• 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!

What cables do you use in your systems?

Completely QEDish here. To lazy for diy. Their midrange. Look, feel and price are reasonable. And this good feeling makes the sound for me. I belong to the people who do not believe in "Kabelklang", sorry.
 
I'm completely baffled by this. The cables I build look fine.
If you have the skill and the time (I used to build my own speaker cable, but disabilities are forcing me to go in the consumer direction). However - the price I pay is minimal compared to what others pay....$25 bucks for a 6 ft, 12 gauge power cable with all the cool looking extras is decent.
 
In fact, cables are the most important thing in an audio system.

Definitely. Before I had cables, my system was dead silient. Now with them, it makes all kinds of noises and looks like Medusa.
 
Each cable is made of different material, so they must sound different. If you don't agree, you are science-deniers.

(paraphrasing someone from the DAC Sound Signature thread)
 
Mains cables, mostly what ever came in the box, unless it has got mixed up, in which case it is what ever came in another box.
Signal cables I often have to DIY due to odd ball amp manufacturers methodology, otherwise, what ever came in the box or Amazon basics which I quite like because they are nice an flexible.
Speaker cables, what ever is cheap and thick enough for the required length.
 
Each cable is made of different material, so they must sound different. If you don't agree, you are science-deniers.

(paraphrasing someone from the DAC Sound Signature thread)
And by different material they mean COPPER?

Oh, and copper, and... copper??
 
And by different material they mean COPPER?

Oh, and copper, and... copper??
But not the same copper!! c'mon, get with the program.
 
And by different material they mean COPPER?

Oh, and copper, and... copper??
The copper is the boring part. Apparently the dielectric, insulation, and sleeving materials make the biggest difference in sound (and price)... and don't forget the wood/metal/carbon fiber blocks indicating "directivity" and the brand logo. That's where all that R&D money goes. ;)
 
No question about it, such cables are a marvel to behold, who would have thought that the values which hold so well for traditional furniture making using the finest timber would be equally valued in the world of electricity?

If I remember correctly from the history of electricity, early electricity installations for power distribution in UK streets used cotton insulated cables, installed in buried timber trunking back filled with pitch. Perhaps the old ways are the best?**

** Probably not.
 
Last edited:
Interconnects: generic and World's Best Cables (Amazon)

Speaker cable: Blue Jeans (12g, locking bananas)

Coax cable: don't currently use one, but when I tried it, Blue Jeans because it was cheap and I just added it to my speaker cable order so I didn't have to pay any more for shipping

USB cable: generic

Power cable: whatever came with the components
 
Um, no. If you don't agree, you are psychoacoustics-deniers. :cool:
Cables are not acoustic devices. They are electrical in nature. The Psycho- part is just a prefix signifying your opinion of the cable's so-called "sound".
 
Cables are not acoustic devices. They are electrical in nature. The Psycho- part is just a prefix signifying your opinion of the cable's so-called "sound".
The problem with language is that it is very limited. Consider the context. How cables sound to audiophools is intrinsically psychoacoustics or bioacoustics. I know about LCR measurements for cables.
 
The problem with language is that it is very limited. Consider the context. How cables sound to audiophools is intrinsically psychoacoustics or bioacoustics. I know about LCR measurements for cables.
"Bioacoustics" implies that there is some physical reality behind the differences they supposedly hear. "Psychoacoustics" is better, as it points out that the differences are in the human mind.
 
"Bioacoustics" implies that there is some physical reality behind the differences they supposedly hear. "Psychoacoustics" is better, as it points out that the differences are in the human mind.
Is the human mind not biological?
 
Back
Top Bottom