I'll quote from a knowledgeable user here in ASR, solderdude:
The implications of this quote is twofold: for we to actually substantiate what you're saying in objective terms, we would have to measure the cables with an analyzer (or a iem measurement device/coupler); your hearing is not an absolute instrument, you're not immune to bias. That's why, to further test the replicability of your assertions, you should at least do the observations blindly, else you're prone to hear characteristics from each cable that are simply due to its color, its price, your liking for the texture, etc.
If you're having fun doing all of these impressions, though, I am not the one to judge. But be mindful of said limitations, lest you spiral out into the heavy snake oil inside the industry.
Thank you, for the warning about snake oil products, and I fully take this on board.
The last thing I would do is waste money on products with no audible results., and especially with no logic to explain why they are better.
The foundation for all this, came from observing that the stock cables that were delivered with some of my cheap budget IEMs, did not deliver the same result sound wise, as the stock cable that was delivered with my more expensive ARTTI T10 IEM. And I've been aiming to understand :
1. Why am I hearing a difference?
2. What criteria should I be using to choose a "good" IEM cable, in the event that the stock cables I have are NOT good enough?
In doing all this, I definitely want to, as much as I am capable of understanding, get to the bottom of the WHY, to know when I have reached the sweet spot of ample quality, beyond which spending any more delivers negligible sonic improvements. So there is absolutely no way, I would spiral out and be hoodwinked by the snake oil merchants. Impossible.
At this point in time, and apologies for not having included this, in the previous post, my focus has been to identify the top criteria, that help in narrowing down what to buy, and exactly that, AVOID, paying over the odds, and AVOID paying for voodoo science, that does not make sense.
The one thing I am sure of, from quite a bit of research on my part, is that I am NOT mistaken, or hearing things. Indeed cables can make a difference to sound, in headphones, and IEMs, especially if there is something fundamentally wrong with the cable. Some of my stock cheapo headphones, have green oxidised metal (most likely oxidised copper) which is visible to the naked eye, in the transparent rubber covering, close to the QDC connector which plugs into the IEM ear piece. Who knows what the impact of that is? Maybe that is what is causing them to sound different.
In acquiring the recent cables, my focus was to narrow down one thing. Get low resistance cables. I have not measured this on my cables, yet, but I undertook an elaborate estimation of the cable resistance based on factors such as the number of threads, thread diameter, cores, what they are made of, and how long the cable is, and assuming some resistance from connectors and cable termination. From another thread on head-fi.com, someone kindly provide the formula for computing resistance of an IEM cable.
All cables I have bought in recent times, have been acquired based on this logic - low resistance, with an assumption, that any manufacturer who bothered to make low resistance cables, would also be likely to have addressed other areas such as inductance and capacitance of the cable. Of course this is an assumption, and the only one I can estimate before buying cables. And, rather than it lead to snake oil, it has actually been the reverse, because I am focussing on very specific criteria, such as low resistance, low inductance and low capacitance, it has helped me avoid many expensive cables, which do NOT meet, or are not likely to meet the criteria I set.
In choosing cables, I set a threshold of 0.2 Ohms as the maximum acceptable resistance. All the cables I have bought, which from my estimates, fall within this benchmark, I was also able to purchase for no more than £10 each. One of the cables is about £5. I do have a more expensive cable in mind, but its not an astronomical cost - £15, and justified cos the estimated resistance of this cable, is 0.11Ohms approx. Which is really low, for the price. So cost is definitely one of my criteria, further to any other technical criteria such as low resistance, being met.
So far, this has proven, to my hearing that :
1. It is possible to get very well made, really nice looking IEM cables, including features such as modular termination (swappable 2.5mm/3.5mm/4.4mm headphone plugs), for not much money, typically less than £10 each., which have impressively low resistance below 0.2 Ohms
2. The 3 new cables I have reviewed, have estimated resistance lower than or about equal to the lowest impedance cable I had - the ARTTI T10 cable.
3. I can hear improvements in the sonics, over and above all my prior stock cables, and also hear differences between the new cables, I recently acquired. It is not conclusive yet, but I think there is a relationship between the plating and the way a cable sounds. I'll do some further listening over the next month.
So low resistance cables, in my opinion, which do not adversely affect the audio, are durable and look good cosmetically, can be bought for not much money, if one is able to pre-estimate their resistance, which fortunately I now am able to (if I have enough information about the cable). And there are a good number of cables out there with enough published specs, to enable me estimate their resistance.
That already addresses the snake oil concern. Based on sensible criteria as outlined above, one actually avoids snake oil., and gets maximum value for any money spent.
If it transpires, that the hypothesis of a single material conductor being better than those made from composites - i.e more than one conductor such as silver plated copper, is correct, that would further lower the cost of any cables I would be acquiring - i.e all they need to be made of is Copper, nothing more. And copper is the cheapest good conductor out there. !!, which completely excludes any snake oil cabling. It does not come cheaper than simple copper. If this be the case, and I can prove that it is so, then the snake oil out there, the major one being silver coated copper, would have been debunked, and would be avoided, in any future purchases.
May I add, cos this is not obvious and I have not mentioned this yet, I have discovered that all one needs if copper is one of the conductors, is just that copper, high purity copper of 99.9% is good enough. Most of the budget and lowest cost IEM cables, costing below £10, and some below £5, already meet this criteria, so I will not be considering super purified copper which is much more expensive, cos I have deduced and from reliable sources, confirmed that such expensive super refined copper or any other conductor for that matter, purer than 99.9%, adds no further benefit to their ability to conduct audio.
All my investments (including during this experimental phase), have been, and will be, based on good logic, and not a penny will be wasted on any snake oil.
……stop fretting and composing diary entries to yourself, just chill out and listen to music
