Kimber cable "how much"

[negger]

Why is it hard to believe recording studios use expensive cabling?

If I owned a magic cable company it would be in my interest to get great placement. I'd offer my cable for next to nothing to such as Abbey Road then sit back and enjoy all the publicity ....

Product placement doesn't mean the company / person using it has it by preference .... it means they were enticed to do so.

 

[Vonhelmet]

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?

It's not at all hard to believe. It is hard to believe they use £18k/2.5m magic cable.

 

[EllisDJ]

It's not at all hard to believe. It is hard to believe they use £18k/2.5m magic cable.

Agreed obviouslly 18k is a super extreme example and probs more of a we sell cables to this price / quality pr stunt despite the negative comments from guys like yourself who have other views - however if you were super rich with a passion for great sound and maybe have spent £100k + on your speakers then they may get auditioned with others such as Valhalla, Sarum etc - why not.

I can't see them selling many sets so I can't see them getting rich off it - if you look at the spec it's an example of over engineering 3 different cable formations - 3 cables in 1 they say best of all 3 I cannot argue for or against that. Very few can with no actual experience of it

my comments have been in defence of cable companies in general - as they are an important area of this hobby and have their place, I have tried lots of different ones and settled on chord based on sound not price. I have done blind tests / used another set of ears and different kit including headphone setups. So it's not always that I just wanted them to better, in fact the opposite I have sometimes heard things wanting them to be worse but had to admit that they are better. Recently I have done tests using very cheap interconnects and they sound ok, good enough for many but if you them swap them out for a half decent set £100-£200 value the change is immediate

I do have very responsive speakers that are above in quality than some of my other kit so even small improvements are noticed but most good quality speakers will Still do this

 

[marl]

If I owned a magic cable company it would be in my interest to get great placement. I'd offer my cable for next to nothing to such as Abbey Road then sit back and enjoy all the publicity ....

Product placement doesn't mean the company / person using it has it by preference .... it means they were enticed to do so.

Given the extremely poor quality of many of the recordings I've bought and concerts I've attended, I sometimes wonder if the Studio/Band forgot to plug something in or turn something on..!

I don't think you can make any judgements based on what the pro's use...

 

[Somnambulist]

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.

Siegfried Linkwitz - oh he of the Linkwitz/Riley crossover fame - used to use regular well made cables to demo his Orion speakers (arguably one of the best speakers ever made), along with muscular but not esoteric power amps. None of the high-end show attendees took them seriously, so they started using Boulder amps and fancier cabling out of peer pressure, just so people would listen to the speakers rather than crying about the amps/interconnects being general consumer stuff.

McIntosh amplifiers - those super expensive ones - used to have something similar on their page, along the lines of 'our amps are well-made, just use good solid reasonably priced cables'.

 

[inogen]

Yep. I know a fella that designs and hand builds high end valve HiFi. I'm a bass player and he fixes / improves my amps for me.

We've had a good laugh about people spending funny money on cables. As long as the cables are made of suitable material and are structurally intact, they're good cables. I believe even if you could prove that different cables sound different (I've yet to see / hear any proof) and it makes no sense to think they would, the differences would be so small compared to other factors as to be negligible. You'd get more tangible differences in sound from the type of paint on the walls or how much coffee you'd drunk. ie none. If a wire makes your stereo sound noticeably different from other suitable wire, it's in some way defective or unsuited to the use you're putting it to. It's a physical tautology - all good, suitable wires will result in the same sound quality. You might you enjoy the effect on the sound reproduction chain a certain type of wire has, but please be aware that's all it is, an effect. Any "improvement" is entirely subjective and is in reality the resultant fidelity loss.

Here's one of the fella's from McIntosh...

http://www.roger-russell.com/

And what he says about wire...

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

 

[Dr.EM]

The thing I find most ridiculous about this whole cables debate is that a majority who are willing to fork out substantial cash on cables have not made any real effort to improve the room acoustics first.

I will state categorically that most peoples listening venues will not only not be perfect, but will be a world away from it! The money could be used to make real and substantial differences to the sound heard, and if done correctly, these changes will improve the sound by actually giving rise to the improvements often claimed of 'high-end' cables; revealing more details, opening up the soundstage, improving the control of the bass end, etc.

All this, for real, for less than the money that cable costs! But indeed, it's much easier for someone to take a random, uneducated stab in the dark and blow a heap of cash on a 'magic' cable and imagine they hear those differences, rather than learning about acoustics and how to improve them. I'm sure you could even pay an acoustic engineer to evaluate the room for less than that cable costs!

I'll accept that proper acoustic treatment may have more than monetary costs, in so much as it might spoil the aesthetic of the room or reduce its usability for other functions, however I would say that spending substantial amounts on cabling for a system which is set up in a typical domestic environment (read: poor, sub-optimal) is tantamount to spending substantial amounts on cabling for a budget Hi-Fi system.


As well as this, I also come from an engineering background, not a marketing one, and so any cable marketed as offering an improvement to the sound needs the claim backed up technical fact. Something tells me we aren't going to see that any time soon though!

 

[oli collett]

Pops head back in after being away - Nope not a lot has changed here!

The thing I find most ridiculous about this whole cables debate is that a majority who are willing to fork out substantial cash on cables have not made any real effort to improve the room acoustics first.

Yep, anyone who's serious about hi-fi would make more of an effort on room acoustics if they were looking at making a real difference. But I guess if they were doing that they might then start looking at technologies like audyssey too, and you can't have that because that might mean polluting the sound chain

Also, do people who buy these cables glue their head into a fixed "ideal" listening position whilst listening to music? If not there's going to be all kinds of problems there!

 

[EllisDJ]

Yep. I know a fella that designs and hand builds high end valve HiFi. I'm a bass player and he fixes / improves my amps for me.

We've had a good laugh about people spending funny money on cables. As long as the cables are made of suitable material and are structurally intact, they're good cables. I believe even if you could prove that different cables sound different (I've yet to see / hear any proof) and it makes no sense to think they would, the differences would be so small compared to other factors as to be negligible. You'd get more tangible differences in sound from the type of paint on the walls or how much coffee you'd drunk. ie none. If a wire makes your stereo sound noticeably different from other suitable wire, it's in some way defective or unsuited to the use you're putting it to. It's a physical tautology - all good, suitable wires will result in the same sound quality. You might you enjoy the effect on the sound reproduction chain a certain type of wire has, but please be aware that's all it is, an effect. Any "improvement" is entirely subjective and is in reality the resultant fidelity loss.

Here's one of the fella's from McIntosh...

http://www.roger-russell.com/

And what he says about wire...

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

They still flog cables and they don't look cheap + they improve the sound according to the site...

"http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/us/Products/pages/ProductListingVertical.aspx?CatId=Cables

 

[negger]

They still flog cables and they don't look cheap + they improve the sound according to the site...

"http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/us/Products/pages/ProductListingVertical.aspx?CatId=Cables

I can't seem to find the part where they make claims about the speaker cable 'improving the sound' ..... care to link ?

 

[9designs2]

You can never improve a sound from the points of source, hence source first principle. All you do is degrade the sound by greater or lesser amounts and by various colourations, so choose your cable by how you like the sound degraded and coloured.
Then say it "improved" the sound of what you were using previously. In relative terms it did improve, in absolute terms if degraded less or different......

Simple, now you can all go spend a fortune on cables and feel satisfied

 

[lucid]

The thing I find most ridiculous about this whole cables debate is that a majority who are willing to fork out substantial cash on cables have not made any real effort to improve the room acoustics first.

That is a very valid point. As you highlighted though, the challenge comes though with aesthetics. There is a general resistance to room design other than for decorative purposes. It seems that the average Hi-Fi enthusiast is more keen to spend on a new shiney bit of hardware. In fact this preoccupation with upgrading hardware rather than getting existing gear to work properly extends to the AV market too.

The cost of professional set-up and calibration often makes a bigger difference than spending 2x-3x that amount on new gear.

As well as this, I also come from an engineering background, not a marketing one, and so any cable marketed as offering an improvement to the sound needs the claim backed up technical fact. Something tells me we aren't going to see that any time soon though!

I suspect that even if the information was presented in an easily digestable form that it still wouldn't be accepted. So, back to square one.

 

[lucid]

Yep, anyone who's serious about hi-fi would make more of an effort on room acoustics if they were looking at making a real difference. But I guess if they were doing that they might then start looking at technologies like audyssey too, and you can't have that because that might mean polluting the sound chain

Audyssey really isn't the answer. It's a convenient quick-fix solution to get AV amps working better than they otherwise would without proper set up. But for music.... No thanks. It's for people who are looking for something a bit sterile from their sound system. All precision and no passion IMO.

Also, do people who buy these cables glue their head into a fixed "ideal" listening position whilst listening to music? If not there's going to be all kinds of problems there!

Once again that touches on the "all precision, no passion" school of sound reproduction. Those of us who are looking for the emotional connection are less concerned with sitting in a certain spot. Just like a concert, good music is good music almost regarless of where one sits.

I think this goes to the root of the problem with any debate on cables. Each camp is looking for something different. It's perhaps why the two sides are so entrenched; some of us have moved past the cliched view of Hi-Fi and are more interested in music.

 

[Dr.EM]

The cost of professional set-up and calibration often makes a bigger difference than spending 2x-3x that amount on new gear.

Rather, I would say that spending 2x-3x the amount on equipment may very often be redundant as the differences/improvements they could bring are being masked by poor room acoustics.

Back on cables, I modelled speaker cable in software based on the resistance, inductance and capacitance properties (some professional, but still comparatively budget priced, cables do provide this information) and found (with typical run lengths and power levels) variations between signal in and signal out in the milli-decibel range. Anyone who claims to hear that is mistaken, and the fact is room acoustics can easily cause variations of greater than 10dB!

 

[oli collett]

Audyssey really isn't the answer. It's a convenient quick-fix solution to get AV amps working better than they otherwise would without proper set up. But for music.... No thanks. It's for people who are looking for something a bit sterile from their sound system. All precision and no passion IMO.

By sterile, you mean closer to the source?

If that's not what you're looking for in Hi-Fi, then what on earth is it?

I mean, according to your logic, you have to have the best possible source/amp/cables in order to not pollute the sound chain, but then the end result isn't meant to sound exactly like the source, so what exactly is it meant to sound like?

Once again that touches on the "all precision, no passion" school of sound reproduction. Those of us who are looking for the emotional connection are less concerned with sitting in a certain spot. Just like a concert, good music is good music almost regarless of where one sits.

I think this goes to the root of the problem with any debate on cables. Each camp is looking for something different. It's perhaps why the two sides are so entrenched; some of us have moved past the cliched view of Hi-Fi and are more interested in music.

Right, so it's not precision, and it's about passion. What do you think people who make hi-fi equipment should be doing then? I would have thought their goal would be to closely replicate the source, which seems a sensible aim, no? If not, then what?

 

[lucid]

Rather, I would say that spending 2x-3x the amount on equipment may very often be redundant as the differences/improvements they could bring are being masked by poor room acoustics.

I was actually talking in terms of AV gear but perhaps that didn't come across clearly.

Back on cables, I modelled speaker cable in software based on the resistance, inductance and capacitance properties (some professional, but still comparatively budget priced, cables do provide this information) and found (with typical run lengths and power levels) variations between signal in and signal out in the milli-decibel range. Anyone who claims to hear that is mistaken, and the fact is room acoustics can easily cause variations of greater than 10dB!

That's looking at the easily identifiable (and measureable) aspects of a conductor. There are other things going on. Look at the trouble DeHavilland had with the Comet a year after it came in to service. All of their engineering models and expertise at the time told them everything was okay. But it still didn't stop them falling out of the sky.

MIT Cables have some interesting papers on design. LINK

 

[Somnambulist]

Rather, I would say that spending 2x-3x the amount on equipment may very often be redundant as the differences/improvements they could bring are being masked by poor room acoustics.

Back on cables, I modelled speaker cable in software based on the resistance, inductance and capacitance properties (some professional, but still comparatively budget priced, cables do provide this information) and found (with typical run lengths and power levels) variations between signal in and signal out in the milli-decibel range. Anyone who claims to hear that is mistaken, and the fact is room acoustics can easily cause variations of greater than 10dB!

You need to take into account the poor design of many audiophile amps.
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/pear-cable-science

Also, yeah, as someone said, you can only take the source and make it worse. 'The best cable is no cable', as they say.

 

[the shadow]

So what's everyone take on Mains Conditioners

 

[MikeHunt79]

Snake oil

 

[negger]

That's looking at the easily identifiable (and measureable) aspects of a conductor. There are other things going on. Look at the trouble DeHavilland had with the Comet a year after it came in to service. All of their engineering models and expertise at the time told them everything was okay. But it still didn't stop them falling out of the sky.

MIT Cables have some interesting papers on design. LINK

The very fact that this company calls itself MIT starts the bells ringing .... and when you see the list of technical whitepapers they have on their site it confirms the reason why LOL (Massachusetts Institute of Technology anyone ?).

Honestly Lucid, read some of those whitepapers you linked then read this - http://www.audioholics.com/educatio...s-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-

I wish the ASA had more powers with issues like we have here with regard to misleading claims and advertising .... but like most things in life the con artists just look for a new angle to skirt the law and relieve another punter of his hard earned cash .... it's a never ending cycle ....