This is by FAR the best example I've ever seen of that fact. Squares A and B are the same shade of grey.
See: http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html for more information.
Kimber cable "how much"
- Thread starter EYEREX
- Start date
See: http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html for more information.
This is by FAR the best example I've ever seen of that fact. Squares A and B are the same shade of grey.
See: http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html for more information.
I dont get that at all??
I am out of this pointless arguement that goes over and over, it is good fun argeuing the toss though.
There will always be haters, people that know best, companies supposedly having you over etc etc. I thinks its great for the hobby - all you boring people that want all companies to sell the same £5m a metre cable then thats up to you to believe in that being better.
Everyone will base judgement on their own experiences within the hobby - I have always thought what I was listening to sounded good - and I have owned some high end equipment and spent ££££ 's on it but that has been far from the case a lot of the time.
For me Its a constant journey, that will never end, as the perfect sound is not achiveable. However I will keep plugging away if it means upgrading cables or not, I am happy to spend my money - my system now is getting very good, not Great Yet it will be great to me one day.
I dont believe in cables making a system sound better - but I do believe in them making it sound worse
I personally would rather spend more and know for sure - then have the doubt - could it be better - for me nothing worse than that and anyon thinking their systems cant be better is a fool - or very rich simple. If I was rich I would not be posting on here
I would say my attitude is what has maybe founded / fueled the potental snake oil products but I dont care I trust my judgement based on a life of chasing not good sound Great Sound, If I am not happy with it I dont keep it.
There will always be haters, people that know best, companies supposedly having you over etc etc. I thinks its great for the hobby - all you boring people that want all companies to sell the same £5m a metre cable then thats up to you to believe in that being better.
Everyone will base judgement on their own experiences within the hobby - I have always thought what I was listening to sounded good - and I have owned some high end equipment and spent ££££ 's on it but that has been far from the case a lot of the time.
For me Its a constant journey, that will never end, as the perfect sound is not achiveable. However I will keep plugging away if it means upgrading cables or not, I am happy to spend my money - my system now is getting very good, not Great Yet it will be great to me one day.
I dont believe in cables making a system sound better - but I do believe in them making it sound worse
I personally would rather spend more and know for sure - then have the doubt - could it be better - for me nothing worse than that and anyon thinking their systems cant be better is a fool - or very rich simple. If I was rich I would not be posting on here
I would say my attitude is what has maybe founded / fueled the potental snake oil products but I dont care I trust my judgement based on a life of chasing not good sound Great Sound, If I am not happy with it I dont keep it.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,762
I think the main issue that we haters have is when companies knowingly and cynically exploit buyers who have just enough knowledge to buy into superficially plausible claims, but not enough to dig deeper and see the pseudoscientific carp for what it actually is. It doesn't affect me one way or another personally, but it's always a bit annoying when you see other people being shafted, and you do what you can to make them at least think about their actions... if they can't understand or choose not to, then at least you've tried.
Anyway, good luck on your mission to spend more money, I'm sure it will make you an even less boring person.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,451
- Location
- Around Town
I'm an owner of a 'high-end' system: Naim CDX/282/Hi-cap/252 and
Shahinian Obelisk loudspeakers.
I use the cables that came with Naim stuff - no reason not to as they were designed to work with the kit and work well. Use Naim speaker cable as the output stage relies on the cable to introduce some inductance (as I remember it).
Anyway it sounds awesome and always has.
Yes there is a lot of 'snake-oil' rubbish talked about hi-fi and it does the trade no favours at all.
But good hi-fi brings much pleasure and those people who dismiss the idea should maybe entertain the idea of booking a demo (freely offered by all good hi-fi shops) where you sit in a 'listening room' (mock up of a normal living room) and listen to the kit of your choice and the music of your choice. The shop staff will offer other options - not always more expensive - so you compare everything on a level playing field.
It's a ear-opener.
Shahinian Obelisk loudspeakers.
I use the cables that came with Naim stuff - no reason not to as they were designed to work with the kit and work well. Use Naim speaker cable as the output stage relies on the cable to introduce some inductance (as I remember it).
Anyway it sounds awesome and always has.
Yes there is a lot of 'snake-oil' rubbish talked about hi-fi and it does the trade no favours at all.
But good hi-fi brings much pleasure and those people who dismiss the idea should maybe entertain the idea of booking a demo (freely offered by all good hi-fi shops) where you sit in a 'listening room' (mock up of a normal living room) and listen to the kit of your choice and the music of your choice. The shop staff will offer other options - not always more expensive - so you compare everything on a level playing field.
It's a ear-opener.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 12,538
- Location
- London
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/pear-cable-science
Again, for me this isn't about good quality interconnects and the differences between well and poorly made ones, but the ridiculous, absurd area of stratospheric pricing on cables and other accessories in 'audiophile land' that have no basis in reality, other than being cynical ploys to make a lot of money.
You don't get this in pro audio for good reason. It's also the reason why, I believe, passive speakers and separate stereo amps have persevered, despite active speakers/crossovers generally being better from a technical standpoint, because it would leave less room for 'tinkering', and tinkering is good in hifi because it means people keep buying new gear all the time, selling it on to buy more new gear etc.
Again, for me this isn't about good quality interconnects and the differences between well and poorly made ones, but the ridiculous, absurd area of stratospheric pricing on cables and other accessories in 'audiophile land' that have no basis in reality, other than being cynical ploys to make a lot of money.
You don't get this in pro audio for good reason. It's also the reason why, I believe, passive speakers and separate stereo amps have persevered, despite active speakers/crossovers generally being better from a technical standpoint, because it would leave less room for 'tinkering', and tinkering is good in hifi because it means people keep buying new gear all the time, selling it on to buy more new gear etc.
Last edited:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/uk/index.php?section=home&page=home
Have a read of Alan Shaw's thoughts on speaker cable. Harbeth make some of the nicest sounding speakers that I have EVER heard. Shame 99% of the UK hifi population have never heard of them.
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/uk/index.php?section=products&page=faq#8
What do you think about speaker cables?
The specialist hi-fi cable industry offers the consumer a vast array of solutions to the problem of connecting audio equipment together. This is surely a very good thing. Ignoring cosmetics, there seem to be two main approaches to the design of speaker cables.
One cable design approach involves the deliberate manipulation of the measurable physical properties of the cable (resistance, capacitance and inductance) to alter the load that the amplifier sees. This would maximise the contribution of the cable to the overall sound. We are not really comfortable with this route, since it is surely length dependent and so the sonic results are rather unpredictable. It may well 'spice-up' the sound, but is it right and is it consistent, week in, week out?
The opposite cable design philosophy states that the cable be designed to minimise its contribution to the overall sound, probably by minimising the basic physical characteristics of resistance, capacitance and inductance. This seems a sensible goal to aim at in an audio listening system that is designed to be as neutral as possible. As far as the BBC are concerned, those Harbeths installed there are wired with modest conventional cable and that seems good enough for their purposes.
The best approach seems to us to be experimentation with cables but having a long-term reference to fall back onto, such as humble 79 strand (or similar). Work with your dealer to find the best solution for your unique set-up.
Have a read of Alan Shaw's thoughts on speaker cable. Harbeth make some of the nicest sounding speakers that I have EVER heard. Shame 99% of the UK hifi population have never heard of them.
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/uk/index.php?section=products&page=faq#8
What do you think about speaker cables?
The specialist hi-fi cable industry offers the consumer a vast array of solutions to the problem of connecting audio equipment together. This is surely a very good thing. Ignoring cosmetics, there seem to be two main approaches to the design of speaker cables.
One cable design approach involves the deliberate manipulation of the measurable physical properties of the cable (resistance, capacitance and inductance) to alter the load that the amplifier sees. This would maximise the contribution of the cable to the overall sound. We are not really comfortable with this route, since it is surely length dependent and so the sonic results are rather unpredictable. It may well 'spice-up' the sound, but is it right and is it consistent, week in, week out?
The opposite cable design philosophy states that the cable be designed to minimise its contribution to the overall sound, probably by minimising the basic physical characteristics of resistance, capacitance and inductance. This seems a sensible goal to aim at in an audio listening system that is designed to be as neutral as possible. As far as the BBC are concerned, those Harbeths installed there are wired with modest conventional cable and that seems good enough for their purposes.
The best approach seems to us to be experimentation with cables but having a long-term reference to fall back onto, such as humble 79 strand (or similar). Work with your dealer to find the best solution for your unique set-up.
Last edited:
You mean you're in an argument that you literally can't win?
EllisD said:
I don't believe £5/m cable is better, but I do believe that there is no way that a 2.5m cable can cost anything close to £18k to make or be worth that.
EllisD said:
Some of us choose to base our judgements on actual science...
EllisD said:
Good for you. I'll buy what I want, you buy what you want.
EllisD said:
Now stop right there. Do you realise how utterly brain meltingly stupid that sentence is? I mean, seriously, that's one of the dumbest things I have ever read, and I've been using the Internet for 15 years.
EllisD said:
Haha, what, you'd be paying for access to a forum with a higher class of poster?
EllisD said:
So you acknowledge that audiophilia has a significant amount of snake oil attached to it, but you still embrace it? On you go then.
You get some anal people on here.
The statement cables making it sound worse is pretty obvious - you must be dumb to not understand it. My kit all cost approx £2k for each unit - to then use cheap wire such as bell wire from b&q would no doubt make it sound worse than it should. My statement also says even using the £20k cable can't make it sound better than the sum of its parts - what's hard to understand about that with your 15 years experience - what a dick comment, I mean come on.
My system cost a lot - but it sounds like it cost it too - puts the cinema to shame so I am happy but know it can sound a lot better still! I am working on that
Science doesn't prove the expensive cable sounds better, but no one can prove they don't! I bet you have no experience with them - have you heard them or any of that range, I doubt it. Have you heard nordost Valhalla? I doubt it again
Have you blind tested any of them No Again
Even that whole av holics 20 page rant has 0 evidence all he does is quote people' and their subjective opinion. Plus he suggests in a blind test the tester cannot recognise any of the links in the test I.e using their own cd player, amp, speakers makes it a invalid test - that's complete cods wallop! It should make it harder to tell the difference using your own kit - in fact there is no difference in cabling so what does it matter..... Completely invalidates his whole theory on that page. There are just as many people that would say there are differences to quote in a counter argument to that whole article.
I really don't care about winning any argument - these debates have and will go on forever. But slandering someones comments is pointless and childish especially in the way you did. You are clearly a muppet ... See anyone can do it
Last edited:
Haha, you're out of this argument... Sure.
If the cables were so good, they could be double blind tested and proven to be better. They can't. End of story.
And the reason you're saying:
is stupid is because if you can replace cable A with cable B and make a system sound worse, then you can replace cable B with cable A and make it sound better again. It's a logical error that just highlights that you're talking rubbish.
EDIT: Screw it, I'm going point by point on this one.
If the cables were so good, they could be double blind tested and proven to be better. They can't. End of story.
And the reason you're saying:
EllisDJ said:
is stupid is because if you can replace cable A with cable B and make a system sound worse, then you can replace cable B with cable A and make it sound better again. It's a logical error that just highlights that you're talking rubbish.
EDIT: Screw it, I'm going point by point on this one.
Last edited:
And you can't resist the argument, even though you said you were out of here.
EllisDJ said:
No, you must be dumb to make a logically invalid statement. If cable A can be replaced with cable B to make the system sound worse, then you can replace cable B with cable A and make it sound better.
EllisDJ said:
That's not what you said, though. You're now saying that a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, which makes sense, but that's not what you said.
EllisDJ said:
EllisDJ said:
Good for you. Have fun with it.
EllisDJ said:
Science can show that no one can tell if the cables are better or not. That's different to what you're saying. If the cables can't be shown to be better, then it's all in the mind of the listener. Now, that could be down to your ears preferring expensive cables, which is unfortunate for your bank balance, or you're kidding yourself. In any case, you can probably enjoy cheaper cables.
EllisDJ said:
No. Have you any familiarity with science? I doubt it.
EllisDJ said:
Have you double blind tested any of them under scientific conditions? No again.
EllisDJ said:
Meh. The point stands the cables haven't been successfully double blind tested.
EllisDJ said:
You clearly do care about winning the argument, or you'd have left when you said you were going to. Now, see, I do care about winning the argument and I don't mind admitting that. That's why I'm still here. Why are you still here?
So it boils down to this .... copper cable is copper cable no matter how much spin these dubious companies put on it. As long as the cross section is sufficient for the signal supplied you will never 'hear' the difference between them.
Measurable differences using electronic equipment is one thing, but the human ear will never be able to distinguish one brand from another. (unless you was to use huge lengths of the stuff .... but that isn't what we're discussing here).
I sometimes wonder at the vigour used by some enthusiasts to defend the marketing claims of companies like Russ Andrews, I guess once you've been suckered it's hard to admit it.
Measurable differences using electronic equipment is one thing, but the human ear will never be able to distinguish one brand from another. (unless you was to use huge lengths of the stuff .... but that isn't what we're discussing here).
I sometimes wonder at the vigour used by some enthusiasts to defend the marketing claims of companies like Russ Andrews, I guess once you've been suckered it's hard to admit it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,911
- Location
- Nottingham
What I don't understand about people that say cables make a difference, power cables, heck even fuses apparently make a difference and yet what cables and such do the studios that actually record the music use? I find it hard to believe that a recording studio is using stupidly expensive cables.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,451
- Location
- Around Town
Why is it hard to believe recording studios use expensive cabling?
Abbey road uses classe amps and b&w 801- 802 they won't be running them off any old bell wire.
- the bbc uses van damme apparently but that's just one studio there are loads out there. Anyone know any others?
Last edited: