Stereophile and Audio Cables

[Zapper]

Okay, maybe this was clutching at straws, up at these silly high all but rf frequencies as all the differences that could be shown

It looks like Figure 1 shows some sort of an IMD test, perhaps demonstrating that frequencies higher than 20kHz can intermodulate and produce difference frequencies in the audio bandwidth. This is a real issue in active circuits. But not in cables per se.

However, poor RF shielding in cables can admit RF into the signal path, where they can potentially get demodulated into audible artifacts. If Stereophile were interested, they could test cables for RFI. But they're not.

 

[rdenney]

Umm - the Sony 101 did sound great if a little 'dry' perhaps, but I regularly got a headache with the original Philips 14 bit models for some obscure reason. First 14 bit player not to do this for me was the Meridian MCD (I also liked the B&O CDX and Mission DAD7000 - Philips 104 in drag, but can't remember their architecture without looking them up) and my first CD player was the MCD-Pro, followed two years later by their 207 CD/Preamp* model.

* Oh sh*t and apologies for going off the track here, I recall the meridian 207 line preamp sounded a little thin toned compared to my then Linn LK1. I now realise the LK1 is *severely* band limited by design (and on test) with a constricting kind-of roll-off at the top which I could clearly hear back then. I was using NS1000's at the time and really should have got a better amp but UK-choice was limited then until the Nakamichi Stasis models came along at well under Krell prices and showed how inferior the UK 'high end' was at the time. Also, the way we then subjectivists could develop a blind spot to odd and audible measurements.

I never got a headache from listening to my Magnavox, or indeed any other CD player since then, even cheapies. Yes, we were depending on the audio electronics in those and not just the digital stream, but I still never got a headache. I've owned a LOT of CD players--Maggotbox 650, Tascam 401 (2 of those), Marantz Commercial PMD331, Cambridge Audio D500SE, Cambridge Audio CXC with a Topping E30 DAC, Cambridge Audio 640C, Naim CD5, Denon something-or-other, and various DVD players. The Denon had an electrical failure on the board, and the NAIM lost the ability to communicate with the drive. And the display on the CXC is almost too dim to read. But mostly problems have been transport-related that I've been able to repair and sustain. (The Magnavox and the D500SE both need new belts.) None of them are high-end, but they are still indistinguishable from my computer playing rips of them through a good DAC, which tells me something.

Maybe my problem has been that my cables see reflections at 21 MHz, masking my ability to detect effects at 8 KHz. Uh, yeah.

Rick "don't need blind test to prove there is no difference when none is expected" Denney

 

[AaronJ]

I knew I recognized the picture of that guy who was defending Herb the most vehemently.

Spoiler: Featured many times by Steve Guttenberg

 

[mhardy6647]

In fact, inside devices and speakers, we talk about millimeters of diameter, insulation only with rubber and no exotic materials...

That line of thought never goes too far with the cableista*.

Oh. the insulation's usually polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Rubber does not hold up well at all to the ravages of time and oxidation.
Indeed, I have a neighbor's pre-war (WW II, that is) Zenith multiband radio in my basement for rehabilitation. Opened it up and discovered that every bit of the (once) rubber insulated wiring has to be replaced... so I've been kind of passively aggressively avoiding the task for a couple of years now.
________________
* or, if you prefer, the cabal of cabelists.

 

[Selkirks]

At one point I had a system that included over £1,500.00 worth of cables.

I now have a much better system that uses about £200.00 worth of cables.

I had 5 figures in cables in systems over the years. Now I use Amazon Basics or similar. The only gear swap needed was a change in thinking.

 

[dtaylo1066]

How about wifi powered speakers that require no cables? For those do we debate the quality of the PSB traces or the hookup wire used? Hmmm?

 

[dtaylo1066]

Shocking!

 

[MattHooper]

my god, some of the arguments in the comments section are nonsensical! Specially the car references by the "I have a PhD in Physics" guy!

In the tweak and cable articles and videos and subjectivist forums there's often someone who says they are trained in electronics or a scientist but "I had to admit to myself that I heard a difference."

For me (and I'm sure most here) it doesn't matter a damn if someone has been trained in electronics or science: what matters is the their method of evaluating the claims.
Much of the method of science is keeping people "honest" - controlling for variables were we fool ourselves, and having our methods and results double checked by skeptical peers. Once you work outside of those control, monsters flourish. Anything seems to happen. All the nonsensical, woo-woo, pseudoscientific nonsense in the world is what happens when you are speculating outside of scientific method and controls. Every single person is susceptible no matter how well trained: that's why controlling for bias is built in to the method.

So, yeah, a highly trained scientist or electrical engineer can take home a cable and imagine effects just like anyone else.

 

[Count Arthur]

So, yeah, a highly trained scientist or electrical engineer can take home a cable and imagine effects just like anyone else.

I stopped hearing the difference, when I stopped expecting to.

 

[MattHooper]

His hypotheses were plausible, or at least possible. They are also measurable. So why doesn't he measure them?

He doesn't because the purpose of his hypothesis is not to explain reality. The purpose is to give believers a framework to rationalize their beliefs. It's the same with any other fringe belief - flat earthers, creationists, moon landing deniers. Each group has their smarter members whose role is to provide the conceptual framework to justify absurd claims. They use seemingly plausible hypotheses or facts to obscure and confuse, not to explain. JA plays that role for the audiophools.

I generally agree with that assessment.

It reminds me very much of R***lig**s Apologists, who do the same work for their devotees.

One reason I started the thread was that my reading-between-the-lines of Stereophile's cable history gave me the hunch that JA wasn't really a "cable guy," so it was interesting to see him produce a defence for the prospect of cables sounding different.

However, I am not inclined to presuming he is lying-for-the-cause. I have no problem accepting JA holds that there are plausible accounts for cable differences and other things Stereophile writers hear.

 

[MAB]

I'm just not knowledgeable enough to vet all the claims

Perhaps go and take a test that @pma has provided.

 

[olieb]

So, yeah, a highly trained scientist or electrical engineer can take home a cable and imagine effects just like anyone else.

Sure, but if he/she does so AFTER being trained for years how you can do it better it is even sadder than otherwise.
On the other hand this "electrical engineer" seems to be some kind of stereotype in the cast.

 

[MattHooper]

Shocking!

A perfect example of where you end up based on unscientific thinking, naivete about human bias, and a lack of electronics knowledge.

(I lack a lot of electronics knowledge myself, but I try to keep my ignorance in view).

Note that he mentioned how perturbed he was that the expensive cables sounded so much better "I don't want to spend any more money, but these just sound better."

And so often from the tweak / cable crowd you get the objection "why do you or anyone else care about this stuff? Just let audiophiles do their thing. It should only be about bringing gear in to your system and if you hear a difference, who cares what anyone else says?"

Well, exactly what the guy in that video said is on reason. Lots of audiophiles have said "I wish I didn't hear such differences in cables but I do, and so I have spent lots of money on cables." Well, wouldn't it be helpful to find out they don't make a damned difference? That it's just down to imagination? Maybe some audiophiles don't care either way, but plenty do care if they are actually getting a sonic upgrade with a cable, and if the manufacturer's claims are B.S. or not. That's why promulgating actual information about how electronics work, and evaluating dubious audio claims, is worthwhile. Those who care about the truth, and who want to allocate their funds to those items that will actually impact the sound, can take this knowledge and use it in their purchases.

 

[DMill]

It’s not as bad as seeing your hero trying to escape in a white Bronco, but I am a bit disappointed in JA on this one.

 

[Dimitri]

How about wifi powered speakers that require no cables? For those do we debate the quality of the PSB traces or the hookup wire used? Hmmm?

The make expen$ive power cables for those too !!!

 

[egellings]

In the tweak and cable articles and videos and subjectivist forums there's often someone who says they are trained in electronics or a scientist but "I had to admit to myself that I heard a difference."

For me (and I'm sure most here) it doesn't matter a damn if someone has been trained in electronics or science: what matters is the their method of evaluating the claims.
Much of the method of science is keeping people "honest" - controlling for variables were we fool ourselves, and having our methods and results double checked by skeptical peers. Once you work outside of those control, monsters flourish. Anything seems to happen. All the nonsensical, woo-woo, pseudoscientific nonsense in the world is what happens when you are speculating outside of scientific method and controls. Every single person is susceptible no matter how well trained: that's why controlling for bias is built in to the method.

So, yeah, a highly trained scientist or electrical engineer can take home a cable and imagine effects just like anyone else.

A PhD gives you expertise in the area covered in the PhD curriculum, but makes you no more knowledgeable than anyone else in areas outside of the matter covered in the PhD program.

 

[egellings]

I never got a headache from listening to my Magnavox, or indeed any other CD player since then, even cheapies. Yes, we were depending on the audio electronics in those and not just the digital stream, but I still never got a headache. I've owned a LOT of CD players--Maggotbox 650, Tascam 401 (2 of those), Marantz Commercial PMD331, Cambridge Audio D500SE, Cambridge Audio CXC with a Topping E30 DAC, Cambridge Audio 640C, Naim CD5, Denon something-or-other, and various DVD players. The Denon had an electrical failure on the board, and the NAIM lost the ability to communicate with the drive. And the display on the CXC is almost too dim to read. But mostly problems have been transport-related that I've been able to repair and sustain. (The Magnavox and the D500SE both need new belts.) None of them are high-end, but they are still indistinguishable from my computer playing rips of them through a good DAC, which tells me something.

Maybe my problem has been that my cables see reflections at 21 MHz, masking my ability to detect effects at 8 KHz. Uh, yeah.

Rick "don't need blind test to prove there is no difference when none is expected" Denney

CD listening never made my deltoid muscles get unexplainably weak, either.

 

[MattHooper]

A PhD gives you expertise in the area covered in the PhD curriculum, but makes you no more knowledgeable than anyone else in areas outside of the matter covered in the PhD program.

For sure. But I wanted to make the finer point that even a PhD talking within her own discipline isn't necessarily trustworthy when operating outside of the scientific system.
There's a reason why sometimes otherwise good or important scientists have gone sort of cuckoo with speculations in their field, once they start operating outside the checks and balances of their discipline.

 

[egellings]

For sure. But I wanted to make the finer point that even a PhD talking within her own discipline isn't necessarily trustworthy when operating outside of the scientific system.
There's a reason why sometimes otherwise good or important scientists have gone sort of cuckoo with speculations in their field, once they start operating outside the checks and balances of their discipline.

It's a problem when arbitrarily acquired beliefs collide with hard-earned knowledge.

 

[Dimitri]

Thanks for the reviews of the review, so that one is free from being exposed to the nonsense

The only way to "escape" is if posters exercise restrain from either bringing it up in the first place or commenting on the original post.

"ABCDEFG said pink cables from the perfect mix of strangeum, unobtainium and expensium will even turn an AM radio to full HiFi quadrophonic system (as long as you buy a set of four!). "

Good for him. Post it in the jokes forum.