Are audiophiles still out of their minds?

Al, 

I understand your points. I guess I was presuming if a person was going to take the step of using a wire with superior properties (capacitance, inductance et. al.) they would take the steps to engineer the system holistically.

Taking things one point at a time.

1) Ground Loops-- The key to avoiding ground loops is ensuring equal electrical potential at each receptacle ground. The concept that the emi rejection method of a premium spec wire (be it twisting or otherwise) would cause a variation in potential, I suppose is possible, but to me that would indicate the wire by definition was  not premium spec. to begin with. Certainly there are wires with tighter geometric tolerances than romex that would quickly render this concern moot as far as the pursuit of improved overall performance is concerned. (As an aside I use a furutech star ground harness which runs directly from my 5 neutrals 3 feet behind my listening wall  to a 1" solid copper 8' grounding rod. It does the trick.) 
 
2) RFI/EMI Filtering-- Of course romex has higher inductance and of course inductance cleans up high frequencies but that would be a blunt (backwards) approach to addressing the problem. I would much prefer wire with both inductance and capacitance thereby maximizing current delivery and clean things up with a purpose built device. ( I use a 75 amp Torus ahead of my 20' 10 gauge Furutech lines. It cleans things up with precision as opposed to hoping my wire is long enough and poorly engineered enough to solve the problem.)

3) Bad is Good Rationalization-- Regarding Steve's stuff, the arguement that taking sound engineering steps to improve the performance of one aspect of a system is a bad idea because it might display the other areas of the system that need improvement has never made any sense to me as it relates to audio or system design generally. How does one ever make progress employing such a mindset?

4) Analog Signals and LCR Tuning-- Yes lots can be done to dial in bandwidth and noise on analog signals to taste. That is why I specifically referred to AC wires in my question.

5) System Predictability-- I would agree predictability is low if system inputs are somewhat randomly assembled, but I would argue results become far more linear (and in fact measurable) when proper science is used in the initial system specification. Again, this holds true in audio as well as system design generally.

Instead of going off subject, why don't we get back on track.  Earlier I posted a list of why I think megaexpensive cables are not worth their price. I hear nothing but silence from those  who oppose my views. It's irrelevant what people pay for watches, cars, Gulf Stream jets, etc.  That wasn't the subject of my original post.  If you feel justified paying for mega expensive cables because they sound good to you despite my contention there are cheaper alternatives, then you don't have to respond. You've made up your mind so happy listening.  However, if someone can justify the issues I have with expensive cables (listed below), I would sincerely like to hear your views.  No more personal attacks, smart ass remarks, and psychoanalysis from either side. 


First, the raw materials needed for expensive cables are easily obtained, are cheap in the quantities needed, and are only few, namely metal wire, connector, and dielectric. How expensive is copper or even silver wire that goes into an expensive 1 meter of IC or 8’ feet of speaker cable? Cost of most dielectric and shielding is almost nothing.

Second, the engineering of expensive audio cables is not sophisticated compared to amplifiers, DACs, speakers, although cable manufacturers will claim otherwise.  I'm not talking about cables used in some components of high energy physics particle colliders (eg, CERN) that my physicist friends have told me about.  They do require sophisticated engineering and manufacturing and are probably expensive for a reason.

Third, markup of expensive audio cable is probably the highest in the industry for no good reason. If you can provide a good reason, please let us know.

Fourth, there is no consistent evidence published or otherwise that expensive cables sound better than inexpensive ones, coat hangers excluded.  I with other audiophiles have conducted blinded AB testing, and there has never been consistent preference for expensive cables ($5k+ speaker cables and ICs) over relatively inexpensive ones ($300-$2k). I do find differences in sound among cables, but price has never been the consistent factor. If you contend blinded AB testing is flawed, then provide an alternative.

Fifth, manufacturing of these expensive, highly marketed audio cables is cheap compared to most high end gear. As far as I know, there is no cable geometry that a machine can't wind. And cables can be made tens of thousands of feet easily by machines. Actually, I think some of the more boutique, one man operations spend more time hand making his wire (hand polishing the wire, making and applying the dielectric by hand, etc).

I would love to hear your responses.

Just two things. Your negative or unsubstantial results actually don’t match what the majority of audiophiles experience with expensive cables, therefore your contention that expensive cables are not worth the price is unfounded. Two, your contention that blind tests reveal that all expensive cables are no better than cheap cables is either your own puffery and untrue or if you have been involved in a blind test, which BTW I actually doubt, that produced negative results I suggest it is simply an outlier and can be thrown out. Besides the tests you yourself (for some bizarre reason) linked earlier on this thread actually show the opposite - they show that there ARE significant differences among cables as heard by almost ALL listeners in the test. Hel-loo! Have you had your hearing checked recently?

cheers,

geoff kait
machina dynamica

Re your argument that for less money other alternative methods can provide more benefits with respect to sound quality than spending big bucks on super expensive cables, nobody said they couldn’t. However, if you wish to use room treatments as the alternative to expensive wires, a word of caution. Room treatments you know, like the tiny little bowl acoustic resonators, the Synergistic Research stuff, the Audio Magic stuff, Shakti Hallographs, SteinMusic Harmonizer, heck, even the ubiquitous Tube Traps ain't cheap, not by any means. I bet you think room treatment involves simply putting up a couple squares of SONEX.

Drac,

Regarding your comments 1,2, 3, and 5 you seem to lack an appreciation for how things work in a free market economy.

Operators capable of raising capital must set pricing on the products the capital is used to produce at a level that maximizes the net-present-value of all future cash flows generated by that capital (as determined using a discount rate equal to the operator's cost of capital) which in turn must maximize the rate-of-return on each dollar of the capital raised.

Those who employ capital must make such pricing decisions by assessing the price elasticity for the product in question and the incumbent capital required to meet the demand for any given price point. The cost to produce any particular product is only used to determine the floor for pricing to determine a go-no-go decision on the capital project.

Failure to employ rate-of-return maximizing corporate finance principals will quickly undermine the operator's ability to raise capital as such capital will alternatively flow to those who understand these concepts. 

What you describe harkens back to a Soviet style centrally planned economy where the cost of manufacturing is used to determine pricing. Maybe this is one small part of the disconnect so many have with your approach to things.

Regarding your comment 4, I must confess I oscillate between whether I think you really believe the things you say about cables (and as such simply need enlightenment as a scientific matter) or you understand how ill founded your positions are but nonetheless use them within the nebulas nature of the subject to berate those who's success you deplore.  All things considered, (i.e., your clear venom toward the affluent, juvenile treatment toward anyone who logically challenges you, and the weakness of your positions) I continue to lean toward the latter. 

Take the corollary of your position into consideration. In my experience I have generally found the correlation coefficient between intelligence and economic success to be greater the zero. On its face, your position argues that the most successful of the successful have happened upon their economic position in spite of the fact that you claim a correlation coefficient of less than zero. A pretty illogical proposition in my opinion.

I strongly encourage you to spend some time with the brain trust you purport to maintain to understand how inductance and capacitance not only impact current availability but influence bandwidth in analog cables; why skin effect is so critical in speaker cables (why I prefer Nordost btw); etc.etc.etc. The mere existence of snake oil is not justification for dismissal of all sound scientific principals. That behavior wreaks of an agenda. 

I nor anyone I have seen on this thread has argued the lack of existence of extremes in the distribution of outcomes for cables (Al articulated this most clearly). Some high priced cables are poor performers and low priced cables are exceptional. Further, some high priced cables company's are indeed selling snake oil and bling. This reality, however, by no means negates the fact that other high-end cables are engineered and manufactured to very high standards and perform accordingly. 

As I pointed out (and you chose to mock rather than acknowledge) there are 70,000 people in the USA alone who's time is valued to such a degree that it makes no economic sense for them to sort through the low priced cables to achieve the performance they desire. Such an endeavor would actually be more expensive not less expensive than going to a cable company with sound engineering and paying for their services. I refuse to believe you are incapable of grasping this concept but choose to ignore it because it stands in the way of your purpose here.

It is your refusal to embrace alternative thought and the absolute nature of your claims--that people who buy expensive cables are fools, retarded, etc.--that is the problem so many have with you and this thread.