Power Cord for Accuphase Amplifier


I have a new Accuphase P-4600 amplifier and am looking for a power cord to replace the stock. So far I’ve tried the Cullen Crossfire and the IceAge OFC Frankencable. While both cables have worked well on my source components they have not performed better than the stock on the amplifier. So to those who have Accuphase amplifiers what power cable has worked for you?
 

As I mentioned in other threads Accuphase strongly recommends that you use only the stock cord and so far that has been the best. The. other two have resulted in a darker sound with less soundscape openness. 
 

I’ve been trying to stay under $500 for the cord but would be willing to go a little higher if it improves the amps performance. 

jfrmusic

- Yep, just because it has better measurements doesn't mean it will sound best to all. 

"What can be more arrogant than to dismiss science in favor of pure subjectivity?"

- Audio is not a objective endeavor from a listening point of view, it has to be subjective because the hardware has too many variables when interacting with other components. You then have human hearing and brain function where no 2 people on the planet are the same. Science can't explain everything because it was created by humans.

What can be more arrogant than to dismiss science in favor of pure subjectivity?

That’s a logical fallacy, straw man argument:

  • By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone’s argument, it’s much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate.

No one here is suggesting that science be dismissed - except you.

The basis for science is observation. Theory follows observation, then testing both positive and negative cases to prove a theory to be true. Observing and analyzing sound quality and the equipment producing it involves many dozens of variables. While there are a number of known and measured variables there are many more not measured and fully understood. Ultimately in this very complex landscape observation is more time effective than trying to understand all the science, particularly as a part time hobbyist. Also, trying to use a few variables to explain sound quality is a just gross oversimplification.

On top of this you have differences in perception… from different skill levels. If you are new to assessing sound quality, then you may only notice gross differences in tonal balance and detail. As you develop skill, particularly if you do this in parallel with reading about sound qualities and then listening for the dozens of discernible attributes, you learn. You can keep learning more and more over decades. So, where you are in this development will change your perceptions of sound quality. Finally, we value different sound qualities differently.

 

So, while science is interesting (I am trained and was a practicing professional scientist for over a decade)… high end audio is  primarily an observational pursuit if you are looking to put together a great sounding system. Thinking somehow that if an audio effect or cause does not have a confirmed scientific explanation and therefore is suspect  or wrong is absolutely ridiculous. While a few gross effects on sound quality are easily scientifically explained, most are not… or are just not worth the Herculean effort required.  

So observation is key and the more experienced and educated you are in it the greater will be your ability to observe and describe the effects on a system of different pieces of equipment.

Audio is not a objective endeavor from a listening point of view, it has to be subjective because the hardware has too many variables when interacting with other components. You then have human hearing and brain function where no 2 people on the planet are the same.

This is why I generally don't recommend any components for threads like this one.