IEM Cables. Please do not laugh, cos I sincerely hear a difference, contrary to expectations. Wish to explore WHY?

[MattHooper]

The only reason I initially changed the cable was over time I had moved from some KZ/CCA cheapie dynamic IEM's to the ARTTI T10, which is head and shoulders above these other IEM's in the resolution and frequency response accuracy. Just in another league. No contest.

So now I had a better listening device, the T10, I wanted to revisit the comparison between the TempoTec Sonata BHD DAC dongle, and an Apple USB-C DAC dongle. The only way to equitably compare these DAC dongles, was to use the T10 with an unbalanced cable, rather than the balanced cable which I ordered it with. So I had bought an unbalanced cable for the T10 separately, so I could use the T10 with my digital stage piano, at home, and also use it to monitor when I do live mixes for events. I'm also a musician and audio engineer, both of these as hobbies and also my profession.

So with the T10 and the unbalanced cable, I was able to compare, at a good quality, the TempoTec SOnata BHD, and the Apple USB-C Dac dongle, as well as use theT10 with the headphone outputs of my digital stage piano, and the mixer at my live events - which also have unbalanced outputs.

It was when I now reverted to the balanced cable which had been the de-facto cable which I normally listen to the T10, and the BHD dongle, that it was obvious to me, something is different !, then I spent hours yesterday going back and forth between the balanced and unbalanced cables, which led to me starting this thread, to reach out and understand better what my ears were definitely hearing.

I have spend further time today, swapping between the balanced cable and the unbalanced cable on the T10 and the BHD, and am even more convinced, they do not sound the same. I prefer the balanced output. The unbalanced output sounds like a subwoofer was switched off !!!....anaemic. Still have not figured out why?

But over the next few weeks, as I order, by the grace of God, more cables, headphones and IEM's and maybe another good quality dongle DAC, I'll get to the bottom of the issue, and it will be a huge much needed education. No more theories, and conjecture but will arrive at an exact understanding of what's going on. And can say without a doubt if its the DAC/Headphone Amp, or the IEM's in question - the T10, or the cables that are responsible for this variation, I have observed.

We'll by the grace of God, get to the bottom of all this.

I hope you take the advice here to do a blind test. They can be very educational.

I’ve “ heard” differences between things like expensive AC cables, but when I did a careful blind test between the expensive AC cable and the cheap AC cable that comes with the equipment - when I didn’t know which I was listening to - I was unable to tell any difference. The telltale sonic differences I thought were there simply were not there to help me distinguish between the cables.

I also had similar experiences with video cables back in the analogue days of Home Theatre. Certain expensive cables seemed to make a visual difference until I manage to blind test a range of cables from cheap to very expensive, and once again those
“ differences” disappeared.

It’s one thing to have people tell you about the power of bias. It’s another thing to experience it yourself. Then it becomes a lifelong lesson.

 

[Chrispy]

I don't often agree with MattHooper on his subjective takes but he's more a shopper and fan of enthusiastic subjective experiences than I am.

 

[polmuaddib]

If cable magic had any footing in the real world, we would be seeing folks upgrading their coffeemakers, shavers, televisions and chandeliers…y’know just to get that extra bit of performance out of the thing…yet we never do.

Exactly!
I would add medical field. Especially the diagnostic. It could mean life or death if we could improve the ultrasound or X-ray image by simply upgrading a cable. If that were true, then the price of cable could cost more than the machine and it would still be justified.

 

[antcollinet]

I think the truth may lie somewhere in between the various points of view.

Truth lies in the truth.

Truth is not an "average of opinion"

If you have multiple "viewpoints" - some of which are correct and some of which are incorrect - it doesn't shift truth away from the correct and towards the incorrect. Even if the number of incorrect viewpoints outweigh the correct viewpoints 100's or 1000's or millions of times.

In this instance, as in all discussion about audio, the truth lies only in the science and engineering of audio reproduction, and in the science based psychoacoustics of human perception.

We do not know what we do not know,

Ah - that old chestnut “There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

But we do know what we do know. Audio is one of the oldest and simplest applications of electronics. We have been doing it near as damnit for 150 years. There is practically nothing we don't know about the physics of it, and we have a good understanding of the related human capabilities.

Furthermore, if there is anything we don't know, it is not going to change the observations we currently have. It won't suddenly turn something that can't be heard into something that can.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I think what is missing is evidence. If someone has evidence of cables, then bring it on. All we ever get are anecdotal uncontrolled impressions and "theories" that violate what we know without adding any evidence for the new theory. Also this is a well researched, well known field that can demonstrate what happens to extraordinarily precise levels. We know what cables do down into the thermal noise floor. If someone has evidence okay. Step #1 is finding someone who can demonstrate the hearing abilities that seem improbable. That is where the blind testing comes in. Don't need a theory, don't need anything. If someone can demonstrate they really hear something, then scientists will need to work on nailing down why. So far the evidence for that is MIA.

 

[Mort]

Audible differences in quality cable are ghosts by another name.

 

[Jimbob54]

Please folks, let's not let this descend into the usual ASR debate / bun-fight about the abstract.

Let's stick to the OP. Cables and IEM balanced connections. Let's see if the OP has anything further to add or requests for guidance on conducting tests /measurements.

Further OT posts will be deleted.

 

[egellings]

Truth lies in the truth.

Truth is not an "average of opinion"

If you have multiple "viewpoints" - some of which are correct and some of which are incorrect - it doesn't shift truth away from the correct and towards the incorrect. Even if the number of incorrect viewpoints outweigh the correct viewpoints 100's or 1000's or millions of times.

In this instance, as in all discussion about audio, the truth lies only in the science and engineering of audio reproduction, and in the science based psychoacoustics of human perception.




Ah - that old chestnut “There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

But we do know what we do know. Audio is one of the oldest and simplest applications of electronics. We have been doing it near as damnit for 150 years. There is practically nothing we don't know about the physics of it, and we have a good understanding of the related human capabilities.

Furthermore, if there is anything we don't know, it is not going to change the observations we currently have. It won't suddenly turn something that can't be heard into something that can.

Audio is basically a solved problem.

 

[JeremyFife]

Audio is basically a solved problem.

Let's qualify that (in interests of pedantry but also accuracy);

Seems that digital audio transfer and processing is a solved problem. There's room for improvement in DSP but the basics of moving bits around is done.
DAC is a solved problem
Amplification is mostly solved, but the edge cases of difficult loads and sustained high power are tricky.
Cabling has always been solved.

Are speakers getting better (and better at lower prices)?
Headphones too? IEMs certainly seem very good and very cheap.

Waiting for those good DACs and decent DSP to become ubiquitous, that does seem possible though.

Meanwhile ... recordings seem to be getting worse! (Not so much for classical or jazz)

Are we heading for better gear with worse music to play on it?

 

[somebodyelse]

Headphones too? IEMs certainly seem very good and very cheap.

Headphones and IEMs still suffer from their response being affected by the physiology of the person wearing them. Accounting for this is still work in progress.

 

[ahofer]

Placebo would have caused me to prefer the balanced cable, but I do not.

That isn't how it works. If we knew how the non-auditory effects worked (direction and magnitude), it would be much easier to control for them.

 

[unpluggged]

Headphones and IEMs still suffer from their response being affected by the physiology of the person wearing them.

Anatomy, perhaps? Or do you mean the losses in hearing a person may experience due to various physiological processes? Then it's the person who suffers, not the HP/IEM.

 

[somebodyelse]

Anatomy, perhaps? Or do you mean the losses in hearing a person may experience due to various physiological processes? Then it's the person who suffers, not the HP/IEM.

Anatomy might be the right word. Differences in ear canal change the resonant system that the IEM is part of, changing the in-ear response. Pinna is an influence for headphones. These are similar to different measurement fixtures giving a different measured response. A good seal is assumed for now - poor seal also influences the resonant system. HRTF will influence the individual's ideal target response. The targets we have now are best attempts at a 'one size fits all' approach. That fits some very well, most reasonably well, and some badly. To fit everyone well we need to tailor for the individual, and that is not yet a solved problem. Some are trying to address this with mics inside the headphone/IEM, and others with 3D scans of head and ears, both followed by EQ. Neither are exactly mainstream. Then there's the seal changing bass response - how well can the pads or tips conform to the individual? How much do glasses and hair affect it? And response changes from repositioning - is it the same every time you put the headphone on, or IEM in?

Having said that, with IEMs with good passive isolation like the Etys I find the noise floor can be dominated by the sounds of heartbeat and breathing. That's me suffering.

 

[KSTR]

My setup. Windows laptop via Reaper DAW => WASAPI Exclusive drivers, => USB-C => Tempotec Sonata BHD DAC dongle which has both balanced and unbalanced outputs => ARTTI T10 Planar magnetic IEM's.

(bold mine)
For a proper compare you must not change any other variable than the cable itself. Which means you must use the same output so that the conditions for the headphone amp are exactly the same.

This means you must have the same type of connectors on the cables, which might involve modifying them (solder same type connector at the amp end of the cables).

Once we have this sorted out, there still could be an audible difference, coming from the effects of different cable resistance. Because your IEMs are low impedance (16 Ohms) even a fraction of an Ohm can make a difference here, in exact level that is presented to the IEMs... and if the resistance difference is large enough even some effect on (bass) frequency response can be expected, depending on the frequency response of the IEMs impedance.
To note: all of this can be readily explained by simple physics and are not any additional magic properties of the cable itself.

 

[pinger]

The OP stated it took him a minute to change cables. That tells you all you need to know

 

[KSTR]

The OP stated it took him a minute to change cables. That tells you all you need to know

That not the real problem. The real problem is that it is very hard to do a blind A/B test properly. One would need two switchover relays, one at the amp and the other right at the IEMs and both cables in place so that blinded switching is possible. This also makes almost instant switching feasible but it is not a requirement for successful A/B blind testing. The notion than humans cannot remember sound signatures for more than a few seconds is a myth but it takes a lot of effort and training.

 

[caught gesture]

The notion than humans cannot remember sound signatures for more than a few seconds is a myth but it takes a lot of effort and training.

Echoic memory is a myth?

 

[KSTR]

Echoic memory is a myth?

Of course not. But the point is training can so to speak "solidify patterns in the brain" that allow us to overcome short-term memory limits.

Lay people for example don't have strong pitch memory, they cannot detect if, say, a guitar is detuned by a semitone when subjected to its sounds not immediately following each other. Trained musicians or well-trained audio engineers and producers can, and they also remember other sound signatures as the mechanism is structrurally not any different from pitch memory.

But even lay people all have deeply memorized the specific signature of the voices of their loved one as we have been exposed to them for years. That's why it strikes us so strongly when we hear someone else on the street or on TV with the same voice signature ever after many years of not being exposed to the voice of a loved one because they have passed away.

 

[egellings]

Headphones and IEMs still suffer from their response being affected by the physiology of the person wearing them. Accounting for this is still work in progress.

At least with the various earphones, you don't have the room response in there messing things up.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Once we have this sorted out, there still could be an audible difference, coming from the effects of different cable resistance. Because your IEMs are low impedance (16 Ohms) even a fraction of an Ohm can make a difference here, in exact level that is presented to the IEMs... and if the resistance difference is large enough even some effect on (bass) frequency response can be expected, depending on the frequency response of the IEMs impedance.

Yeah. Shared ground return resistance in particular is worth measuring, though it could be a bit tricky. At these impedance levels, an ohm is quite sufficient to attenuate L+R vs. L-R enough for a subjectively leaner sound (since the bass is almost all L+R), and it is not entirely unusual for IEM cables to go from 2+2 conductors to 3 conductors which no doubt makes the termination in 3.5 mm TRS easier. Mind you, they're also making TRRS jobs with microphones built-in these days.