advertisement


Cables make a difference - shock!!

With his Bobship's voice as it is, I'd hardly get ecstatic with 'statics and probably recoil with moving coils. However, with him sounding like a demented frog, I guess it'll be acceptable if the speakers are well toad in. His tunes they are a-changin'.

All summed up by his album ‘Modern Times’ then ?
 
Why do people feel the neeed to make such a fuss about cable sounds. Yes they sound a bit different, the odd one day and early evening. But unless you want to make a name for yourself why keep harping on?

Richer Sounds cheap thin speaker wire strangles the sound but i works.

There is a Canadian on Wam from world of Linn, insisting how dramatic a difference Cat8 ethernet cables sound. Using analogue wordage. He fears Linn owners will be unwelcome and unloved. He is making a name for something. I never liked Linn after a demo of same, sorry aweful third harmonic rich noise. Sorry Linn owners, you’ve been duped. Still have my LP12 though, just never use it.
 
The psychology is fascinating. I suppose. If you took away all the ad copy for foo and relegated it to what consumers could see in a shop, would it hurt foo sales? How much of it is simple power of suggestion?

I remember buying my first stereo at an outfit called Circuit City, and back then the components came with what would now be considered trash cabling. The Pioneer receiver (SX-6?) came with little spindly black and red speaker cables that I used until the box died. I mean thin. Like Angel Hair pasta thin.

You spend a small fortune, relatively speaking, on a system. Then maybe you upgrade bits of it, then you sit back to listen. But something about the retail process was stimulating enough to stick in your head. But then it's silly to buy something else when you just bought all of this expensive stuff. And I know it was this brain-tickling after-purchase compulsion that compelled most of foo.

The other, more controversial angle, is that many 'audiophiles' really don't care all that much about music. And so Foo became an industry, and eventually all sorts of insane claims were made to differentiate the products, many that go well beyond any claims made for the components they connect.

But then the real fun begins, and that's the battle over whether any of the claims are true. Which actually only serves to mask the real issue, which is the pretense that this is all done "for the music!" Because even though it's essential as justification for buying all this shit you don't need to enjoy music, the elephant in the room is that it's really all about buying the shit so you can talk about it, take pictures of it, and revel in all of that, not music.

That's the psychology I'm most interested in.
 
Replay.

A curiosity, I think.

No doubt that any replay system is actually the sum of all its parts, from amplifier to speaker and of course, the connecting wires. ETC.

I have a simple aim with mine. That it should work well on the largest proportion of recordings that I have. These range from early acoustic records from before 1914, through all periods of analogue electric recording, and up to the digital revolution. These recordings have a rather large range of characteristics, and that should be no surprise. Yet when they were newly made the idea was to create the best replay possible at the time within the constraints of their era. At no time has a recording [at least of classical music] been made that was purposely made to sound worse than the possibilities of its era.

My assumption is that whatever replay I use should, as a starting point, make any of the recordings I have sound fine. I have never had the aim of some "perfection" in replay. As of today, no perfect recording has been made - only the best that our understanding and current technology allows.

I suspect that some cables connecting electronic parts of the replay can have an audible effect, but I ask how significant this is? The actual range of recording styles and the degree of technical quality of these is an order of magnitude greater than the difference between any competently made wire can induce. So I start from the standpoint of taking the stock cables or a reasonable priced [ie. cheap, but competently made] after-market wires and using them. If the result, within the context of my replay chain, pleases me, then I am happy to leave it alone.

I simply don't have the inclination to experiment with the small differences this or that bit of connecting wire might make, given that the recordings themselves range far more ...
 
...and yet, science evolves dosent it? What we couldn't do yesterday, we may be able to do tomorrow. Evolution, its wondrous thing. Although it seems old people don't like it, they seem stuck in a period of time long forgotten spending time on an internet forum repeating the same things hoping they can stop evolution with a quote from some dude fifty years ago who made some hifi...lols.
That's me your talking about:(, of course science develops, and new discoveries seem to be a daily occurrence. However it does not mean that past experience is invalid - which you seem to be implying. Many who post on here are serious engineers, understand the process of new discoveries and the subsequent development. Where would all the bridges, Iphones etc. etc come from if not from engineering discoveries and development. Please don't lump all old people in to one basket of trying stop experimentation. There is a famous expression at attributed to Bernard of Chartres - 'dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants' which describes the discovery and development of new invention and innovation.
 
For the record, I have over the last two years lived and experiments with over 10 different types and manufacturers of some really high quality cables & connectors.
I've recently finalised my own personal position and assessment on them and the outcome is that 'star-quad' Mogami W3104 with CMC pure copper spades are all one really needs. 2x2.5m cost £130.. jobs done for me :)

https://www.hhb.co.uk/product/mogami-mogami-four-4mm-(12awg)-conductor-speaker-cable-(3104)/1944/
https://www.hificollective.co.uk/spades_bananas/cmc-6005scu-gold-plated-press-type-spade.html

These spades are large enough to comfortable crimp then solder two cores of 4mm2 into each for a gunshot (1-3) configuration.
 
I suspect that some cables connecting electronic parts of the replay can have an audible effect, but I ask how significant this is? T

You suspect; I know ! How significant? only by dint of an incontrovertible improvement in dynamics and all that goes with it. A recent speaker cable bake-off involving 7 people incl. a classical music lover dealer were present. With a specific track from a good master of a 'Living Presence' Danse Macabre, 4 different cables were tried. NAC A5 plus 2 others and a True Signal (American?). Wadia CDP into E.A.R. 899 into the latest Quad ESLs.

There were shades of difference; even improvements, between 3 of them. The 4th, though, astounded everybody, incl. the dealer who'd brought them, as he hadn't been aware within his more limited system at home. Chalk and cheese ? Yup ! Total unanimity in all 7 listeners.

This doesn't mean that this or any cable is a panacea for all ills nor a guaranteed upgrade in all systems, but it sure as Hell was in that one. As I have a very similar system, I'm sufficiently motivated to try them, if feasible (I have long runs), despite their being he most costly of the group.
 
suppliers who 'gild the lilly', sometimes in sheep's clothing,

My wife's name is Lilly, and a.f.a.I.k she's never been gilded; Silver-tongued and with a heart of gold though. Think you mean the flower (lily). :D Now I come to think about it, she's named after the flower, so 'l' hath no fury.....
 
Last edited:
You suspect; I know ! How significant? only by dint of an incontrovertible improvement in dynamics and all that goes with it. A recent speaker cable bake-off involving 7 people incl. a classical music lover dealer were present. With a specific track from a good master of a 'Living Presence' Danse Macabre, 4 different cables were tried. NAC A5 plus 2 others and a True Signal (American?). Wadia CDP into E.A.R. 899 into the latest Quad ESLs.
...

Dear Mike,

I know that there are differences. I was being meek!

But, I also know that slight improvements can be made at a budget level, even on speaker wire.

In the old days, when I had Naim amplification [90, and later 100], I used the stock NACA 5 cable, which is unwieldy at best. When I went to Quad [valve] amplification I decided to change speaker wire. After all second hand NACA 5 is an appreciable monetary asset that it would be idle not to exploit.

I asked Quad at Huntingdon for their optimal speaker wire recommendation between the amplifier and an ESL. They gave me a specification and not an actual recommendation. I found out the specification of the normal highest grade Maplin speaker wire, and asked Quad if that would be fine. The reply was that it was a proper match and would certainly work better than NACA 5. And it did! Not by a lot, but certainly enough to find that the sold NACA 5 covered my new six foot length of Maplins cable price by five times! Quad gave me a couple of banana plugs for the speaker end and and I used the binding posts on the amp directly.

I am not really sure that I would have concurred with your group test though in preferring a speaker wire that made the system more dynamic. I am assuming that you mean "macro" rather than "micro" dynamic, but I do find that even old style recordings have sometimes too much dynamic swing for domestic use. So I would not want to expand on this aspect personally, even if I could perceive it in a test.

Best wishes from George

PS: [Edit]. The improvement I perceived with the Maplin speaker cable was also down to dynamics and clarity. Overall the cable was less weighty in the bass, which was a delightful relief, as even a single ESL can make more bass than I would want at home. But in reducing the perceived bass by a small margin the Maplin wire also reduced the macro-dynamic effect slightly, while concentrating the effect in the middle voices, where subtle musical balances and vital micro-dynamics were made all the clearer and musically involving. So the Maplin wire was bringing out the qualities already associated with the ESL 57 type.
 
Let your ears decide

There is still have an invitation for PFMers to come and listen to my system with various mains cables as well as other bits.
Bring your own kit by arrangement.
 
do you buy the EWA LS25?

Could you elucidate? Don't know what this is, although that also answers the question, I s 'pose !

I am not really sure that I would have concurred with your group test though in preferring a speaker wire that made the system more dynamic.

I think you might well have done, George, as anybody with audiological perception would have. My NAC A5 suits my valves to ESLs very well, whereas the Chord Odyssey I also had didn't..at all ( in fact, I thought I'd bought a pup in the 2905s). It also suits my friend's system, which is in a livelier room than mine. We both have E.A.R. amplification and Quads (his are smaller, though). There were many finer ears in that room than mine.

It's not just comparing notes; it's suddenly realising that the music is creating a more visceral and emotive performance. I/we assumed it was not that the cable was changing the tonal aspects but simply letting a lot more through, which is what cables are all about, really.
 


advertisement


Back
Top