Why Do Cables Matter?
To me, all you need is low L, C, and R. I run Mogami W3104 bi-wire from my McIntosh MAC7200 to my Martin Logan Theos. We all know that a chain is only as strong as its' weakest link - so I am honestly confused by all this cable discussion.
What kind of wiring goes from the transistor or tube to the amplifier speaker binding post inside the amplifier? It is usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper. Then we are supposed to install 5 - 10' or so of wallet-emptying, pipe-sized pure CU or AG with "special configurations" to the speaker terminals?
What kind of wiring is inside the speaker from the terminals to the crossover, and from the crossover to the drivers? Usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper.
So you have "weak links" inside the amplifier, and inside the speaker, so why bother with mega expensive cabling between the two? It doesn't make logical sense to me. It makes more sense to match the quality of your speaker wires with the existing wires in the signal path [inside the amplifier and inside the speaker].
Showing 23 responses by knownothing
At least some designers of high end cables have obtained patents for their products and designs. https://patents.justia.com/inventor/caelin-gabriel And these patent applications have received some review by qualified engineers to determine if there are any technical grounds justifying award. “Patent examiners review patent applications to determine whether the invention(s) claimed in each of them should be granted a patent or whether the application should instead be refused. One of the most important tasks of a patent examiner is to review the disclosure in the application and to compare it to the prior art. This involves reading and understanding a patent application, searching the prior art (including prior patent applications and patents, scientific literature databases, etc.) to determine what contribution the invention makes over the prior art, and issuing office actions to explain to the applicants and their representatives (i.e., patent attorneys or agents) any objections that may exist against the grant of a patent. In other words, an examiner reviews a patent application substantively to determine whether it complies with the legal requirements for granting of a patent. A claimed invention must meet patentability requirements of novelty, inventive step or non-obviousness, industrial application(or utility) and sufficiency of disclosure.” From Wikipedia article titled “Patent Examiner” |
@asctim says: ”If someone was curious to hear more clearly what various cables do to the sound, it seems they could be tried with long cable runs, like maybe 100 feet. Surely that would exaggerate whatever change the cable is making compared to another cable of the same length. They might both sound bad at that length, but in different ways.” Cable length seems to be discussed most often in terms of speaker cables (keep them short to reduce signal loss, or keep them above a minimum length to match amplifier properties (Naim), and digital cables (1.5ft or greater to reduce reflections in the cable). Balanced cables are preferred in pro audio for low level signals to reduce signal loss on long runs. Lot’s of discussion of this topic on this and other forums, check it out. But length is only one parameter in cable performance, and the one that the end user has universal control over in the selection process, whether buying lamp cord or exotic six figure wires. One could argue long runs could require more care in cable selection and matching cables to your particular gear than shorter runs because of greater chances for selective loss of certain signal frequencies, smear in time domains, interference in electrically noisy environments, or compounding or decreasing negative gear/cable interactions unique to your system. Speaking of electrically noisy environments, how about the environment right behind your integrated amp or preamp, where high and low level analog signals cross paths with high level power supply cables and various ethernet, USB and coax digital cables? This is where cable technologies that tame interference and keep various signal forms in their respective lanes really pays off. The performance benefits of good design here are generally independent of cable length (unless various cables are coiling on top of each other in a pile behind your gear) and, I think, one element in answering the original question “why do cables matter”. YMMV kn |
”Just for laughs, when I see a patent on HiFi gear these days, I read it... ... if I can while ROTFLMFAO 🤣” Applying for and receiving a US patent requires that the product designer provide some plausible engineering principles to support the patent application, and an attempt to explain how it works and how it provides a unique design solution for a particular problem of set of problems. While patent applications are also a form of “sales”, one hopes that the engineers approving patent applications have greater experience and expertise than the average consumer, in this case consumers of hifi cables. My assumption here is that there is a higher standard of “proof” required for the presentation of the idea to the patent office than, say to consumers at audio shows, showrooms, or viewing online videos. If this assumption is not true in general for patent approvals, then heaven help us all. kn |
@yoyoyaya says in response to @donavabdear : “Your argument implies that because recordings are made with components of a particular level of quality, then using better quality components to reproduce them is pointless. That argument is specious for the reasons set out above.” 100%. But as our systems become more resolving (and the quality of the wires both inside and outside of our boxes contribute significantly to that resolving ability), relative strengths and weaknesses in recording quality and craftsmanship become more and more apparent. One of the acquired skills of audiophiles is to learn to listen past the warts on some of our previously favorite recordings to still hear and appreciate the musical event captured in time. |
I trained as a biological oceanographer, and my experience with electronics beyond plugging them in and turning them on is taking delicate research instruments out of the ocean where a seal leaked and trying to resuscitate them 1,000 away from the nearest electronics shop, wiring my house and building custom power cables for audio equipment that I hope will not destroy audio gear or cause a fire. I have a rudimentary understanding of resistance, capacitance and continuity, and beyond that, it’s pretty much try something in my current system and see how it sounds. Scientists are professional skeptics, and are paid to knock the crap out of ideas until they either wither or hold up under scrutiny. I have had plenty of my ideas beaten down and a few hold up. With any audio gear, I am always a skeptic until I hear the results for myself. If I am making a large audio investment ( for me), I will seek second opinions and have arranged blind tests with people whose ears I trust. Through my audio journey, I have determined that cables matter a lot, but results don’t always match linearly with investment. All that said, I am perfectly comfortable having my ideas and comments challenged here by people who have a lot more formal training and experience in this field than I do. I brought up the patent process as a possible place where different concepts and claims for exotic or new audio cable designs get vetted by a neutral third party out of the glare of advertising and competing claims of glory in the marketplace. Based on y’all’s comments, this suggestion was misguided. Both my brother and his son are electrical engineers who have patents for things I completely don’t understand, and they are not at liberty to divulge the intended use. Perhaps I should have asked them first about the patent process before bringing it up here. LOL BTW, I referenced Caelin Gabriel’s patents in this thread because I am aware that he has an engineering background and I know (from effective marketing on his part) that he has patented a number of his product ideas. I own some of his gear and it works well enough, but I would not call myself a fan boy. |
@donavabdear we are apparently talking past each other here a bit. To the degree you called me out on that, you sound like my wife. She is quite smart, so that’s a compliment. Like others who just posted to this thread, I never said I was trying to get 7.5 worth of information value out of a recording that only has a value of 7. OK? We straight on that? I think pretty much everyone on here has addressed that issue in a way that is consistent with your point, so we should be good. I also maybe misinterpreted your point to mean it is hopeless to use way more expensive cables than the recording studio, because you might be trying to score a 12 out of 7 in replaying the recording, and that is just such a ridiculous concept, right? Nobody would claim that. Right? At least I haven’t read a single post in this thread where anyone claimed that. I think what folks are getting at here is that better hifi systems, including their better and finely optimized cable looms, more closely approach reproduction value of 7.0, say attaining a value of 6.45 (subjectively) compared with less capable systems with less resolving or higher loss cables which may only be capable of achieving a reproduction value of 5.9 or 6.2 (subjectively) for the listener. My point was also that as systems become more resolving and more closely capable of reproducing what is actually on the recording (nothing more), the variation between quality of different recordings and their pressings becomes quite apparent, and this can either lead to more enjoyment or less enjoyment for the listener. Again, with system and cable qualities adding synergistically to the approximation of perfect replay of only that information captured on the original recording and source material, be it analog or digital formats. All that said, I am having a distinct sense of deja vu, so I’ve either had this exact same discussion in the past on this or other forum, or I am doomed to have it again. kn
|
You say: ”Super turbo mega cables inserted between a skinny fuse and the crossover wire a speaker can't make a difference just like inserting a firehose between two garden hoses can't make a difference. In physics in called Kickoffs law.” Terrible analogy. Let me give you a better one. “Super turbo mega cables inserted between a skinny fuse and the crossover wire inside a speaker can make a real difference in what you hear, just like inserting a leakproof section of hose with great leakproof fittings between two garden hoses can make a difference in conserving pressure and flow compared to an equal length section of drip irrigation hose with leaky connectors.” You either refuse to listen, or you are completely incapable of understanding even the most simple concepts. We have all been here before. kn |
Have you ever been involved in a blind test comparing an array of, say, digital cables of different price points and quality rotated in a decent (not even SOTA) home sound system in a purpose built listening room and comparing across the same music tracks? Or with headphones and a decent headphone amplifier and source gear? Because, if you have done this, and you maintain that there is little to be gained in the sound quality coming out of your speakers (or should I more accurately say, much less being lost) by listening random through the price scale for offerings from reputable brands like say Nordost or Chord, then I can only surmise that you actually have tin ears. Seriously, the differences between at least some cables can be quite astonishing, and will make you laugh out loud at what lesser cables are masking or leaving out of what’s actually in your recordings and present to be unlocked by the inherent capabilities of your powered equipment. Frankly, the fact that you are stating you have a background in the recording industry and you cling this flat earth perspective on premium cables as a blanket accusation based on fundamentally misapplied principles and inept analogies without providing any evidence that you have actually done some serious blind testing with your own ears is really hard to understand or take seriously. Sure, some expensive cables probably are lousy, overpriced or at least a bad match in some systems. But when you get it right, it is really, really right and you will know it immediately. And you wont want to go back again. Good luck, kn PS - Kimber is generally good stuff. And they publish their cable specs, which I respect. |
I will venture at least one guess as to the cause of your intense resistance to listening seriously to and evaluating premium audio cables, and soldering on to come up with all manner of irrelevant excuses for why it can’t make a difference. With 73 speakers at your home, even using only mid-level audiophile products from reputable makers like Kimber, Audioquest, Nordost, etc. would cost you an investment approaching that for all of your electronics combined. Especially if you are trying to drive all speakers in a home theater system with hard wires versus wirelessly. I can understand this hesitation on your part, and your valiant attempts to convince yourself it won’t make a difference. But trying to enlist and seek support from the entire Audiogon community in your self deception is a fools errand. I promise. And bro, seriously, what does Anthony Hopkins have to do with the performance of audiophile cables? |
says: “Why do audiophiles think that inserting a very high quality AC cable between the romex and the Amp fuse makes the audio signal change (there is no audio until after the transformer where the power is changed to DC). (Also I've spent 100 of thousands on Power conditioning personally).” This may be difficult to grasp, but a good power cable can affect the sound produced by your system without interacting directly with the processed signal path🤯 I know, right? One way a good PC can do that is not limiting the current to your gear. That requires both adequate gauge wire AND good connections. Wire and connector metallurgy can affect this greatly. I tend to like power cables built with 12 gauge or greater POCC or OCC copper, and copper connectors plated with gold (warmer sounding) or rhodium (less conductive, sounds neutral to me with leaner more defined bass - but a long break in period). I built a wire that uses silver plated copper connectors and it is a unicorn cable, tipping the frequency spectrum up in everything I have plugged it into. Too little resistance? Dunno, it’s not for me. Another factor is reducing stray electrical fields behind your gear in the vicinity of low level analog or digital signal cables, especially on or near the back plate of your integrated amp or preamp where many cables and their connectors come into close proximity. This is accomplished in power cable design with shielding, cable geometry and connectors that reduce emissions. Problems with interference can arise from the current in the cable, and electrical noise from your gear - especially digital sources - returning to your outlet, power strip or power conditioner via your PC. The area behind your gear is the worst place for your delicate low level signals to transit, but transit they must. Why pro audio uses balanced interconnects, am I right? And why you like wireless connections. There is also a school of thought that vibration is bad for power circuits, and serious manufacturers of power cord connectors like Furutech put a lot of effort into reducing vibration. And their high end AC connectors do sound very good to me. I have built PCs for a few hundred bucks that I think sound terrific, and I’ve bought or built PCs for a lot more that were just OK or even unlistenable. I have bought some finished PCs from China for a little over $100 that sound fantastic, while others I bought sounded meh. And I have listened to higher end power cables from some big name brands and I thought they were worth every penny. So maximizing current delivery and minimizing noise and vibration in power cables can have noticeable benefits on sound of your hifi. And even though they are technically upstream of the processed signal, because they occupy a common space on your shelf with cables delivering low level signals between your boxes, PC’s are an integrated part of your hifi ecosystem where every step you take to isolate the signals from noise and from one another matters. Audiophile don’t “think” well designed power cables improve how they experience the music produced by their systems. They know it from empirical experience because they try different cables and they hear differences in the sound coming out of their speakers or headphones. As mentioned by others here, exceptional cables really enhance spatial cues and recreate the timing and flow of the recorded notes in ways that just make more sense to my ears and my brain. Spend less time typing about why it doesn’t work, and spend more time exploring different cables in your systems at home. You might actually enjoy yourself. |
It’s refreshing to see the two-way learning in this thread. I had written you off as coming here to make a point, rather than share a point of view and accept that it might be challenged and your initial perspective may be improved. I was wrong about that. Many of us who have developed strong opinions about hifi cabling based on our unique empirical experiences and some understanding of both theory and uncertainty associated with connecting a bunch of boxes with various electronics inside with wires forming a complex “system” driven by variously clean power from the wall and played in infinitely variable acoustic room environments. Every time there is a thread on here or another forum containing the word ‘cable’ some collection of theorists join the thread and talk about graphs and what they know about resistance, and many of us have developed sensitive trolling antenna. To folks that have learned to keep an open mind and trust theirs and others’ ears, it resembles a chorus of the flat earth society. It’s tiresome and interferes with productive sharing. So forgive our collective fatigue. I do have to admit I am taken aback by your name dropping, even if it is sincere and in support of a point. I am much more convinced and interested in your description of the physical and acoustic challenges of recording sound in complex and noisy environments with the sources moving around, and then trying to mix that in ways that make sense and support the moving images in a film. That’s cool. I regularly work with rich and famous people, and I find that name dropping NEVER succeeds as a validator of my thoughts or points, and it is almost always a turn off in a conversation. Just a suggestion of something to consider in this and other discussions. Back on topic, you said; ”I have no extreme reverence for knowing what the original record was I'm just saying if you didn't do the original recording then haw can you or anyone else talk about the proper image or the tightness of the bass, you can make the tightest bass ever just add gating, ducking, and lots of compression. Tighter and wider on every recording isn't always correct” The improvement by good cables with respect to reproducing soundstage width and depth and timing aren’t some technicolor hallucination that appears on all recordings. Mono doesn’t become stereo, flat or not particularly well-miked stereo recordings don’t grow width or depth that wasn’t captured or mixed into the final cut. Good gear and wires just tell you more of whats going on, good and bad, and sometimes that can make you want to listen to certain recordings on your Bluetooth speaker in your kitchen rather than your two-channel big rig. Enjoy the journey, kn |
