Why cables can be expensive

[RobHolt]

You know perfectly well the abuse to both Alan Brown and myself came from SQ, Nando and mostly from Mescalino, you have removed a lot of it for which I thank you. All I personally have done is return insult that hasn't been addressed by the mods, I have initiated nothing. This is all explained in my posts on ad hominem, unless you deal with the initiation then it all just escalates. But Allan hasn't even responded and has remained polite and yet he is still subject to continuing abuse.

Why cant the subject be discussed and argued without insult, you have seen the results of this in the past and it threatens your forum and you lost membership and posts for a long period because of it, learn from it and don't allow the likes of Mescalino to damage the recovery of the forum.

You have been polite on the surface but you are still insulting the intelligence of the poster, which is what I have returned to you. Alan has commented on this as well.

I'm not insulting the intelligence of the poster, I'm questioning him and his methods for reaching his conclusions.
That is one of the remaining good things about a forum. Simple posting of opinion with no challenge is a blog, and this isn't a blog.
NLP & expectation bias are known phenomena - this is nothing new.
I simply ask that people take reasonable steps to eliminate the possible effects.
It surprises me that such a request causes such outrage!

 

[Richard Dunn]

Thank you, I would like that.

If you want some dac or computer audio kit I can bring along an Apple based solution.
Might appeal as the new Mac notebooks (use as digital transport) run for about 8 hours on a charge so no SMPS connected to your system.
Lossles files running optically into one of your own dacs might be of interest to you.

Brilliant, you will be welcome. I am clueless when it comes to computer audio and have been a complete luddite to it, so it is time I changed that and actually judged the level it has got to.

 

[RobHolt]

Brilliant, you will be welcome. I am clueless when it comes to computer audio and have been a complete luddite to it, so it is time I changed that and actually judged the level it has got to.

Excellent.

I'll bring the Apple notebook with fully charged battery, the SMPS and optical cables.
I have around 800 albums ripped to a small pocket hard drive so chances are you'll find something you like, though I warn you it also contains the likes of ABBA and Duran Duran

I'll also bring an all singing and dancing 24/196 upsampling Cambridge DAC so you can hear something bang up to date converter-wise.

All small items so i can chuck them into a bag.

 

[Richard Dunn]

one of the best threads ever, needs another airing !

https://www.audio-forums.com/as-rediect/showthread.php?t=22779

For me the whole computer file thing for comparing things is a nonsense, for heaven sake on PF they even doing it with turntables, how daft can you get.

Anyway after the bake-off I will see if I am a convert, but so far I see it as a travesty of what hi-fi musical reproduction should be, especially of analogue sources.

And it still doesn't break through the principle that if the system is incapable of showing it and the person listening is incapable of hearing it then it is a pointless exercise. In this case it is even worse as there are now two different systems involved, the recording system and the playback system, plus all the digitising in between. So IMO it is still a complete nonsense that proves nothing.

 

[Richard Dunn]

I'm not insulting the intelligence of the poster, I'm questioning him and his methods for reaching his conclusions.
That is one of the remaining good things about a forum. Simple posting of opinion with no challenge is a blog, and this isn't a blog.
NLP & expectation bias are known phenomena - this is nothing new.
I simply ask that people take reasonable steps to eliminate the possible effects.
It surprises me that such a request causes such outrage!

Sorry but argument is good, patronising a persons intelligence is not, and that is what you do. Perhaps Alan can explain it better to you, as we both see it.

 

[RobHolt]

For me the whole computer file thing for comparing things is a nonsense, for heaven sake on PF they even doing it with turntables, how daft can you get.

Anyway after the bake-off I will see if I am a convert, but so far I see it as a travesty of what hi-fi musical reproduction should be, especially of analogue sources.

And it still doesn't break through the principle that if the system is incapable of showing it and the person listening is incapable of hearing it then it is a pointless exercise. In this case it is even worse as there are now two different systems involved, the recording system and the playback system, plus all the digitising in between. So IMO it is still a complete nonsense that proves nothing.

Ah, but look at what they are recording and discussing over there.
Different pressings, different arms, sub-chassis modifications, fresh v used cartridges.
Then there are the outright comparisons between different front ends.
They are all hearing differences via that digital medium so it might be premature to dismiss the resolving power. Many are using the very basic analogue inputs on laptops so not even a dedicated quality sound card - but differences still emerge even through these.

In the cable test in the link I deliberately chose extremes in some attempt to magnify any difference. It wasn't done to demonstrate 'no difference' but show that IMO differences are trivial at best.

 

[RobHolt]

Sorry but argument is good, patronising a persons intelligence is not, and that is what you do. Perhaps Alan can explain it better to you, as we both see it.

It is just healthy argument and disagreement.
I'm often accused of being deaf, or not knowing how to assemble a clean system, or not understanding or appreciating 'musicality', or talking bullshit etc...

I could easily take that to heart, feel offended and that my intelligence has been insulted.

If you are going to define and assume a moral highground on this then it cuts all ways.

But moving on, these things are better understood face to face, so lets look forward to good and enjoyable computer audio bake-off.
These things usually seem a lot clearer when there is real interaction as opposed to just keyboard dialogue.

 

[nando]

told you rob, it cuts both ways,

 

[Richard Dunn]

Ah, but look at what they are recording and discussing over there.
Different pressings, different arms, sub-chassis modifications, fresh v used cartridges.
Then there are the outright comparisons between different front ends.
They are all hearing differences via that digital medium so it might be premature to dismiss the resolving power. Many are using the very basic analogue inputs on laptops so not even a dedicated quality sound card - but differences still emerge even through these.

In the cable test in the link I deliberately chose extremes in some attempt to magnify any difference. It wasn't done to demonstrate 'no difference' but show that IMO differences are trivial at best.

They are not all hearing differences, and if they are it is more to do with process than what they are trying to show, there is no consensus. Many people over there also think like me it is at best a irrelevance and at worst a complete waste of time.

 

[Richard Dunn]

It is just healthy argument and disagreement.
I'm often accused of being deaf, or not knowing how to assemble a clean system, or not understanding or appreciating 'musicality', or talking bullshit etc...

I could easily take that to heart, feel offended and that my intelligence has been insulted.

If you are going to define and assume a moral highground on this then it cuts all ways.

But moving on, these things are better understood face to face, so lets look forward to good and enjoyable computer audio bake-off.
These things usually seem a lot clearer when there is real interaction as opposed to just keyboard dialogue.

You patronised Alan - full stop!

 

[RobHolt]

You patronised Alan - full stop!

I spoke my mind, politely.

I think he might be wrong in his findings and said - very clearly - why.

I'm not getting hung-up on these semantics and if Alan wishes to discuss it he is welcome to PM.

Full stop.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Back to the origin - "why cables can be expensive"

Old ways

From my experience the cable costs less to produce in many cases than the packaging.

Without good reviews and constant mentions in magazines, then forget it, and that costs serious advertising money.

A retailer will not take a cable unless he makes a serious profit margin, normally a doubling of price but I have know for them to ask for tripling of price if it is a new product, no matter how good.

So £10 raw costs, call it £10 packaging, call it £20 to cover marketing costs, call it £40 manufacturer profit margin (times 2 direct costs), call it £10 to cover the difficulty to getting the retailer to pay you (i.e. interest on extended credit) = £90.

Retailer wants minimum another £90 for him (if you are lucky) so cable retails for £180.

New ways

Direct sold with 30 day return for refund.

Ebay is best as you get reviews and build up a reputation.

No packaging, just a jiffy bag.

No magazines, no reviews, no advertising. Just on-line recs through forums and feedbacks.

So £10 raw cost, £2 to cover ebay / paypal and returns costs, £3 to cover P&P, manufacturers profit (times 2 direct costs) £15 = £30 selling price.

Sort of a no brainer, don't you think?

 

[RobHolt]

Yes, absolutely right.

Plus, many pro audio outlets sell good stuff for very fair prices.

I think the show or jewellery aspect is also responsible for a lot of the cost, or at least it is used to justify it.
Some the the RCA connectors you find on really expensive cables are bonkers. Huge over-engineered things that can lock onto a socket so tightly that use as a tow rope seems more appropriate.

 

[bottleneck]

Back to the origin - "why cables can be expensive"

Old ways

From my experience the cable costs less to produce in many cases than the packaging.

Without good reviews and constant mentions in magazines, then forget it, and that costs serious advertising money.

A retailer will not take a cable unless he makes a serious profit margin, normally a doubling of price but I have know for them to ask for tripling of price if it is a new product, no matter how good.

So £10 raw costs, call it £10 packaging, call it £20 to cover marketing costs, call it £40 manufacturer profit margin (times 2 direct costs), call it £10 to cover the difficulty to getting the retailer to pay you (i.e. interest on extended credit) = £90.

Retailer wants minimum another £90 for him (if you are lucky) so cable retails for £180.

New ways

Direct sold with 30 day return for refund.

Ebay is best as you get reviews and build up a reputation.

No packaging, just a jiffy bag.

No magazines, no reviews, no advertising. Just on-line recs through forums and feedbacks.

So £10 raw cost, £2 to cover ebay / paypal and returns costs, £3 to cover P&P, manufacturers profit (times 2 direct costs) £15 = £30 selling price.

Sort of a no brainer, don't you think?

Im sorry Richard, but this comes across as a blatant advert.

The ten quid cable can just as easily be bought from Maplins IMO.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Im sorry Richard, but this comes across as a blatant advert.

The ten quid cable can just as easily be bought from Maplins IMO.

Typical - this is bloody daft, it is advertising a method not a company. AND if this is what I think, would it be logical for me to do anything different There are many companies selling cables direct through ebay and / or their own websites so why aren't I accused of advertising them. I saw how Zanash was treated on this forum and I think it was bloody disgracefull, so you want to start further witch hunts do you

Maplins sell on line so they are in my line of praise - or are you incapable of the intelligence to see that. If they were not a direct seller, and were just wholesalers and supplying Hi-Fi retailers then they would be in the rip-off camp, but obviously they are not. If they sell a cable for £10 then their raw material cost would be £2 - £3, do you understand business or do you just like the sound of your own voice

 

[muzzer]

Richard.
I have one of your SSP interconnects I looks more or less the same as a normal SP, why is the SSP so much more expensive ?

 

[bottleneck]

Richard - pot-kettle-black.

Hearing you say ''I like the sound of my own voice'' is hilarious... if you looked in the mirror (past the rather unattractive fat and bald pensioner) you would find this relates more specifically to you.

You're always the first to take umbridge, and always the first to get nasty. In case any readers don't know - Richard sells NVA cables, amplifiers etc on Ebay. I can't reccomend them.

He gave me one of his cables once. It broke after a couple of months and was sonically indistinguishable from the pvc coated freebie that replaced it.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Richard.
I have one of your SSP interconnects I looks more or less the same as a normal SP, why is the SSP so much more expensive ?

I don't want to use this forum to discuss my products. I am here as an individual not as a company. I will get accused again of promotion, so send me an email or via Ebay or PM me here. If you then want to publish the answer then that is up to you.

Or you could go to the Subjectivist as there have been a couple of threads on it, or Ebay and read the description.

 

[Richard Dunn]

He gave me one of his cables once. It broke after a couple of months and was sonically indistinguishable from the pvc coated freebie that replaced it.

Normal people return damaged or faulty product for repair, you didn't.

 

[bottleneck]

Hi Richard - it was a freebie, and it was kind of you to give it to me.

Incidentally - my comments above - are just in response to your own. Calling someone ''lacking in intelligence'' deserves this kind of response. Mere tit-for-tat.

If you were wondering why I felt it was advertising -

It's a '' straw man'' approach. Consider AVI over on Pink Fish. They constantly speak of ''active loudspeakers'' and their advantages. They sell active loudspeakers. It comes across as advertising. You've even pointed this out on PFM yourself. You're doing the same thing IMO in your long post about cables being sold on Ebay.

A fair initial comment I thought, and still do.

I like Zanash, and have never said anything bad to him. He's been round my pad once also, and is a nice bloke. Shame we dont see him, he was a boon to the DIY side of the forum.