clip or carpet tack" category that Groucho spoke of.

Having made these estimates, one can now ask about actual experimental data. The obvious first thing to ask for, if a claim of an audible difference between two cables is made, is for data on the resistance, capacitance and inductance of the two cables, and for measurements (frequency response, etc) of the performance. This kind of information is not commonly available, especially from the manufacturers of "high-end" cables. The other experimental data that one can ask for is listening tests. But these are almost worthless unless they are properly-conducted double-blind tests. Glowing reports by a reviewer for a glossy audio magazine whose job depends upon keeping the advertising revenue flowing from the "high-end" manufacturers just won't cut it.

I have come across reports of ABX testing of cables that found no evidence for differences (for example, on the website http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_data.htm), but I have not come across any that reported finding audible differences.

So, as Groucho said, until such time as some real solid evidence is presented that demonstrates the audibility of cable differences, the simplest and most pausible "null hypothesis" seems to be perfectly satisfactory. And by the way, if it ever were demonstrated in ABX tests that a particular high-end cable did produce a better sound, the sensible thing to do would not be to rush out and buy it, but instead to put together a cheap cable that mocked up the same R, C and L characteristics and then test that against the original in further ABX testing. Of course no audio magazine would do that because they know on which side their bread is buttered.

Chris

 

[microstrip]

I have come across reports of ABX testing of cables that found no evidence for differences (for example, on the website http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_data.htm), but I have not come across any that reported finding audible differences.

Chris

I did not have to time to go through the site you refer, but are there any evidence in it of having found differences in their database?

 

[cnpope]

I did not have to time to go through the site you refer, but are there any evidence in it of having found differences in their database?

For some things yes (e.g. certain pairs of power amplifiers but not others, certain pairs of phono cartridges but not others, etc., etc.) For speaker wires and for interconnects, they found no examples of distinguishable pairs.

Chris

 

[j_j]

For some things yes (e.g. certain pairs of power amplifiers but not others, certain pairs of phono cartridges but not others, etc., etc.) For speaker wires and for interconnects, they found no examples of distinguishable pairs.

Chris

Hm? One published test I saw clearly identified the level loss in a thin speaker cable. This is not unexpected, of course, but it was visible.

One of the things people must put in any test is controls, both positive (i.e. people should distinguish, this tests the test) controls, and negative (no difference, testing the test equipment) controls.

 

[microstrip]

For some things yes (e.g. certain pairs of power amplifiers but not others, certain pairs of phono cartridges but not others, etc., etc.) For speaker wires and for interconnects, they found no examples of distinguishable pairs.

Chris

If they were not able to find any differences in speaker cables or interconnects this can be an indication that the method is not able to find them or they did not try enough to find them.

Sometime ago I tried to build my speaker cables using different very different types of cables and was surprised by the negative - I really managed to built some sounding very poor, although their RLC parameters would not affect frequency response more than .1 dB.