2. cables
  3. 146425-122613

The Science of Cables

It seems to me that there is too little scientific, objective evidence for why cables sound the way they do. When I see discussions on cables, physical attributes are discussed; things like shielding, gauge, material, geometry, etc. and rarely are things like resistance, impedance, inductance, capacitance, etc. Why is this? Why aren’t cables discussed in terms of physical measurements very often?

Seems to me like that would increase the customer base. I know several “objectivist” that won’t accept any of your claims unless you have measurements and blind tests. If there were measurements that correlated to what you hear, I think more people would be interested in cables. 

I know cables are often system dependent but there are still many generalizations that can be made.
128x128mkgus
boxer12
8,656 posts
 
So I adopted the DS method about a week ago between my DAC (Audio Alchemy DDP-1) & preamp (Jeff Rowland Consonance) using audioquest yukon cables & 4 well dampened splitters. Since the splitters are new I wanted to wait until I had some time on them before commenting. In my system there is not one drawback from this. The stage is wider & deeper which is a great improvement in and of itself, but what really surprised me is the overall improvement in clarity. This "tweek" is the real deal. Thank you Doug for bringing it to our attention.  
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
Boxer12, congratulations!  You are a wise man for properly intuiting the discussion by myself and other users. Just wait; with variations it can get much better!

It's time for me to trot out my saying: The greatest impediment to advancing an audio system is the audiophile. Demonstrated wonderfully on this thread. :)

My understanding is that manufactured Schroeder Method ICS are a significant step up. Don't you doubt it! :)

I love moments like this!  Win/win, but the skeptics keep losing out. Their choice. So be it. :)

Last point: let's not call this a tweak. I named it a method to differentiate it from many of the insipid activities and products I disdain. This is worthwhile as a method, whereas most tweaks are a waste of time and money.

glupson
7,842 posts
 
"Go buy the ones that make you feel happy..."
That is a practical problem. How will you know which one will make you happy? I know you can go to the store and ask to compare two pairs of speakers, or amplifiers, but does the same happen with cables?

Reading through these threads, I got an impression that any observation "I do not think that sounds any better" may be met by "they need longer burn-in". In the end, there may be no practical way to win and find a cable that will make you happy, unless it already makes you happy before you walk in the store. Do stores allow for returns and refund of cables? After a month or two of "burn-in"?
taras22
412 posts
 
Do stores allow for returns and refund of cables?


Several manufacturers offer long term trials tied with a money back guarantee.
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
glupson, I'm not making any promotion of burn in. So, you can lay aside that argument against trying Schroeder Method ICs. Double ICs need no burn in to sound superior to single IC. I advise that you make the comparison to single IC as soon as you have built the double. It will take zero time on the system to sound superior.  :) 

You may find my Audiophile Law: Thou Shalt Not Overemphasize Burn In at dagogo.com to be interesting. You will see why I don't wait around for change; I make it happen.   :) 

I presume that plenty of ardent audiophiles would disagree with me on that topic. However, I have no interest in debating my perspective on it. 
More to discover