Why cables can be expensive

Hi,

I have found the real reason why some cables are not cheap.



SCIDB

 

I think they should go without the in flight meal and champers so they dont get so fat so we can bend them round corbers at least

The life of the rich and famous hey!

 

lol

 

This will look like promo to a lot of you, but that is not the motive. This link to the thread is to show that a lot of people do believe that different digital cables make a lot of difference, in some circumstances even more than analogue - or even considered the biggest upgrade they have made.

So why do we have this dichotomy of opinion, well for me it is down to the person or the system. You can *never* prove a negative! all you can say is that for *me* I have not heard it, where as those that hear it cannot be denied, for them it is a reality.

http://thehifisubjectivist.noadforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=160

 

I agree it is down to the person, but I'd argue it has more to do with the degree to which the person in open to suggestibility than actual, real differences.
That is why I always argue that as many external influences as possible be removed form an evaluation scenario.

Not always I'd agree, but usually IMO. There are some some perfectly good and rational reasons why some cables can sound different in some systems.

The biggest issue for me has always been the cost, or I suppose what Richard calls 'slurp'. Mark-up on many cables is obscene. At least in RD's case the cost is realistic for a what are hand made and therefore labour intensive products.

 

quote to dissagree

digital cables are less diferintal in signal quality than analogue cables, most of the hype on digital cables are not ended at 75 ohm's but are rca 60 ohms at most, there fore it makes a bit of difference if not a lot from having bnc connectors that can end in 75 ohms and there for can deliver a more acurate digital signal with more bites, as for analogue conductors are more system dependant than digis,
nando.

 

Leaving aside your point about listeners suggestibility, could it be that we listen to music in different ways? I.e. what is a minor but detectable difference in certain notes for me could be another listener's "day and night"? I believe I could hear subtle differences when listening to various cables but it was not enough to get excited about.

 

It could be, but I'd argue that you need to test the idea.
The only way to perform such a test is to listen without knowing the identity of the cable . If you can repeatedly identify a cable as 'different' under those conditions then I and others sitting in my camp on the issue would accept that the difference is real.
You then move on to look at why the cable performs differently. Can you identify the reason according to known and obvious matching consideration?
If not, then and only then should we explore other possibilities.

As I mentioned when we met last week, I've performed a 'fake' cable demo on a group of three listeners on two occasions now. Pretending to introduce a cable into a system with a widely accepted sonic signature and the listeners all respond in a positive way and identify the 'known' qualities of the cable. External bias is extremely powerful and any test that ignores it has a huge red flashing question mark hovering over it IMO.

 

I certainly cannot, and I suspect ever could, identify cables consistently in a blind test because (as I said) the differences are subtle at best. When I thought I could hear differences in the cables I thought there were genuine reasons why they sounded different, whether it was their LCR or susceptibility to noise etc.

 

I think we pretty much agree on the subject.

All I'd say is that there are far bigger fish to fry where audio is concerned and i suspect that for all but a small hardcore of enthusiasts this is a non issue.

 

everybody , i agree has a personal way of how they want their "hi-fi" to reproduce the sound that pleases them, as you said rob iit is a indidual choice, my thought on this is to conpare it to a restaurant starters menu,
nando, p.s always ask the chef.

 

Clarity and definition is what it is all about. Some people seem happy with a "sound" and that is what they look for. I find this in the classic flat earth Linn / Naim senario, and also now in most of the valve amp popularity.

I am different, I have these gods - clarity, definition and information, which for me = a clean window. If you have a clean window (to use the visual analogy) not only can you see the fly but you can also see the fly poo he leaves behind. With a thick, unclean or distorted window you are lucky if you even see the fly amoungst all the muck. But if that distorted view on reality is what you are after then you are highly unlikely to ever recognise the differences that cables can make.

 

I think you could add to that list though.

Analogue LP replay is horribly distorted and dirty compared to the master with even the finest TT sources. I too worship the gods of clarity and information which is why I find listening to the majority of cartridges on the marked a real challenge because of the distortion they introduce. Most people find them perfectly ok, just as some like the contrived PRaT distortions of Linn or the tonal and harmonic distortions of (some) valve kit.

Same goes for speakers. Most aren't particularly accurate in many respects and different types and quantities of distortion are introduced.

Cable differences are minute compared to the real problems in audio unless there is a matching issue.

In all likelihood this thread will generate more traffic than anything else on ZG over say the past month, which is frankly bonkers but it shows the completely skewed priorities that many audio enthusiasts now have.

 

people like a good arguement, sadly.

The original post was jokey and pretty funny, and I hope we don't have a ''solid state sounds grey and like listening to ... I don't know paper mache, valve amps are coloured blah " scenario.

The forum needs lots of positive input right now.

 

As the top poster, please do the honours.

 

I am? oh dear !!

A dubious honour


- anyway Richard, Dev, etc - lets have your input in my ''a bit of fun'' thread. It's a great one and I'm quite proud of it

 

Exactly yhats why I made a jokey comment in return!

 

I think it all comes down to what you hear I bought a pair of Shark Wire 1 meter
Silver cables .I have a Thorens 850 T/T Origin Live Ultra motor kit SME 309 Nordust
Phono Cable Groove Phono amp Ortofon Rondo bronze cartridge use my NAD 378
Receiver as my pre amp a anthem stero power amp 200 into 8 ohms Wharfedale
Opus3 speakers plus a few bits and pieces .Never had a better upgrade sound Great.
But that is me others might not hear the same that is why they have audio shops
Noel W.

 

I don't use freebie cables for two reasons, one to try to get the clarity RD mentioned and two, I like well constructed products.
There's also the slightly illogical attraction of say, fitting a cable with WBT hiline connectors to a phono socket or the reassuring
solid 'click' from a metal XLR - I don't underestimate these things despite having a scientific background.
Mind you, I did once buy some zymol vintage wax for my motor car . . . . . .

 

I don't generally use the freebie cables either though I think they sound fine unless you need ultra low capacitance. Construction can be less than robust so I think it worth spending a little more on something more substantial.

I use Klotz AC110 instrument cable which is a pro cable using good materials and designed for long life. Also low cap.
I also use Neutrik Profi connectors again because they are robust and long life. The sprung ground connector ensures that ground connection is always made before signal, so no unpleasant buzzes and bangs if you forget to lower the volume.

Here's some I made earlier: