Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck

Okay guys we are getting way off track from the original post. I do believe that cables offer the biggest bang for the buck. The right $300 cable can revolutionize a system where as a $300 component wouldn't in most cases.

now I digress...

Hshapiro, I do not think I am missing Audioengr's point.
He kind of side stepped my arguments by mentioning two modules which do not effect the sound the gain and the buffer. But.. what about the other modules?

First off, I believe the term "tone control" as well as "Band-Aid" have both been negative ways people have chosen to describe the effects of cables on a system. While the terms are for the most part accurate, the terms are still a slam on cables in general and really not fair commentary on a system.

Secondly, I have never taken a LinCD12 apart so I cannot confirm whether or not the wires are short. They may infarct be but its silly to attribute the astonishing sound of a Linn CD12 only to short wire... Audioengr does also state that changing bad wire to good wire might make an improvement but it would be infinitesimal. This seems to differ from the results you had with your Adcom GFA-555 where you replaced cheap input wire with "custom" 22g pure silver wire in a Teflon jacket. Can you describe the changes you heard? Do you think that just maybe, the tone of the Adcom changed a bit? If not, what did change? How did you know it was better?

I guess I have stepped across a new line in the sand when I speak of the tone controls inside of a component as well as the components themselves being tone controls designed to produce a specific sound.

This side of the sand is fun to be on.. so for fun, let me ask, hasn't any one here thought that just maybe, ALL AUDIO COMPONENTS (REGARDLESS OF WHICH ONE) ARE IN FACT TONE CONTROLS... What do you think differentiates McIntosh, LAMM, Krell, Levinson, AudioAero, AudioMeca, Sony, Pioneer, blah.... blah... blah....and yes the Linn CD12?? They all sound different do they not? Why do you suppose that is? Could it be tone?

Tone comes in many forms and yes, dynamic contrasts, shadings and a lack of distortion can in fact be a direct result of "tone" since the definition of TONE as it refers to sound is: the quality or character of sound, a distinct pitch, a sound of distinct pitch and vibration, quality, and duration, a... blah... blah... blah.. the list goes on.
Tone is a pretty big word. And since audiophile tend to use visual cues to describe what they hear, tone can be even more profound than the above definition indicates.

Anyhow, perhaps we are not aware that many aftermarket manufacturers have been quite busy upgrading parts inside of the new SACD players (they don't just shorten the wire), they alter the various "modules" as I called them - with new parts. The upgrades improve the quality of sound these components (SACD players) produce.

Now.. what is the difference between the before SACD player and the after CD player?

Do you think that maybe the tonal quality... --> From Stereophile Glossary: The accuracy (correctness) with which reproduced sound replicates the timbres of the original instruments. --> may have improved?

Audioengr... I would be very interested to know what your system is comprised of. You make a rather bold statement:

Until you have heard a superior system where there are no "weak links", one that is wired with truly low-loss IC's and speaker cables, you will not know what I am talking about. This "tone-control" mentality is what makes it really difficult to get an even playing field to compare cable performance.

Who needs an even playing field to compare cable performance? Which combination of audio components makes for an even playing field? Isn't sound the ultimate playing field, or are electrical properties more important?

And.. while were on the subject of even playing field. How many of you have a room that sounds just like mine? or Audioengr's?

THERE IS NO EVEN PLAYING FIELD!

Audioengr is there a difference in sound between Auricaps and Black Gate? Do Caddocks sound the same as Vishays?

Bwhite, whatever component, including cables, that gets out of the way of the original musical performance through reduced distortion of the signal can offer the "biggest bang for the buck." If, for instance, your electronic components which cost ten times that of your cables are flawed in some obvious way, no $300 cable will come to their rescue. In fact, a good cable, regardless of price, will only reveal other problems upstream. Obviously, a $300 component would be incapable of "revolutionizing" a system. I would agree, however, that if your electronics are fundamentally sound, a properly designed $300 cable can make a remarkable improvement, given that your previous cables were not properly designed.

I happen to believe that all modules, including gain can effect sound, even if only in a less obvious way. For instance, the choice of a pot for controlling levels can effect the sound.

The best bang for the buck in one part of my system cost almost nothing. I own a Linn Sondek LP12 turntable, with ITTOK arm and an older Kiseki Blue cartridge. Years ago, I tapped on the arm until I found the point of greatest resonance, and wrapped a short lightweight piece of clear rubberized tape around that point. The improvement was remarkable for the cost of about 2 cents.

While I no longer have the Adcom GFA-555 amp, a few years ago, a friend of mine who hand-makes cable, suggested that I try to replace a few of the wires within the amp with some of his wire. This Adcom, I should add, was already modified and markedly improved by Stan Warren of PS Audio fame. After a short burn-in period, the improvements from inserting the new wire were immediate and confirmed by other audiophile friends who were not told of the change. Yes, one of the changes was in the tone, but it was the least obvious improvement in this tweak. The frequency extremes gained greater extension. Whenever the original signal is allowed to pass unhindered, some increase in a particular frequency will shift the overall tonal balance. The greatest improvements were that the sound became quicker, with greater dynamics and weight. Clarity improved as well, and there was a decrease in audible noise. All of this came from changing a few inches of wire in critical areas of the amplifier. I should also add that the original Adcom wire was of the standard copper stranded variety, not as short as possible, and was hanging over the main circuit board. This probably contributed to the noise I spoke of. We used solid core silver wire in the shortest possible lengths and situated them out of the path of the circuits.

Hshapiro - for the most part it looks as if we are on the same page.

The topic of this thread is "cables vs. electronics: biggest bang for the buck". I used a $300 cable vs. a $300 component as a comparison and it seems you agree that a $300 component wouldn't revolutionize a system like a cable might. How about a $1500 cable vs. a $1500 component?

Hshapiro wrote:

In fact, a good cable, regardless of price, will only reveal other problems upstream. Obviously, a $300 component would be incapable of "revolutionizing" a system.

So if a cable is good, it reveals problems? Not in my experience. What defines a "good cable"? Problems? That's weird. Good cables tend to be good no matter where they are. If a cable reveals a problem upstream - wouldn't you think that just maybe the cable isn't the best choice for the application? Or do you fall in the camp of folks who try to change components to accomodate what they perceive as a good cable?

Hshapiro wrote:

I happen to believe that all modules, including gain can effect sound, even if only in a less obvious way. For instance, the choice of a pot for controlling levels can effect the sound.

Tell me if I am wrong but I think the potentiometer is in the signal path. It's not truly the "Gain Stage". But I know what you mean.

I am glad you agree that the various modules can change the sound of a compoenent. However...

Hshapiro wrote:

Yes, one of the changes was in the tone, but it was the least obvious improvement in this tweak. The frequency extremes gained greater extension. Whenever the original signal is allowed to pass unhindered, some increase in a particular frequency will shift the overall tonal balance. The greatest improvements were that the sound became quicker, with greater dynamics and weight. Clarity improved as well, and there was a decrease in audible noise. All of this came from changing a few inches of wire in critical areas of the amplifier.

Everything you experienced in the changes to the Adcom can be associated with tone and are perceived because of the change in tone or accentuation of various frequencies which were otherwise subdued. Greater Extension, Dynamics, weight, clarity, speed, decrease in noise, etc. This is tone at work.

Dynamic: Giving an impression of wide dynamic range; punchy. This is related to system speed as well as to volume contrast.

---> Made evident by a change in tone.

If you've ever thought of cables as tone controls you should try high end NBS cables... Man! They can produce some very dynamic music!

Weight: The feeling of solidity and foundation contributed to music by extended, natural bass reproduction.

Clarity? How about Transparency?

Transparency: A quality of sound reproduction that gives the impression of listening through the system to the original sounds, rather than to a pair of loudspeakers. 2) Freedom from veiling, texturing, or any other quality which tends to obscure the signal. A quality of crystalline clarity.

Highs.... Open up the sound create that illusion of clarity.

Bwhite wrote:
"But.. what about the other modules?"

Let me give some examples, since I have some technical knowledge in this area:

1) Film resistors - these are lower inductance and lower noise. They reduce the thermal noise that causes the hiss at low levels that you hear. Does not affect tone.

2) Poly caps (polypropylene, polystyrene) in the signal path - these reduce dielectric absorption. DA causes time smearing of the signal. also does not affect tone. This is a dynamic effect.

3) Power supply cap increase - this provides more capacity to respond to high-power events, so dynamics can be improved. prevents voltage sags when high-power events occur. does not affect tone. This is a dynamic effect.

4) high-frequency, low internal resistance caps in the power supply (decoupling caps) - Improves response to high-frequency transients. Prevents truncation of transients because the power system can react faster. This is a dynamic effect.

Changes in tone are changes in amplitude as a function of frequency. It is a steady-state effect.

As for my system, I have 3, so I will describe my reference:

Source: Sony DVP-S7700 transport
Pre: Proceed AVP
Amp: Coda 10.5
Spkrs: KEF reference 104/2
Cables: Empirical Audio

This shows that old components, particularly speakers can still be reference quality. Also, you can get 95% of the performance of the most expensive reference components at a fraction of the price.