Cable auditions - Hard Work?

Pardales - I agree with your comment on synergy. During the Kubala visit, by the time we got to swapping out the IC from the line stage to the amp, from MIT 350 Evo to K-S Emotion, there was a huge peak in the midrange. Anyone would immediately point blame to the K-S cable. In fact Joe Kubala made a bold statement and said it had to be the Concident TRS speaker cables in my system. His theory was that I had managed to obtain a "synergy" between the MIT and Coincident cables to achieve a balanced midrange. But with this also came a slight roll-off of the frequency extremes. This was new "territory" for me to take on such a theory so seriously and yet you know what...when we put in the K-S Emotion speaker cables, Joe was right on! What my synergy before was nothing more than a bandaid that happened to work with these two different cables. The musicality was there but now with the K-S pair, I had so much more resolution and frequency extreme extension. Two identically voiced cables paired together were far more accurate than two different cables. That's not synergy, that's neutrality and accuracy. I learned far more than I ever would have expected from the Kubala visit.

Synergy is important to compensate for faults in other links in the chain. As we upgrade our system, one component at a time, we base the performance of that new component on how it "mates" with the rest of our system. We need to put in component ABC with its Fault22 because component XYZ is complimentary to this with its Fault47 and so on.

So many people here claim that when one picks a cable, it should be the same model throughout the system. So far I have only ever heard one cable model where this can be done to excellent success - the Kubala Sosna Emotion. Even the Purist Dominus B which I have listened to for 2 days now, and absolutely love, would most likely be too much of a good thing for me if used throughout. It errors just enough from neutrality to make me feel summing up this error in many links would not be ideal. Here, "synergy" would be critical.

In time, I am starting to dislike this whole synergy thing more and more.

John

Hmm...

I used to be a skeptic about cables too. however I do hear differences in various cables - especially ICs.
So:
Bojack - Not sure i agree with your statement that cables are a scam. I agree there must be a price point where the returns diminish so greatly, that it no longer is a worthy pursuit. But, there are differences, though subtle, in the cables I'm currently auditioning.

I think my stress is due to the fact that I don't want to be missing anything in the sonic picture, not the actual act of auditioning. Although - I will admit - I hate getting up and down to switch the cables. :-)

Synergy - I think I've just been lucky so far with regard to synergy. ALL of the pieces of equipment that I've inserted into the chain have performed well. My preferences dictate which i like better, but, none of them have been a disaster the likes of which I've read about on these threads. I suppose, this is why I always come back to cables.

Here’s some food for thought.

If there is such a thing as a completely neutral set of cables, as has been suggested by Kubala-Sosna about the Emotion cables, it would be hard to prove by listening. The Kubala-Sosna Emotion cables (power cords, interconnects, speaker cable and digital cables) pass a square sign wave through the full audible spectrum. This is the only test I know of that can quantify a cables ability to transfer a signal without altering the characteristics of the signal. I can not verify the point, but KS explains that other cables they have tested are not able to pass a completely square wave throughout the frequency spectrum. If I understand this correctly, that means all the other cables he tested were not able to transfer the signal un-altered. I do not know if this creates neutrality or simply effects the dynamics, but...

OK, for the sake of argument let me say that the KS Emotion are as close to neutral (not effecting signal and sonics) as any product tested. If we set up a system with 100% KS Emotion cables, than in theory we would be listening to only the equipment, and not the effects of the cables. Now say we add one cable from some other manufacturer that is not passing 100% square sign waves. Let’s for the sake of this discussion say the high frequency sweep was distorting on the scope, meaning we are losing signal or what we call rolled off.

The effect on the sonic qualities in our system would appear as more bass. We might even conclude this cable added bass, but it is not possible for a cable (a passive device) to add, so in fact the bass sounds deeper because the high end is no longer fully extended. Now through trial and error we find an interconnect that appears to add treble, so combined with the other cable it sounds balanced. In fact the second cable was rolling off the bass, thus balancing the signal back to neutral, but with both high and low frequencies rolled off. This is in effect what we experienced with John’s final two cables.

Cables do not EVER add, unless they have some active electronics in them, possibly cables like MIT or transparent may add, but that is something different all together.

So when someone tells you it’s synergy, it may be but it’s backward synergy. We spend $$$ on a source and more $$$ on amplification and more $$$ to turn the signal into music through our speakers. If we want to receive the most of what we purchase, it makes sense that we want to lose the least signal as it passes from source to speaker. Every time a cable rolls off a frequency we are losing a small amount of the potential we paid for. Add this up with a number of cables and the net result is something far less than our components are capable of.

This would tell me we should want as neutral a cable as possible. Or in other words a cable that alters the original signal as little as possible. It appears that the Kubala-Sosna cables are in fact doing just that. At this point my system is one cable short of 100% Emotion cables,(power cord to Hydra power conditioner) and that should mean I’m hearing my equipment for the first time. This of course means my isolation techniques that were created using the Valhalla cables needs to be looked at. I have no idea what a sign wave sent through the Valhalla cable might look like, but sonically my system sounded thin in comparison to now.

Here’s a second set of thoughts;

Let’s say you have your system all set up with brand X interconnects, and brand Y speaker cable. So far your budget or your denial of power cables making a difference has prevented you from trying power cords. So now you decide to try three different brands. Each one had some effect, one sounded bright, one was bloated in the bass and one seemed to dampen the entire presentation. What really happened? How did cord one sound?

There is no true way to answer this question, and because of this we have created audiophile lingo to describe our findings. Synergy, system dependent, my opinion, blah, blah, blah. The reality is person one experiences brightness because of the other cables weaknesses. He never actually heard the power cord, only the effect of that cords weaknesses upon the other weaknesses from the interconnects and speaker wire.

So when you are testing cables, it is not fully possible to explain the characteristic of one cable or another unless you have full understanding of what your system is already losing.

Is this an explanation to why some people do not hear a difference? Is it possible that the interconnect someone tries has less added roll off that the remaining system? This would mean the final sonic characteristic did not change with the new cable because the remaining cables were performing below the capabilities of the tested cable.

To actually say that cables make no difference is just plain naive, or it’s someone who has too much ear wax or it’s someone who has so many bad cables they have not experienced the issue or it’s just a jerk looking for a fight. This is not a debatable topic, cables do matter, and to a much bigger degree than we know.

So when you buy that new cable and put it in your system, remember, your not hearing that cables characteristics, your hearing the remaining cables, assuming of course your upgrading.

If you are interested in hearing your components I recommend finding a neutral cable. I personally have found the KS cables to effect my system with a completely different result than any other cables I’ve tried.. I have now heard these in five different systems, and in each and every case the effects were the same. In my system the bass tightened, the noise floor dropped, the highs remained fully extended yet with body. Midrange is very colorful. The notes appear more separated, more defined, yet my system does not at all sound clinical or analytical. In fact it sounds the best it ever has. I guess that means the equipment I have sound great.

I believe Kubala-Sosna cables are 100% neutral, and that no other cable they tested were able to pass a square sine wave. I believe this is a break through product, and it has helped me understand how cables work.

I hope this post was understandable, for I think it is a whole new thought process for explaining the effects of cables.

JD

JD

Thank you for the amazingly well said explaination. In theory this all makes perfect sence. It's also sad to think that only one cable (KS Emotion) is able to pass a perfectly square sine wave, thus allowing a pure signal to reach the speakers. At $2700 per meter, the KS is out of the question for me. So the question arises - Does anyone want to buy my rig? :-)

I believe all three, actually five lines of KS cables have the same characteristics. I actually know very little about the other lines, other than each line is about half the cost of the one above. They also come with a trade up policy which allows upgrading if desired.

As far as no other cable... I'm not sure, this is the only one however I have tried that is unique in it's characteristics and thus revolutionary in my mind.