Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

61 - 70 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
I'm not an esoteric audiopile by any means, so you'll have to bear with me. First and mot importantly: Can any of these insane reviewers claim that thier listening experiance would be improved more by investing tens of thousands of dollars on cables, than say the same amount on acuostical improvements?

Also, am I to assume the "baseline" cables are a midrange Monster? I have Z1's and while I won't claim to have heard a huge difference, I do think that in my system, the jump from 14g zip line made a very subtle change, mostly in level, but that;s an improvement.

I guess what I'm getting at is that no matter what your looking at, speaker cable or motorcycles, the more money you spend, the less of a difference that extra bit of cash will make.
 

·
Elite Shackster
Joined
·
1,506 Posts
Can any of these insane reviewers claim that thier listening experiance would be improved more by investing tens of thousands of dollars on cables, than say the same amount on acuostical improvements?
No but the tens of thousands of dollars they make in advertising dollars from the cable companies will certainly go a long way in the improvement in their system :neener:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
All of these recent threads are missing the point. The point being- can anyone hear the difference between $100 speaker wires and $10k ones. Randi is offering $1M for this test and should be commended. He chose some ridiculous speaker wires which had the hilarious review of 'danceable' and Monster cables and wants someone to tell the difference *with their ears*. You could probably find miniscule differences with instrumentation (the more expensive ones actually degrading the sound due to capacitance), but if the best set of ears cannot tell a difference, why would you do it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Everyone needs to take a common sense approach to cabling their system. The cables should match your system. If you have a Sony HTIB, then you don't need high-end cables. But i would be hard pressed to justify a $300/ft HDMI cable as it is for a digital signal. Digital signals don't require such high end cables like speaker wire. Some analog signals and audio signals are more susceptible to interference. This is where you should invest your money in good cables.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Digital signals don't require such high end cables like speaker wire.
Interestingly, that's almost completely wrong.

Digital signals carry far-higher frequency content that analogue signals, and therefore require "better" cabling, e.g. lower capacitance etc, in order to minimise losses in the high frequencies which would lead to "rounding off" of the square waves. Too much rounding (from ****** cables, cables that are too long, etc) and the digital signal will be misinterpreted, quickly leading to no intelligible transmission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,249 Posts
I'll see your "almost completely wrong" and raise you a "not quite true but close".

While a certain quality of cable is required for optimum digital transfer, the idea that cheap cables fall below this quality control is wrong. There will not be sufficient rounding of square wave due to the capacitance or jitter issues due to impedance mismatch unless the cable is a pre-loved power cable from the mid 1800's.
There is a good reason most people can't tell the difference between entry level digital and even the most expensive digital cables.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I'll see your "almost completely wrong" and raise you a "not quite true but close".

While a certain quality of cable is required for optimum digital transfer, the idea that cheap cables fall below this quality control is wrong. There will not be sufficient rounding of square wave due to the capacitance or jitter issues due to impedance mismatch unless the cable is a pre-loved power cable from the mid 1800's.
There is a good reason most people can't tell the difference between entry level digital and even the most expensive digital cables.
Understood! :yes: I was just trying to point out that digital cables can have more stringent requirements than analogue cables, which can be counterintuitive. I wasn't trying to suggest that everyday cheap cables can't do the job in short runs.

It should only really be audible (or visible, in the case of HDMI cables) if the cables are really badly constructed, or for loooong run lengths.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,249 Posts
One other thing I forgot to mention:

Welcome to the forums rogergraham. good to see new people
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Interestingly, that's almost completely wrong.

Digital signals carry far-higher frequency content that analogue signals, and therefore require "better" cabling, e.g. lower capacitance etc, in order to minimise losses in the high frequencies which would lead to "rounding off" of the square waves. Too much rounding (from ****** cables, cables that are too long, etc) and the digital signal will be misinterpreted, quickly leading to no intelligible transmission.
What I am trying to say is that a $10 fiber optic cable vs a $100 fiber optic cable will not give any noticable difference in sound quality. But speaker cabling can be a different story depending on your gear. I speak from personnal experience only. You are correct that digital cables must meet a higher standard, **** there really isn't anything due to speaker wire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I have $4,500 q-tips that clean the ear canal for max frequency response. Your music will come to life with a clarity and definition that will redefine the soundstage! These q's are NOS and VERY RARE...
 
61 - 70 of 70 Posts
Top