2. digital
  3. 160660-83203

Dynamic range - effect on different speaker cables - even very high quality ones

I have siltech Emperor double crown speaker cables. I recently bought Tara Omega Gold. 
The difference was very strange, and significant. I could not put my finger on it and changed interconnects to see if there was a compatibility issue. The Siltechs brought out superbly the main "players" and that sound was bang in my face - great. But it was a bit lean in other areas (more periphery sounds such as tinkling of percussion here and there - that sort of thing). 
The Omegas were exceptionally clean and detailed with EVERYTHING coming through, top to bottom, but no particular light and shade that the Siltechs gave. As such, a great pure sound but a bit soulless and didn't give me the bite that the Siltechs did.
I cannot survive life without the hit that the Siltechs give, so have kept those installed and I use the Omegas in an analogue set up (also lower dynamic range it seems) to enjoy those more

My false assumption before was that different cables had different qualities, and (or but) the basics of each recording would be dealt with principally the same i.e. just a different "house" sound
My dealer was nonplussed too as my description of the differences was a bit out of the ordinary, and the difference were VERY stark. I have tried many different cables over the years and never encountered this issue.

By asking around he came up with an interesting "reasoning"

Normal "players" or sources chuck out at a dynamic range of 70db. My DCS upsampler/clock/dac sends out at twice that, and the cables may get over saturated with the sound and act differently. It may appear that excessive dynamic range was not particularly an issue when they designed the cables and so the effect might be unpredictable?
Does anyone have a practical experience of this too - and I suppose the theory buffs out there could confuse me yet more.

tatyana69
tatyana69 OP
269 posts
 

douglas_schroeder
  "It seemed clear to me that when a person expresses confusion, ignorance of the potential outcomes of mixing cables, which can vary widely, as demonstrated in the OP, that they are not employing proper methodology in system establishment. Ergo, my response was more relevant than realized. "

Are you saying I am ignorant of the potential outcomes of mixing cables?
That is a stupid thing to say, where did you get that from? I was writing about the effect of different cables, demonstrating very clearly that I am aware of the effect of different cables. And not employing proper methodology in system establishment ... ??? Are you a civil servant with no proper job? Writing incomprehensible words like that shows a lack of touch with the real world, but I have come to that conclusion some time ago. Gosh I despair of some people ...
tatyana69 OP
269 posts
 
ieales
" @OP please read  http://www.ielogical.com/Audio/CableSnakeOil.php to help understand how cable interact with components. "

I have read it and have rarely seen such bunkum. A few minutes wasted of my life. Figures all over the place and not a sane conclusion to be seen. For example  "Burn In is BUNK!"

Now that is sheer and rank ignorance. Yet again I despair of some people
tbakin63
69 posts
 
Your despair at it’s base is borne of the fact that there is zero scientific basis for any aspect of this conversation.  Hence all the facts, figures, measurements and assertions that amount to alchemy, witchcraft and wishful thinking.  “I swear I can hear a difference from the cable costing $20K!”   “A highly respected ‘engineer’ developed it!”   There’s science for you.  This whole thread is inane.  
Post removed 
tatyana69 OP
269 posts
 
Just to clarify, are you saying I cannot tell the differences between 2 cables each having an rrp in excess of £20k?
More to discover