Interconnects
- Thread starter George Hincapie
- Start date
I don't see anything to suggest that the cables are shielded.
There's the white of the filler material, but that isn't shield if it's cotton or some synthetic. Besides, for a shield to be effective it needs to be grounded at atleast one end. As it stands in the picture then even if the cables were shielded (which I doubt) the shielding wouldn't be effective because it doesn't appear to be grounded. Can you see any shield ground wires?
AFAICT, KEF hasn't made a big play on the fact that it pays attention to the internal cabling. I don't recall ever reading some sales blurb from the company mentioning it a specific way. I would also think there are easier ways to make a bit extra profit than going to the trouble of having produced branded cable produced in at least three different varieties for the internal wiring of their speakers. Particularly as it's something that few would ever see to appreciate even if they understood the benefits.
I can't speak for the results of others. A line from the Audioholics article you linked in a previous post kind of sums up the situation. It said there's a grey area and I think that is very true. My own experiences suggest that the results are mixed. I don't have time to go through pages and pages of test dissections where people argue at length about the validity of this or that small element in a test, and I don't read French well enough to make head or tail of that Pico test other than to make one fairly obvious (to me at least) observation. That is why we're they doing such a controversial test in a room so full of speakers? I wouldn't expect a store to demo any bits of hi-fi in that fashion, and I certainly wouldn't rely on being able to accurately assess the sound of one pair of speakers from another in such a room with all the rest of the speakers vibration in sympathy. So why did they think they'd be able to tell the much smaller differences of one cable from another?
Hang on a sec..... If a person was on the "extremely high end of the hifi scale" then would £100-£300 even scratch the surface of an amp or speaker upgrade? I don't think it would. So how does what you just wrote make any sense?
lolConsider this then... It's easy to prove that one processor is faster than another, or one set of RAM is speedier than another, but when installed in a system the contribution made might well be negligible to the overall speed of that system. In fact, in ABX tests it would be likely that few if any of the users would notice a difference. Does that then render all processor or RAM upgrades pointless?
Surely that would depend on the the criteria? If it was "does this change your desktop experience" then no-one would tell the difference, if it was a CPU limited Distributed Computing, or a RAM limited Photoshop test, then I hope 99% of people could spot which was the upgraded component.
The difference is I can prove or disprove that a processor or RAM upgrade make a difference, depending on what a user is trying achieve - Neither you or I, can categorically say that spending X amount on a cable will (or won't) make Y difference.
You (and the manufacturers) can't prove anything about a cable beyond it's construction, appearance or electrical properties. Given that the electrical properties have been tested and make no difference - that leaves construction (which as long as it meets a minimum level is acceptable) and appearance (which is personal preference)
Fair complaint. Then what about the five follow up tests by different people, with different cables, systems, and environments, where nobody could tell the difference?
E.g. In the second one they couldn't differentiate a 1,700 euro cable from a freebie bundled one.
Honestly, consider the following:
- Interconnects vary slightly in construction and quality
- Interconnects are very high markup products
- Nobody has ever been able to tell interconnects apart in blind tests
- In blind tests you can tell people you're changing the cables even when you aren't, and they'll claim to hear differences (so-called "liar tests")
I really can't put it any more clearly than that.
Where on the internet did you dig that one up from or do you make it up as you go along? Have you ever auditioned any yourself?
I use the £30 QED interconnects, I am not willing to spend more than £30 on interconnects as there is not enough proof that they make an audible difference beyond about £30. Might try a better one if I have some spare money at some point, but I have about 0.1% hope that I would hear any difference.
All of that doesn't really answer the question I asked though. If a new processor is 20% faster than the current one, but the rest of the system isn't capable of taking advantage of that speed difference so that to the end user there's no appreciable difference, does that render processor upgrades pointless?
Don't worry, you don't have to answer because the answer is no. The result is conditional on a lot of other factors, and some of those are hard to quantify such as user expectations.
Let's bring it back to cables now. I have some sub cable that's outstanding at dealing with the effects of RF interference. The paper spec is very similar to conventional coax cable as typically measured in the MHz to GHz range. I could take it to one house where there's no issue with interference, swap out the existing lead and hear no difference appreciable difference. In a different house where hiss and hum are an issue the same cable would make a massive improvement. Thw cable properties haven't changed. But the environment it is being used in greatly affects the outcome; just the same as the processor upgrade.
I can say catagorically that for a certain type of customer situation that this cable has a verifiable benefit. On paper there's no reason why one cable is more effective than another. That's because the measurements are centred in the wrong place. You wouldn't choose it from its looks either. The plug ends aren't gold plated, the cable is quite thin (actually that's one of its virtues) and it's 6-10 times more expensive than a budget sub lead. The point is there are things we can easily measure and quantify, and because there's some degree of certainty we feel we understand the world. However, any decent scientist will tell you that the more we think we understand a thing the more complex it becomes. Just like a good scientist I like to keep an open mind.
I fully accept that I can't say hand-on-heart that this or that pair of phono leads will make the guitars 10% sweeter or the drums 6% more drummie
then again I am not trying to. What I would say is give it a whirl and see what you think; and while I would avoid recommending spending mad money in a system that didn't justify it, I would hope I'd never be so closed-minded as to say 'don't bother'.Really..... You think I don't understand?
I haven't the time to go reading through every Internet post of this or that proof. I understand perfectly that you feel the issue is resolved to your satisfaction. Great! Fabulous. Super! I am happy for you, I really am.
TBH I neither know nor care why some bunch of guys couldn't tell a freebie from a €1700 cable. It seems to me that people doing these tests get so wrapped up in the procedure that they lose sight of what they're listening to which is human emotions expressed as music. FWIW I did some unscientific listening a while ago to a freebie leadstereo phono lead versus something at £40. The differences in how the instruments sounded seemed clear to me. Maybe that's the effect of resistance, capacitance, shielding etc. Oh, and this was from a DVD/SACD player in to an AV receiver.
In the end it doesn't make much difference what you or I believe. We each have our views. Mine are based on my own experiences of skeptical albeit unscientific listening. I realise that will rankle with you, but there it is.
I wouldn't say "making it up", but doing the research and backing up my claims as I go. I've found and linked at least ten blind tests in all sorts of scenarios where nobody could tell the interconnects apart. (Two more here.) I've found none where they could. Would you care to try?
Yes there are blind amplifier, source, and speaker wire tests with (occasional) successful outcomes, but never interconnects.
Personally I've never auditioned interconnects. My gut feeling has always been it would be pointless, and there is no evidence to the contrary (AFAIK).
Since you've answered your own question I'm not sure I need to bother but I'll answer it and some of my own.
"does that render processor upgrades pointless" - No
Would I knowingly recommend someone to upgrade their processor if it would have no effect on performance - No.
Equally
Are Uprated cables pointless - No
Would I knowingly recommend someone upgrade their cables if it would have no effect on the sound - No
So you are buying a cable that is of better construction that copes with interference better? No issue with that but that is all it is - it's not making the sound any better.
I fully accept that I can't say hand-on-heart that this or that pair of phono leads will make the guitars 10% sweeter or the drums 6% more drummie
But that is exactly what most high end manufacturers (and indeed a majority of audiophiles) would have you believe. Power leads that makes your 0's and 1's more high definition, directional ethernet cables to make sure your digital music plays flawlessly, cables that make your colours more vibrant etc.
Basically to sum this up :
a) There are many scientific tests which show that nobody can tell the difference between interconnects.
b) Other people say "but I think it sounds better so that's good enough for me" (expectation bias, placebo etc. more likely than actual difference)
There you go that's about all you ever need to know about it in 2 sentences.
a) There are many scientific tests which show that nobody can tell the difference between interconnects.
b) Other people say "but I think it sounds better so that's good enough for me" (expectation bias, placebo etc. more likely than actual difference)
There you go that's about all you ever need to know about it in 2 sentences.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,831
- Location
- Nottingham
Hang on a sec..... If a person was on the "extremely high end of the hifi scale" then would £100-£300 even scratch the surface of an amp or speaker upgrade? I don't think it would. So how does what you just wrote make any sense?
I may have worded it wrong, but I meant that if someone is using equipment that's not on the extreme high end then generally I'd imagine the £100-£300 that someone may spend on 'better' interconnects would be better off spent on buying a higher model of speaker, amp, etc
Where's if you have a system that would cost 2x-3x the cost to get a decent upgrade then sure look at cables or other means to improve it.
The flaw here is that there isn't any scientific proof that cables can make improvements as long as they're adequate for the job.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,831
- Location
- Nottingham
I personally know this, but there's plenty of people that want to spend money on their system just for the sake of it. Buying expensive cables whilst pointless isn't usually going to cause any harm, if people want to spend money in that way that's up to them..
Same goes for people who will buy stupid stuff like risers that hold their speaker cables off the floor, or plinths that go under their amps to somehow stop vibration..