• 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!

The "audiophile" cable test

I assume when you take the stance on tubes that you realize that is a subjective preference rather than stating that tubes are somehow 'better' or 'more accurate'
My reasons are absolutely unrelated to sonics. A well-engineered tube amplifier will sound (within its power limitations) exactly the same as a well engineered solid state amp. And I would modestly claim that my tube gear is well engineered.
 
I'm a tube sceptic. I know there are quite some good ones and many impractical designs. Most of the tube specialists I know have been drifting from reasonable electonics into esotheric and voodoo over the years. They found their niche market and give customers what they want, expanding it even if they demand wonders and unicorns. So nothing for me in general.
By accident I got a CD player with a tube output stage. I must admitt there is quite positive difference from my usual, no frills players and DAC's.
Even if it is a somehow modified sound, it can be very pleasing. Today I see it like some room correction: If you like it, use it.

For testing audible differences I build may own gear, a switch box with a wireless remote control. That way I can do my own tests that only have relevance for me, blind or not. I'm not interested in telling forum people what is best, but want to find out my personal truth.


If I modify something, I always try to get two identical units, if you only have one you are going to fool yourself.
What also works for me is to have a baseline object, that is clearly preferred to the one to be modified. If the modification works for the better (If!), it should get closer or even better than the baseline.
If you do such stuff for you self, don't discuss it and don't have to brag about it, you can be quite objective.

PS with the switch box any DUT has the same disadvantage if there is one from a relay contact. It is made to be quite universal. Very interesting is comparing CD player, if both run the same CD, just a little out of sync. So you hear the same part on both of them, directly, one ofter the other.
 

Attachments

  • top_switch.jpg
    top_switch.jpg
    292.6 KB · Views: 36
  • power_switch.jpg
    power_switch.jpg
    288.5 KB · Views: 38
Last edited:
Hello, this is my first post on the forum (having lurked about on here for a number of years and thank you all for all the highly informative posts!).

So a quick preamble:

For many years I have happily accepted that aside from build quality there is very little or nothing about audio cables that affects audio quality (eg high end studios don't wire up with mega buck cabling so why should a domestic setup be any different). As a result I've never listened for or perceived any difference between cables.

Nothing dogmatic, it was simply something I didn't have to worry about beyond feeling sorry for people forking out kilobucks for fancy cabling.

So over the last few years I've become interested in IEMs and headphones - a great way to enjoy hifi in a context where I can't really play my speakers very loud.

I've accrued one or two IEMs (mainly budget and low mid range) and have found myself with sets that have annoyingly flimsy cables that tangle easily. So I decided to get some replacements.

Long story short: for a couple of weeks I managed to convince myself different cables have different audio effects - bigger bass, wider stereo image, better highs. The whole gamut.

This was despite my continued skepticism, but over time my skepticism had the ironic effect of reinforcing the impression I was certain I was hearing!

Surely a rational individual could not dupe themselves?

So I rationalised what I thought I was hearing: these tiny little balanced armatures and microscopically thin beryllium diaphragms must be uniquely sensitive and that, coupled with the proximity to my eardrum was palpably affecting the sound.

So I ordered more cables (nothing expensive) - what might oil impregnated litz copper (or whatever) sound like? What about silver-plated carbon fibre OCC copper 24 strand etc yadda yadda?

Then I realised where the problem was:

1: Between swapping cables there was a gap of about 20 to 30 seconds where I was trying to hold onto the memory of this cymbal sound or that syntheiser texture, the fatness of the bass.
2: Ear fit and position is critical to the sound (as is eartip choice) so there's no way to guarantee perfect exact positioning between changing cables.
3: If I felt that a particular element of the sound hadn't changed to my satisfaction I would find another element I was sure I hadn't really heard before then concentrate on that, and so back to the previous cable, and so on.

So a couple of weeks in I finally realise I can't actually hear any difference after all, obviously.

So it dawned on me that rather than testing the cable (graphs don't prove anything to the golden eared, dyed in the wool audiophile) there is feasibly a way to test the listener and in a manner that would I think be pretty conclusive.

What you need is an amplifier with two or more sockets and a corresponding good quality IEM (or headphone, earbud etc) with two or more inputs. Multiple cables of various types and price point, and the facility on your amplifier to switch instantly and seamlessly (no clicks or pops if possible) between each one while playing the source music continuously. That way it would be possible to switch cables without changing the postion of the IEM and the test subject can just sit still and concentrate on the music.

Because if there is a radical difference between a $5 and a $300 cable, you're going to hear the switch right?

You might even introduce confounding visual and or audio cues that you might tell the test subject will signal when the device will switch to the next cable. You could either make the switch or keep it in the same place. You could use multiples of the exact same cable (covered with a masking sleeve so there are no visual clues about what they are listening on).

And so on.

There would be numerous test configurations.

Anyhow I had to get that off my chest, but I thought my little journey there and back might amuse a few people on here.

At least I now have a bunch of really nice, cute looking, brightly coloured and interestingly braided cables I can match my outfits with going forward! Audio jewelry basically.
You sound like me 30 years ago.
I had fun doing similar things.
 
I'm a tube sceptic. I know there are quite some good ones and many impractical designs. Most of the tube specialists I know have been drifting from reasonable electonics into esotheric and voodoo over the years. They found their niche market and give customers what they want, expanding it even if they demand wonders and unicorns. So nothing for me in general.
By accident I got a CD player with a tube output stage. I must admitt there is quite positive difference from my usual, no frills players and DAC's.
Even if it is a somehow modified sound, it can be very pleasing. Today I see it like some room correction: If you like it, use it.

For testing audible differences I build may own gear, a switch box with a wireless remote control. That way I can do my own tests that only have relevance for me, blind or not. I'm not interested in telling forum people what is best, but want to find out my personal truth.


If I modify something, I always try to get two identical units, if you only have one you are going to fool yourself.
What also works for me is to have a baseline object, that is clearly preferred to the one to be modified. If the modification works for the better (If!), it should get closer or even better than the baseline.
If you do such stuff for you self, don't discuss it and don't have to brag about it, you can be quite objective.

PS with the switch box any DUT has the same disadvantage if there is one from a relay contact. It is made to be quite universal. Very interesting is comparing CD player, if both run the same CD, just a little out of sync. So you hear the same part on both of them, directly, one ofter the other.
If I may, here are a few possible complications one may run into using relays to switch live signals (beyond the simple fact of using relays).
  • Live switching a line level signal prior to the amplification stage can cause fast transients: spikes, pops, etc.
  • Live switching amplifier outputs during loud low frequency content can create an inductive kickback effect which can decrease the life of the contacts.
  • The order of each individual relay change needs to be considered. If you update the bit status for all relays at the same time, you have a race condition. For example, you wouldn't want two RCA outputs to briefly be connected. For example:
    • Disconnect RCA source 1's positive (center pin)
    • Wait 10ms
    • Disconnect RCA source 1's negative (shield)
    • Wait 10ms
    • Connect RCA source 2's negative (shield)
    • Wait 10ms
    • Connect RCA source 2's positive (center pin)
  • It's even conceivable it may be better to disconnect RCA source 1's negative (shield) last.
btw: it would not require much code for it to randomized between switching to A or B. You'll want to toggle relays even if there is no change simply so it sounds the same.
 
I know the limitations of relay contacts and all the problems with switching them around.
Anyway, I bet this is a better way to find my personal audible differences, than what most here ever tried to practicaly do.
In my world I can not be objective if I change wires, switch amps on and off and then try to figure out a minimalistic difference after returning to my listening place.

To minimize such relay problems, you can use motor driven banana plugs for example. Even when this was realized, it was criticized by "gold ears", because of the influence of the banana connection. People that buy a 200$ banana plug and insist it sounds better than a German made laboratory standard.
 
Back
Top Bottom