I used to think pricey interconnects were snake oil...


But recently I had a chance to test my old free cables vs Audioquest Red River and then Mackenzie. The difference was subtle, but definitely there with each upgrade.

I guess reluctantly I am a believer now.

saulh

One of my early jaw dropping experiences in audio were with digital cables. I had already learned how important they were to optimize the analog components. Around 1990 I had a two box CD player. I happily thought, finally a cable that will not matter, it’s digital. But I am a scientist and it comes out, I wanted to prove to myself it didn’t matter. So I borrowed a decent quality digital interconnect. I remember the feeling of complete embarrassment as the first few notes were played… it sounded like someone had come in and upgraded both component boxes with much higher level ones. I was just speechless. Also, what a screaming deal it was… while expensive… nothing like it would have cost to upgrade the player and DAC. 
 

Some components are highly dependent, some less so. Good quality equipment require carefully chosen interconnects to get the best out of them 

Over any other kind of cables, digital interconnects make the biggest difference in my setup. 

Post removed 

 

newbee

4,587 posts

 

……..

BTW I think the value of A/B testing is flawed, not so much in the theory but in the execution, and of little real value. FWIW.

100%. And not just for cables. For components as well. To properly assess the changes you need to have several listening sessions 3-4 days in a row each day with a new component only. Let everything settle including your initial reaction. Then go back to old component or cables. Whatever it is you’re evaluating. 
How I know this? I’ve made plenty of bad rush decisions only to realize days later that what I heard was different but not necessarily better. 

So to @newbee ’s point, A/B testing, blind or not, is bull 💩.