Esoteric cables

This is a fight I was trying to keep myself from getting into but I feel I must. Generally speaking you cant get better then your source, you can only get worse. By that I mean that if you have a poor recording to start with you cant improve that with good cables, you can only help keep it from getting worse so saying cables will improve your sound is unture, I just believe they can help keep your sound true. Plain and simple, the cables that are included in the box with a DVD player are sh*t and do hurt the sound. You cant tell me other wise and In the TRUE BLIND tests I have done I have been able to pick it out every time. Do I think there is an audible difference between the 40 dollar monster Audio cables and the 300 dollar monster cables, I doubt it, at least I doubt I can hear it and I generally think I have pretty good ears. Do I think Phsycoacoustics comes into play, ya probally. When a picture is painted by a salesman its hard to not hear the difference because you have alreay been told and preped to hear the difference. I do believe that there is advantages in the video side when it comes to shielding, as I have personally seen issues with RF noise being picked up by a lower quality cable where as replacing it with a higher end cable fixed this problem. I am not looking for a fight here and I am not saying who is right and who is wrong, I am just stating my personal opinions. An for the record, personally I dont really care what an ossciolascope (I know I spelled that wrong) shows for results because I dont spend time looking at one in my house, I spend time sitting in my chair and LISTENING to the music so if there is an audible difference to me, then thats what I am concerened about and that is what I am paying for, and that is what determins whether the money was well spent or not. Finally I love the line in that article about a cable needing break in time. Thats just too funny. I wonder  if that ever works.

Oh my gosh.  A great quote from an extremely funny "movie".  And Ron "Tater Salad" White was my favorite.

"My son, Tator tot."

And now I should probably read that article and get back on topic.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

Well that was an interesting read.  And although I don't agree with everythign he says, I do agree with the conclusions.

04mdx4sq said: "Obviously osciiloscope readings will tell the whole story of the way something sounds, won't they? We are talking about subtle nuances and a difference in staging and imaging. I am speaking of an audible difference.  Like I said, I can hear a difference and so can true audiophiles."

I think you are giving way too much credit to the ear and not enough credit to the brain.  My boss does a lot of research on how we hear things, and I have learned a lot from him.  Our ears aren't as accurate as many would have you believe.  For instance, two sounds played within 3 miliseconds (and greater depending on the frequency) will sound like one sound.  They measure differently even by the Ociliscope, but sound the same to us.  So how can we hear these subtle differences that even the Ociliscopes and other test equipment can't measure?  I believe the differences heard in cables are almost always psychoacoustic.  Do they preceive to hear a difference?  Yes, I believe they do.  But it wasn't because there was a difference in the actual sound produced, but their brain told them to hear a difference and so they did.

I wonder how many of these people realize that those highly expensive speaker wires are being connected to some pretty cheap tinsel leads on the speakers.  Hmmm, maybe that would be a good marketing point for our new Arachnid spider when we finally get it into our equipment.  After all, they will have a lot less loss than terminals/tinsel leads.  Maybe platinum plating them would be a $500 upgrade. 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

Okay, you want proof, check out these white papers by Bruce Brisson.

http://www.mitcables.com/technology/wp.asp

Often.  I've been married four times, as an example...