John Dunlavy On "Cable Nonsense"

I don't think he was saying that there's no difference between cable and cable technology...I believe he mentions that they make their own(?)...he's just saying a lot of the so-called science that goes into the cables is just a bunch of marketing nonsense, and not very scientific. That's probably very true (and I use various Cardas, Coincident, JPS, etc).

He must also think that there's no difference in speaker drivers as well. I was told that he left Duntech and started Dunlavy, used a very similar design, charged just as much money, but he used cheaper drivers. Hmmm. :-)

If Dunlavy isn't a fan of cables then what must he be wiring his speakers with?
Chilling isn't it?

I found that article interesting. I believe, I have been sucked into the belief that more expensive is better, or that fancy cabling is better. I expect a $1000 pair of speaker cable to sound better than a $200 one. Truth is, they both may sound different but not better than one another. I too, am taken aback at the marketing machine of cable makers, in particular, of late, power cord makers. Ive started other threads in regards to internal speaker wires and the majority of those who replied, stated, likely correctly, that a speaker is "voiced" using the stock cable and dont mess with it. How does that change then, with an amp, preamp, or Dac which came voiced with a stock captive power cord? Is it better, or different? Believe me, I have aftermarket powercords on all my gear, but am disheartnened at the amount of $1000 midlevel power cords, and $3000 top of the line power cords. This claims that are being assosiated with these cords I believe is akin to the comments Dunleavy was making.

Kelly -

At shows, Dunlavy uses his own design of cable (Z6 at CES 2001). And yes, he feels that there is (in the overwhelming majority of real world systems) little to zero AUDIBLE difference between his technically superior cable and zipcord.

If you ask John Dunlavy (and he'd be most happy to answer), you'd find out that they use both measurements and listening tests when designing and testing speakers. And he feels that buyers must listen; and that measured accuracy is a means towards superior audible results. He is honest, though, and admits that some of the measured results (phase accuracy, in particular) may have little sonic benefit.

John's forgotten more about speakers and electronics than any given dozen posters (almost typed "posers", might've been more accurate at that) on this site will ever know.

JHunter

Sugarbie -

Trotting out this analogy again? Your strawman has no bearing to anything Dunlavy has said.

JHunter