• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Stereophile and Audio Cables

If the impedance is really that low, then it's vastly better than could ever be needed in a home audio setup. If that is a "comes with" on a piece of reasonably priced equipment acquired, then no problem. If extra had to be paid to get that, then no. Why order a drop forge when all you need is a tack hammer?
The really low impedance is appreciated and the good engineering is undeniable.
But after all this epic internet battles early on on biwiring and bi amping is odd to see a company which is facts oriented to imply clear benefits (not only talking about the actual feature but "load depended currents" for bass impacting mid-highs,degrees of isolation,etc)

Stuff like this fuels these debates to eternity instead of putting them to rest.
 
The really low impedance is appreciated and the good engineering is undeniable.
But after all this epic internet battles early on on biwiring and bi amping is odd to see a company which is facts oriented to imply clear benefits (not only talking about the actual feature but "load depended currents" for bass impacting mid-highs,degrees of isolation,etc)

Stuff like this fuels these debates to eternity instead of putting them to rest.
I have to appreciate the engineering that goes into a Caterpillar excavator, but I really don't need one for my backyard garden. Audio components, once they cross a threshold of performance where an improvement in performance is inaudible, are much like that. Outside of appreciating the engineering behind the Cat and the outrageous audio component, I'm okay with equipment that performs no better than I am able to appreciate via listening to it.
 
I have to appreciate the engineering that goes into a Caterpillar excavator, but I really don't need one for my backyard garden. Audio components, once they cross a threshold of performance where an improvement in performance is inaudible, are much like that. Outside of appreciating the engineering behind the Cat and the outrageous audio component, I'm okay with equipment that performs no better than I am able to appreciate via listening to it.
I'm of the same line of thought,it's either audible or inaudible for me.
But we have to draw a line here as in every other thread in ASR which we use one or the other,depending what it suits us.

And even there,there are subcategories,depending the price I guess.This big Purifi is above any criticism but I suspect that a Halcro Eclipse for example with it's insane measurements would get a good hit for it price tag.

But non of the above matches the near snake-oil stuff like biwiring or biamping revived by this datasheet.
 
My pet boa sniffs at the term snake oil. She is lean (and long!) and not oily at all.

This is why boa snake oil is not good. It makes the sound constricted, as if the air has been squeezed out of it. It's the same with Anaconda and Python oil. Cobra oil is better, it gives you some bite. I bought mine from a deceased Indian snake charmer (no need to guess why he's deceased). Sea snake oil is liquid but can be a bit black and white. Rattlesnake oil is the best, it sounds musical.

Avoid garter snake oil. You need dozens of the little bastards to harvest enough oil.
 
I would bring out my silver cables for classical flute music only.

Are there brass cables for music with a lot of cymbals ?


:)
*sweats looking for cables for vocals*

Anybody wants to guess the name of the cable?
 
Good sentence (the last one). I was banned from Stereophile for less than that otherwise...
More seriously, my way of listening to music changed when I played it myself. My ears (actually my brain) were descaled. Gone was the "sound image" which extends well beyond the speakers (of course! In case it remains stuck to the speaker membrane!), the punchy bass and silky highs, the midrange free from harshness and so on . And I was a high-end hi-fi salesman at the very beginning of this trend, I know what I'm talking about. Well I try so very hard...:)
 
This is why boa snake oil is not good. It makes the sound constricted, as if the air has been squeezed out of it. It's the same with Anaconda and Python oil. Cobra oil is better, it gives you some bite. I bought mine from a deceased Indian snake charmer (no need to guess why he's deceased). Sea snake oil is liquid but can be a bit black and white. Rattlesnake oil is the best, it sounds musical.

Avoid garter snake oil. You need dozens of the little bastards to harvest enough oil.
That, and the little sniglitz hate having it extracted from them.
 
Silver makes the sound brighter and shinier, copper makes the sound warmer, and gold richer. It is called sympathetic magic.
Using a silver interconnect was giving me listener fatigue and tinnitus and switching to copper helped.
 
OH NO, Not Pete again,

1. The Cable Lie

Logically this is not the lie to start with because cables are accessories, not primary audio components. But it is the hugest, dirtiest, most cynical, most intelligence-insulting and, above all, most fraudulently profitable lie in audio, and therefore must go to the head of the list.

The lie is that high-priced speaker cables and interconnects sound better than the standard, run-of-the-mill (say, Radio Shack) ones. It is a lie that has been exposed, shamed, and refuted over and over again by every genuine authority under the sun, but the tweako audio cultists hate authority and the innocents can’t distinguish it from self-serving charlatanry.

The simple truth is that resistance, inductance, and capacitance (R, L, and C) are the only cable parameters that affect performance in the range below radio frequencies. The signal has no idea whether it is being transmitted through cheap or expensive RLC. Yes, you have to pay a little more than rock bottom for decent plugs, shielding, insulation, etc., to avoid reliability problems, and you have to pay attention to resistance in longer connections. In basic electrical performance, however, a nice pair of straightened-out wire coat hangers with the ends scraped is not a whit inferior to a $2000 gee-whiz miracle cable. Nor is 16-gauge lamp cord at 18-cents a foot. Ultrahigh-priced cables are the biggest scam in consumer electronics, and the cowardly surrender of nearly all audio publications to the pressures of the cable marketers is truly depressing to behold.
 
If I have my say, I think that the limit of all cables, which are indispensable, unless you have wireless connections, is 0.
The cable is a passive element: it cannot add anything, at most it can take away from the signal.
But I think that its scale of evaluation and consequently of contribution to the signal is from zero to negative.
However, I think that the highly negative cable is a broken, non-compliant, wrong or unsuitable cable.
Then we all agree that there may be "more right" cables for this purpose, in terms of caliber, connection, electrical characteristics.
However, I think that a cable can never make a positive or improving contribution to the system, being a passive "component". the ideal cable carries equivalent chain support to zero.

On the timbre, I couldn't give an opinion: the electrical differences measured are often so small that it becomes a challenge to find audible differences.
But I have a consideration: why do so many people continue to change cables compulsively? perhaps because after a period of getting used to they realize that one and the other are practically identical?
it could, but perhaps what they don't like is the system itself which, if it sounds in a certain way, it certainly won't be a cable that gives it different characteristics...

last aspect: in the hundreds of meters of connection that are inside our system, I find it particular to focus so much on the 4 total meters that are between the wall and the system, between devices and speakers. I would tell you to never look inside the devices themselves....you will never find anything "esoteric"....not even upstream from your main power socket...;)
 
If I have my say, I think that the limit of all cables, which are indispensable, unless you have wireless connections, is 0.
The cable is a passive element: it cannot add anything, at most it can take away from the signal.
But I think that its scale of evaluation and consequently of contribution to the signal is from zero to negative.
However, I think that the highly negative cable is a broken, non-compliant, wrong or unsuitable cable.
Then we all agree that there may be "more right" cables for this purpose, in terms of caliber, connection, electrical characteristics.
However, I think that a cable can never make a positive or improving contribution to the system, being a passive "component". the ideal cable carries equivalent chain support to zero.

On the timbre, I couldn't give an opinion: the electrical differences measured are often so small that it becomes a challenge to find audible differences.
But I have a consideration: why do so many people continue to change cables compulsively? perhaps because after a period of getting used to they realize that one and the other are practically identical?
it could, but perhaps what they don't like is the system itself which, if it sounds in a certain way, it certainly won't be a cable that gives it different characteristics...

last aspect: in the hundreds of meters of connection that are inside our system, I find it particular to focus so much on the 4 total meters that are between the wall and the system, between devices and speakers. I would tell you to never look inside the devices themselves....you will never find anything "esoteric"....not even upstream from your main power socket...;)


You have expressed many correct points; that is the point that I intend to make when I say that all that I care is that the cable doesn't break. Add to your argument re: the miles of normal cable upstream, the somewhat related fact that recording studios/engineers are tremendously pragmatic. For the most part they also care only about the cable not breaking/functioning properly. But of course preaching to the converted here. That said, preaching to the unconverted it is also, well, futile.

I am naturally insecure and full doubts. It is weird to see how confident the believers are in "what they hear". The have internalized that as a skill/superior ability and taste/superpower :D Impossible to convince. They will never admit it. Their ego/self confidence/self image won't allow it. How many times have you see them go "You are right! There is not reason why a cable would sound differently" ? My guess is that never...

So, unfortunately, we have lost the fight to irrational thinking. That's why I kind of stopped... The only result has been getting myself close to banning from forums. Specially the dumb Roon forum, on which I had to grovel because that's the only means of customer support they offer, hence I don't wanna lose access to it.

Although once in a while, still try to fight the good fight.
 
Last edited:
As with most things like this, of course common sense tells us, there will be at best only tiny changes in cables, which translates to VERY little ability to be heard by the end listener........

With that said, I have Often questioned those that claim to hear Very audible changes with cables to somehow substantiate what they hear, or demonstrate to another individual or do SOMETHING or ANYTHING to show they can discern one cable from another.......

In fact most times, I have simply got argumentative replies about me being a Troll, non believer, nor having a good system etc. They put their lack of ability onto the one questioning their lack of proof......Or simply Name calling.
I reply back "No I am asking YOU to show me in ANY meaningful way, you can hear a difference", to which I get "Why should I Prove to YOU....?"


All I have gotten in return, are excuses as to why its impossible to demonstrate, prove, measure or in ANY meaningful way, actually make it known, other than simply anecdotal stories on audio forums.......

So in the end, all we literally have is: "I saw Bigfoot, I know I did" with nothing more......
 
Last edited:
You have expressed many correct points; that is the point that I intend to make when I say that all that I care is that the cable doesn't break. Add to your argument re: the miles of normal cable upstream, the somewhat related fact that recording studios/engineers are tremendously pragmatic. For the most part they also care only about the cable not breaking/functioning properly. But of course preaching to the converted here. That said, preaching to the unconverted it is also, well, futile.

I am naturally insecure and full doubts. It is weird to see how confident the believers are in "what they hear". The have internalized that as a skill/superior ability and taste/superpower :D Impossible to convince. They will never admit it. Their ego/self confidence/self image won't allow it. How many times have you see them go "You are right! There is not reason why a cable would sound differently" ? My guess is that never...

So, unfortunately, we have lost the fight to irrational thinking. That's why I kind of stopped... The only result has been getting myself close to banning from forums. Specially the dumb Roon forum, on which I had to grovel because that's the only means of customer support they offer, hence I don't wanna lose access to it.

Although once in a while, still try to fight the good fight.

I often equate this to that euphonic feeling you get after having your car washed and its pristine and clean, and somehow you just "know" it drives better, or you "feel" it seems better. I have literally had that feeling after changing oil or waxing a car.

But I realize it is all in my mind. Why are "they" unable to realize is the bigger deeper issue?
 
The difficulty on all forums and this is the web limit, is that everyone can give their opinion. What is acceptable and necessary. For tastes and colors or the soft sciences also called "human" (which is stupid), there is no need to react or even argue. It just doesn't matter.
In the technical field, it's different. Because there are numbers that we cannot escape and here we are going to handle words. The rule would be not to participate in a discussion where I am in unknown territory. For example, I would not be able to question the Nyquist-Shannon theorem. But many do.
What is astonishing are these endless discussions on audio, almost nothing on video. If we admit that we listen well with our brain and not with our ears, does that mean that we believe our eyes more? There is also the optical illusion...
 
Back
Top Bottom