Point is, surely, that anybody contemplating £2k cables, already has >>£2k speakers.
Not necessarily, again example - Neat Petite Classic. Do you know speaker that definitely will be better than those + good cable in a matching room?
Point is, surely, that anybody contemplating £2k cables, already has >>£2k speakers.
Yes the argument itself is pointless. Because different people have different philosophies of what 'speaker cables are for, how to achieve that objective and how much to pay. If a philosophy works for someone and they are happy then it's a good philosophy. But it's personal, it doesn't have to be rationally arguable, and it's not guaranteed to work for anyone else (however much it gets vigorously evangelized).Anyone who's considering 3k cables vs 1k cables isn't basing performance on measurements. So if they're basing it on just opinion, welcome to the world where any choice can be validated by the opinions of others....
It's a pointless argument
Well, our ears and the processing between (and the bits that look out to the front!) are essential for deciding what will work well for us individually.We all have a tremendously sophisticated measuring device between our ears, that’s enough)
As a measurement device, however, our ears and brains aren’t ideal, as a measurement device needs to be calibrated to a fixed standard.
As I said our own “hearing” is invaluable for choosing what works for us personally but let’s not pretend that it is a measurement device.It’s the same for vision for example, everybody knows that there’re numerous optical illusions, color perception could be different etc.
However what an adopters of measurements for audio are actually suggesting is to select a painting for your living room based on spectroscopy results. That would be weird, no?
As I said our own “hearing” is invaluable for choosing what works for us personally but let’s not pretend that it is a measurement device.
To evaluate high fidelity reproduction equipment? I have to disagree...You’re saying that it is not because not calibrated. But it is calibrated only by…time. Hundreds thousands of years.
With respect, I don’t think you’ve quite got the hang of the requirements of a measurement device!You’re saying that it is not because not calibrated. But it is calibrated only by…time. Hundreds thousands of years.
high fidelity reproduction
Shush now Doppy. Let sleeping subs lie.Worth experimenting with anything to see if there is any difference
Now there's a major understatement if ever I saw one.As a measurement device, however, our ears and brains aren’t ideal
Not when there are well founded associations between colours and phychological "feelings", no.It’s the same for vision for example, everybody knows that there’re numerous optical illusions, color perception could be different etc.
However what an adopters of measurements for audio are actually suggesting is to select a painting for your living room based on spectroscopy results. That would be weird, no?
As long as you make sure to disable the one informed by the eyes!We all have a tremendously sophisticated measuring device between our ears, that’s enough)
Errr. Nope.Point is, surely, that anybody contemplating £2k cables, already has >>£2k speakers.