The most detailed speaker cable??
The Nordost and kimber 4TC always seemed on the bright side in my system. I am currently using the Analysis Plus silver oval, and I can assure you that they are not even close to being bright. I also have the AP oval nine's, and believe it or not, they are brighter sounding than the silvers.I think it would be helpful if you posted your system, as I cannot imagine it sounding mellow with the Kimber or Nordost. |
| Post removed |
I recently purchased the Spletz anti-cables out of curiosity to try in my system. My early impressions are that these cables are remarkably clear and detailed. They are not bright but ever so slightly forward. Could be just what your looking for. My system is fairly similar to yours and I would expect similar, favorable, results in your system. I recommend you try them. |
I have not heard as many cables as many here, but my Pure Note Ceruleun cables gave me the exact sound I was looking for. They were terrible for a week and then the brightness disapeared into perfection. The new Paragons (I think) are supposed to be even better but I have not auditioned them. I think I paid $600 for a two meter bi-wired pair. These are definately worth auditioning. |
The most detailed speaker cables will be the ones that are fed the most information by the front end, pre-amp, amplifier and that feed the signal into speakers capable of resolving that signal into a room that doesn't suppress the detail because of some problem or another. Speaker cables aren't detailed, systems are detailed. If you're not getting enough detail, it is unlikely the cables are causing this problem. If you hear "brightness" as more detail, get an equalizer and bump the high end. You'll have more control over your sound than you will by fishing around hoping to find a pair of speaker cables that will bump the high end. If you want a tone control, why not get a tone control? For the same price as you pay for Acoustic Zen Sartori's, I've got to think you could get a hell of a graphic equalizer. There are some that can analyze and help solve problems in your room and give you the ability to make very small adjustments in narrow portions of the audio band. Why use a cable for a tone control when it gives you such little control -- IF you can find one that bumps the part of the audio band that you favor to the extent you find pleasurable? With some careful search, you can probably also find speakers that have a bump in the high end and more than just a fraction of a db, or whatever you're hoping for from a cable. Before buying cables hoping they will bump the high end, giving you the impression you're getting more detail, make sure you get a frequency response graph proving that the cables in question will give you an audible bump in the high end. Then, compare the cost of those cables for the effect you might get versus switching speakers or adding a graphic equalizer. |
| Post removed |
I agree with Boa2... Silver. Did you try the Nordost SPM or Valhalla? You may want to work your way up the Nordost ladder. I tried six or seven different cables from the Cable Company, before I arrived at my biwired Nordost SPM. Some of the cables that I listened to included Synergistic Resaerch Resolution Reference (discrete biwire), Audioquest Volcano, Wireworld Eclipse (not Silver Eclipse) and Kimber Kable BiFocal- XL. For detail, and in my system, the Nordost SPM was the clear winner of all those that I tried. It's top end is excellent, but I wouldn't call them bright. Also, to Gunbei... Theres no silver in my backyard.... just dog pooh. |
Rsbeck's points are well-taken, as is Tvad's affection for Rsbeck's way of thinking. In my experience, however, going from copper to silver actually unveiled the mids and highs, making what had previously sounded vague and concealed now detailed and present. Of course, the cables don't put anything in the mix that isn't already there. I think Elizabeth said it once, that silver just tends to let through the frequencies that make some people believe it sounds bright, when it is simply being transparent. Sorry if I've misquoted her, but it helps me make my point and ultimately what else is there, huh? I don't have THE answer, only the one that worked for me thus far. Why not buy some cables used, and if they don't get you the result you want, re-sell them at no loss to you save a bit of your time? |
I think too often people listen to detailed cables and immediately label them "bright" without listening closer. A detailed cable is one that preserves the signal fed to it. The same cables able to properly convey chimes or the brush of a cymbal is also more likely to be able to convey the pitch resolution of an acoustic bass or a piano note as it decays within body of the piano. Timbre will also be improved in these systems because timbre is directly related to reproduction of harmonics and high-freq extension. A cable that rolls off the high-freq extension too soon will never be able get the timbre right. One other thing to look at is shielding. If your system is in a high emi/rfi environment then shielding will lower the noise floor help in preserving those tiny details. Thereby extending note decay and etc. My cables are Pure Note Epsilon Reference or Signature or whatever. I'm not a hard-core cable junkie but they definitely make a big difference. |
Just about any speaker cable of appropriate guage will "preserve that signal." The notion that your signal is lost in the speaker cable is something that was dreamed up in a cable marketers advertising meeting. The signal is lost in your speaker -- not the cable. There are rather large problems in just about every speaker and most rooms. Just about all speakers are only linear +/- anywhere from 1 to 3 db (or more) and roll off at the extremes. Cables are far more linear by comparison. Listening rooms, unless they have been specifically designed for listening to reproduced music, usually have rather large problems with rather large peaks and valleys, introduce time smear, boomy bass, hardness in the highs, etc. No one has ever been able to measure distortion caused by a cable, despite what cable advertisers say. Cable companies have done a brilliant job of getting people to focus suspicion on their innocent cables while ignoring the rest of the chain. I'd wager that a couple of hundred dollars spent on acoustical consulting or a speaker upgrade would go exponentially further in fixing what is wrong or improving the sound of 99% of the systems on Audiogon. In most cases, money spent on expensive speaker cables -- where improved performance is questionable and controversial at best would be better spent elsewhere in the chain. Regarding silver: The only thing silver has to offer is that it has less resistance, which means all you have to do is use thicker copper cables to get the exact same effect. I think the fixtion on silver is a carry over from people who play musical instruments. For example, steel strings sound different from bronze, brass horns sound different from silver, etc. Cables are not plucked, they do not make music by vibrating -- they just carry signal. The signal doesn't pick up any sound from the silver or copper. If you've been using copper and you switch to the same gauge silver cable and you don't level match, it is possible the silver cable simply makes the music slightly louder, and any audio salesman knows you can trick customers into thinking one component is more detailed than another simply by playing it a little louder. We all know that sometimes just a few ticks more volume is enough to make the speakers open up and become fuller. Other than that, there may be some psychological effect from thinking of silver as shinier, whiter -- and thus more pure than copper which is, of course, copper colored. |
Rsbeck, I see that you have alot of money tied up in equipment (Meitner Emm Labs, Levinson, Monitor Audio), but there's no mention of interconnects and your speakerwire is listed at $100. Have you tried any of the upper end cables- interconnects and speakerwire? You sound as though good quality wire doesn't matter much. Or am I understanding you incorrectly? There's alot of people that would disagree with you. |
>>You sound as though good quality wire doesn't matter much.<< Let's be specific. You select the particular speaker cable and tell me what makes it worthy of adulation. As you can see by the rest of my gear, money is no object. I can afford the most expensive cables out there and would if I were convinced they offered superior performance. I've looked into all kinds of cables, heard all the hype, and I haven't seen any claim for "high end" cables that doesn't dissolve when investigated. Most of the claims I see regarding high end cables aren't just unfounded, they are laughable. Speakers have a far more complex and difficult job to do. Listening rooms commonly have large peaks and valleys -- and yet I see a lot of focus on cables. Cable companies have clearly done a masterful job of creating doubt in the mind of the audio enthusiast about his/her cables. They do this by coming up with bogus maladies and then you see these myths repeated until they become accepted. Next thing you know, you've got a lot of audiophiles feeling like they need new cables -- when there is no evidence the old one had any problem, that the new one will cure the allleged problem and without investigating other areas where real problems are easily documented. When someone asks for help, I think we can do better than that. If *I* am going to solve a problem, I first want to make a good diagnosis, then I want to make sure the "cure" is going to solve it. I am going to focus on real problems rather than bogus ones that have been made up by cable marketeers that have no basis in fact. |
Rsbeck, First, let me say that I agree with you concerning alot of what you've been saying. I think that for total system improvement, room treatment and dedicated power- ( I noticed that you too have dedicated A/C lines.) are some of the biggest improvements that you can make. There was a major change in my system when I went to dedicated A/C; as much improvement as an upgrade in equipment. I tried powercords for my preamp a year ago, courtesy of the Cable Company. The powercords ranged from $700 to $1500 list. I tried Acoustic Zen Krakatoa, Acoustic Zen Gargantua, Shunyata Research Taipan, and the Elrod Signiture 2. All these cables changed the system sound, but in the end I preferred the stock cable that came with my Bat vk5i. But... at least I tried these products to see what they sounded like in my system. With all due respect, analytic research is good, but, for me, I prefer to listen with my own ears. |
Talon: While cost may not be an object to Rsbeck, he refuses to listen for himself and draw his own conclusions, even if it costs him nothing to do so. Instead, he chooses to regurgitate the "hype" that he has been fed by various cable naysayers based on poorly conducted and less than thorough tests. In effect, his responses may come across as both sensible and reasonable in approach, but his actions speak louder than his words. Sean > http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1112250293&openfrom&1&4#1 |
That's the thread where Sean claimed he could hear the difference between flat and .1db down at 20Khz. Sorry, but this is *exactly* the type of thing that comes with the cable phenomenon. I'm supposed to trade in my cables because they're .088 db down at 20 Khz when driven into a 4 Ohm load? Let's join the real world. "The psycho-acoustic data shows that for pure tones at 16kHz the smallest average detectable difference in level is 3.05 dB. The findings were based on individuals 20 to 24 years old that had normal hearing to 20 kHz." -- Audio, July 1994 .1 db down at 20Khz is inaudible, folks. Anyone basing any theory on the notion that he/she can hear this as an audible "roll-off" has already lost my attention Ooops -- Sean won't take a test to prove this amazing hearing acuity? Wow -- what a surprise! Exactly what I would expect. Come on, folks, if your BS meter isn't redlining by now, you need to have it checked. What are the properties of the new cable he suggests? How does it solve this non-existant problem? Who knows? How *does* one solve a non-existant problem? This is exactly what I am talking about. I think we can do better, folks. |
I never asked you to trade in your cables or that i could hear the difference between -.1 dB down at 20 KHz and a flat response. Both of those are false statements that you use to divert attention away from the real facts of the matter. I simply asked you to listen to some cables within the confines of your system and see if you heard a difference. If you can honestly hear a difference, those differences have to be measurable using the proper tools and test methodology. As i pointed out in that other thread and explained why, ABX tests are flawed. The same tools that could be used to demonstrate that ABX boxes alter the electrical signal that is fed into the speakers is the same device that will show that speaker cables alter the load that the amp responds to and that is fed into the speakers. The fact that you are afraid to perform such a simple test as swapping one high impedance speaker cable for another high impedance speaker cable while you continue to spout the same rhetoric only lessens your credibility. Eldartford is both an engineer and a cable skeptic, yet he's open minded enough to try such a test. Are you afraid you might actually hear a difference and have to change your mind? If you have such faith in your "cable convictions", here's your chance to prove it to yourself. Sean > |
How *does* one solve a non-existant problemI'd start by being adventurous: bypass the IC connectors and hard-wire b/ween components. Not easy to do when using expensive commercial equipment, I know! After it's not only the wire that's conducting it's the connectors too: the wire carries what it gets from source connection and the load gets whatever's there after the destination connection. |
It looks like this thread took a big turn and went south. Instead of reading analytic white papers, I'd suggest one listens with thier own ears. After all, isn't that what we do... listen? When mariners first set out to sea, people said that they would fall off the edge of the world. It was flat. Why? It was proven, scientific knowledge at that time. And it sure looked convincing on parchment. Well, guess what the earth's round. Listen, listen, listen... Oh yeah... listen. Happy trails, all! |
I'd like to take Sean and Robert E. Greene of TAS and lock them up in a room together and watch the festivities. The esteemed Dr. Greene thinks pretty much like Rsbeck except that he also doesn't care much about source components or amplification. I respect all three of these gentlemen, by the way. With some audio buddies yesterday, we wanted to evaluate a new IC. The CD player had two sets of outputs, so we used one for one brand and the second for the other brand. The comparison was then done by switching the input on the preamp. The first time through, the system's owner made the switch while music was playing, so "now switching to Brand X", then "back to Brand Y", etc. None of us could hear a meaningful difference. I suggested that the rapid switching was a problem, so we listened to a passage with Brand X and then paused and listened to the same passage with Brand Y. This time through, there were noticeable differences. My question is this: Which listening procedure is the most flawed? I'm telling this tale and asking this question in this thread because this is exactly what is at issue here. Rsbeck and Dr. Greene would maintain (I'm putting words in their mouths, but indulge me please) that the physics dictate no meaningful differences. Ergo, any differences we believe we hear while listening are imagined or whatever. There's a sh*tstorm in the Harbeth user's group forum now over the issue of aftermarket bi-wire jumpers. Some users (including me) believe they hear a meaningful improvement when replacing the stock jumper plates with Audience or other third-party jumpers. We have taken considerable harsh criticism from the "scientists", especially REG. I know we go down this road over and over again in these forums. You don't have to tell me that if *I* can hear a difference, what should I care what the science says. I always make my purchase decisions based on what I hear. Nevertheless, I would like to know what is TRUE because, unlike some audiophiles, I am open-minded to the possibility that my subjective evaluation is not reliable and that I need to temper what I sometimes hear with a pinch of reason. |
I do not think that the money you spend is necessarily worth the sound you get especially in cables. But if you are going to tell me that cables make no difference you are just crazy. I was a skeptic as well but over time, and lot's of listening, I have been converted. Remember, the body feels sound as well as the ears hear so there are additional factors at play. I have even swithed out all my power cords. No this must really be crazy but I can hear a difference. There is only one way to go here, try things and make a choice for yourself. Just buy used and you can't go wrong with the adventure. |
>>It was flat. Why? It was proven, scientific knowledge at that time.<< Uh, no. It was the mythology of the time. It was scientific investigation that proved the world is round. When you investigate the claims made about cables -- you end up laughing. Look -- put up a cable and tell me why I should admire it. What does it do? It sounds good? John Dunlavy used to do a test where he would invite audiophiles and audio critis to his lab, position techicians behind speakers, show the audience Zip Cord and the audience would be unimpressed, then the technicians would switch them with exotic speaker cables and the audience would wax poetic about all of the huge improvements and changes they were hearing. Only problem -- the cables were never changed, it was Zip Cord all along. Cable testimonials aren't convincing. Not to mention the way people talk about cables. I was in a thread where a guy wanted more bass. People recommended cables. I asked him about his system and it turned out he was using bookshelf speakers. I suggested he buy full range speakers and cable enthusiasts became agitated and told me I didn't understand what cables can do. Uh.....yeah. I don't think they can make bass in a speaker without bass capability. Magical thinking. Weird non-sequiter insults. Another time someone was recommending thousand dollar speaker cables to a kid with a $500 system. The kid was complaining his system is too bright. I looked at the pictures of his system and three walls of his listening room were celing to floor plate glass windows. I suggested room treatments and other component upgrades and this drew more bizarre comments. I find it interesting that people who claim to have such sensitive hearing that they can be disturbed by inaudible things in speaker cables an overlook macro problems in their speakers and rooms. It don't add up. You get an inch deep in the cable phenomenon and your BS Meter goes off the Richter Scale. |
>>I simply asked you to listen to some cables within the confines of your system and see if you heard a difference.<< See -- here's another problem. The thread was not about whether cables can sound different. I believe cables CAN sound different. In this thread alone, I told the poster that if he wanted tonally BRIGHT speaker cables, or added BRIGHTNESS in his system, he should do the minimum -- get a frequency response chart of any proposed cable. The issue was whether or not .1 db down at 20Khz is an audible roll-off. In my experience with Sean, he has chased me from thread to thread telling me about this "ROLL-OFF." Of course, he didn't specify the "roll-off" so I looked up the information and posted links to frequency response charts which showed that this "roll-off" is .088 down at 20Khz. Great -- another bogus cable claim. Sorry, but when you do stuff like that, credibility goes bye bye. So, Sean tells me that he can hear this "roll-off." Great -- another bogus cable claim. If he wants to concede now that he can hear no such thing, we can at least get to some semblance of reality. We'll see. |
>>If you can honestly hear a difference<< Honestly hear a difference? Sorry, but sighted tests carry no weight -- see the Dunlavy tests referenced above. >>those differences have to be measurable using the proper tools and test methodology.<< If the test is based on the idea that one cable has an audible roll-off because it is .088 db down at 20Khz when driven into a 4 ohm load, you've already got a faulty test. If you don't know the frequency reponse chart of the other cable, you're shooting in the dark. If it isn't perfectly flat, then what will it tell you? What if the frequency response shows that the other cables are bumped up in the high end? Then, what do you know? That cables with a bumped high end sound different than ones that are audibly flat? Two words: Who cares? >>lessens your credibility.<< Obviously, we have vastly different ideas about what consitutes credibility. >>Eldartford is both an engineer and a cable skeptic, yet he's open minded enough to try such a test.<< Because Eldartford has a DIFFERENT issue. He wants to see if they sound different. You've never bothered to notice what position I have taken, you simply blunder in and start arguing with ghosts about whether or not cables can sound DIFFERENT, even though I've written in each thread that it is possible for cables to sound different. But, that doesn't make .1db down at 20Khz any more audible. Sheesh. |
Rsbeck, You've made your point. In fact, you've made your point repeatedly in this and numerous other threads. But what does this have to do with the question of the author? You are firm in your beliefs, and have found an answer that works for you. I say that's terrific. But it's terribly fatiguing to jump into a thread for a lively exhange of information only to each time be blasted by your attempts to convert the wayward cable-ites. Clearly, you're an intelligent person, one who knows far more than I do about the science behind this hobby. I'm only asking if you might see your way to kicking the conversation forward, maybe just for the sake of musical enjoyment? Thanks for considering it. |
I've addressed the question posed by the originator of this thread. If you don't like to see other threads hashed out again in this one, then you need to voice your disapproval to Sean, who posted a link to another thread and started that argument all over again in this one. We already had a thread for that argument. Seems to me we were having a nice conversation in here until that. And -- yeah -- it is a nice idea that we might "exchange information" without disagreeing, and clearly it can be fatiguing to listen to opposing viewpoints, but come on, imagine what you'd think if I asked all of the cable believers to stop posting so I could enjoy a less fatiguing exchange of information. |
I do not have any such position that all cables sound the same. The position I have taken is that if someone comes to this forum looking for help, the best thing we can do for him/her is to look at the entire system, including the room. Sorry, but I disagree with the notion that -- because a poster thinks he/she needs cables to solve a problem that we have to limit our suggestions to cables. If I post a problem to this forum, I expect to get suggestions from people who follow all different approaches. It is up to me to sift through them all and make a list of things to audition, approaches to consider, etc. The first thing is to try to make a diagnosis of the entire system to see where the problem might originate. If a problem is identified, we should investigate a little to see whether or not the disagnosis is sound. If a solution is offered, we ought to be able to debate whether or not it will solve the problem. If only cable enthusiasts are allowed to respond, it gives a false impression -- that there is a concensus that cables are the problem and the solution. Since we don't all feel this way, there will be debate. The controversy isn't going to go away no matter how much we may wish it so. |
Sorry, Rsbeck. By the time I posted my comments, you had written a second time. The first thing is to try to make a diagnosis of the entire system to see where the problem might originate. I certainly agree. Perhaps I misread your earlier posts, because I came away with the impression that when it comes to cables, your conclusions circumvent the need for any debate at all. Each of us responds to the author's question based upon our personal experiences. And in my experience, moving from copper to silver cables produced exactly the result sought by Harnellt. I say that except for tying up a few bucks in used cables, he has nothing to lose by experimenting. If it is indeed a debate at hand, then such discoveries are hardly settled. There are no absolutes that apply to every one of us, except maybe what'll happen if you change an outlet without first cutting the power. All I'm trying to say is that the findings of others are not nullified by your (or anyone else's) contentions. If I interpreted your comments as such, I apologize. |
| Post removed |
I have to agree with Rsbeck -- completely. Putting aside the placebo factor, in all truth you'd be hard pressed to find something better that -- drum roll, please -- 14 gauge low voltage lighting cable from Home Depot. Approximately 15 cents a foot. Well-shield, super-well constructed, very pure copper, does the trick. Don't believe me? Roy Allison and the fine folks at McIntosh all have the same thought. Power cables? Give Dusty at CI Audio a call -- he's an extremely thoughtful, honest designer and recommends, drum roll, please, normal computer power cords from Radio Shack. Yes, a dedicated line is a great idea, and a better outlet is certainly a good idea. Otherwise -- snob and placebo factor aside -- the money one would invest in expensive cables would make much more of a difference, as Rsbeck has said, in components, especially your amp and speakers. |
Grant, I completely agree. And given the variables Harnellt's system (absent the unanswered issue of room treatment), I would again recommend silver speaker cables. I've tried six different cables in my system, and the differences between copper and silver were not even close. As well, the variations in detail and transparency amongst the copper cables were not marginal either. Does this mean that I have the answer to his dilemma? I don't know. In response to the suggestion that one of the components might be the culprit here, which one would it be? AR cd3 Pass alpeh P Pass X-150.5 with AZ silver ref. xlr Joseph Audio RM22si MK2 His system seems capable of producing the detail he is after, but in my experience the speaker cables listed in his initial post will not translate the same level of detail that silver will. And as far as treating the room, doing so in our house did not enhance the effects of brightness, but rather tamed it instead. Again, just my experience. Harnellt, let us know what you discover. |
Rsbeck, I agree that money is better spent on components, room acoustics, and dedicated A/C, than on cabling. But I also think that cabling makes a big difference in a system. I don't read the hype that you talk about. I just try the cable. But... About a year ago, I needed a cable that was balanced and longer to replace my 0.5 meter Siltec FTM4sg single ended interconnect. I tried 6 interconnects that were on loan. The one that stood out above the rest was the Siltec SQ110 Classic. I bought it. I use this between my preamp and amp. It's biggest asset was lowering the noisefloor in my system. At any rate, here's the hype on this cable. I just pulled out the booklet that came with it. "our shielding effect reduces the noise floor by 40-60db" "total noise is limited by the electronics used (typically 90-130 db)" "the theoretical signal-noise level of our new technology is on the order of 160-180db"-- Is all this true? who knows. I just know that it worked very well in my system. I gained more clarity, microdynamics and musicality compared to my already good interconnect. So you were asking about a cable? In spite of some of the hype, I choose Siltec, for thier unique technology of using gold and silver. And yes, I think that cabling is probably the most overpriced "component" in the audio chain. |
| Post removed |
