I can't tell one wine apart from another - philistine that I am - but that doesn't mean there isn't any difference. all white wines are made in the same way with the same ingredients so there can be no differences right?
Not a good analogy really, because we know exactly why wines taste different from one another - no magic involved.
What I would like to ask you is this: do you believe, as an engineer, that the cable differences which you hear are caused by L, C & R variations or do you feel that there is some other, as yet unknown, mechanism at work here?
Oh indulge me a little - I think the analogy is okay for me to use as I don't know exactly why wines taste different and it was another example where a difference can me 'observed' but it is very hard to measure or quantify. I'd love to see Jilly Goulden et al trying to quantify the smell or taste of a wine precisely! I reckon I'd be an "8 units of hollyhocks leaping from the glass" with "3 units of freshly mown lawns" man myself! I'm sure that if I spent long enough with one of these wine buffs I'd pick up some knowlege and `tune in' to the differences as happened with James May and Oz Clarke in a programme earlier in the year.
I think the difference in sound of different cables is complex. It occurs to me that perhaps what we should talk about is the sound of a system with different cable in it rather than just say we are talking about a cable. Different materials and constructions have a bearing on a signal as do the interactions between the cables and devices. I also noticed a fairly significant difference in sound when I changed speaker cable from QED silver anniversary XT to DNM Reson solid cored cable. With the solid cable it sounded more open and better focussed and the top-end became better defined. Instrument separation was also a bit better but I quote this from a hifi website: "Reson is one of the finest audio cables but does not work with LINN/Naim systems". It's unusual to see such a clear statement being made. It appears that the feedback circuit was designed with a much higher capacitance in mind and the amp doesn't work properly with this cable.
I also took this from the DNM website: "When auditioning speaker cable, most of the differences heard are caused not by the cable itself but by the amplifier reacting to the revised loading of the cable. Large, multi-strand cables are recommended by some manufacturers because their low resistance is thought to maintain the amplifier's low output impedance. Whilst this is true, it has no sonic benefit at all because amplifiers sound better when driving through a resistive or inductive load.
Large diameter high-capacitance cables connect the amplifier's sensitive feedback control system to a short circuit, a type of load that invariably worsens the amplifiers sound quality. A cross-section (diagram was here) of the spaced pair DNM reson cable shows its simple, clean and uniform magnetic field frozen at an instant in time. It is easy to forget that music signals produce a complex, dynamic version of this picture-and the field interacts strongly with the conductors. Bearing this in mind, it would be amazing if different cable designs sounded the same - not amazing that they sound different!."
I'm not qualified to comment specifically on any of this stuff from the websites as I've not looked into it in any great detail but it sounds quite plausible to me. There's also a load of stuff on the Van Den Hul website. There a lot of theory from the manufacturers and a lot of contradictions and a lot of it sounds somewhat dubious to me so, yet again, it comes down to listening with your own ears to your own system and deciding on what you like.
Rather than quoting from websites why don't we post urls of the best (and worst) articles on cables as this may add some more spice. I've quoted and referenced a couple in my posts but I'm sure we've all come across articles ranging from excellent and informative to real `snake oil' candidates. Let's look to gather all that we can from all all points of view. I've come across web sites where people have made their own cables from exotic materials and others where people report great results from 30A Twin and earth cable for speakers and I'll see if I can find those again. I also see that Jason Kennedy and Alan Sircom port on this web site and it would be interesting to get their input too as they review these things, amongst others, as their day job.
First reply to Robin re: the 6dB issue, remember we were talking 'audio interconnects' and for the most part we are therefore talking Voltage levels rather than power, sorry for the confusion. As one engineer to another, you do describe cable difference at very high frequencies, that I understand. However I fail to see the significance of these effects over a 20KHz bandwidth. I accept that a junction between two dissimilar metals may create a 'diode' effect, and that would create distortion, a metal on it's own cannot, whatever that metal may be create distortion, If the source impedance was unrealistically high, and the load unrealistically low, then the R,C,L factors may have some bearing, but as Pluto continually states 'any well engineered' equipment will not have these failings. In answer to the question 'did I measure the lead in isolation', yes I did, as it was the lead I wanted to check for differences, in order to find what differences may occur then measure each in isolation first, before complicating matters with ‘combinations’ As for the point that wines taste different then why should cables not, there are a thousand different variables that go into a wine's taste, against a relatively few variables that can go into a cable. Up until the early 1980s, all Hi Fi reviews were based on measured results, plus some observations, build quality etc. no ‘airy fairy’ comments about cables, that period of time was a peak of Hi Fi knowledge and awareness, so have we gone downhill since? In reply to Mick Cox, you are quite right the 75% caper was a little misunderstanding apologies all round re: voltage and power, and yes I still would like to understand what one claims to hear that cannot be measured. In reply to the rest, I believe Peter Walker the creator of ‘Quad’ used in adverts ‘The closest approach to the original sound’ that is what, in my mind Hi Fi is all about, not putting our own slant on the listening experience, but recreating the original performance. Not creating a new sound that we prefer, but hearing the sound intended, now this is a totally different scenario from finding a wine we can enjoy. Creating the wine is analogues to creating the recording, reproducing the recording is analogues to ‘looking after’ and ‘preserving’ the wine, such that we may enjoy it as the producer intended. If for a moment we could imagine a reproduction system that had no ‘signature’ or ‘sound of it’s own’ and reproduced everything exactly as recorded, then I wonder, how many would like it, or even think it good. As a measuring device our hearing is perhaps the most unreliable instrument, it is prone to massive errors of judegment, and I’m sure we’ve all experienced the ’it sounded great last night’ experience, but then in the ’cold light of day’ we may think ’not as good as I remember‘. Still waiting ’with bated breath’ as to Amanda’s input, I wonder where the other posting was?
Sorry Robin, I had missed your input as of 03/08 00:30 as I think I was replying to an earlier posting at the time. Are you suggesting that some respected amps are so badly designed that they are critical of a ‘cable’ that some amps do not like ‘low resistance’ cables , low resistance is all a cable needs to be, as resistance affects ’damping factor’ and that is audible. Personally I would keep well clear of any design that is so sensitive to cable effect that they end up changing the sound, but maybe we are now getting to grips with the perceived differences, maybe we should not be debating cables at all but amplifier design ?
I'm not suggesting that some amps are badly designed just that they are different; I for one would be perfectly happy I'm sure with either a Naim or Linn system. I included this to illustrate where perhaps we are missing something which is that cables do not act in isolation but are part of a system and can therefore have effects on other parts of the system. A good example of this is Formula 1 where the cars are hugely complex systems where the suspension (amp?) is designed with certain expected characteristics of the tyres (cables?) and any one of these can be altered to accommodate the other to make a harmonious fit. To me is seems clear that if you can accept that cables have different characteristics, and I think we can all accept differences in L, C & R exist and are measurable then we can also accept that they will interact differently with other components. Perhaps this is the key to understanding their effect. When I get back to the UK (I'm currently in the middle of a desert) I'll try some interconnects through a different amplifier from the same source and see if there are any differences between then in that configuration. I still have an older, cheaper amp kicking about so it might be an interesting experiment. It has always been a niggle for me that when cables get reviewed the context isn't given i.e. what source,amp and speakers. I'm pretty sure that the experience of a cable change in, for example, an entry-level Cambridge Audio system (good though it is) would be different to that of a Krell or Classe system and the other question would be what is their reference cable? The qualities of a cable being stated must be relative to something else. As has been noted previously we cannot compare it to the ultimate source as we weren't there when it was recorded so we must compare it to a sound which be believe to be close the sound of the source. I guess these are the places where ludicrously priced interconnects and speaker cables live in these `reference' systems.
Christopher No, you haven't missed any rules or codes of conduct - we just haven't felt the need for a formalised version so far. It's probably about time though, so I'll sort something out soon. Thanks for the tip.
"Reson is one of the finest audio cables but does not work with LINN/Naim systems"
Statements like this scare me. There are only two possible technical reasons for a statement like this. The first is that the amplifiers in question are so close to the brink of instability that this wire takes them over the edge. The second is that this wire is so weird that some well regarded amplifiers simply cannot drive the load that these wires, in combination with typical loudspeakers, present. Either way that means, avoid any of this kit like the plague; a decent amplifier should be stable into anything, a decent cable should present as low a load as possible - absolute minimum L, C, R.
I've said it before and I will continue to say it: 99% of people's dislike of their sound is down to frequency response, and to attempt to adjust the response with the minute changes available by tinkering with cable is a ludicrous joke. A first rate parametric equaliser would be a far more useful investment, but this would offend the puritanical zeal of most so-called audiophiles. It always amuses me that people bother to buy equipment that is flat within a quarter of a dB from 10Hz to 50kHz and then put such kit in rooms. What a stupid thing to do!!
Robin - your holistic approach to audio systems is very new-age, but an engineer should never forget that each link in a chain needs to support the entire load. If you need to test two new materials for your chain, you test one link with one new material and then one link with the other new material - in effect, AB testing. So it is with audio. If two well engineered cables sound different, it can only be due to deficiencies in one or both elements on either side - the power amplifier or the speaker itself.
Obviously a highly inductive cable combined with a rather capacitive load might be beneficial as would the opposite, but any designs that need to exploit this concept are clearly engineered well below the baseline quality of which our technology is capable.
Robin, it,s nice to see someone with a balanced view especially as you seem to have a similar technical skills as john and pluto. I have had long discussions with john and pluto on another thread and we seem to to 'agree to dissagree' on the subject of cables. I have no technical background so i have to rely completely on my ears and instinct when making choices to improve my hifi system, and so far both have served me well. Pluto would have me believe that the improvements/differences that i hear are purely psychoacoustic fueled by aggressive marketing and just plain lies. John i think deep down may admit (to himself) there are sonic differences but because it can't be measured by him it can't really be so. Seeing as this thread is about nordost odin, my view is that it may be obscenely overpriced ( to us mere mortals ) but to some people who can afford a hifi system costing say £250,000, it may be a bit of a bargain! people who are this wealthy want the best of everything ( or the most expensive ) and who are we to deny them this. Odin cable was never intended for us to use, the only reason we are discussing this cable is because of its incredible price not its incredible performance! how could we ever know what difference it might make we are unlikely to ever hear it, but we cannot dismiss it out of hand it may be a world beating breakthrough in cable technology. I use nordost spm which is the 10 maybe 12 year old equivalent of odin , bought at a fraction of the new price second hand on ebay and it made a massive improvement to my system. The inductance ,capacitance, resistance figures are extremely low also the propagation delay is 95% the speed of light , john explained to me on another thread that in nearly all cables this is usually 50% and expressed some doubt as to the accuracy of the claim, but i would have thought somebody would have blown the whistle if it was not true. So i suppose eventually in many years time there may be a set of odin cables on ebay that i can afford , if there is i will let you know if they were worth the money!
Pluto would have me believe that the improvements/differences that i hear are purely psychoacoustic fueled by aggressive marketing and just plain lies.
Not entirely accurate. I would have you believe just TWO things about cables.
1. That the improvements you hear are fuelled LARGELY by marketing and - well, lies is a nasty word - but can we say, deliberate omission or brushing aside of certain facts.
2. That everything you DO hear is satisfactorily explained within the confines of L, C and R. Nothing more. You stated earlier that you had read page 37 of
This indeed does explain some cable differences in terms of conventional science. Do you suggest that other forces are at work? The cable vendors most certainly do!
3. Did I say two. Sorry, I lied. I have been looking at some undeniably expensive cables in the local hi-fi shop, and some of them strike the engineer in me as looking like real crap! It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if such cables WERE to have an effect on the sound, but it certainly wouldn't follow the fundamental diktat that a cable should affect the circuit in which it is placed as little as possible.
Too much to answer in one hit, but I'll try. To electrohead re: i think deep down may admit (to himself) there are sonic differences but because it can't be measured by him it can't really be so I don't think so as I clearly heard a difference between a powerful Pioneer class 'B' amp and my mini class 'T' so I think I can hear subtle differences. Re the Nordost propagation delay is 95% the speed of light, one they would need some pretty fast measuring system to test this, and is it of any relevance, therefore why even state it as it is the difference of moving your head maybe a millimetre further away. This is all quite apart from the physical impossibility of such a claim. If you were to visit me with say 10M of said cable then I could measure it's speed, L& C, but not R as I would expect it to be millohms. Tell me is this cable not made of metal, as electrons do not travel through metal as fast as light? somebody would have blown the whistle if it was not true Probably not, as to 'blow the whistle' one needs backing from many others. Ask the 911 survivors, the police, the fire crews all of them were there at the time and saw/heard what really happened a far greater cause to 'blow the whistle' but so far no one has! In reply to Pluto, an item on the web, a speaker cable test.
This was carried out by a group of some thirty people, and four different cables, they had 'tick box answers' so was quick and easy to fill in, first up a budget cable at 20p a metre ‘report your findings’ up to a top notch cable at many hundreds a metre, again 'report' your findings Now this was rather a turnabout test, in that the cables were described before hand, i.e. 'we are now about to hear bla bla at £300 a metre report your findings', the reports were completely in line with the cable costs and descriptions. However the organisers of this particular event felt morally bound not to let on that ’AT NO TIME DID THEY CHANGE THE CABLE’ only to present a different description, and that in itself created a different sound a different result.
I rest my case.
John…
PS If you want to know more about my measurements and technical lifestyle visit www.fisherproducts.co.uk
People are very open to suggestion and what John highlights above is I'm sure entirely correct and something which could also be repeated however a number of magazines carry out blind listenining and sighted listenings and compare the results. I also did blind listening tests as well as sighted and heard a difference. Not all who listened did but those who did hear a difference agreed pretty closely with what those differences were.
I send the case to appeal and have it re-opened ;-)
In all fairness to John he in a very difficult position here in that he has the far harder job of arguing for the non-existence of something whereas I have the good fortune (for the sake of this argument anyway) to be arguing for the existence of something. John has to prove that in all cases without question there is no difference whereas I only have to show one case to prove my stance. This is compounded by the fact that if you take the route John has of relying on measuring only and in isolation then there is no evidence there to support any difference and from a purely scientific point of view it is a perfectly reasonable point of view but from my experience of hearing differences I can deduce that there is some flaw in the thinking.
I have to say that I also had this view and was very sceptical at first but then I heard a difference. I cannot fully explain it and to be honest I'm not too bothered about that any more. Once I got to quantum theory in physics I gave up the need to see things for myself to believe them.
There are things out there in the physical world which we can measure and cannot explain and some we can explain but cannot measure but we believe them to be there. Hell, even in medicine a lot of it is down to luck and the data sheets are frighteningly full of things like "we do not fully understand the mechanism by which..." - we can observe but cannot measure or explain. If we can sell drugs without understaning how they work but being able to measure the difference they make then I'm sure we can do the same with bits of wire. I'm sure that most cable manufacturers as well as other hifi manufacturers do a lot or R&D by trial and error and I'm pretty sure you'd never have a hifi manufacturer who'd design a product on computer and then go to manufacturing without having a listen to it.
I have a friend who makes me almost cry sometimes as he cares so little about sound quality but I was round tweaking his surround sound system of an evening and did a simple swap of the cheap bell-wire to his centre speaker with still pretty cheap QED 79-strand. The difference was, I'd go as far as to say, enormous. Even he agreed to go and buy some which he did. Sound had gone from thin and tinny to much more full-bodied with better defined mid-range and base and far less tinny treble or, for the less technically minded, from b****y awful to okay!
I'd rest my case now but it's just too much fun.
When he and I both get back to the UK I'll see if I can get these two pieces of wire and will be happy to send them to John for testing although they are rather short. I may even try cracking out the minidisk recorder and mic and trying to sample the difference directly and post them to make it easier to judge.
Try it now. Buy some cheap bellwire tomorrow and try it instead of your speaker cable and see what happens. Try the same stuff with a couple of phono plugs on the end too. If you want to get answers then get listening.
The Nordost website makes a big thing of the "90% of the speed of light" claim, without any attempt to say why they believe this to be significant.
The velocity factor of coax cables varies from about .66 to .9. I cannot quote the velocity factor for non-coax cable types because nobody bothers to measure it. Why not? Because it only matters at radio frequencies and at such frequencies you only use coax or 'ladder' wire. Now let's look at ladder wire as that's rather closer to typical speaker cable than coax. Oh look! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladder_line The typical velocity factor of ladder wire is .95. Blimey - better than Nordost cable! And the last time I checked it was about a quid a metre!
"Buy some cheap bell wire tomorrow and try it instead of your speaker cable and see what happens".
WHY??? Bell wire is clearly inadequate for decent audio for the most basic of reasons. I don't believe anybody here has ever said that wire makes no difference; what has been said is that correctly engineered cables make no difference!
What's wrong with bellwire? It has L, C & R and is made of copper. You can get a reasonable volume from a few watts into average speakers so why not? What is clearly inadequate about it?
Mainly R - far too high when used in typical speaker cable lengths. My present room layout needs about 8m of cable (on one side, but I've fitted equal-ish lengths to both channels). Also, I rather doubt the ability of bell wire to handle the current involved which I suspect is, in reality, rather greater than many people realise.
Looking at some typical cables in my local shop earlier, I was surprised by just how weedy some of them looked - it wouldn't surprise me at all were they to sound rather naff. Were an inexperienced listener to be sold these cables as an upgrade, and he happened to like to results, he might come up on this board proclaiming how his wonderful new cables had transformed his listening experience for the better.
Resistance, that is the only characteristic that maybe wrong, too high to be technical, other than that nothing. It may not be as fast, but that is irrelevant, it may have a higher inductance, it would probably have lower capacitance. So what it's high resistance will reduce base slam and more importantly reduce speaker damping. These fact alone would make the differences audible. Now try using it for a CD to amp interconnect, make sure the polarity is correct, and I think you will find it perfectly adequate over short runs, even Woolworths bottom end bell wire. What you define as correctly engineered, is a cable designed to carry the Amps required and to have low enough resistance to maintain the damping factor your amp can provide, for some detailed information on these aspects please view the AVreview article 'Some thoughts on class 'D'!!
