Absolutely ridiculous claims by Monster Cable.

[Ethanno]

Sorry if this has come up before, but I couldn't believe this when I saw it. I also felt this was the proper forum for this, despite being of a technological nature.

http://www.succubi.org/monster-optical-cable.jpg

It's always been my firm belief that the overpriced Monster Cable speaker wire will provide no better sound than an electric cord ripped off a 20-year old lamp. If such a difference exists, I can't hear it.

But to make these claims with digital information? What does it do, make the 1's and 0's warmer? And how do 1's and 0's "jitter"?


Ethan Forsythe

[Dragonrock]

Stereophiles "know" that their stuff sounds better. They "know" that the 99.9999% oxygen free copper cable that costs $200 a foot allows the singer's "true emotions" to come through. They "know" all this because if they didn't "know" it, then they are just brain-dead morons who spent 200 bucks for a lamp cord.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

They should let me test their systems. Many years ago, I had my stereo set to mono for months and didn't realize it.

~~ Paul

[Rolfe]

Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
They should let me test their systems. Many years ago, I had my stereo set to mono for months and didn't realize it.
I've done that, but I knew there was something wrong! There's no problem telling the difference if you switch from one to the other, let's face it.

Cabling does make a bit of difference at the junk end. A decent solid cable will sound better than a bit of fuse wire or a damp string. However, I'm damn sure the human ear can't detect a difference well below the £250 a metre level!

The thing that really does it, if you're a radio listener, is the aerial. Money spent there makes a really audible difference, and to some extent using non-junk cable on the aerial feed is a good idea because it's usually long. But I'd like to see some of these guys pick the expensive from the merely decent in a blind testing!

Rolfe.

[TLN]

I'm just going to read this thread and blush...

[Jeff Corey]

Over 10 years ago, Dan Dugan of SF asked me to join a panel discussion on speaker cables at the AES convention. He demonstrated that the differences between a bell wire and a monster-tyre cable were neglible. But I still stick with standard Radio Shack level speaker wires.
At that convention the editor of Audiophile said that the reason that people who couldn't tell the difference in any good double blind test just didn't have a "golden ear".
His "golden ear" shone, and showed when the current issue of Audiophile had a full-page, full-color advert for Monster Cables.
And there was the cretin from Hahvaad who claimed to have invented the triple blind test.

[CurtC]

Actually, jitter is a common thing that has to be measured in optical communications. With bit rates at 2.5, 10, or even 40 Gbit/sec, it's pretty important. If the source of the jitter is random, it will occasionally shift the signal so far that a one is interpreted as a zero or vice-versa. And reduced signal power will make the system more sensitive to these jitter errors.

However, I don't believe that a) you can hear bit errors on the order of one bit in 10^12, which is the standard, b) that these low-frequency optical devices are prone to jitter-caused errors, or c) that Monster Cable fiber would make a difference anyway.

By the way, one bit in 10^12 would be one bit in a stack of 200 CDs.

[shemp]

Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
They should let me test their systems. Many years ago, I had my stereo set to mono for months and didn't realize it.

~~ Paul

Hey, only one of four speakers in my car works, and I can't tell the difference either! Maybe we should start a record label for tone-deaf people.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by shemp
Hey, only one of four speakers in my car works, and I can't tell the difference either! Maybe we should start a record label for tone-deaf people.

I believe, for the most part, that Warner Brothers beat you to it.

[HarryKeogh]

Originally posted by shemp


Hey, only one of four speakers in my car works, and I can't tell the difference either! Maybe we should start a record label for tone-deaf people.

you guys should start your own company. Shemp Anagnostopoulos Inc. has a nice ring to it. Ask for it by name!

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Ethanno
It's always been my firm belief that the overpriced Monster Cable speaker wire will provide no better sound than an electric cord ripped off a 20-year old lamp. If such a difference exists, I can't hear it.


The funny thing is that the Monster Cable is now the CHEAP stuff. Heck, you can buy it at any low-end audio retailer.

I've got some Monster Cable myself - mainly because it was as cheap and better marked than the other cable in the store.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by Ethanno
Sorry if this has come up before, but I couldn't believe this when I saw it. I also felt this was the proper forum for this, despite being of a technological nature.

It's always been my firm belief that the overpriced Monster Cable speaker wire will provide no better sound than an electric cord ripped off a 20-year old lamp. If such a difference exists, I can't hear it.

Welcome to the forum! Great first post.

IIRC, there have been a few discussions here in the past about cabling, but it's likely helpful to see the topic revisited, as there may still be misconceptions lurking. The electrons I've dealt with in the past just aren't that picky, lol. IMHO, anyone willing to spend hundreds of dollars for a platinum dual-RCA interconnect cable should have their head examined.

The only high-end cables I usually splurge on are specialty 1/4" instrument cables specifically designed for guitar -- and even at that it's due to increased longevity in a high-use cable that's bound to receive far more abuse than one would ever encounter in a home stereo/video application (these (http://www.procosound.com/musicians/audio/guardian/blackjack.htm) are my favorites; although they claim superior tone, I use them because of the quality in construction, excellent shielding and durability).

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Ethanno
But to make these claims with digital information?
Even worse, you can buy $1000 Power Cables, and they aren't even in the signal path. By Power Cable I mean the lead that runs from the wall outlet to the back of the amp.

Of course, the power cable you should use to bring out the highs of a female's voice is -- at least according to audiophile wankers -- a completely different cable to the one you need if you want to be able to tell which breed of pig was used to make the skin on the bass drum.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
EOf course, the power cable you should use to bring out the highs of a female's voice is -- at least according to audiophile wankers -- a completely different cable to the one you need if you want to be able to tell which breed of pig was used to make the skin on the bass drum.

I'd say that Iconoclast was knocking down a few strawmen here, but having read some audio boards in the past ... I'm not so sure. :D

[HarryKeogh]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
Even worse, you can buy $1000 Power Cables, and they aren't even in the signal path. By Power Cable I mean the lead that runs from the wall outlet to the back of the amp.

Of course, the power cable you should use to bring out the highs of a female's voice is -- at least according to audiophile wankers -- a completely different cable to the one you need if you want to be able to tell which breed of pig was used to make the skin on the bass drum.

my friend spent quite a few bucks on a power line "conditioner" (not to be confused with a surge supressor). he swore it made a difference. i couldnt tell an iota of difference. he also had cables the width of my forearm leading to his speakers.

saddest part...he was broke, he was charging all this crap on his credit cards.

i once played the most blistering, kick ass bass solo for him and his only response was "wow, that must give you listener fatigue"

jeez! talk about forgetting what it's all about. it's about the music man, the music!!! not just the equipment you play it on!

[Ethanno]

Ah, I got an excellent response. Glad to see I'm not the only here who's not tired of all the nonsense running around the audio world. There's also another issue about speaker cables and wiring that really bugs me.

"Cable burn-in". I've seen more than one $200+ per-foot speaker wire retailer say that in order to align the electrons or ions or whatever in your wiring, you need to run the stereo full-blast from up to 1 whole day to an ENTIRE MONTH. One of my friends said, "you know why they do that? So they can have plenty of time working thier mind over to justify spending $200 a foot for speaker wire."

I could also mention battles on other forums where people claim that certain colours of CD-Rs give you better or worse sound, by my head is already hurting at the mere thought of it.

Ethane

[Pakaran]

Originally posted by Ethanno

"Cable burn-in". I've seen more than one $200+ per-foot speaker wire retailer say that in order to align the electrons or ions or whatever in your wiring, you need to run the stereo full-blast from up to 1 whole day to an ENTIRE MONTH.



When I got my cell phone, it told me to charge and fully use the battery 3 times. Should I be shouting into it all 9 days it's on standby to discharge too? :D

[jallenecs]

Let me say for the record that anybody who is spending the kind of money you all are describing on audio equipment? They need to go buy a life; do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

I'm sorry, but I ABSOLUTELY don't get it. Look, I went to conservatory; in my earlier days, I made my sole living from playing music. Today, I still teach both voice and instrument. I appreciate -- and have recordings of -- everything from Run DMC to Godsmack, Extreme, James Taylor, Shania Twain, The Beatles, Beverly Sills to Kenny Chesney, gospel, Barbershop quartet, Beethoven; you name it, I've listened to it and have a favorite song/piece in it.

NOBODY could accuse me of not taking music VERY seriously.

When I listen to recordings, do I have a surround sound Blaupunkt gadget that loads the CD, fluffs my pillow and pours me a cappuccino? No. I listen to music on either the computer (with two little four inch speakers that my son bought for twenty bucks), or on my DVD player, through the Television's mono audio. Once or twice, when the front room DVD and the computer were occurpied, I've even listened to music by putting the CD into my daughters' Playstation.

The people who are spending $1000 on speaker wires? IMHO, it has nothing to do with how the music actually sounds, and everything to do with their bragging rights.

Face it: your stereo system is an extension of your penis. :v:

[Pakaran]

Originally posted by jallenecs
.
When I listen to recordings, do I have a surround sound Blaupunkt gadget that loads the CD, fluffs my pillow and pours me a cappuccino? No. I listen to music on either the computer (with two little four inch speakers that my son bought for twenty bucks), or on my DVD player, through the Television's mono audio. Once or twice, when the front room DVD and the computer were occurpied, I've even listened to music by putting the CD into my daughters' Playstation.


I generally use my computer as well. Personally, I'm not "serious" about music, but as I've mentioned in other threads I do have absolute pitch, so distortion is something I notice. It's there in radio, but NOT in a CD, with ANY cable, including a $5 speaker cable.

I can't speak for analog speakers since I don't use them, but digital speakers the cable does not make a difference, even if you tie it in a knot.

I notice more of a tone problem with a cappello concerts performed live, and some singers like Bob Dylan recorded and played by any means, than I do with a CD played on my computer of a classical orchestra, or a singer with relatively little timbre like the Red Hot Chili Peppers or Sinatra.

I think buying a $800 speaker cord makes less sense than buying a $150 pair of designered jeans. At least with the later when you boast about them you will not appear to be totally clueless.

[voidx]

While I agree that these high end stereo components differences can seemingly only be detected by the dedicated audiophile, and therefore seem very much suspect...there is an advantage to buying a "decent" quality of "sturdy" speaker wire. As mentioned you won't get superior sound because of something advanced in the cable. You'll get better sound because its a sturdier and more robust cable and will probably keep a good connection better and eliminate feedback and buzzing and the like. However, base level sturdy speaker wire shouldn't be running you hunders of dollars a foot. Obviously listening to movies in Dolby or AC3 or DTS is a different listening experience than listening to them in normal stereo, or mono. Anyone thinking otherwise hasn't actually listened to the different systems properly setup. Now, how much you're willing to spend for the better listening experience, and how much better you think it actually is, is rather subjective, and while it certainly makes a difference, its not one I'm personally willing to pay more than a couple hundred bucks for in total.

I agree with the idea that if these cables make any difference, which if you look deep enough, they very well may, its to a point so negligible, that no human ear could ever perceive it, or perceive it so little as to make most people indifferent, or not willing to spend the extra money, for so minute an improvement. Either way, I think you're wasting your money. But lets not forget there is some difference obviously between the cheapest components on the market, and the first few reasonable levels of quality components.

[Martin]

Originally posted by Pakaran
At least with the later when you boast about them you will not appear to be totally clueless...no?

[Pakaran]

Ok, Martin, clueless to a lesser degree. Thereby less than *totally* clueless.

:)

[Ethanno]

As for me, I'm of the opinion that "audiophiles" with the "golden ear" are about on par with spoon benders, people who talk to the dead and dowsers. I'd really like to see Mr. Randi set up a nice test with lampcord wire, radio shack speaker wire, and $200-per-foot "burned in", aligned-with-north-pole oxygen-free shielded wire and see if they can really tell the difference.

Wait, scratch that. What I really need to do is set up a service that handles "burn-in" for customers who don't want to be handed a court summons for disturbing the peace.

Ethane

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by voidx
Obviously listening to movies in Dolby or AC3 or DTS is a different listening experience than listening to them in normal stereo, or mono. Anyone thinking otherwise hasn't actually listened to the different systems properly setup.

Or even improperly set up. :) Heck, even plain old Pro-Logic makes movies sound a whole lot better. Even my mom noticed. (She still makes comments about "planes whooshing through the room" the first time she watched a movie at home with Pro-Logic.)

Now as far as the difference in AC3 and DTS - personally I don't hear much difference between the two.

[patnray]

Originally posted by voidx
You'll get better sound because its a sturdier and more robust cable and will probably keep a good connection better and eliminate feedback and buzzing and the like.


In analog cables only two things matter: good (low resistance) connections at each end and the internal resistance of the wire. Which means you should tin the ends and use as thick a cable as practical. But you won't hear any degradation using ordinary 18 ga copper wire to 8 ohm speakers in cable lengths of 20 feet or less in the ordinary living room environment. Anyone who claims a specialty cable produces a detectable difference in that environment is hearing things....

[voidx]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist


Or even improperly set up. :) Heck, even plain old Pro-Logic makes movies sound a whole lot better. Even my mom noticed. (She still makes comments about "planes whooshing through the room" the first time she watched a movie at home with Pro-Logic.)

Now as far as the difference in AC3 and DTS - personally I don't hear much difference between the two.
Exactly, as for AC3 and DTS I agree. I've heard both, but not side by side, but there's not really any difference that I can detect. But then I'm not exactly a hardcore audiophile either ;).

[voidx]

Originally posted by patnray


In analog cables only two things matter: good (low resistance) connections at each end and the internal resistance of the wire. Which means you should tin the ends and use as thick a cable as practical. But you won't hear any degradation using ordinary 18 ga copper wire to 8 ohm speakers in cable lengths of 20 feet or less in the ordinary living room environment. Anyone who claims a specialty cable produces a detectable difference in that environment is hearing things....
You know more about the specifics than I, but basically in my laymen's terms that's what I was trying to say. If you don't have good ends on the cables, or if their cheaper, and you've moved them around a lot, then you might not be getting a good connection. On a cable with sturdier connections on the end, they will be more durable longer, therefore being more likely to give you a solid connection. That was all I was trying to say. The cable wouldn't work better because of better technology, but rather just possibly might work better because its made better than a cheap cable.

From my own experience I had a problem with this, having to keep re-twisting and inserting the speaker wire into the back of either the speaker or receiver to correct poor connections, then when I bought a cable with proper ends on it, the problem disappeared, or at least, become far less frequent.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by Ethanno
As for me, I'm of the opinion that "audiophiles" with the "golden ear" are about on par with spoon benders, people who talk to the dead and dowsers. I'd really like to see Mr. Randi set up a nice test with lampcord wire, radio shack speaker wire, and $200-per-foot "burned in", aligned-with-north-pole oxygen-free shielded wire and see if they can really tell the difference.

Wait, scratch that. What I really need to do is set up a service that handles "burn-in" for customers who don't want to be handed a court summons for disturbing the peace.

Ethane

It's been done... ( not by Randi though...)

Speaker Wire (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire.htm#resistancehigh)

..."...So what do our fifty hours of testing, scoring and listening to speaker cables amount to? Only that 16-gauge lamp cord and Monster cable are indistinguishable from each other with music and seem to be superior to the 24 gauge wire commonly sold or given away as 'speaker cable.' Remember, however, that it was a measurable characteristic--higher resistance per foot--that made 24 gauge sound different from the other cables. If the cable runs were only 6 instead of 30 feet, the overall cable resistances would have been lower and our tests would probably have found no audible differences between the three cables. This project was unable to validate the sonic benefits claimed for exotic speaker cables over common 16-gauge zip cord. We can only conclude, therefore, that there is little advantage besides pride of ownership in using these thick, expensive wires"




Another one of our members posted this link.. Sorry, do not remember who.....

[roger]

Originally posted by Ethanno
I'd really like to see Mr. Randi set up a nice test with lampcord wire, radio shack speaker wire, and $200-per-foot "burned in", aligned-with-north-pole oxygen-free shielded wire and see if they can really tell the difference. Well, of course these tests have been done, and it doesn't convince the 'golden ears' at all. You see, they claim that DBT is not a valid way to test audio equipment.

If you really want to cause some of your neurons to melt, head on over to rec.audio.high-end and read any thread labelled DBT, cables, etc.

[Ethanno]

Originally posted by Diogenes


It's been done... ( not by Randi though...)

Speaker Wire (http://www.roger-russell.com/wire.htm#resistancehigh)


Aaaaah, thank you sir! Hard to believe that this is from 1983, no less -- amazing.

I'm currently passing this URL around to other people I know. Thanks again!

Ethan

[ESW]

Glad to see this finally come up. If you want to witness audiophile insanity firsthand, check out the audiogon forums.

For those of you unfamiliar with audio component "break in", allow me to summarize:

1. You read a glowing review of a very expensive thing.
2. Excited, you purchase the very expensive thing.
3. The performance of the very expensive thing does not meet your expectations.
4. After a time, you get used to it.

Break-in is very real - it's just not the component that's being 'broken-in'.

[WildCat]

Originally posted by roger
Well, of course these tests have been done, and it doesn't convince the 'golden ears' at all. You see, they claim that DBT is not a valid way to test audio equipment.
Hah! Playing the Drive-By Truckers (DBT) full blast will test the limits of any stereo system. Shows what they know!

[WildCat]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
Even worse, you can buy $1000 Power Cables, and they aren't even in the signal path. By Power Cable I mean the lead that runs from the wall outlet to the back of the amp.

Of course, the power cable you should use to bring out the highs of a female's voice is -- at least according to audiophile wankers -- a completely different cable to the one you need if you want to be able to tell which breed of pig was used to make the skin on the bass drum.
$1000 power cables will definitely bring out the highs of a females voice - your wife's! :D

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Dragonrock
Stereophiles "know" that their stuff sounds better. They "know" that the 99.9999% oxygen free copper cable that costs $200 a foot allows the singer's "true emotions" to come through. They "know" all this because if they didn't "know" it, then they are just brain-dead morons who spent 200 bucks for a lamp cord.

I read an article on the audio-freaks. Their biggest fear is that their wife will find out how much it all costs.

[tracer]

Originally posted by shemp
Hey, only one of four speakers in my car works, and I can't tell the difference either! Maybe we should start a record label for tone-deaf people.
Hmmm ... if you can't tell the difference between mono and stereo, it's probably not due to tone-deafness. Are you sure you can hear things in both ears?

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by roger
If you really want to cause some of your neurons to melt, head on over to rec.audio.high-end and read any thread labelled DBT, cables, etc.

Ahh yes ... that reminds me why I stopped reading those groups except for humor value. A sample quote:


I'll be brief. I'm a firm believer in DBT for objectively-verifiable data (such as whether a given drug cures cancer) but given that sound is fugitive, (and that consequently audio perception is inherently non-repeatable, subjective, and not quanifiable) DBT is impossible. Tharefore no debate on whether DBT is useful in audio is warranted. There cannot be any such thing as DBT in audio.

Translation: "I'm scared to do actual testing because I might not be able to actually tell the difference between $5, $20, $50, and $500 wires."

edited to add: The same guy who penned the quote above also believes in the green pen effect...

[Thanz]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist

Translation: "I'm scared to do actual testing because I might not be able to actually tell the difference between $5, $20, $50, and $500 wires."
Exactly. Unlike other areas that are also subjective, but constantly do DBT. For example, wine tasting - which is always done blinded. I would think that most serious wine drinkers/critics could tell the difference between a $10 bottle of wine and a $200 bottle.

BTW - what does he mean by "sound is fugitive"?

edited to add: The same guy who penned the quote above also believes in the green pen effect... Pray tell - what is this green pen effect? I am unfamiliar with the term.

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by Thanz

Exactly. Unlike other areas that are also subjective, but constantly do DBT. For example, wine tasting - which is always done blinded. I would think that most serious wine drinkers/critics could tell the difference between a $10 bottle of wine and a $200 bottle.

BTW - what does he mean by "sound is fugitive"?

[B]Pray tell - what is this green pen effect? I am unfamiliar with the term.
The green pen effect (http://www.msen.com/~lwp/green.pen.html). Try not to laugh.

Another, more explanatory article: http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/greenink86.html


Because hearing is a private experience, no one can know for sure if someone else is hearing the same thing. Only a truly scientific test, in which neither the test taker nor the test giver have inside knowledge of the test data, can be used to separate claims from facts.
But even that kind of evidence is of little use to someone who believes in green markers. Conviction is more powerful than truth, even in such a silly issue as this.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Thanz

BTW - what does he mean by "sound is fugitive"?


I think he's referring to this defintion:

"being of short duration b : difficult to grasp or retain : ELUSIVE "

Of course, saying that while claiming to be able to reliably hear minute differences between $50 and $500 cables just about wrecks my irony meter.

Pray tell - what is this green pen effect? I am unfamiliar with the term.

Snopes has a good page on this - basically, a (mistaken) notion that marking on the edge of a CD with a green pen will improve sound quality.

Green Pen Legend (http://www.snopes.com/music/media/marker.htm)

[DaChew]

I've been annoyed for years by the woo-woo garbage floating through the audiophile world. Because I work in the audio/video business I'm constantly barraged by questions from my coworkers about this stuff. Normally I tell them just to get good 16 guage (or bigger if they feel like it) copper speaker wire and use that. Monster Cable has been misleading people for a long time.

I used to install a lot of EV power amps and part of the owner's manual had this nifty nomograph that made cable guage selection based on the length of the run and the speaker load very easy. You simply drew a straight line from the load resistance through your desired damping factor and it would give you a point on a source resistance line. Then you draw another straight line from the source resistance through your cable length and that gave you the proper guage wire to use.

For instance: You've got an 8 ohm speaker load you draw a line from 8 ohm through the desired damping factor (EV says 50 is typical) intersecting the source resistance line at about 1.75. Then a line is drawn through a cable length line (I'll use 20 feet)to a gauge line where it intersects at 16 AWG.

I don't know if they have that chart on their website but I think I'll check.

[Thanz]

Thanks for the info on the green pen, AP and OC. I tried not to laugh, but was unsuccessful.

I do have a couple of questions, and this seems like a good place to get a non-BS answer.

1. The major difference I have seen when buying cable (either tv cable or AC (?) cables for hooking up DVD, vcr, etc.) is that some are gold tipped and somer are not. Is there a real difference between the two?

2. I have a DVD and home theatre set up. I use a digital audio cable to connect them. I could also use an optical cable. Does the optical cable make a real difference?

Thanks for your assistance.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Thanz

2. I have a DVD and home theatre set up. I use a digital audio cable to connect them. I could also use an optical cable. Does the optical cable make a real difference?

I can hear no audible difference switching from coaxial to optical cable on my DVD player. I was curious about that sort of thing myself a while back, and I had the cables to test it out.

Aside: Why do I have both kinds of cables? Mainly because I have two sources that have only optical digital outputs - and I have no choice but to use optical cable for those.

I'd say that there's no need to spend extra money on an optical cable if you've already got the coaxial one hooked up and you're satisfied with it.

[jj]

Originally posted by DaChew
I've been annoyed for years by the woo-woo garbage floating through the audiophile world. Because I work in the audio/video business I'm constantly barraged by questions from my coworkers about this stuff.

*A*M*E*N*

(look at my 'www' button to see why, basically)

Monster cable is very nearly the most innocent of the, um, cough, "remarkable" explainations for how things work in the audio world.

There are a couple of things that have to be noted:

1) Audio is very sensitive to the listener's attention. If you think something is different, and you focus differently, you will recall it sounding different.

2) The periphery and first levels of the auditory system appear to be tuned to have more false positives and fewer false negatives. In other words, you tend to hear differences even when they don't exist. The upside is that you rarely miss differences that do exist, in some sense.

The fact that it is easy to accidentally, without any intent at all, to decieve yourself into "hearing" a difference (where "hear" is defined as the memory created by the whole process, which is a bit of a stretch, perhaps I should say "remember a difference") when no difference at all exists.

This means that when you make a change you will hear a difference, or are likely to.

Now, imagine how this interacts with non-blind-testing and marketing.

Also be aware that the high end is very hostile, at least mostly, to double-blind tests. Some of this hostility is, I think, purely the result of people being upset that they didn't hear anything, and the feeling is sincere, if misguided. Some other of the hostility, I sense, although I wouldn't accuse any individual of this behavior since it's roughly impossible to get concrete evidence, may be due to the fact that DBT's would lessen the demand for their snake oil and naturopathy.

Another annoying bunch of people who are involved are people who in fact naysay much more, in fact denying that things that have been demostrated to be audible are in fact audible.

The two have reduced the public debate to, well, I think "lowest common denominator" is a necessary but hardly sufficient description.

Those who want to see what I mean can visit rec.audio.opinion via google. Those who want to see my positions can go back a few years to when I bothered to try to contribute there.

I haven't been in rec.audio.high-end in a while, it seems to me that nowadays it's permissable there to make accusations of the scientists, but not permissable for the scientists to reply in kind.

Having said all that, I have encountered some truly buggy, hideously designed, scandalously implemented SPDIF and AES/EBU recievers that WERE sensitive to cable issues. I wont' say much more, simply because a proper description of the design quality would require the use of words that Hal doesn't approve of, perhaps all of them woven into one sentence.

So the other side of all this cable hoopla is that some of the other hardware is designed preposterously, too.

I use Home Depot #12 zip cord for speakers. That costs something like $0.25 a foot.

I used to run what was perhaps the most sensitive testing lab that existed in the world for five years. It used 4-conductor anti-inductive zip-type cord for speaker cables. That cost a dollar a foot, and we had to use it to keep from having trouble with the wires running 100' in steel conduit.

We used Mogami mic cable because we could fit enough of them into where we needed to, and they had good enough flexibility that we didn't couple too much floor noise to the mic's.

Nothing cost more than a dollar a foot. NOTHING, and this in a lab that was frankly beyond the state of the art in most respects.

[MRC_Hans]

Why are you all so surprised? We see people selling and buying zero energy machines, water detox systems, crystal healing, homeopathy, etc. Why not audio woowoo?

Speaker cables: There is a difference. Being an electronic engineer I say, copper gauge makes a difference. FOr best results, you'd want about twice the amount of copper than that of a normal mains cable. Cheapest way to get this is use two mains cables in parallel.

Signal cables: As long as you have a stable connection and no audible noise, you're fine.

Mains cables: If that power lamp is lit, you're fine.

CD or DVD players: Nobody can make a living selling one that does not work excellently.

Amplifiers: You might want a certain wattage, but with modern technology, it is difficult to build a bad amplifier.

Speakers: The weak link in the chain. If you wanna spend money, spend them on speakers.

Hans

[Skeptical Greg]

jj,

Your post brings to mind the anecdote/s ( but highly believable ) about how ' life-like ' the first Edison recordings sounded to people first exposed to them. They didn't have anything else ( except a live experience ) to compare them to...

Think about how ' Great ' the early T.V.s, motion pictures and photographs appeared to their viewers.

People tend to forget how great ' crap ' can be, when it is all there is..

[jj]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist


Ahh yes ... that reminds me why I stopped reading those groups except for humor value. A sample quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll be brief. I'm a firm believer in DBT for objectively-verifiable data (such as whether a given drug cures cancer) but given that sound is fugitive, (and that consequently audio perception is inherently non-repeatable, subjective, and not quanifiable) DBT is impossible. Tharefore no debate on whether DBT is useful in audio is warranted. There cannot be any such thing as DBT in audio.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Translation: "I'm scared to do actual testing because I might not be able to actually tell the difference between $5, $20, $50, and $500 wires."

edited to add: The same guy who penned the quote above also believes in the green pen effect...

This is classic apologia from the high end.

A variety of people ( I could name names, but I won't ) have created a whole variety of totally nonsensical excuses about why DBT doesn't work, when of course it has been shown, quite clearly, to work right down to the possible physical thresholds, as long ago as Harvey Fletcher.

The High End, for the most part, has no reason to exist (except to start to use GOOD multichannel methods, perhaps), if we dont' accept that DBT's don't work.

Of course, all, and I mean (*&(*&( all of the evidence, shows that DBT's (done right, of course) work fine and dandy, and the various fuzzy-headed objections are nothing but excuses.

I used to participate in both r.a.he and r.a.o, but I am presently unwelcome in r.a.he,and there is no point in r.a.o. I've acquired nasty internet stalkers from r.a.o, people who mail stuff to family, (email and paper), call the house, etc...

Lunatics!

I haven't participated in either in some time. You can find me there as jj@research.att.com (no longer a valid address), and you may noitice I haven't much patience with the mystical deniers.

[jj]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Why are you all so surprised?

Who's surprised?

Speaker cables: There is a difference. Being an electronic engineer I say, copper gauge makes a difference. FOr best results, you'd want about twice the amount of copper than that of a normal mains cable. Cheapest way to get this is use two mains cables in parallel.

Shorter runs, usually not necessary to go that high in copper.

Signal cables: As long as you have a stable connection and no audible noise, you're fine.

Almost but not quite true. Some people build the most remarkably icky input stages.

Mains cables: If that power lamp is lit, you're fine.

I made a lifelong enemy of a couple of engineers by saying that. I still think it's right. A power supply IS SUPPOSED TO FILTER OUT NOISE. It's one of the power supply's FUNCTIONS.

Geeze, louise, guys. If it doesn't FIX THE (*&(&*( POWER SUPPLY.

CD or DVD players: Nobody can make a living selling one that does not work excellently.

You've never heard of Wadia, then?

(difference between "can" and "should" applies here)


Amplifiers: You might want a certain wattage, but with modern technology, it is difficult to build a bad amplifier.

Dead wrong, some people like distortions from some kinds of amps. It's their money, let them have it. It SHOULD be impossible if the target was good amplifiers, but actually it's possible and some high-enders, in particular, desire less accurate amps. There is an interesting psychoacoustic reason or three here...

Speakers: The weak link in the chain. If you wanna spend money, spend them on speakers.

Wrong!

The second-weakest link. They are where you should spend your money, but speakers also suffer from another problem:

They are called on to fake what we didn't record (soundfield complexity) in the first place.

So, the weakest link is the RECORDINGS.

Fletcher and Snow, in something like 1929, showed that 2-channel stereo had an egregious flaw.

It still does. It's due to basic physics, but we're still mostly stuck with it.

If you want to talk about taht, start another thread in two weeks when I'm back from my standards meeting.

Hans

jj

[jj]

Originally posted by Thanz
1. The major difference I have seen when buying cable (either tv cable or AC (?) cables for hooking up DVD, vcr, etc.) is that some are gold tipped and somer are not. Is there a real difference between the two?

Gold plated connectors connecting to gold plated connectors will grow less oxide and have less connection problems than tin on tin.

Tin on gold is initially very good, but then goes right to (*&(*&*(.

2. I have a DVD and home theatre set up. I use a digital audio cable to connect them. I could also use an optical cable. Does the optical cable make a real difference?

Thanks for your assistance.

If you've any ground loop problems the optical cable will help.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by jj

Tin on gold is initially very good, but then goes right to (*&(*&*(.

What sort of time frame are we talking here?

[jj]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist


What sort of time frame are we talking here?

Well, in the work I saw, over a few years. Some kind of amalgam happens, apparently.

[MRC_Hans]

jj :

*snip*
(Speaker cables: There is a difference. Being an electronic engineer I say, copper gauge makes a difference. FOr best results, you'd want about twice the amount of copper than that of a normal mains cable. Cheapest way to get this is use two mains cables in parallel.)

Shorter runs, usually not necessary to go that high in copper.

Halve the run or double the copper area, same result. But there is such a thing as interior design considerations ;). My speakers sit where it looks good, and I don't want wires diagonally across walls.

Reminds me of another pet peeve: Audiophiles say length of speaker cables should be equal.. total BS.

(Signal cables: As long as you have a stable connection and no audible noise, you're fine.)

Almost but not quite true. Some people build the most remarkably icky input stages.

Whatz that do do with the cables??

(Mains cables: If that power lamp is lit, you're fine.)

I made a lifelong enemy of a couple of engineers by saying that. I still think it's right. A power supply IS SUPPOSED TO FILTER OUT NOISE. It's one of the power supply's FUNCTIONS.

Geeze, louise, guys. If it doesn't FIX THE (*&(&*( POWER SUPPLY.

Youp! And moreover, you simply cannot filter anything of importance in a cable.

(CD or DVD players: Nobody can make a living selling one that does not work excellently.)

You've never heard of Wadia, then?

Actually, no. ;)


(Amplifiers: You might want a certain wattage, but with modern technology, it is difficult to build a bad amplifier.)

Dead wrong, some people like distortions from some kinds of amps. It's their money, let them have it. It SHOULD be impossible if the target was good amplifiers, but actually it's possible and some high-enders, in particular, desire less accurate amps. There is an interesting psychoacoustic reason or three here...

I was of course referring to the needs of sensible people. :rolleyes:

(Speakers: The weak link in the chain. If you wanna spend money, spend them on speakers.)

Wrong!

The second-weakest link. They are where you should spend your money, but speakers also suffer from another problem:

They are called on to fake what we didn't record (soundfield complexity) in the first place.

So, the weakest link is the RECORDINGS.

Yeah, well, the weakest link you can do something about. ;) Except, of course, you can stop listening to records :rolleyes:

*snip*

Hans

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by jj


Well, in the work I saw, over a few years. Some kind of amalgam happens, apparently.

Also causes problems in computers. The RAM sockets are invariably tin plated, but for a while there many RAM manufacturers were bringing out the edge connectors gold plated. Much better to just leave them both tin plated.

[Occasional Chemist]

jj

Well, in the work I saw, over a few years. Some kind of amalgam happens, apparently.


AUP

Also causes problems in computers. The RAM sockets are invariably tin plated, but for a while there many RAM manufacturers were bringing out the edge connectors gold plated. Much better to just leave them both tin plated.


Thanks jj, AUP. I asked about the time scale because if it were short enough (less than six months for anything noticable to happen), I might have been able to get some of my (freshman) students to investigate it.

As it stands, they already chemically investigate natural food products, but for the electronically-inclined in the class, investigating these effects might have been intersting.

Alas, I don't keep the freshmen for several years. Well, at least not the GOOD ones ... :)

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist
I'd say that Iconoclast was knocking down a few strawmen here, but having read some audio boards in the past ... I'm not so sure. :D
Well, I read dozens of pages on an Audiophile message board jj posted a while back, and a couple of people were seriously recommending different power cables depending on the type of music being played. No, nobody mentioned breeds of pig, but everything else I said really was as written.

[Vitnir]

Originally posted by Thanz

1. The major difference I have seen when buying cable (either tv cable or AC (?) cables for hooking up DVD, vcr, etc.) is that some are gold tipped and somer are not. Is there a real difference between the two?


Gold plating should keep oxides away which tends to build up and cause bad connections. The extra cost should be low for that still.

[voidx]

I couldn't help but shake my head while at Future Shop(Potentially a Canadian only chain?) last night. They had rows and rows of Monster cable in every shape, colour and form. Then like under a shelf and a bunch of dust they had the normal run of the mill speaker cable. Out of sight out of mind dah? They even had Monster USB cables, wowee!

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by voidx
I couldn't help but shake my head while at Future Shop(Potentially a Canadian only chain?) last night.

Sounds sorta like the US's Best Buy chain. At Best Buy they do have "normal" cables, but they've been upped in price. I guess this is done so they compete better with the Monstar cables, being only a few bucks cheaper?

The local Circuit City (a similar chain) doesn't have ANY cables on the shelves that aren't Monster. Must be some sort of exclusive deal ...

They even had Monster USB cables, wowee!

I'll have to pick up the box and see what sort of claims they make about their USB cables. It should be amusing!

[Thanz]

Thanks for the input, everyone. It sounds like for my needs I'll go with the gold tipped cables (not much more expensive) but skip the optical cable.

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist

Sounds sorta like the US's Best Buy chain. At Best Buy they do have "normal" cables, but they've been upped in price. I guess this is done so they compete better with the Monstar cables, being only a few bucks cheaper?

It is very much like Best Buy. In fact, Best Buy now owns the Future Shop, but continues with both stores here in Canada.

[nick]

Originally posted by Ethanno
What does it do, make the 1's and 0's warmer? And how do 1's and 0's "jitter"?


You can have fun with computer (l)users by telling them to keep their printer cable straight. if they don't, some of the bits - specifically, the 1's - will get stuck in the corners. The 0's are generally OK because they have round edges :)

[voidx]

Originally posted by Thanz
Thanks for the input, everyone. It sounds like for my needs I'll go with the gold tipped cables (not much more expensive) but skip the optical cable.



It is very much like Best Buy. In fact, Best Buy now owns the Future Shop, but continues with both stores here in Canada.
Awww come on! First our Chapters and now our Future Shop. Them Americans dun own everyting! Next you'll tell me Canadian Tire is owned by Dubya.

[Thanz]

Originally posted by voidx

Awww come on! First our Chapters and now our Future Shop. Them Americans dun own everyting! Next you'll tell me Canadian Tire is owned by Dubya.
Hopefully this will ease your mind: Chapters is still Canadian. From chapters.indigo.ca:Indigo Books & Music Inc., (TSE: IDG) is a Canadian company committed to providing a service-driven, stress-free approach to satisfying the booklover.

Indigo was created in 1996 by and for booklovers, and merged with Chapters Inc. in August 2001 to become Canada’s largest books retail chain. Indigo Books & Music Inc. is committed to being your most complete and trusted resource for books, music, gifts and much more.

[voidx]

Originally posted by Thanz

Hopefully this will ease your mind: Chapters is still Canadian. From chapters.indigo.ca:
Well looky there. I was told Indigo was an American company. Leave me my books and my Canadian Tire money, that's all I ask.

[tracer]

Originally posted by voidx
Well looky there. I was told Indigo was an American company.
Maybe you were thinkin' of Indigo children (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28743).

[fsol]

From Newscientist

AT THE UK's annual hi-fi show, held recently in two hotels at London's Heathrow airport, several exhibitors were selling exotic cables to connect amplifiers to loudspeakers. The price of these cables was staggering. A 6-metre length of oxygen-free copper could cost as much as £30,000 - and no, those four zeros are not a misprint.

We cannot comment on whether these cables really do make music sound better, because none of the exhibitors offered a controlled blind test - switching the same music between cheap and expensive cables without the listener knowing which was which.

But now that the show is over, we can reveal a secret.

One of the most popular demonstrations at the show was staged by British company Quad, to mark 50 years of making its world-famous hi-fi equipment. Recording engineer Tony Faulkner demonstrated Quad's latest loudspeakers. He explained how he used them to monitor the sound while making a recording of Saint-Saëns's complete works for piano and orchestra, which recently won the coveted Record of the Year award from Gramophone magazine.

As hi-fi buffs enthused over the sound, we spotted that the speakers were connected by some orange wires that looked strangely familiar.

"Yes, they would look familiar if you have a garden", Faulkner told us. "Before the show opened we went over the road to the DIY superstore and bought one of those £20 extension leads that Black & Decker sells for electric hedge-cutters. They are made from good, thick copper wire, look nice and sound good to me. The show's been running for three days and no one in the audience has noticed".

http://www.newscientist.com/opinion/opfeedback.jsp;jsessionid=PJJDPCBCENJB?id=ns241899

[jj]

Originally posted by roger
If you really want to cause some of your neurons to melt, head on over to rec.audio.high-end and read any thread labelled DBT, cables, etc.

You may wish to note that mail from the moderators of rec.audio.high-end has appeared stating that no new discussions on Double-Blind-Testing will be accepted.

It appears the woowoo takeover there is complete.

[jj]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
jj :



Hans

Hans, cables that have more or less shunt capacitance can affect output stages. Shouldn't happen, but does.

Inputs with bad Pin1 problems can be affected by cabling, as can other inputs that are wide-bandwidth that shouldn't be, etc... Questions of shielding.

As to distortions in power amps, they can actually, while reducing power, make it SOUND as though the power and dymanic range are better.

Start with Fletcher's work on Loudness vs. intensity... If you want to know, we can start a new thread, and get refreshed on the Fourier math first. (sorry, it's a complex issue)

As to recordings, well, you havce a point. So do some of hte producers these days. Yours is in print, theirs is on the top of their heads.

Oh well.

[jj]

Originally posted by nick


You can have fun with computer (l)users by telling them to keep their printer cable straight. if they don't, some of the bits - specifically, the 1's - will get stuck in the corners. The 0's are generally OK because they have round edges :)

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?forum=general&n=209303

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?forum=general&n=110773

Funny you should say that. :D

(do check the dates on John's postings, though)

[teddygrahams]

From jj's second link:

We were wrong on one thing, though, square wire is not any worse for conducting round signals, it's simply better for conducting square waves.

At least they know when to admit they're wrong.

[UserGoogol]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2002/20021125l.gif

Indeed.

[ktesibios]

I've measured amplitude-vs.-frequency response variations of nearly 3 dB at the terminals of a speaker which was connected with too long a length of too-thin wire. When the wire run was made much shorter and somewhat heavier, the anomalies disappeared.

It seems that the series resistance of the too-long too-thin speaker wiring in that room was interacting with the impedance of the speakers (wiring resistance and speaker input impedance form a voltage divider; speaker impedances generally vary pretty widely with frequency- nasty little boxes of reactances they are) to form a completely unintended equalization network.

So, I can claim some genuinely objective reasons to say that keeping it short and thick does have an effect on the sound of a system.

Is Monster still claiming that low, mid and high frequencies propagate down normal cables at different velocities and providing nothing even vaguely resembling measurements in support?

I've always found that one a giggle, since equipment capable of measuring the group delay of long cables at frequencies far beyond the audio bandwidth can even be found on the surplus market, courtesy of dear old Ma Bell, who had to concern herself with such issues in transmitting TV programming (a minimum 30Hz-6MHz bandwidth) the length and breadth of the U.S.

JJ- when you speak of "Pin 1 problems", are you by any chance referring to the pernicious and evil practice of connecting pin 1 (and thus the cable shield) to the input stage's circuit common, instead of letting the shield be an extension of the equipment enclosure the way it should be?

It's only taken 29 years since the IEC adopted a standard for the wiring of 3-pin XLR-type connectors to see a majority of pro audio manufacturers start to comply with it (if anyone wants a demonstration of how industrial standards can make life easier on the poor grunts who work in the trenches- and the effect of the lack of them- just go up to someone in my line of work and say "hey, are you pin 2 or pin 3?". Don't forget to bring your earplugs.)

Perhaps in another thrity years they'll all have their grounding and shielding practices straightened out, and I won't have to play around with telescoping shields to make things work right.