Why Do Cables Matter?

Blame it on Noel Lee!

Some of us were experimenting with cables & connectors long before 1976.

Ieales needs a graphic equalizer- much easier for adjusting the tone of his system.

@tonywinga

Ever viewed the phase response of a graphic? It’s horrendous.

For longer than I care to remember, I’ve said "It’s not the frequency response. It’s the Time!!" Asynchronous harmonic arrival causes a musically educated brain to work overtime trying to rearrange the harmonic structure. Good time and phase response is why the Quad electrostat still sounds amazing and something like the Tekton Moab and its ilk are initially impressive but ultimately extremely fatiguing.

Many systems can be vastly improved with the minimal EQ with a ’tilt’ of ±1 or 2 dB around a mid frequency. In the studio, we used to fake it with two band really low Q parametric EQ, especially when disc mastering. Today it’s a doddle to implement in the digital domain.

Completely baseless claim...

More than 50 years ago, pals and I began experimenting with listening to cables and electronics in our various systems. Initially we tried A/B testing, but found that what we had was C/D.

We all had separates. Some examples: Mitch Cottter, Apt, SAE, Ampzilla, Marantz, HK, db, Dayton-Wright, KEF, Celestion, Tannoy, AR, etc. No Bose, API or Japanese speakers.

We schlepped everything but turntables and speakers to one another’s homes. We mostly agreed that systems were better with the familiar than interlopers. About the same time we agreed that specs were so much twaddle.

Ieales, I love the sound of Quads.  My first encounter with them was in the late 1980’s pared with an ARC SP-8 and Quicksilver amp.  A Sota Star was generating the magical music emanating from those modified Quad ESLs.  That was where my true hi end journey began.  I had planars too but eventually moved on to Thiel speakers.  To me they were fast like planars but with stronger bass.  Agreed, time coherence is critical but I’m not convinced cables can alter that- at least they shouldn’t.  I even had MIT cables with the LCR networks for a long time.  I have since moved back to non-networked cables.

I’m saying that generalizations about cables are inaccurate.  Cables have progressed over the decades as much as any other stereo component, ie. DACs, amps, preamps, etc.  The disappointing part, as I have said is that it is not a regulated industry and finding true and legitimate technology can be a challenge.  And I have also found, just as with any other stereo component- some bargains exist that make great sound for the money but mostly the good stuff tends to be more expensive.  Expensive or cheap what we are all looking for is something genuine.  It is not easy to make the OCC copper wire which sounds the best.  And how many people have their own metallurgical lab to verify they are getting what they paid for.  It comes down to how it sounds and for sure, we can get fooled into thinking something sounds better only later to discover it doesn’t.  It’s happened to me.

OCC copper wire wasn’t created for audio.  It was created for Aerospace- same with silver plated copper wire.  The goal is resistance to fatigue and corrosion.  Back in the day I would spec MIL-W-16878 wire, if I remember correctly for LVDTs used in aerospace.  Similar wire is used these days in automotive too in order to help meet OBD-II and durability requirements.  (Not so much the OCC in automotive.  It is too expensive).

@tonywinga ..I’m saying that generalizations about cables are inaccurate. Cables have progressed over the decades as much as any other stereo component,

Agree, 100%. Yes they have. Along with other cable providers, i.e, i’ve been testing and evaluating with Cardas Audio cables for 30+ years. Today’s designs, products, and results are different from 10, 20, 30 years ago. Anyone who’s tested them knows, like them or not, in any case they are different. Preference is a personal choice. Also similar exp with your comments on OCC, silver-over copper too.

Have you ever tried it? What were there [sic] results? "Unlikely" how, share more?

Tried it more times than I can count.

I remember when I first tried Kimber speaker cable which sounded outstanding in the store. I don't recall my system at the time, but I returned them the next day. I think the cable may have been Oracle which I used until Monster came out with a superior 'pro' product in the 80's.

At that point, I had biamped Tympani [III? IV?] with a custom 70wpc tube amp, & 350wpc SS for the woofers with short cables right behind the speakers. AR SP[?] pre reworked by Michael Fraser, Conrad Johnson MC amp, MC cartridge, Goldmund TT in another room on a stand bolted to the concrete and connected to the power amps with 20[?] feet of Mark Levinson silver [litz?]. The Monster Cable was the first that improved over the Oracle in my system after other cable positive speaker cable store demos.

In the 80's I was a recording engineer. I became an unpaid Monster Cable consultant after Noel Lee loaned me a prototype of a new professional mic cable. On Neumann and Telefunken tube microphones, it blew us away.

We had different microphones, EQ, mic pre, compressors, limiters, to adjust the sound. We now had cables that allowed us to use less of the preceding.

I'd sometimes accompany the sales rep to studios and explain what we experienced. Taking the same sets of cables from studio to studio as demos, results varied from meh to none to stunning depending on what gear was on either end.

A valid determination can only be made in situ as everything else there contributes.