Which cables go with what?????

Has getting as close to what you would think is the real thing fit into the equation or is that being neutral?

Some cables just do not work with systems or speakers I would think. Atleast that is what I have founnd in my system. I also do not weigh much into having a cable for 30days. In some cases I can tell within the first week weather they are going to be right.Sometimes In the first day. Then there are others which I cannot put my final impression on because there is that something that just does not come off correct. It is only after an extended period I figure it out then they are gone.

I have a passive controller. I never thought of cables as being tone controls. If I wanted tone controls I would get an active Pre-Amp. I would rather just have what is what I would think to be the regular presentation as the Engineer had settled on being the final version. I could always add an EQ if I felt I needed one.

JMO

When *any* cable is introduced into a system, the signal path has to travel through that cable. Once this happens, neutrality is impossible, audioengr, because the signal is inherently degraded in the mere process of *moving through* that path.

As a result, there is no neutrality, and therefore there is no "absolute sound."

From the Concise Oxford Dictionary, ninth edition

"ignorant- 1 (a) lacking knowledge or experience. 1 (b) uninformed about a fact or subject. 2. ill-mannered, uncouth"

I disagree 100%.

If you terminate most any cable with the nominal load and source impedances that it would see during normal operation, most all of them will pass signals with phenomenally high levels of linearity. It is the impedances of each component being linked together combined with the electrical characteristics of the cable itself that we hear, not the cable itself. That's why "Cable A" may bomb / sound horrible between the Super Deluxe 2000 and Whiz Bang 1000 but works great between the Whiz Bang 1000 and a Golden Jalopy 1500.

While i do agree that some cables may have a higher DA ( dielectric absorption ) factor, have slightly variable series resistance, varying levels of reactance, etc... most all of them are capable of passing signal without major problems on their own. What makes the big difference is the fact that the terminated and source impedances are changing as both amplitude and frequency are varied. As such, the cables themselves are acting as impedance transformers between the two mating components. How good of a job the cable can do in terms of minimizing the reflections between the two impedances while allowing maximum signal transfer "wins". That is, as far as "system transparency" goes.

Cables that lack this ability ( in a specific source / load combo ) will result in some type of "colouration" being presented. This is due to a greater amount of reflections altering how the signal is transferred and how the circuitry responds to those reflections. Changing either the source or the load component could produce drastically different results.

When all is said and done, it is more a matter of system synergy / circuit stability / personal preference than any other factor. There are no "best" cables because their are no perfect sources or loads. Sean
>

boring [adj.]
PRON: /'bOri[ng]/
1. So lacking in interest as to cause mental weariness; "a boring evening with uninteresting people"; SYN. deadening, dull, ho-hum, irksome, slow, tedious, tiresome, wearisome.
boringly [adv.]
1. In a tedious manner; "boringly slow work"; SYN. tediously, tiresomely.
boringness [n.]
1. Extreme dullness; SYN. dreariness.
born [adj.]

ultralingua (english vers.)
-cfb