# Copper vs silver cables



## dantztiludrop

I'm extremely happy with the rig I've put together in just a couple weeks & on the budget I have, but.....next step: cables.

 I know, only from reading here, the general difference in characteristics between copper & silver cables.

 As it stands, I have the stock digital optical that came with the Zero coming from AV710. I can live with that for awhile (at least, for another couple weeks
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





). But from the Zero to LD MKIII, I have RadioShack RCA interconnects, which calls for immediate action. My question is due to the bassier, somewhat darker Denons & the warmth of the tube amp (both of which I like). Is it obvious that I should be going for silver cables to complement these other characteristics & not going towards even more warmth from the copper? Given this set-up, will silver cables help add some airiness & a wider soundstage that I'd like a little more of? This question holds true for the eventual HP cable upgrade too.

 Then last ?: Can anyone recommend some good "bang for your buck" ICs? I know it's really low budget, but I really cannot afford > $80 at the moment. (Is that ridiculously too low to have any reasonable expectations?)


----------



## oshox

Moon Audio and Signal Cable both sell good quality interconnects in your price range.

 As per the optical cable: Don't believe the hype! Expensive digital signal cables are unnecessary, since digital signals are not nearly as susceptible to noise as analog. Especially when you're talking about an optical cable.


----------



## meat01

Pure silver audio video cables at TweekGeek.com


----------



## oicdn

FWIW, you're probably fine with your "rat shack" cables:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/bl...esults-190566/

 But if you're really set on some good ICs...contact Turbo. He makes some really nice IC's for reasonable prices. Also, there are some members in the DIY forum who have a thread "post your DIY IC" or something like that, you can probably PM one of them to make you one.

 The difference is so subtle, and sometimes unnoticeable, it's debatable if it's worth the upgrade...especially considering the cost of some cables.


----------



## infinitesymphony

For RCAs, I like Blue Jeans Cable LC-1s. They're made with solderless Canare RCAP connectors and custom low-capacitance Belden wire for a very fair price.

 The copper vs. silver debate tends to have a lot of confounding variables that make it seem like silver might naturally sound "brighter" than copper. But it's possible to construct one cable with silver and one with copper, and have them sound and measure completely identical. The wire material is just a small part of a cable's specifications and resultant sound quality; don't worry too much about it.


----------



## Spiritboxer

For silver try auralthrillsaudio.com. I purchased a 1m silver mini to rca from him for $29.99 and got a 7" mini to mini for $15. I was amazed at the quality price ratio and the mini to mini SQ was just short of another IC I have costing six times as much.


----------



## Uncle Erik

I'd recommend Blue Jeans cables. They're fairly priced and the construction is very good. I'm happy with mine and will buy more when I need them.

 Though if you're happy with the setup, why change it? People, supposedly, buy cables to change the sound. Have you considered that they might change it for the worse?

 Why not buy something fun, like a Grado SR-60? You'll absolutely hear the difference between them and your Denons.


----------



## Jaw007

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *oicdn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_FWIW, you're probably fine with your "rat shack" cables:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/bl...esults-190566/

 But if you're really set on some good ICs...contact Turbo. He makes some really nice IC's for reasonable prices. Also, there are some members in the DIY forum who have a thread "post your DIY IC" or something like that, you can probably PM one of them to make you one.

 The difference is so subtle, and sometimes unnoticeable, it's debatable if it's worth the upgrade...especially considering the cost of some cables._

 

X2 On contacting Turbo,he makes some fine IC'S.


----------



## dura

I got a kimber PBJ and a Kimber Silverstreak; almost identical cables but with the SS the signalcable is silver.
 They both have that typical Kimersound; wide open, extended, detailed.
 But the PBJ is a little rough and rolled off in the treble and undamped in the bass, giving it some warmth. The SS does not have these deviations; it is very clean with smooth but extended treble. But again, the similarities are IMO much more evident then the differences and it depends no your set too.


----------



## milkpowder

65 bucks






 Nice ay?


----------



## Namrac

SolozAudio has some nicely priced cables. depending on your length requirements, silver might fit into your budget, but if you need a reasonably long IC than the copper will fit was well.

 Copper:
Copper Series

 Silver:
Silver Series


----------



## dantztiludrop

Thanks all! I really appreciate all of your recommendations. I have checked into every single suggestion that's been presented....& I still don't know exactly what I'm going to purchase, but I definitely feel a lot better about not having to spend big money on cables (at least for the time being 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




).


----------



## bigshot

Consider regular Radio Shack cables. They're copper. The standard grade ones (not gold) are well made. And they sounded like high end cables to folks participating in a blind test right here on headfi.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Consider regular Radio Shack cables. They're copper. The standard grade ones (not gold) are well made. And they sounded like high end cables to folks participating in a blind test right here on headfi.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Everytime I put RS IC cables in my system the sound becomes harsh/ analytical .... but somehow lacking in resolution. Maybe they sound ok on a quick listen in a blind test. But, for longer (or shorter in this case) listening sessions to music ... they are a serious limiting factor compared to the IC's I normally use. Have you ever listened to these cables you are recommending?


----------



## bigshot

I'm afraid I don't know what "analytical" sounds like, and if by "harsh", you mean that they add distortion or accentuate the upper mids, that just plain isn't true. Yes, I use Radio Shack cables. They sound just like every other cable. The connectors on the Radio Shack gold cables suck, so I don't recommend them. But the standard cables are great.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## philodox

I can't believe how much people bring up that test. You'd think the skeptics would be able to realize that it was completely flawed. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I suppose it is ok for the test to be flawed as long as it says what you want it to say?


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm afraid I don't know what "analytical" sounds like, and if by "harsh", you mean that they add distortion or accentuate the upper mids, that just plain isn't true. Yes, I use Radio Shack cables. They sound just like every other cable. The connectors on the Radio Shack gold cables suck, so I don't recommend them. But the standard cables are great.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

No they dont sound like every other cable. They add an edginess to the sound that is unpleasant in my setup .... and very easy to hear. I hate the sound when these cables are in my system. I dont understand if you really cant hear very well, your system lacks resolution .... or you just have a closed your mind and refuse to listen and compare. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Anyway, I guess we wil have to agree to disagree. RS cables are inferior in my setup and they are sitting retired in a box.


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *philodox* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't believe how much people bring up that test. You'd think the skeptics would be able to realize that it was completely flawed. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I suppose it is ok for the test to be flawed as long as it says what you want it to say?_

 

Well put!


----------



## jpr703

I wouldn't worry too much about copper vs. silver. The construction of the cable will have more influence on it's sound than which of those materials it's made of.

 For a starting setup, I don't think you can go wrong with Bluejeans. I used their audio cables in my earlier rigs and still use their video cables for my tv equipment. Good folks and a good quality product.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you really cant hear very well, your system lacks resolution_

 

It always comes back to that. There must be something wrong with ME because I don't see any evidence that cables of reasonable quality sound different.

 If you can say "it must be your ears or your equipment", I can say "Emperor's New Clothes".

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *philodox* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't believe how much people bring up that test. You'd think the skeptics would be able to realize that it was completely flawed._

 

Blind test. Audiophiles right here in this forum were asked to identify the high end silver cable. They picked Radio Shack. They couldn't tell a silver from a copper, a high end from a low end. It all fell into the range of random choice. There ya go.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## philodox

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Blind test. Audiophiles right here in this forum were asked to identify the high end silver cable. They picked Radio Shack. They couldn't tell a silver from a copper, a high end from a low end. It all fell into the range of random choice. There ya go._

 

Nobody who took the test had previous experience with any of the cables. That is what makes the test flawed. If you can't see that, I don't know what to say.

 As an example.

 Individual #1
 Goes into the test with preconceptions that the Radio Shack cables will sound the worst, the silver cables will be bright and the copper cables will be warm.

 If he then says that the Radio Shack cables are the silver cables, all this means is that he perceived the Radio Shack cables to be bright.

 Individual #2
 Swears by Radio Shack cables and thinks they will sound the best and expects the silver and copper cables to sound identical.

 If he then says that the Copper Cables are the Radio Shack cables, all this means is that he liked them the best.

 Now, if they had gone into the test all being familiar with all of the cables involved, we may have gotten something meaningful. Or possibly, if they were just asked to list the cables based on their various sonic merits.

 Since this is not the case, all we have proved is that based on second hand knowledge it is difficult to tell audio components apart.

 I could have told you that without a blind test.

 See ya
 Jay


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It always comes back to that. There must be something wrong with ME because I don't see any evidence that cables of reasonable quality sound different.

 If you can say "it must be your ears or your equipment", I can say "Emperor's New Clothes".

 See ya
 Steve_

 

You dont seem to hear much of a difference with anything. 

 Like I said, , I guess we will have to agree to disagree. RS cables are inferior in my setup and they are sitting retired in a box.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You dont seem to hear much of a difference with anything._

 

That's not true. There are lots of things that truly do make a difference. The quality of recording, mixing and mastering. Speakers. Room acoustics. Frequency response... all of these make huge differences. The things that don't make a difference are high bitrates, fancy cables or jitter.

 The important thing about achieving optimal sound quality is knowing what is important and what isn't. That's the sense of proportion lacking in people who listen to numbers on a sheet of paper, or listen to advertising sales pitch instead of listening with their ears and brains.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## tjumper78

how about silver coated copper wires? do we get something in between silver sound and copper sound?


----------



## SoundGoon

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tjumper78* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_how about silver coated copper wires? do we get something in between silver sound and copper sound?
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

In theory yes? I have used them, and they do sound _brighther that_/a bit more detailed-sounding than plain copper wires, but I do not know if they are bright in general really. They seem to be a happy medium of sorts if you are looking for more detail but still the "warmth" of copper


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's not true. There are lots of things that truly do make a difference. The quality of recording, mixing and mastering. Speakers. Room acoustics. Frequency response... all of these make huge differences. The things that don't make a difference are high bitrates, fancy cables or jitter.

 The important thing about achieving optimal sound quality is knowing what is important and what isn't. That's the sense of proportion lacking in people who listen to numbers on a sheet of paper, or listen to advertising sales pitch instead of listening with their ears and brains.

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 That seems to be the issue though .... do you really listen in an unbiased manner and how much have you actually compared various cable designs or cd players? We dont have any control over any aspect of the recording quality, and given this is a headphone site, how many are worried about speakers and room acoustics with headphones?

 Just curious .... what power cables do you think I use? What IC's do you think I use? What digital cable do I use for my dacs? These are serious question so lets avoid snide remarks or avasive answers .... please just answer the questions. I know there are a lot of possibilities but give it a shot.


----------



## rodentmacbeastie

Personally, I think at test where the listener does not know a damn thing about anything is best Philadox. This way there should be no preconceived ideas or conclusions. My opinion with copper and silver and even gold or construction techniques is irrelevant as long as they are built to last. In the end, the best way is to buy a few pairs, listen to them and sell the others you don't like. Besides, I am a firm believer that the information is always present regardless of the cable, the difference in sound in just your perception. Your perception of that information CAN make cables sound different though. I am not talking about placebo at all either. I truly believe that the material and construction method used cannot alter the sound, just your perception of it! My gold plated silver/copper/gold alloy cables sound best to me but I am not suggesting that there is more or less info, bass weight, treble smoothness, or midrange purity, just that my body and mind work better alongside these materials. 

 When I am happy and healthy, silver and copper sound very similar to me. At a little stress, lack of sleep(my problem) and the silver is very tiring and often bright in my system. The alloy I am using tends to sound the same all of the time. This is why EE will often argue that there is no way the metal used can mechanically alter the sound, because they don't(IMHO)! It happens to sound different on a level that occurs in your physiology. The whole metaphysical thing! Nobel prize winning scientists(not EE's) believe in the metaphysical attributes of conductors so I feel OK about my ideas. Not to say that EE's ideas are not sound, just that they generally regurgitate theory accepted as fact and taught to them, not create theory to further science. However, if my and some of the top research minds' theories do not please you and you want a empirical approach, carbon is by far a better conductor over any of the previously mentioned.

 Here are the resistivity values for a few [ρ (nΩ·m)]
 -silicon dioxide(1300 °C) 0.004
 -carbon, amorphous 0.35
 -germanium 0.46
 -carbon, diamond 2.7
 -silver 15.9
 -copper 17.1
 -gold 22.1
 -tungsten 52.8
 -zinc 59
 -brass 64
 -nickel 69.3
 -lithium 92.8
 -iron 96.1
 -platinum 105
 -palladium 105.4
 -tin (0 °C) 115
 -solder 150

 So, based on resistive numbers alone(I hate to do that), silver betters copper only by a little and it all becomes mute when you see the resistance in the solder used to hold them together. Keep in mind that non-metal semi-conductors must be doped to achieve good results. Find a way to join wires and not use solder and you will find that could mean more of an improvement. Also, this may show why high carbon cables are the best for performance but are not practical due to their very fragile and rigid nature. If you want the best bar none, heat up your new silicon dioxide cables to 1300 degrees since it is very resistive at room temp. I am thinking that the best results for getting the best from you circuit is to point to point wire it and then gold plate everything(especially the solder). Why gold plate and not silver? CORROSION IS VERY BAD FOR CONDUCTIVITY! I could be wrong but the information I read was from three dudes who won the Nobel science prize for work in semiconductors. However, I thought the resistivity and conductivity are similar but not the same... Maybe an EE can verify this before I preach this as the gospel according to Rodent.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_We dont have any control over any aspect of the recording quality, and given this is a headphone site, how many are worried about speakers and room acoustics with headphones?_

 

You may not have control of sloppy recording quality, but if you can recognize it when you hear it, you can avoid wasting money buying expensive wires or equipment to try to improve what can't be fixed.

 As for speakers vs. headphones... The same rule of thumb holds true for headphones as for speakers... it's best to spend the bulk of your budget on the transducers, not the electronics. But that said, headphones are never going to give you as good of an experience as really good speakers. Cans are fine for casual listening or times or places when you just can't use speakers. But speakers are the only way to experience music the way it's intended to be heard. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just curious .... what power cables do you think I use? What IC's do you think I use?_

 

To be honest, I really don't care. I'm sharing what I know for the benefit of newbies who need direction as to where they should best focus their attention. I'm trying to help them understand the basic concepts, so they can get a great sounding system without a lot of trial and error. You can feel free to do whatever you please. I was just replying to your claim that I don't think anything makes a difference. That clearly isn't true.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You may not have control of sloppy recording quality, but if you can recognize it when you hear it, you can avoid wasting money buying expensive wires or equipment to try to improve what can't be fixed.

 As for speakers vs. headphones... The same rule of thumb holds true for headphones as for speakers... it's best to spend the bulk of your budget on the transducers, not the electronics. But that said, headphones are never going to give you as good of an experience as really good speakers. Cans are fine for casual listening or times or places when you just can't use speakers. But speakers are the only way to experience music the way it's intended to be heard. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.



 To be honest, I really don't care. I'm sharing what I know for the benefit of newbies who need direction as to where they should best focus their attention. I'm trying to help them understand the basic concepts, so they can get a great sounding system without a lot of trial and error. You can feel free to do whatever you please. I was just replying to your claim that I don't think anything makes a difference. That clearly isn't true.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that on a HEADPHONE site...you are trying to give newbies direction...

 "If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers"


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You may not have control of sloppy recording quality, but if you can recognize it when you hear it, you can avoid wasting money buying expensive wires or equipment to try to improve what can't be fixed.

 As for speakers vs. headphones... The same rule of thumb holds true for headphones as for speakers... it's best to spend the bulk of your budget on the transducers, not the electronics. But that said, headphones are never going to give you as good of an experience as really good speakers. Cans are fine for casual listening or times or places when you just can't use speakers. But speakers are the only way to experience music the way it's intended to be heard. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

So you can recognize a bad recording when you hear it but you cant recognize a poor sounding or good sounding cable match?

 Speakers are more realistic IMO as well, but again, this is a headphone site so many people simply dont care about your speaker/ room acoustics advice. However, you CAN get great sound with headphones that is equally satisfying. Listen to a cd player with a high quality discrete output stage that matches the quality of the digital section, connected to a good tube amp and your favorite headphone ....


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you can recognize a bad recording when you hear it but you cant recognize a poor sounding or good sounding cable match?_

 

I've supervised recording and mixing for CD and TV release. I can recognize sloppy engineering when I hear it. Cables should be neutral. If they color the sound, they are defective.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Speakers are more realistic IMO as well, but again, this is a headphone site so many people simply dont care about your speaker/ room acoustics advice._

 

Featured Full Reviews of Cables, Power, Tweaks, *Speakers*, Accessories

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rodentmacbeastie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Personally, I think a test where the listener does not know a damn thing about anything is best, Philodox. This way there should be no preconceived ideas or conclusions._

 

Theoretically, yes. But the test in question was based on preconceived ideas, namely the three types of cables to which the perceived characteristic had to be attributed, although none of the participants had heard them before -- a real nonsense. 

  Quote:


 _...I am a firm believer that the information is always present regardless of the cable, the difference in sound in just your perception. Your perception of that information CAN make cables sound different though. I am not talking about placebo at all either. I truly believe that the material and construction method used cannot alter the sound, just your perception of it! My gold plated silver/copper/gold alloy cables sound best to me but I am not suggesting that there is more or less info, bass weight, treble smoothness, or midrange purity, just that my body and mind work better alongside these materials. 

 When I am happy and healthy, silver and copper sound very similar to me. At a little stress, lack of sleep (my problem) and the silver is very tiring and often bright in my system. The alloy I am using tends to sound the same all of the time. This is why EE will often argue that there is no way the metal used can mechanically alter the sound, because they don't (IMHO)! It happens to sound different on a level that occurs in your physiology. The whole metaphysical thing! Nobel prize winning scientists (not EE's) believe in the metaphysical attributes of conductors so I feel OK about my ideas. Not to say that EE's ideas are not sound, just that they generally regurgitate theory accepted as fact and taught to them, not create theory to further science._ 
 

Interesting thoughts -- which I wouldn't have dared to mention in a technics-oriented forum like this. Personally I think that openness towards the possiblity of sonic differences is the key, and I also leave the possibility open that there's in fact no physical process in play, but a metaphysical one. Still I rather bet on the physical scenario nonetheless.

  Quote:


 _However, if my and some of the top research minds' theories do not please you and you want a empirical approach, carbon is by far a better conductor over any of the previously mentioned..._ 
 

Conductivity per se is no quality criterion with audio signal transmission. Input impedances of the concerned amps are in the thousands of ohms, so the resistance of interconnect cables has absolutely no meaning, as long as its clearly below 10 ohm (which it is in any known case) -- otherwise some hum may occur because of the loose ground connection (that's the case with my homegrown carbon-fibre cables). Speaker cables better be low impedance, though, otherwise a low damping factor may lead to a boomy bass. Apart from that, the sound will barely suffer, though, also lower conductivity can be compensated by wire gauge. 

 However, I have experimented a lot with different conductor materials and cables geometries, and the presence of silver definitely shows a certain impact to my ears, which largely corresponds to what's been mentioned.
.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *883dave* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Am I the only one who finds it ironic that on a HEADPHONE site...you are trying to give newbies direction... "If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers"_

 

Recording engineers don't use headphones. There's a reason for that. The only time headphones are used in a studio, it's in the booth to isolate playback from being picked up by the mike. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## JaZZ

...Featured Full *Reviews* of Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Recording engineers don't use headphones. There's a reason for that. The only time headphones are used in a studio, it's in the booth to isolate playback from being picked up by the mike. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers._

 

I've been into speakers probably more than anybody else on this forum -- and now I enjoy my headphones immensely. I'd clearly prefer speakers for monitoring recordings, though (one flop using headphones is enough).
.


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_


 To be honest, I really don't care. I'm sharing what I know for the benefit of newbies who need direction as to where they should best focus their attention. I'm trying to help them understand the basic concepts, so they can get a great sounding system without a lot of trial and error. You can feel free to do whatever you please. I was just replying to your claim that I don't think anything makes a difference. That clearly isn't true.

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 What .... you cant answer a few simple questions? What are you afraid of Steve?

 As for your claim you are sharing to benefit newbies .... lots of people are doing the same. But, clearly some of us do not have the same opinions as you. Cable performance may not have any concrete price/ performance relationship. But, cables do sound different and depending on what they are connected to they can make anything from no difference to a very noticeable difference. I believe if you dont do a little cable experimentation you will never truly get the most out of your system. I have been a music lover all my life, DIYer and audio experimenter for for nearly 40 years and in my experience there is no doubt there are cable differences from my audio experiences.

 To answer the questions .... I use $6 volex 17604 power cords on all my equipment. Why? I tried some different high end .... or whatever you call them power cords. Again, they sound different but I didnt get any performance advantages over cheap cords. The cheap volex cords actually sound noticeably better to me on my tube amps and I am thrilled they do. The "high end" power cords are long gone.

 I have used every type of IC from the stock IC that came with a unit to some fairly expensive name brand stuff like MIT. IC's make a definite difference to me which makes sense since they ARE the signal path. Cheap stock IC's, IC's from Radio Shack etc... have never offered the musical satisfaction I demand. Name brand IC's are hit and miss but some do synergize very well in my setups. 

 But, I dont like to pay the high price tag for the ones that do synergize. So to get around this I go through DIYers and get a better quality IC at a substantially lower price. Unfortunately, to get the best match you still have to experiement. A cable that is awesome in one setup will not sound so perfect in another. 

 Much of the cable resistance appears to be this sticking point .... the expectation a cable will always sound superior in every situation. Price, wire gauge, wire type etc... have no bearing on what will work best in any given system or situation; you have to hook them up and listen. I only consider an IC cable unfit if the cable will not offer a minimum good sound quality level with at least one setup. What is this minimum sound quality level? I dont know .... but I do know when I hear it. Just like I know when I hear a good recording vs a bad one. 

 I have some pure copper, gold alloy and silver / gold alloy hybrid IC's. Each one has a system they excell in. But, none are the answer for every setup.

 Digital cables, again I have experimented quite a bit here and there are differences in presentation and resolution that matter. I dont think digital cables matter as much these days with the newer input receivers and better digital clocks vs pre 2000 digital. But, the inexpensive BJ's digital and the like just have not worked for me, even though on paper, the BJ cable seems to be a perfect solution. I have tried more expensive cables but I preferred a cable that cost $50. 

 My DIY cable maker turned into Enigma Audio and I asked for the cheapest cable he made and got this $50 wonder. The difference is to the level, for example, I dont care for the OMZ dac with the BJ cable vs I am very pleased with the OMZ dac with the Enigma Audio cable.

 Saying expensive cables are overpriced, which I agree with in most cases, is much different than saying all cables sound the same. Saying an expensive cable will provide a better sound quality in every case, which I dont agree with, is much different than saying all cables sound the same. Saying all cables, be the they copper, silver or an alloy, regardless of the design and manufacturer all sound the same is foolish .... my eight year old can tell there is a difference. Hence, my question if you really do listen with an open mind. 

 I am in no way tied to price as an indication of quality. I am in no way convinced any particular cable materials or metals will always offer superior sound. But, throwing in just any cable, particularly interconnects, with high resolution componenets can be asking for disappointment. If you put in any cable in your system and the sound is good enough for you .... congratulations. I get lucky on the first try sometimes too. But, sometmes that is not the case and I have to try a few different cables to get the sound to sound right.

 So, I have some advice for newbies myself. Dont accept theory, hype and spec sheets .... listen and have an open mind. Listening will tell you all you need to know. If a componenet or cable makes a difference to YOU that is what matters. 

 Cheers, see ya


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Recording engineers don't use headphones. There's a reason for that. The only time headphones are used in a studio, it's in the booth to isolate playback from being picked up by the mike. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 How did your answer address this question? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Originally Posted by 883dave 
 Am I the only one who finds it ironic that on a HEADPHONE site...you are trying to give newbies direction... "If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers" 

 Let me interpret that for you Steve .... speakers are irrelevant if we are using headphones. This is a headphone site. We are using headphones for a reason. We may even want speakers but due to some factor can not use them. In my case, that would be because the speakers would interfere with homework, my wifes need for quiet after a long day at work, TV time .... and later sleep. I love speakers but I in no way feel cheated listening to my headphones .... and sometimes the intimacy and isolation is even preferable.


----------



## philodox

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rodentmacbeastie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Personally, I think at test where the listener does not know a damn thing about anything is best Philodox._

 

You can't be asked to guess which is which if you have no frame of reference but heresay. It is like someone describing his daughter to you then lining up a bunch of people and asking that you pick Molly out of the lineup. Actually it is even more vague than that, but you get the idea. Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Theoretically, yes. But the test in question was based on preconceived ideas, namely the three types of cables to which the perceived characteristic had to be attributed, although none of the participants had heard them before -- a real nonsense._

 

Exactly, and thanks for the spelling correction.


----------



## brainsalad

I currently own solid silver interconnects and I have owned several pairs of very expensive solid silver (not plated) interconnects in the past.

 What influence on the flow of electrons does silver have that copper doesn't? beside a slightly lower resistance (5.505 %
 per foot) ?

 In what way does that influence affect audio reproduction?


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I've supervised recording and mixing for CD and TV release. I can recognize sloppy engineering when I hear it. Cables should be neutral. If they color the sound, they are defective.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Which does not remotely address my question.

 Originally Posted by sacd lover 
 So you can recognize a bad recording when you hear it but you cant recognize a poor sounding or good sounding cable match?

 Let me help you out Steve. 

 So you can recognize a bad recording when you hear it .... think globally here, meaning we, not just you (everything is not just about Steve) have the ability to identify good vs bad recordings because we can identify when something sounds wrong. 

 but you cant recognize a poor sounding or good sounding cable match? .... meaning we can recognize good vs poor recording quality but you claim we cant tell when a cable is well matched or poorly matched to our stereo systems because all cables sound the same.

 Now you state cables should be neutral and if they color the sound they are defective. What cables are neutral and what cables are colored and thus defective? Could you give me some examples? Because I am not sure I have never heard a cable that is completely neutral and I have no idea what cables are defective.


----------



## stevenkelby

Apparently no cables color the sound, and all cables are neutral, because they all sound the same.


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Recording engineers don't use headphones. There's a reason for that. The only time headphones are used in a studio, it's in the booth to isolate playback from being picked up by the mike. If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers.

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 What I find strange is that many times you have made yourself the champion of the Newbies...don't waste your money on cables, all CD players and amps sound the same...spend your money on good recordings...
 Then you say "Oh and if you are SERIOUS about listening to music you have to get Speakers". I am willing to bet that most if not all the people on this site are SERIOUS about listening to music.

 Even though this is a SPEAKER sub forum the reason people and newbies are here is all in the name...HEAD-FI.

 If you are truly interested in helping newbies, give them information that is not wholly biased to your own beliefs.

 Steve do you actually listen to Headphones at your home? If so what make and model


----------



## OverlordXenu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *883dave* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What I find strange is that many times you have made yourself the champion of the Newbies...don't waste your money on cables, all CD players and amps sound the same...spend your money on good recordings...
 Then you say "Oh and if you are SERIOUS about listening to music you have to get Speakers". I am willing to bet that most if not all the people on this site are SERIOUS about listening to music.

 Even though this is a SPEAKER sub forum the reason people and newbies are here is all in the name...HEAD-FI.

 If you are truly interested in helping newbies, give them information that is not wholly biased to your own beliefs.

 Steve do you actually listen to Headphones at your home? If so what make and model_

 

I think you need to calm down and take a deep breath, you're coming across a bit harsh.


----------



## 883dave

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *OverlordXenu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you need to calm down and take a deep breath, you're coming across a bit harsh._

 

Why do you feel the need to answer for someone else?


----------



## MuseMan

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *883dave* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why do you feel the need to answer for someone else?_

 

Do not stress, those two are joined at the hip. Their goal? - to educate this oblivious community about their universal truths. To re-phrase - anti cable fundamentalists.

 It would not surprise me if they go door knocking on a Saturday morning, clipboard in hand - preaching their views to those not interested.


----------



## OverlordXenu

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *883dave* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why do you feel the need to answer for someone else?_

 

I will say this: Speakers do give you the most realistic experience. I do not use them, however. Why? Money, a good speaker setup costs a lot more than a good headphone setup. Not to mention I live with others and speakers would be too disturbing for them, and I can't go tearing apart my living space to get good acoustics.

 And, you do need to calm down. Your post is bordering on a personal attack.


----------



## bigshot

I'm happy to discuss audio issues if people can keep their tempers and not resort to semantic argumentativeness. Ask clear questions, and I will give clear responses.

 Speakers are always used by recording engineers to monitor, mix and master. Headphones are only used when isolation is required. I only use headphones when I'm doing noise reduction work on old recordings. I have Sennheiser HD-590s, which I find are reasonably flat in their response and are close enough to sounding like speakers that I can ballpark stuff as a first pass on them. But speakers are the baseline and that's where most of my work is done.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How did your answer address this question? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Originally Posted by 883dave 
 Am I the only one who finds it ironic that on a HEADPHONE site...you are trying to give newbies direction... "If you're really serious about great sound, you need speakers"_

 

I quoted the title of this forum. Actually, I copied the wrong line. Here is the correct title of this forum...

 Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories

 This is a forum where speakers are discussed.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Apparently no cables color the sound, and all cables are neutral, because they all sound the same._

 

If they are doing their job correctly, that is absolutely correct. Coloration is added in tone controls or equalization. Everything else should be flat and clean.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## Ted Goldie

I bought a cable from Ultimate Cables called the Silver C4 RCA and it is a great cable. They are not really expensive about $45 and can be found on his website and on ebay. This cable has a copper core and is coated with silver until it is the same amount of material as the copper. I feel it is the best of both worlds. I would not pass judgement on this cable until after at least 30 hours of burn-in. At first it sounded kind of harsh but really warmed up after I burned it in properly. Now the sound has a better balance between the highs and the lows. I know that many people feel that cables do not make a difference, but I am not one of them. That being said I do not feel you have to spend much more than $50 to get a good cable.


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I quoted the title of this forum. Actually, I copied the wrong line. Here is the correct title of this forum...

 Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories

 This is a forum where speakers are discussed.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Once again Steve .... here is the actual question .... not the one you quoted above.

 Originally Posted by bigshot 
 I've supervised recording and mixing for CD and TV release. I can recognize sloppy engineering when I hear it.

 Originally Posted by sacd lover 
 So you can recognize a bad recording when you hear it but you cant recognize a poor sounding or good sounding cable match? 

 Since all you do is talk around the question .... I will answer .... sure you can. Why .... because cables do sound different.

 Secondly, I had posted another question you seem to have missed .....

 Originally Posted by bigshot 
 Cables should be neutral. If they color the sound, they are defective.

 You state cables should be neutral and if they color the sound they are defective. What cables are neutral and what cables are colored and thus defective? Could you give me some examples?


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 You state cables should be neutral and if they color the sound they are defective. What cables are neutral and what cables are colored and thus defective?_

 

None of them, they all sound the same! Sorry to answer for him but his position is obvious (and yes, flawed, in my opinion and experience).


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_because cables do sound different._

 

Not if they are working properly, they don't. Cables should be neutral. If they color the sound, they are defective.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You state cables should be neutral and if they color the sound they are defective. What cables are neutral and what cables are colored and thus defective? Could you give me some examples?_

 

Radio Shack cables are neutral. I have read that a particular Monster Cable was designed to give a slight high end rolloff, presumably to sound more "analog" to people who don't know the difference between flat and colored. I imagine that there are other examples, but I am only interested in neutral cables that don't have a "sound".

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_None of them, they all sound the same! Sorry to answer for him but his position is obvious (and yes, flawed, in my opinion and experience)._

 

You should spend more time backing up the comment in the parenthesis, and less time speaking for me. I am perfectly able to answer for myself, thank you.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## stevenkelby

So that monster cable sounded different to other cables? Or do all cables sound the same? Have you actually heard the difference between that monster cable and any other cable? Or any cable and any other cable?


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not if they are working properly, they don't. Cables should be neutral. If they color the sound, they are defective.



 Radio Shack cables are neutral. I have read that a particular Monster Cable was designed to give a slight high end rolloff, presumably to sound more "analog" to people who don't know the difference between flat and colored. I imagine that there are other examples, but I am only interested in neutral cables that don't have a "sound".

 See ya
 Steve_

 


 First, all the cables I use pass the full spectrum signal so they are obviously not defective. However, the cables do sound different. 

 So you have READ the Monsters are different 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ... as usual, no first hand experience, only conjecture.

 I am interested in getting the most life like sound. So, I listen to see what fits that criteria. Imagine that, actual experience with what I am talking about .... instead of parroting what someone else said.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_First, all the cables I use pass the full spectrum signal so they are obviously not defective. However, the cables do sound different._

 

Then only one could possibly neutral--passing the input directly to the output--or they are all contributing coloration so some degree. To a lot of us, colored sound = defective sound.

 If the cables sound different, what is actually different in the output versus the input--how do they change the waveform? Are the cables not flat in amplitude response vs. frequency, do some create phase shift in certain frequency regimes, or what?

 The job of any decent cable should be to pass the signal in a completely unaltered state. That's all. 

 If extremely small changes in cable resistance or other measurable parameters make a significant impact in the final sound--that could very well mean the input and/or output stages of the gear aren't well-designed, could it not?


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So that monster cable sounded different to other cables?_

 

According to the article I read, yes. It also measured different in response. It was deliberately designed to not pass along the signal cleanly. It is possible to create a cable that sounds different. That isn't a good thing though.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So you have READ the Monsters are different 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ... as usual, no first hand experience, only conjecture._

 

No. Not conjecture. I believe it was an article in Stereo Review years ago.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am interested in getting the most life like sound._

 

The best way to achieve that is through speakers that have been tuned to provide a flat response.

 If you want me to continue to be polite, you can begin being polite yourself. I'm ignoring your snide comments right now, but I won't forever.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Then only one could possibly neutral--passing the input directly to the output--or they are all contributing coloration so some degree. To a lot of us, colored sound = defective sound._

 

I prefer flat response myself, and that's going to be the most lifelike and natural way to listen to music, but I don't see anything wrong with colored sound if someone wants to listen that way. However, coloring your system through random combinations of colored equipment is a terribly inefficient way to get the sound you want. It's best to start with stone flat equipment equalized for an acoustically balanced environment. That's the baseline where you start. Then you can add coloration with tone controls or EQ adjustments to your heart's content.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_According to the article I read, yes. It also measured different in response. It was deliberately designed to not pass along the signal cleanly. It is possible to create a cable that sounds different. That isn't a good thing though.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

You admit if it is possible to create a cable that sounds different. So, cables can and do sound differently. Thank you!


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You admit if it is possible to create a cable that sounds different. So, cables can and do sound differently. Thank you!_

 

It's certainly possible to build a defective cable that sounds bad compared to a properly constructed, non-defective cable.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You admit if it is possible to create a cable that sounds different. So, cables can and do sound differently. Thank you!_

 

Yes. Defective cables sound different. Properly constructed cables all sound the same.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## spacemanspliff

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes. Defective cables sound different. Properly constructed cables all sound the same.

 See ya
 Steve_

 

Sigh. 

 Steve, you could have just said altered cables sound different. Defective implies that they did something wrong unintentionally. They altered them on purpose. I agree that there is no difference b/w standard copper/silver/gold cables terminated properly though. Each does have a flavor due to the different metals. However, gold to gold or silver to silver SHOULD sound exactly the same right?


----------



## bigshot

Unshielded cables receiving RF interference sound different. Extremely long runs of cables sound different. Poorly manufactured cables that don't make a solid connection sound different. Cables that have been designed to deliberately hobble specific frequencies sound different.

 Well designed and constructed silver cables and well designed and constructed copper cables sound exactly the same. Both metals are able to conduct electricity well enough to do the job. If you have a silver cable that sounds different from a copper cable, one or the other of them is defective.

 I am saying the same thing over and over as clearly as I can. If you're perceiving me changing my point of view, you aren't understanding what I am trying to say. You can reword the question in a million different ways to try to get me to say that black is white, but that isn't what I'm saying.

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## spacemanspliff

Nope. I agree with you Steve. Was just trying to avoid the old argument.

 Good point though. That is what I was trying to say.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Unshielded cables receiving RF interference sound different. Extremely long runs of cables sound different. Poorly manufactured cables that don't make a solid connection sound different. Cables that have been designed to deliberately hobble specific frequencies sound different.

 Well designed and constructed silver cables and well designed and constructed copper cables sound exactly the same. Both metals are able to conduct electricity well enough to do the job. If you have a silver cable that sounds different from a copper cable, one or the other of them is defective._

 

Shielding of (IC) cables in a headphone setup -- with a gain factor around 0.25 -- is dispensable. Renouncing it (resulting in lower capacitance) may even provide better sound, depending on system synergy. 

 The cables in my collection -- most of them homemade -- sound different from each other, although most of them aren't defective (the latter I don't use anymore). Also, the conductor material does make a difference, too, to my ears. So generalizing comments such as yours aren't adequate -- you should have stated that you couldn't hear a difference among the cables you've auditioned. 
.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *spacemanspliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nope. I agree with you Steve._

 

Sorry for the confusion! I see what you were saying now.

 Thanks
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you should have stated that you couldn't hear a difference among the cables you've auditioned._

 

OK. In the hundreds of thousands of cables I have auditioned in the various studios I have worked with, I have never detected a difference between one non-defective cable and another. I've asked several of the engineers and fire crew members about it as well, and they had never auditioned a properly constructed cable that didn't sound exactly the same as every other one either.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The cables in my collection -- most of them homemade -- sound different from each other, although most of them aren't defective_

 

Quote of the day!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bigshot* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_OK. In the hundreds of thousands of cables I have auditioned in the various studios I have worked with, I have never detected a difference between one non-defective cable and another._

 

Working with cables and seriously comparing them with an open mind are different things.
.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Working with cables and seriously comparing them with an open mind are different things.
._

 

Huh? That doesn't make sense. If cable construction or materials made a huge difference, that would be widely known within the pro audio world.

 Those guys listen to live music more than almost any hobbyists, and it seems to me that too many here don't want to accept that fact.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Huh? That doesn't make sense. If cable construction or materials made a huge difference, that would be widely known within the pro audio world.

 Those guys listen to live music more than almost any hobbyists, and it seems to me that too many here don't want to accept that fact._

 

They may listen a lot to live music, but they don't occupy themselves with dedicated cable tests. That's where audiophiles have a clear advantage. 
.


----------



## sejarzo

I think you're wrong in that regard.....think about classical recording engineers.

 So you don't think that with their somewhat long runs from mics to mic pres, and likely more long runs from the mic pre to their remote recording gear, that they would take the time to be certain that they were using the best possible cable?

 If the signal is screwed up at that point, it's screwed up forever.......and they certainly don't want that.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If the signal is screwed up at that point, it's screwed up forever.......and they certainly don't want that._

 

But they also «know» that it doesn't screw up the signal, so they don't have to care and can renounce extensive and expensive evaluation tests.
.


----------



## sejarzo

So, you think that classical recording engineers just use whatever is handy, and have never compared cables?


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, you think that classical recording engineers just use whatever is handy, and have never compared cables?_

 

I don't really know -- but why should they? If science tells them they don't have to care, they probably won't. If at all, certainly not with the meticulousness and fanatism of some audiophiles.

 Every profession has its specializations: Musicians are specialized in playing music, recording engineers are specialized in recording gear, measuring data and a flat frequency response, also monitoring of the recording, audiophiles are specialized in listening to recorded music, sound and their systems.
.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Why every single thread started here gets hijacked by the same non-believers? That's just so irritating, is there any way to filter some users out?


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Every profession has its specializations: Musicians are specialized in playing music, recording engineers are specialized in recording gear, measuring data and a flat frequency response, also monitoring of the recording, audiophiles are specialized in listening to recorded music, sound and their systems.
._

 

If you are claiming that recording engineers are NOT "specialized in listening to recorded music, sound, and their systems"......it's the most freakin' ridiculous claim I've ever read.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you are claiming that recording engineers are NOT "specialized in listening to recorded music, sound, and their systems"......it's the most freakin' ridiculous claim I've ever read._

 

Really? And what about audiophile music lovers which you seem to belittle?
.


----------



## Kees

I just wonder, who in a recording studio, decides what equipment is used?
 Who decides what cables are actually present and installed to do a recording?
 Do recording engineers do that? Or do they just work with what the studio has available / installed?
 I think, most studios probaly basically use the same cable...
 I also think economic factors in choosing which cable to use are rather important...


----------



## brainsalad

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just wonder, who in a recording studio, decides what equipment is used?
 Who decides what cables are actually present and installed to do a recording?
 Do recording engineers do that? Or do they just work with what the studio has available / installed?
 I think, most studios probaly basically use the same cable...
 I also think economic factors in choosing which cable to use are rather important..._

 

VERY, VERY good points. Who decides the microphone? have you ever listened to the differences microphones make? It makes all this squabbling over silver vs copper insignificant.

 I posted this on another circular thread:

  Quote:


 This stuff ends up going in circles, the people blessed with "golden ears" will continue to defend the cable difference. The rest of the poor "unblessed" people, like me, will never be convinced because I/we were not blessed with the "golden ears"

 The golden eared people will continue to say that the hearing differences can not be measured, even though EVERYTHING to do with audio and computer design is measured, calculated, and uses the scientific method. Golden eared people have sensory inputs that far exceed the finest measuring equipment when it comes to audio.

 Funny, there are no "golden eyed" people that can see better than video test equipment.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Really? And what about audiophile music lovers which you seem to belittle?
._

 

I didn't belittle anyone.....I think you painted all recording engineers with a ludicrously wide brush, in fact.

 Classical recordings are very rarely done in studios with "whatever is there"--they are done in real performance spaces, and not with any pre-installed gear. The recording engineer works with what he has selected for the project, down to the last detail. I know one in particular that has top-notch recording gear, a mastering studio full of audiophile-grade DAC's, amps, and speakers, plus is an accomplished violin and horn player and teacher.

 His gear is all selected based on what provides the most natural and accurate sound possible.....and he uses standard Mogami raw cable, usually terminated in standard Neutrik XLR's.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I didn't belittle anyone.....I think you painted all recording engineers with a ludicrously wide brush, in fact.

 Classical recordings are very rarely done in studios with "whatever is there"--they are done in real performance spaces, and not with any pre-installed gear. The recording engineer works with what he has selected for the project, down to the last detail. I know one in particular that has top-notch recording gear, a mastering studio full of audiophile-grade DAC's, amps, and speakers, plus is an accomplished violin and horn player and teacher.

 His gear is all selected based on what provides the most natural and accurate sound possible.....and he uses standard Mogami raw cable, usually terminated in standard Neutrik XLR's._

 

That's his own decision. I don't think any non-audiophile cable limits sound quality in a way that an audiophile setup can't show its potential. But he arbitrarily sacrifices the last 3.3%...

 I may have painted recording engineers with a somewhat large brush, but in turn you seem to be afflicted with a cliché: that audio pros necessarily have a better hearing than audiophile music consumers -- and a more open mind due to their technical background. Whereas I say: the latter point may even be a handicap.
.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why every single thread started here gets hijacked by the same non-believers? That's just so irritating, is there any way to filter some users out?_

 

Why did a thread started by a reasonable skeptic/non-believer about digital cables get hijacked by a believer?

 As far as I can tell, this forum is not limited to threads started by believers.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's his own decision. I don't think any non-audiophile cable limits sound quality in a way that an audiophile setup can't show its potential. But he arbitrarily sacrifices the last 3.3%..._

 

Please answer this: What recording studios/engineers use what you believe to be "audiophile cables"? What makes a cable used in the recording chain "non-audiophile"? What errors do "non-audiophile" cables introduce?

 Are you claiming that all studios/engineers are (probably?) using cabling that limits the potential quality of their recordings?


  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I may have painted recording engineers with a somewhat large brush, but in turn you seem to be afflicted with a cliché: that audio pros necessarily have a better hearing than audiophile music consumers -- and a more open mind due to their technical background. Whereas I say: the latter point may even be a handicap._

 

Knowledge is rarely a handicap.


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't really know_

 

See, we don't always disagree!

 See ya
 Steve


----------



## bigshot

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just wonder, who in a recording studio, decides what equipment is used?_

 

This is all generalized. Each studio will have a slightly different setup, depending on how big it is and the particular talents of the people working there...

 Every studio has a head engineer, whose job it is to design and build the various bays, booths and machine rooms. They're interesting people to talk to, because they can speak for hours about each and every choice they made in designing the space. All of the wiring (except mike and instrument cables) is hard wired into the mixing board and runs through the floors and walls. It's generally just standard grade cable that they buy on huge spindles. Once the bays are all built, the head engineer moves to supervising the fire crew... the group of engineers that are always on call to fix equipment when it acts up.

 The recording is supervised by a producer and engineer, who make the choices about tracking, miking and mixing. The producer works with the creatives and the engineer works with the techs. The engineer usually has an assistant who sets things up and breaks them down and operates stuff when the engineer needs an extra set of hands. When video is involved, there's usually a machine room full of decks that are run by a team of specialized engineers who feed the picture into the bay.

 Hope this helps
 Steve


----------



## vcoheda

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why every single thread started here gets hijacked by the same non-believers? That's just so irritating, is there any way to filter some users out?_

 

pretty much every thread in this part of the forum is useless.


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Please answer this: What recording studios/engineers use what you believe to be "audiophile cables"? What makes a cable used in the recording chain "non-audiophile"? What errors do "non-audiophile" cables introduce?_

 

How can I know what cables recording studios use! But according to some people who should know most of them use standard cable (see above), although someone in another thread posted examples of studios using audiophile cabling. I guess Chesky Records known for their audiophile approach will put some importance on cabling. 

 It's fruitless to ask for measuring data standing for audiophile quality -- nobody can tell which measuring criteria cause which sonic characteristic. The same applies e.g. for amps. We're running in circles with such a discussion. Audiophile cables just are those which make the sound in your stereo setup (subjectively) better than standard cables. 

  Quote:


 _Are you claiming that all studios/engineers are (probably?) using cabling that limits the potential quality of their recordings?_ 
 

There's a high likeliness for that. But since more or less all recordings are affected, we're used to this quality standard. Moreover, it's absolutely not clear that it's the standard cables which introduce «errors», it could just as well be the audiophile cables -- although I rather doubt it. 

  Quote:


 _Knowledge is rarely a handicap._ 
 

Rarely, perhaps, but you can imagine how it could be in this case?
.


----------



## sejarzo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's fruitless to ask for measuring data standing for audiophile quality -- nobody can tell which measuring criteria cause which sonic characteristic. The same applies e.g. for amps. We're running in circles with such a discussion. Audiophile cables just are those which make the sound in your stereo setup (subjectively) better than standard cables._

 

Do you believe that there are no measurements at all that can be made that are indicative of the quality of audio reproduction, or just that they fail at some point to discriminate audible differences?

 Are there any "night and day" differences that would always and forever be beyond the capabilities of measurements?

 And this is a serious and honest question......what are a couple of areas in which you feel audiophile cables consistently perform better?


----------



## JaZZ

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do you believe that there are no measurements at all that can be made that are indicative of the quality of audio reproduction, or just that they fail at some point to discriminate audible differences?_

 

The latter. It's more than an assumption. Amplifier sound is still somewhat of a mystery, regarding virtually identical measuring data, but apparently the human hearing threshold is much lower than officially accepted -- in certain areas --, that's why harmonic distortion values of 0.001% apparently still matter for perception (within the frame of a «distortion pattern»). So let's assume the «microscopic» distortions (WRT phase and frequency response) in cables do something as well. 

  Quote:


 _Are there any "night and day" differences that would always and forever be beyond the capabilities of measurements?_ 
 

Certainly not.

  Quote:


 _And this is a serious and honest question......what are a couple of areas in which you feel audiophile cables consistently perform better?_ 
 

I really value honest and non-sarcastic questions! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 (Not especially addressed to you, though.) My personal perception is that of higher transparency and smoothness and especially more fluid and sparkling treble. That's what I like in the few audiophile cables I bought and which is an even more pronounced trademark of my homegrown magnet-wire cables. It's not without side effects, though, as it sacrifices a bit of accuracy (although not in comparison to standard cables).
.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JaZZ* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The latter. It's more than an assumption. Amplifier sound is still somewhat of a mystery, regarding virtually identical measuring data, but apparently the human hearing threshold is much lower than officially accepted -- in certain areas --, that's why harmonic distortion values of 0.001% apparently still matter for perception (within the frame of a «distortion pattern»). So let's assume the «microscopic» distortions (WRT phase and frequency response) in cables do something as well. 

 Certainly not.

 I really value honest and non-sarcastic questions! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (Not especially addressed to you, though.) My personal perception is that of higher transparency and smoothness and especially more fluid and sparkling treble. That's what I like in the few audiophile cables I bought and which is an even more pronounced trademark of my homegrown magnet-wire cables. It's not without side effects, though, as it sacrifices a bit of accuracy (although not in comparison to standard cables).
._

 

Exactly what i found out/heard when going up the ladder of high end cables.
 More transparent, more neutral, better top end and low end and more musical, music flows easier...more lifelike.


----------



## Nebby

Can't we all just get along? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Seriously though, the OP asked for some recommendations on what cables to get and instead of getting that he got....5 pages of debate


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Can't we all just get along? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Seriously though, the OP asked for some recommendations on what cables to get and instead of getting that he got....5 pages of debate 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I don't know about that, I think the thread title sums it up perfectly.


----------



## essentiale

i just placed an order for these... hope they're good. decided to not spend the extra cash on silver/gold cables, based on what i've read here.

 would anyone like to give their views on this and this?


----------



## essentiale

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't know about that, I think the thread title sums it up perfectly. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

steven,

 do you still custom make cables/LODs?


----------



## Drag0n

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *milkpowder* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_65 bucks






 Nice ay?
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







_

 

Its just 75 ohm cable TV wire with a nylon jacket net covering and fancy connectors.
 I didnt like 75 ohm cable when i tried it here. Sounded dead to me.
 They are pretty though.


----------



## Drag0n

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sejarzo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, you think that classical recording engineers just use whatever is handy, and have never compared cables?_

 

Being engineers produce CDs using a 31 band EQ and other processing, the balance or imbalance that a cable causes just doesnt matter.
 If one cable slightly accentuates the highs, well so what, because he can fix it with the EQ.
 Most Music mixers do not care about audiophile cables, but they do try to buy good name cables with good connectors and well shielded so they can resist noise. 

 Drag a cheap guitar cable along the ground and youll hear alot of noise, then drag a good one and you wont hear noise, or at least less noise.


----------



## mbd2884

It's hilarious that some people think Studios won't invest in the best cables if it actually made a difference. They will spend millions on their studio and equipment, but can't spare a few thousand for cables. That's hilarious...


----------



## Drag0n

$50,000 CD Player > $50,000 preamp > $50,000 amp > lamp cord > $100,000 speakers > $100,000 room treatments > $6000 ac conditioner > pressed wood componant rack

 location: sams trailor park


----------



## royalcrown

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Drag0n* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Being engineers produce CDs using a 31 band EQ and other processing, the balance or imbalance that a cable causes just doesnt matter.
 If one cable slightly accentuates the highs, well so what, because he can fix it with the EQ.
 Most Music mixers do not care about audiophile cables, but they do try to buy good name cables with good connectors and well shielded so they can resist noise. 

 Drag a cheap guitar cable along the ground and youll hear alot of noise, then drag a good one and you wont hear noise, or at least less noise._

 

Just out of curiosity (and this isn't sarcastic or rhetorical in the least), if engineers can simply EQ away the difference that a lousy cable makes, couldn't the listener also get an EQ for under/matching the price it would cost to completely outfit a rig with high-end cables and then just tweak that to their preference? If it works for the ones producing the music, why wouldn't it work for the end user?

 I ask not because I think that cables don't make a difference; I'm just not entirely convinced that EQ is the reason why professionals don't use high end cables, especially given people like Steve Hoffman who IIRC uses such high end cables - but I can't see him mastering basically anything without some sort of EQ.


----------



## LostOne.TR

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *essentiale* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_would anyone like to give their views on this and this?_

 

Isn't that lil'knight? looks like the same cables he makes, same location, and I think I've seen that ebay name associated with him somewhere.

 Pricing seems kind of high. Seems like the prices were upped for ebay, compared to what I've seen him offer in the past (in regards to senn cables). $115 for 6ft mogami neglex senn cable, sure I saw kimber TCSS for around the same price from him in the past. And the jena labs senn cable listing says:  Quote:


 More infos and reviews can be read here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f70/al...-cable-293581/

 Please keep in mind that the same cable will cost you >400$: ALO Audio 
 

Though with Jena Labs cable prices, I'd say his price is pretty fair. The mogami one is screaming at me to pickup a soldering iron and learn to make cables though.

 If the pricing of the senn cables is any indication, I'd expect you could get roughly the same quality of LOD (likely same parts) for a lot less via contacting DIYers here on head-fi.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *royalcrown* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just out of curiosity (and this isn't sarcastic or rhetorical in the least), if engineers can simply EQ away the difference that a lousy cable makes, couldn't the listener also get an EQ for under/matching the price it would cost to completely outfit a rig with high-end cables and then just tweak that to their preference? If it works for the ones producing the music, why wouldn't it work for the end user?

 I ask not because I think that cables don't make a difference; I'm just not entirely convinced that EQ is the reason why professionals don't use high end cables, especially given people like Steve Hoffman who IIRC uses such high end cables - but I can't see him mastering basically anything without some sort of EQ._

 

I agree and I have made the same observation before. Never got an answer. 
 I am curious though. The EQing they do in studios would make any audible cable difference moot....


----------



## Drag0n

I believe in cable differences for my system, but i do not believe you have to spend crazy dollars to get it right. I think if you try many reasonably priced cables, youll find one that has synergy with your system.

 Audiophile purists wont use an EQ because too many things in the line will eventually cause distortion and loss of detail.

 The guys that make your CDs are not going to keep trying wire combos etc, because they would have to do it with every band they record. So many mic and amp and instrument and processor combos!!!

 Also most audio engineers just dont buy into all the cable hype anyway.
 They do believe in quality-made cables with good connections and shielding,as i said earlier.

 EQing is for a last resort if you just cant get the sound right naturally with componants,wires,speakers,room acoustics,etc.
 If you do resort to an EQ, you need one that matches the level of your equipments quality. I dont know any company that makes a truly high-end audiophile EQs, because most real high-end audiophiles do not use EQs anyway, so the best might be a good quality Pro mixer EQ.

 I have a decent EQ made by Coustic.
 Sometimes i use it for certain recordings, especially live ones recorded at local venues by friends of mine, but mostly i dont use an EQ.


----------



## Happy Camper

You can't EQ clarity or prat and you can't make a slight tone adjustment with an IC. Both will color the signal if done deliberately.


----------



## LostOne.TR

sorry for the topic derailment, but Happy Camper, your avatar is hilarious.


----------



## Happy Camper

Our boy Patrick.


----------



## RockinCannoisseur

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rodentmacbeastie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Personally, I think at test where the listener does not know a damn thing about anything is best Philadox. This way there should be no preconceived ideas or conclusions. My opinion with copper and silver and even gold or construction techniques is irrelevant as long as they are built to last. In the end, the best way is to buy a few pairs, listen to them and sell the others you don't like. Besides, I am a firm believer that the information is always present regardless of the cable, the difference in sound in just your perception. Your perception of that information CAN make cables sound different though. I am not talking about placebo at all either. I truly believe that the material and construction method used cannot alter the sound, just your perception of it! My gold plated silver/copper/gold alloy cables sound best to me but I am not suggesting that there is more or less info, bass weight, treble smoothness, or midrange purity, just that my body and mind work better alongside these materials. 

 When I am happy and healthy, silver and copper sound very similar to me. At a little stress, lack of sleep(my problem) and the silver is very tiring and often bright in my system. The alloy I am using tends to sound the same all of the time. This is why EE will often argue that there is no way the metal used can mechanically alter the sound, because they don't(IMHO)! It happens to sound different on a level that occurs in your physiology. The whole metaphysical thing! Nobel prize winning scientists(not EE's) believe in the metaphysical attributes of conductors so I feel OK about my ideas. Not to say that EE's ideas are not sound, just that they generally regurgitate theory accepted as fact and taught to them, not create theory to further science. However, if my and some of the top research minds' theories do not please you and you want a empirical approach, carbon is by far a better conductor over any of the previously mentioned.

 Here are the resistivity values for a few [ρ (nΩ·m)]
 -silicon dioxide(1300 °C) 0.004
 -carbon, amorphous 0.35
 -germanium 0.46
 -carbon, diamond 2.7
 -silver 15.9
 -copper 17.1
 -gold 22.1
 -tungsten 52.8
 -zinc 59
 -brass 64
 -nickel 69.3
 -lithium 92.8
 -iron 96.1
 -platinum 105
 -palladium 105.4
 -tin (0 °C) 115
 -solder 150

 So, based on resistive numbers alone(I hate to do that), silver betters copper only by a little and it all becomes mute when you see the resistance in the solder used to hold them together. Keep in mind that non-metal semi-conductors must be doped to achieve good results. Find a way to join wires and not use solder and you will find that could mean more of an improvement. Also, this may show why high carbon cables are the best for performance but are not practical due to their very fragile and rigid nature. If you want the best bar none, heat up your new silicon dioxide cables to 1300 degrees since it is very resistive at room temp. I am thinking that the best results for getting the best from you circuit is to point to point wire it and then gold plate everything(especially the solder). Why gold plate and not silver? CORROSION IS VERY BAD FOR CONDUCTIVITY! I could be wrong but the information I read was from three dudes who won the Nobel science prize for work in semiconductors. However, I thought the resistivity and conductivity are similar but not the same... Maybe an EE can verify this before I preach this as the gospel according to Rodent._

 


 interesting bumpification


----------



## paul02

Quote: 





rockincannoisseur said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *rodentmacbeastie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> ...


 
  Bumps again for a very insightful read. If I had the money I'd do what you think would be the best set-up for audio cables.


----------



## dyl1dyl

Quote: 





paul02 said:


> Bumps again for a very insightful read. If I had the money I'd do what you think would be the best set-up for audio cables.


 
   
  X2. Great read. I've always felt copper cables sounded better actually, more realistic sounding.


----------



## spiderking31

I currently have the moon audio, blue dragon v3 audio cable made from up-occ copper for my sennheiser hd650's, and I definitely think they're a superb improvement over the stock cable....so, copper is very good to my ears...but I heard silver is better...but I've never tried a silver cable yet....so, can't comment on silver...


----------



## JuicyBruce

Quote: 





dyl1dyl said:


> X2. Great read. I've always felt copper cables sounded better actually, more realistic sounding.


 
   
  Same here. For years ive only ever used stock cables and recently bought a SilveryRay IEM cable for the 1964-q after drinking a bottle of wine. 
  Anyhoo to my great surprise the difference bordered on startling. Im still not sure if I like yet to be honest but im satisfied in my mind that there is at least a difference between the two. All the usual claims of "brighter" and more forward are true but there was an aluminium quality that im not sure about. It also sounds like there is some fairly intense frequency carving going on somehow. My copper cable is much more even across all frequencies. 
  Colour me surprised. Im leaving it for a while to see if I adjust. Had a long listening session with it today and im beginning to like it more I think.


----------



## doublea71

Quote: 





juicybruce said:


> Same here. For years ive only ever used stock cables and recently bought a SilveryRay IEM cable for the 1964-q after drinking a bottle of wine.
> Anyhoo to my great surprise the difference bordered on startling. Im still not sure if I like yet to be honest but im satisfied in my mind that there is at least a difference between the two. All the usual claims of "brighter" and more forward are true but there was an aluminium quality that im not sure about. It also sounds like there is some fairly intense frequency carving going on somehow. My copper cable is much more even across all frequencies.
> Colour me surprised. Im leaving it for a while to see if I adjust. Had a long listening session with it today and im beginning to like it more I think.


 

 How is that cable working out with your Quads? Mine are being re-shelled as we speak, and I'd love to hear your impressions of the SilverRay and their effect on the 1964s as I'm sure I'll be replacing the stock cable before long. Cheers!


----------



## goodolcheez

The top-end copper will give you good "first impression" about the cable.  You will like the warm mid / lows and gorgeous detail pop and sweet orange treble (not sour), or should I say, "matured" treble.   You will find it pleasing on many songs.  However, there is no headroom for songs that are more treble region.
   
   
  The top-end silver (100% solid) + top end insulation (minimal noise carrier) will get you happy in the "long run".  It has plenty headroom for treble region.  It is superior in the detail from mid to top.  Low detail is about as good as the top-end copper, just not as "weighty", or better word "meaty" as the copper.  But still, absolutely beautiful.   You will thank yourself you went for the silver several months later.
   
   
  The coolest and the most famous quote on earth -- *"You get what you pay for"*.


----------



## JuicyBruce

Quote: 





doublea71 said:


> How is that cable working out with your Quads? Mine are being re-shelled as we speak, and I'd love to hear your impressions of the SilverRay and their effect on the 1964s as I'm sure I'll be replacing the stock cable before long. Cheers!


 
   
  Really well actually. Had a couple of weeks of AB testing and I can say with confidence that they do a bang-up job of filling that trademark top end roll-off. I still think there is an aluminium quality (think tapping a coke can with your fingernail) but its not apparent in all music - heavily mastered stuff mainly. Acoustic recordings now really shine.
  Microphonics are off the chart.. not one for walking unless you can pull the cable a bit to tighten it. The plug terminals are also a touch narrow and come out quite easily compared to stock. Hasnt really been an issue, just mindful of losing an earpiece one day. The only other niggle i had was the isolating material and heat shrink at the terminal end are quite thick end tend to push a bit at the top of my ear meaning I have to keep bending it about to get a good seal back. 
  Apart from that it looks pimp, the stiffness of the cable for some strange reason meant a lot less tangles when I travel. I put the stock cable back on tonight after a solid week with SR and after about 10 minutes was actually pretty bored. 
  But yeah - overall thumbs up from me.


----------



## doublea71

Thanks for the response, Bruce. I'm a bit wary of having a less-than-snug connection - maybe that wouldn't be a problem for me after a UM re-shell...I'll have to check with the man Himself. A bit more sparkle and detail in the highs might be nice. The stock cables are tangle-prone, at least the ones I have. Well, first things first - let's see how I like them and whether I think the custom cables are needed at all...thanks again.


----------



## doublea71

Check out the mods page for BTG-Audio:
   
   
   
http://btg-audio.webs.com/mods.htm
  
  At the bottom of the page, there's a super-cool mod of a full-size CAL! with a Sansa Clip....it's such a bad-ass idea no matter how odd it would look in use.


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





paul02 said:


> Bumps again for a very insightful read. If I had the money I'd do what you think would be the best set-up for audio cables.


 
  Wrong bumpification.  It's more like trolling or spamming.  We do not tolerate spamming here.
   
  resistivity values means squat.  It doesn't give you the final result of how each cables perform.  it's meaningless and worthless info that should have been removed from thread, not bumpification.  This is a huge fail.


----------



## doublea71

Just how is that trolling or spamming? And what's this "we" business? You speak for yourself and nobody else, pal.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> resistivity values means squat.  It doesn't give you the final result of how each cables perform.


 
   
  But resistivity is the only thing the conductors themselves have to offer. Unless you want to talk about ferromagnetic materials or what may be going on down below the thermal noise of the wire itself. The rest is just geometry and dielectric materials.
   
  se


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





doublea71 said:


> Just how is that trolling or spamming? And what's this "we" business? You speak for yourself and nobody else, pal.


 
  Ah kind of nevermind what I said earlier....
  "-silver 15.9
 -copper 17.1
 -gold 22.1"
   
  The information on the resistivity is correct, but the poster made lame comment which should be removed as fast as possible. Psychology my butt....
   
  Quote: 





> Quote:Originally Posted by *doublea71* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> And what's this "*we*" business? You speak for yourself and nobody else, *pal*.


 
  You and I. 
   
*Pal*.....
   
  p.s. You kind of look good with that sun glasses.  Next you need a cigar....  Perfect.
   
   
   
  Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> But resistivity is the only thing the conductors themselves have to offer. Unless you want to talk about ferromagnetic materials or what may be going on down below the thermal noise of the wire itself. The rest is just geometry and dielectric materials.
> 
> se


 
   
  I was looking at the chart wrong.  Nevermind


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





rockincannoisseur said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *rodentmacbeastie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> ...


 
   
  That guy did bring up good point about human's ability to listen and articulate the differences sound quality between cables. The sound they hear changes depending on their "health level".  If you are tired, you will definitely lose sensitivity with hearing.  It's not the hardware fault, it's you in this case. But that's your problem. Have some good food, take plenty of rest. Oh take some vitamins too. See you next day. You will feel better.
   
*Rule Number 1*:   Don't do critiquing on sound when you are tired.  This is incredibly stupid idea...  Don't go drink pops and eat other junk food... they are not good for you.  Eat healthy food. 
   
  This is a good suggestion. Take note.


----------



## doublea71

You're just a bit too prescriptive in your comments and authoritarian in your register. Even the most knowledgeable of head-fi members (and some are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to electrical engineering/the physics of sound) have the courtesy to respond politely when they know they are 100% right. If you feel you are right, there's no need to try to verbally beat somebody down because of it. Be a gentleman about it when you disagree with what somebody says and I think you'll find that you'll have many more positive interactions with your fellow members.


----------



## paul02

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> Wrong bumpification.  It's more like trolling or spamming.  We do not tolerate spamming here.
> 
> resistivity values means squat.  It doesn't give you the final result of how each cables perform.  it's meaningless and worthless info that should have been removed from thread, not bumpification.  This is a huge fail.


 
   
  Am I? Really? Let's see you try infracting me because of spamming then.
   
  If not, keep your peace.


----------



## paul02

Quote: 





doublea71 said:


> You're just a bit too prescriptive in your comments and authoritarian in your register. Even the most knowledgeable of head-fi members (and some are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to electrical engineering/the physics of sound) have the courtesy to respond politely when they know they are 100% right. If you feel you are right, there's no need to try to verbally beat somebody down because of it. Be a gentleman about it when you disagree with what somebody says and I think you'll find that you'll have many more positive interactions with your fellow members.


 
   
  Well said.


----------



## BIG POPPA

Wow can't believe I almost missed this thread. I'm all about this stuff. Make most of my cables.


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





doublea71 said:


> You're just a bit too prescriptive in your comments and authoritarian in your register. Even the most knowledgeable of head-fi members (and some are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to electrical engineering/the physics of sound) have the courtesy to respond politely when they know they are 100% right. If you feel you are right, there's no need to try to verbally beat somebody down because of it. Be a gentleman about it when you disagree with what somebody says and I think you'll find that you'll have many more positive interactions with your fellow members.


 
   
  Thank you for the suggestion, teacher!
   
  Sometimes you gotta be tough on these naysayers....  sometimes aggression is needed.
   
  Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Wow can't believe I almost missed this thread. I'm all about this stuff. Make most of my cables.


 
   
  Good man.... please keep it up.  We need the forum filled with people like you....  Gimme some of that pop corn.


----------



## doublea71

Quote: 





goodolcheez said:


> Thank you for the suggestion, teacher!
> 
> Sometimes you gotta be tough on these naysayers....  sometimes aggression is needed.
> 
> ...


 

 Ha! It's all good.


----------



## proton007

Quote: 





steve eddy said:


> But resistivity is the only thing the conductors themselves have to offer. Unless you want to talk about ferromagnetic materials or what may be going on down below the thermal noise of the wire itself. The rest is just geometry and dielectric materials.
> 
> se


 
   
  Do you think superconducting materials would sound better? They have the lowest resistance, right? Has someone tried that? 
  I'm sure it sounds 'cooler' 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.


----------



## BIG POPPA

Steve Eddy is one of those who likes to dismiss without trying out for himself. It is is all theoretical with him


----------



## kevin gilmore

Quote: 





proton007 said:


> Do you think superconducting materials would sound better? They have the lowest resistance, right? Has someone tried that?
> I'm sure it sounds 'cooler'
> 
> 
> ...


 
   
  You should probably read up more on the current batch of superconductors.
  At room temperature, the resistance of this material is quite high. In fact
  the copper sheath that encloses the material is the only thing that actually
  can conduct at room temperature. Being a very thin layer, the resistance
  is at least 10 ohms per foot.


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Steve Eddy is one of those who likes to dismiss without trying out for himself. It is is all theoretical with him


 
   
  And you know what I've tried and haven't tried how, exactly?
   
  Tell us, Carnac the Magnificent, what haven't I tried?
   
  Either that or keep your baseless personal attacks to yourself.
   
  se


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





proton007 said:


> Do you think superconducting materials would sound better? They have the lowest resistance, right? Has someone tried that?
> I'm sure it sounds 'cooler'
> 
> 
> ...


 
   




   
  se


----------



## Steve Eddy

Quote: 





kevin gilmore said:


> You should probably read up more on the current batch of superconductors.
> At room temperature, the resistance of this material is quite high.


 
   
  Nonsense. Jack Bybee has been selling room temperature superconductors for years. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



   
  se


----------



## spiderking31

like I said, I love my copper, up-occ copper cable...works wonders!


----------



## MattTCG

I'm a copper lover based on the cables that I've tried...


----------



## Chris_Himself

Quote: 





matttcg said:


> I'm a copper lover based on the cables that I've tried...


 
   
  Yeah I had to suck it up and order 4000 meters of stranded copper for guys like you LOL.


----------



## goodolcheez

The reason why the copper is highly attracted by most users is because, cheaper, meaning more affordable.  This is a known fact guys.   I have a $1200 1.5m silver cable and I love it...   Now for the living room setup, I need another cable along with new set of speakers.... and a sound card.  I need a longer one for this setup, maybe 2m.  As much as I would love to get me another silver cable my wallet won't allow me to buy it ($1400).    I'll settle for a Sydney cable 2m which is a near top quality copper.


----------



## Agarvaen

When upgrading cables would you say interconnects for AMP and DAC are more important or headphone cable?


----------



## brianchia

^ the headphone cable


----------



## Chris_Himself

Quote: 





agarvaen said:


> When upgrading cables would you say interconnects for AMP and DAC are more important or headphone cable?


 
   
  Depends which one is dragging your system down.. I mean I've went from crappy Fry's Electronics RCA's to some Kimber Cables and notice a big difference as well.
   
  When it comes to digital like Coaxial or USB, I have yet to find a difference.. at least with the stuff I build at home for myself.


----------



## ScaryFatKidGT

I have some questions.
   
  Why do cables even madder when the wires in your devices and in most speakers are all copper and all soldered? Also how can Resistance and conductivity of wire be used if the solder and all wire isn't factored in.
   
  Why aren't audiophile speakers welded (not soldered) directly to an amp welded directly to the line out of a DAC?
   
  And why aren't speaker coils made from silver? Don't tell me its cost because there are speakers out there were the cost would be only about a 5% increase in price and there still not silver.


----------



## doublea71

Good questions. If there's something else in the chain unrelated to the cables that has a different resistance, wouldn't that make fancy cables pointless? Maybe somebody else who is more knowledgeable will chime in. I don't know the answer to this, but it's definitely a good question.


----------



## BIG POPPA

Everything matters. Just have to break everything down to understand how. I mean everything!
Cost, Sound, price point in competing gear, make gear easy to assemble, that is your biggest cost... Labor. It is what it is.
Welding....... Come on... Everybody hears differently. Not practical. Everybody's set up is different.
Silver is way more expensive. 5 percent difference is way unrealistic. And silver may have sound qualities that may not benefit speaker coils. 

This is my 2 cents.


----------



## Doc-holliday

scaryfatkidgt said:


> I have some questions.
> 
> Why do cables even madder when the wires in your devices and in most speakers are all copper and all soldered? Also how can Resistance and conductivity of wire be used if the solder and all wire isn't factored in.
> 
> ...




I see where his questions are going and I know what he means. I asked a similar question about "burn in" recently which was "why do things ALWAYS seem to burn-in for the better? Never worse...?" Anyway I digress....

All I can say is I just finished my first DIY cable today which was an interconnect from my LOD to my headphone amp. I mainly did it just for fun. I decided to upgrade the cables of a headphone and I have extra wire and parts so decided to make a longer interconnect that can be used with my ipad on a plane without leaving my amp dangling in the air. 

I hooked it up after checking continuity just to make sure it worked. And I had to pause for a second. I wasn't even trying to check SQ at all but it seemed so noticeably improved I couldn't believe it. I don't mean drastic, I just mean I was shocked that I could notice it. 

So two things could come out of this. 

1. I used silver plated ofc stranded wire for my cable. I could now become head-fi's latest silver fanboy OR....

2. I could just simply recognize that there are MANY factors involved in why my cable is better than the Fiio L9 cable I was using (first and formost I would imagine 24 AWG vs 28+ AWG?). 

I don't know why but I do know bad cables can certainly result in an unwanted vail like feeling on your music from my experience today....

The end.


----------



## doublea71

Quote: 





big poppa said:


> Everything matters. Just have to break everything down to understand how. I mean everything!
> Cost, Sound, price point in competing gear, make gear easy to assemble, that is your biggest cost... Labor. It is what it is.
> Welding....... Come on... Everybody hears differently. Not practical. Everybody's set up is different.
> Silver is way more expensive. 5 percent difference is way unrealistic. And silver may have sound qualities that may not benefit speaker coils.
> This is my 2 cents.


 

 I'm only really interested in how it affects sound. Do soldering points render a cable's resistance/capacitance(?) moot in any way? Silver is going up in price as of late, too. Copper is relatively cheap compared to silver. I've read about imods with internal wires/parts being replaced, but I don't know if it really makes a difference - there's lots of debate on this matter, that's for sure.


----------



## spiderking31

I stopped using my blue dragon v3, and now use my standard OFC COPPER cable....because I really don't notice a difference! $200 down the drain....and the cable is malfunctioning! So, again...$200 down the drain...my little dot mk3 with my sennheiser hd650's really sound out of this world! But you must listen to CDs, and my CD player has a built in DAC....that's my 2 cents....and I've owned my headphones for over a year now....


----------



## goodolcheez

Quote: 





scaryfatkidgt said:


> I have some questions.
> 
> Why do cables even madder when the wires in your devices and in most speakers are all copper and all soldered? Also how can Resistance and conductivity of wire be used if the solder and all wire isn't factored in.


 
  The cable part (i.e. interconnects, speaker wires, etc) takes even further signal loss (due to timing).  Cable is where it takes the hit the most.
  You have a crappy speaker so the sound is 50% good with generic cable.  But with high-end cable you could be getting 55% good sound quality.  The proof is in the hearing, as I heard a big difference from generic cable to the $200 Sydney cable for my A2 speakers.  The location of the some of the musical instruments being played changed and each came more distinctive + more enhanced details.  So it apparently the cable plays very important role despite less than stellar internals in the cheaper speakers.


----------



## Happy Camper

The goal in this hobby is removing every contaminant from the signal so that it can be as pure as possible at the driver. Cost constraints will limit the purity of signal. We find as many weaknesses and minimize them but there is still some level of contamination because of the physics of a system. The simpler and shorter the better. Ideally, the output of the analog section of the source should go directly to the input of the amps gain stage. Putting extra connectors, wire, solder, etc. adds to the contamination. The least amount of RLC from ideal that is added to the circuit will sound the best. If we have to live with some preconditions in the components, that's the cost. You can order gear with silver internal wiring, solder, transformers, etc. if ya wanna, for a cost. The goal of a vendor isn't to make the best possible gear but least amount of compromises for the cost.

Looking at the insides, most of the money spent on a piece is it's power supply. The signal circuit is kept as minimal as possible. 

KISS applies.


----------



## ScaryFatKidGT

Yeah I'm not trying to say cables don't make a difference because I have seen way more people that instantly notice a difference. I have noticed speaker wire is up in debate while almost everyone agrees recabling headphones makes a difference. I have just read so many articles about blind tests and how a rusty coat hanger scrubbed off at the ends will transfer a signal just as good as any copper wire and how interconnects don't make any difference but speaker wire could or another article will say nothing makes and audio able change or everything does its so confusing.
   
  Also the advantage of resistance that silver has over copper is nothing compared to using one gauge bigger of copper, like 5% to %40 IIRC. So Silver must have some other magic property that makes it perform different from copper.
   
  But even Fostexs and Denon must agree with OFC sounding better cabling higher up headphones with better cables.
   
  And people say gold sounds even better, and you know what I bet platinum is even better and cut up 100 dollar bills and diamonds even better.
   
  Wouldn't the ultimate audiophile system be a DAC welded, either directly or with a solid chunk of copper, to the amp and then directly welded to the speaker voice coil?
  Quote: 





happy camper said:


> The goal in this hobby is removing every contaminant from the signal so that it can be as pure as possible at the driver. Cost constraints will limit the purity of signal. We find as many weaknesses and minimize them but there is still some level of contamination because of the physics of a system. The simpler and shorter the better. Ideally, the output of the analog section of the source should go directly to the input of the amps gain stage. Putting extra connectors, wire, solder, etc. adds to the contamination. The least amount of RLC from ideal that is added to the circuit will sound the best. If we have to live with some preconditions in the components, that's the cost. You can order gear with silver internal wiring, solder, transformers, etc. if ya wanna, for a cost. The goal of a vendor isn't to make the best possible gear but least amount of compromises for the cost.
> Looking at the insides, most of the money spent on a piece is it's power supply. The signal circuit is kept as minimal as possible.
> KISS applies.


 
  I agree, but another thing I don't get is why "PURE" even sounds good when the cables used to record the stuff and in the electronic instruments them selves aren't even close to the same quality, most people seem to jump on OFC and then get into Teflon or PE dielectric but beyond that its a crazy world of audiophiles and headphone nuts that every one else thinks is crazy.


----------



## joeyjojo

Quote: 





scaryfatkidgt said:


> I agree, but another thing I don't get is why "PURE" even sounds good when the cables used to record the stuff and in the electronic instruments them selves aren't even close to the same quality, most people seem to jump on OFC and then get into Teflon or PE dielectric but beyond that its a crazy world of audiophiles and headphone nuts that every one else thinks is crazy.


 
   
  I keep my feet on the ground by periodically remembering this fact. There's no point in using anything better than the recording studio, who will typically use high quality components interconnected with unbranded bargain bucket cables.


----------



## joeyjojo

Quote: 





agarvaen said:


> When upgrading cables would you say interconnects for AMP and DAC are more important or headphone cable?


 
   
  Depends on the output impedance of each device I suppose. A device with high output impedance will pick up more noise in the downstream cable than a device with low output impedance. This is why you can use unshielded speaker wire out of a power amp (very low output impedance) but may need a shielded interconnect (if your DAC or whatever has a high output impedance).
   
  It's also the only reason I can think of for needing a fancy headphone cable (if your headphone amp has a high output impedance *cough tube amp cough* perhaps it could pick up noise in the cable?).


----------



## fuzzyash

Spoiler: Warning%3A%20Spoiler!



Originally Posted by *ScaryFatKidGT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
  
  Yeah I'm not trying to say cables don't make a difference because I have seen way more people that instantly notice a difference. I have noticed speaker wire is up in debate while almost everyone agrees recabling headphones makes a difference. I have just read so many articles about blind tests and how a rusty coat hanger scrubbed off at the ends will transfer a signal just as good as any copper wire and how interconnects don't make any difference but speaker wire could or another article will say nothing makes and audio able change or everything does its so confusing.
   
  Also the advantage of resistance that silver has over copper is nothing compared to using one gauge bigger of copper, like 5% to %40 IIRC. So Silver must have some other magic property that makes it perform different from copper.
   
  But even Fostexs and Denon must agree with OFC sounding better cabling higher up headphones with better cables.
   
  And people say gold sounds even better, and you know what I bet platinum is even better and cut up 100 dollar bills and diamonds even better.
   
  Wouldn't the ultimate audiophile system be a DAC welded, either directly or with a solid chunk of copper, to the amp and then directly welded to the speaker voice coil?
  I agree, but another thing I don't get is why "PURE" even sounds good when the cables used to record the stuff and in the electronic instruments them selves aren't even close to the same quality, most people seem to jump on OFC and then get into Teflon or PE dielectric but beyond that its a crazy world of audiophiles and headphone nuts that every one else thinks is crazy.
   


  diamond in the bowers and wilkins speakers actually do sound pretty good 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




  sorry for derailing the thread...


----------



## green-fi mk2s

Waiting for my new cables that I'm diying to come in the mail, I got ofc copper for the headphones, and silver for the interconnect. I did it because I read silver has very good highs and definition, and copper has good lows.. u know what I mean I'm trying to have a piece of both worlds. This is my first time with cable audiophiles so I'm still not sure if it will make a difference in sound but theyre gunna look awsome so eather way ill be happy with them


----------



## Mooses9

Quote: 





green-fi mk2s said:


> Waiting for my new cables that I'm diying to come in the mail, I got ofc copper for the headphones, and silver for the interconnect. I did it because I read silver has very good highs and definition, and copper has good lows.. u know what I mean I'm trying to have a piece of both worlds. This is my first time with cable audiophiles so I'm still not sure if it will make a difference in sound but theyre gunna look awsome so eather way ill be happy with them


 
  you should try out SPC . Silver Plated Copper. this kind of cable gives you what you are looking for. its copper gives you the dynamic lows, yet also the silver brightens up the overall sound, mainly in the mids and highs.
   
  with the copper cable and silver interconnect it should give you what you are looking for.


----------



## green-fi mk2s

Thanks I ended up canceling that order because I realised I needed 5 feet of cable not 3 and I cant afford to spend 90 dollars on wire so I got Mogami ofc copper instead. By the way I want to recommend to everyone my Gaofei OFC rhodium plated RCA connectors which are amazing imo just as good if not better than Eichmann Silver Bullets I've borrowed from my father. It's a Chinese product but most of you know the Chinese take hifi seriously, there is no Chinese quality stereotype here. And they don't seem to inflate the hell out of their prices eather like American companies that's why I'm stressing this. I hate to see hard working people like myself empty theirs wallet on overpriced products. There 45 dollars a set of 4 on eBay and the seller is very trustworthy. here's the link http://item.mobileweb.ebay.com/viewitem?itemId=330896858332&index=6&nav=SEARCH&nid=72197115401


----------



## JohnSantana

infinitesymphony said:


> For RCAs, I like Blue Jeans Cable LC-1s. They're made with solderless Canare RCAP connectors and custom low-capacitance Belden wire for a very fair price.
> 
> 
> The copper vs. silver debate tends to have a lot of confounding variables that make it seem like silver might naturally sound "brighter" than copper. But it's possible to construct one cable with silver and one with copper, and have them sound and measure completely identical. The wire material is just a small part of a cable's specifications and resultant sound quality; don't worry too much about it.




Ok, so does this means that silver cable and copper cable will not make any difference apart from the cosmetic coloring of the cabling only ?


----------



## Jam_Master_J

I think there are a couple reasons silver cables sound better to some listeners, both are mental:
   
  1) The (true) fact that silver has a lower resistance.  This idea promotes the idea of a conductor that is faster, more revealing (even if electrically it doesn't have this effect).  Not to mention, the small difference in resistance is quite minor compared to other inline resistances.  Not to mention, a 3 foot copper cable (properly terminated) will have lower resistance than a 3.5 foot silver cable of similar wire thickness yet you see this brightness impression being quite prominent regardless of length or awg of wire.  If it comes down to resistance, the big upgrade would be to buy cables as short as possible with solid locking connectors.
   
  2) The more important thing in my opinion is the effect of human beings to associate visible material attributes to sound.  SIlver has a clean, bright look to it, copper is warm and pleasant in comparison.  Should it be so surprising that our brain is influenced by this?  Take two identical amplifiers one with a blue LED versus one with a red LED, I'd admit that I'd probably refer to the latter as warmer.
   
  This is coming from an electrical engineer who loves to DIY cables, mostly cause I enjoy it and I like the looks.  I am not saying that good cables are not needed.  But I am qualifying that "good cables" means an appropriate type of cable terminated correctly.  This can be had for about $20.


----------



## Jam_Master_J

Quote: 





mooses9 said:


> you should try out SPC . Silver Plated Copper. this kind of cable gives you what you are looking for. its copper gives you the dynamic lows, yet also the silver brightens up the overall sound, mainly in the mids and highs.
> 
> with the copper cable and silver interconnect it should give you what you are looking for.


 
  What exactly about the silver impedes the low end dynamics?  Does this mean that in a silver-plated copper the bass frequencies will propogate through the copper core while the mids and highs stick to the silver coating?


----------



## nigeljames

Quote: 





jam_master_j said:


> *What exactly about the silver impedes the low end dynamics?*  Does this mean that in a silver-plated copper the bass frequencies will propogate through the copper core while the mids and highs stick to the silver coating?


 
   
  Nothing, it's a myth.
   
  A good quality silver cable gives a deeper, tighter bass than a good quality copper. Copper might give a bigger, fuller bass but it's not better IMO.


----------



## BIG POPPA

jam_master_j said:


> I think there are a couple reasons silver cables sound better to some listeners, both are mental:
> 
> 1) The (true) fact that silver has a lower resistance.  This idea promotes the idea of a conductor that is faster, more revealing (even if electrically it doesn't have this effect).  Not to mention, the small difference in resistance is quite minor compared to other inline resistances.  Not to mention, a 3 foot copper cable (properly terminated) will have lower resistance than a 3.5 foot silver cable of similar wire thickness yet you see this brightness impression being quite prominent regardless of length or awg of wire.  If it comes down to resistance, the big upgrade would be to buy cables as short as possible with solid locking connectors.
> 
> ...




Dude your opinion is pretty out there. Spend some real money like a few hundred dollars getting good wire , good connectors and then make an opinion. Also go to the local audio stores and audition some cables. And lastly go to head-fi meets and audition the cables and enjoy the gear you will get to listen to. 
On your first point , what cables did you use to come up with your findings? Also your point of shorter cables and locking connectors..... If that was the cure all everybody would be doing it. Still haven't found out why you need locking connectors? Just a choice. The longer the cable the more color. Some cables sound better than others and you may want the longer cable.

And your second point is halarious. You really sound like you know what you talking about. Like to share that one at the next local audio society meeting. ...... I don't post as much as i used to, but this post had me .........


----------



## Jam_Master_J

My opinion is not valid because I don't have hundreds of dollars sunk into parts that, in my experience, make so significant difference to the sound?  I've got nothing against listening subjectively, I pick all my other parts based on sound not specs.
   
  Yes I do legitimately do believe people are pulled in with a certain kind of placebo effect and that it could be associated with their perceptions of things that are more physical and less electrical.  I'd bet money that if you prepared two identical audio systems and put one in a bigger, industrial style enclosure and one in a very finely machined enclosure with visible smaller cables you would see words like "nimble", "delicate" and "fast" thrown at the little one more often and words like "full" and "anchored" on the large one.  The theoretical differences between cables are in a whole other order of magnitude below the influence of our own personal expectations, mood, visual ques.  I know we'd like to think we aren't influenced by these things but we are.


----------



## Mooses9

imo pure silver sounds the best. i think vocals male and female are crisp, soundstage is wider, mids and highs are crystal clear. pure silver some might feel is more of a aggrerssive sound vs copper or silver plated copper.....besides the pure silver the silver plated copper is pretty good also, gives you somewehat of both worlds the silver and copper.


----------



## BIG POPPA

You have to spend money to make cables. or buy them. you really cant make a fair judgement being an arm chair quarter back. most noobs get caught up on the looks of the cables. that is not me or my peeps (quote name="Jam_Master_J" url="/t/292127/copper-vs-silver-cables/150#post_9562705"]My opinion is not valid because I don't have hundreds of dollars sunk into parts that, in my experience, make so significant difference to the sound?  I've got nothing against listening subjectively, I pick all my other parts based on sound not specs.

Yes I do legitimately do believe people are pulled in with a certain kind of placebo effect and that it could be associated with their perceptions of things that are more physical and less electrical.  I'd bet money that if you prepared two identical audio systems and put one in a bigger, industrial style enclosure and one in a very finely machined enclosure with visible smaller cables you would see words like "nimble", "delicate" and "fast" thrown at the little one more often and words like "full" and "anchored" on the large one.  The theoretical differences between cables are in a whole other order of magnitude below the influence of our own personal expectations, mood, visual ques.  I know we'd like to think we aren't influenced by these things but we are.
[/quote]


----------



## BIG POPPA

You have to spend money to make cables. or buy them. you really cant make a fair judgement being an arm chair quarter back. most noobs get caught up on the looks of the cables. that is not me or my peeps (quote name="Jam_Master_J" url="/t/292127/copper-vs-silver-cables/150#post_9562705"]My opinion is not valid because I don't have hundreds of dollars sunk into parts that, in my experience, make so significant difference to the sound?  I've got nothing against listening subjectively, I pick all my other parts based on sound not specs.

Yes I do legitimately do believe people are pulled in with a certain kind of placebo effect and that it could be associated with their perceptions of things that are more physical and less electrical.  I'd bet money that if you prepared two identical audio systems and put one in a bigger, industrial style enclosure and one in a very finely machined enclosure with visible smaller cables you would see words like "nimble", "delicate" and "fast" thrown at the little one more often and words like "full" and "anchored" on the large one.  The theoretical differences between cables are in a whole other order of magnitude below the influence of our own personal expectations, mood, visual ques.  I know we'd like to think we aren't influenced by these things but we are.
[/quote]


----------



## karloil

been reading this thread and it's quite helpful to see different opinions on copper and silver. however, i hope you can also help me with my question and share your insights - will a few inches of interconnect - lets say 2-3inches matter on which type of cable i use? (copper, spc or silver).


----------



## Mooses9

karloil said:


> been reading this thread and it's quite helpful to see different opinions on copper and silver. however, i hope you can also help me with my question and share your insights - will a few inches of interconnect - lets say 2-3inches matter on which type of cable i use? (copper, spc or silver).


 
  
 Yes, even if its a few inches like 2-3 inches, the interconnects are transfering signal, and different materials conduct and have better conductivity than another, like copper vs silver....so in short the answer is yes. i have A'd and B using pure silver cable but with a copper interconnect, and then with a matching pure silver interconnect and there was a difference.


----------



## karloil

thanks for the feedback!


----------



## BIG POPPA

karloil said:


> been reading this thread and it's quite helpful to see different opinions on copper and silver. however, i hope you can also help me with my question and share your insights - will a few inches of interconnect - lets say 2-3inches matter on which type of cable i use? (copper, spc or silver).


With that length you will not get the benefit as much as you think. I would make a few cables and give a good listen. You may or may not hear a difference at that length.It sounds that the length may be for portable use and you do pay a premium for decent gear.For home gear I do reccomend at least a meter of getting full benefit of these cables. My 2 cents


----------



## karloil

thanks for your insights too! yes, it's for portable use.


----------



## Mooses9

Take into consideration materials, conductivity of materials and clenliness of the conductivity of the signals path. I honestly do feel it makes a difference.

I was using a super annealed sxc24 alo audio cable with my algorhythm solo the switched to the whiplash pure silver scscag 24awg cable and it made a big difference.

I also went and paired all my cables to the toxic silver poison and I noticed a difference in sound quality over the ali sxc24 cables.

Thats just ny personal experience. Just saying


----------



## BIG POPPA

Absolutely, just imagine those cables 3 feet long or even 6. ALO has great stuff.


----------



## Steve Eddy

mooses9 said:


> Yes, even if its a few inches like 2-3 inches, the interconnects are transfering signal, and different materials conduct and have better conductivity than another, like copper vs silver....so in short the answer is yes.




Conductivity is a pretty meaningless term on its own. In the real world when considering something like a cable, conductivity boils down to resistance. And the rsistance of a given wire will be determined by its gauge and it's length.

So while silver may have a higher conductivity than copper, using just a very slightly larger copper conductor (the conductivity of silver is only about 6% greater than copper) will result in the same resistance as a silver wire. 

se


----------



## karloil

steve eddy said:


> Conductivity is a pretty meaningless term on its own. In the real world when considering something like a cable, conductivity boils down to resistance. And the rsistance of a given wire will be determined by its gauge and it's length.
> 
> So while silver may have a higher conductivity than copper, using just a very slightly larger copper conductor (the conductivity of silver is only about 6% greater than copper) will result in the same resistance as a silver wire.
> 
> se


 
  
 i have a bunch of spc wires, 22 and 26 awg. i plan to put 2 wires per channel, each channel would have both 22 and 26awg wires - tried this before but i never had a chance to do an A/B comparison with just single wire per channel 26awg interconnect, i never had enough plugs to try it.


----------



## karloil

i got to test the theory myself, i made 2 ICs. first was using TWag v2 - 1 wire per channel, neutrik plugs. the IC was just 1.2" in length. the second was using spc - 2 wires per channel, rean plugs, its 3" in length. i know there's still a lot of variables but i did notice that the first IC gave me a louder volume....aside from that, i really can't hear anything else....time for a blind test!


----------



## StanD

karloil said:


> been reading this thread and it's quite helpful to see different opinions on copper and silver. however, i hope you can also help me with my question and share your insights - will a few inches of interconnect - lets say 2-3inches matter on which type of cable i use? (copper, spc or silver).


 
 IMO, not a spec of difference unless that materials are very defective. I know this is a hot topic, but IMO at the driving impedances and audio frequencies/wavelengths the resistance and capacitance of a reasonable quality cable shouldn't make a difference, even at ten feet. Just my opinion, an electrical engineer that has designed electronic music synthesizers and has had analog electronic hardware designs certified by the National Bureau of Standards. In any case anyone is free to feel as they think and enjoy their stuff to the fullest. If it sounds good, it's fun.


----------



## JohnSantana

stand said:


> IMO, not a spec of difference unless that materials are very defective. I know this is a hot topic, but IMO at the driving impedances and audio frequencies/wavelengths the resistance and capacitance of a reasonable quality cable shouldn't make a difference, even at ten feet. Just my opinion, an electrical engineer that has designed electronic music synthesizers and has had analog electronic hardware designs certified by the National Bureau of Standards. In any case anyone is free to feel as they think and enjoy their stuff to the fullest. If it sounds good, it's fun.




Thanks Karl for the explanation. It seems that there are plenty of variables to be considered.


----------



## StanD

Quote:
  
 Originally Posted by *StanD* 



 IMO, not a spec of difference unless that materials are very defective. I know this is a hot topic, but IMO at the driving impedances and audio frequencies/wavelengths the resistance and capacitance of a reasonable quality cable shouldn't make a difference, even at ten feet. Just my opinion, an electrical engineer that has designed electronic music synthesizers and has had analog electronic hardware designs certified by the National Bureau of Standards. In any case anyone is free to feel as they think and enjoy their stuff to the fullest. If it sounds good, it's fun.


johnsantana said:


> Thanks Karl for the explanation. It seems that there are plenty of variables to be considered.


 
 I'm Stan, Karl asked the question. There's a lot of myths and opinions about cables. Unfortunately many people get upset when someone disputes these. Keep it friendly folks.


----------



## karloil

^ yeah, don't thank me....i got to ask the question/s. imo, if they have the money to burn on getting those expensive cables, then why not - it's that thing that floats their boat!


----------



## StanD

karloil said:


> ^ yeah, don't thank me....i got to ask the question/s. imo, if they have the money to burn on getting those expensive cables, then why not - it's that thing that floats their boat!


 
 How true. Unfortunately they convince others to toss their cash on the same bonfire. Then again, I've bought can's that I should have known better not to. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 They actually did work and weren't endorsed by a tone deaf personality. I can't wait till the Kardashian by Monster cans come out, NOT.


----------



## Happy Camper

I just finished a three week trial with three different solid silver cables. I've now gone back to the original copper cables I've been using. There is a difference in what I heard with the silver giving more detail and portraying a more open, natural sound with less power needed to hear it. Going back to the copper cable has a negative impact IMO. The music isn't as engaging. It has nothing to do with the build because they are all built well. The question is if I feel it worth the value for the difference, but as far as hearing a difference, I could. I could also hear a difference between the three different silver cables. More conductors and better fittings gave more details at lower volumes. It would be interesting to try the better fittings with the lower number of conductors. 

There are a large percentage of hobbyists that use silver in their rigs. They do not choose silver because of status. No one wants to spend more for no reason. It's not arrogance of wealth that motivates them. So science needs to do a better job at what they offer than "there is no difference" and introducing human defect and placebo as proof. Judgement nuts have no help to offer so justify their stance by financial condemnation and ridicule. The only way of finding truth is to research and experience. Don't be lazy if you're truly interested. Finding pied pipers to back an ignorant point of view isn't answering the question. Cheapskate Templars are popular for a reason.


----------



## karloil

well, we can really just all agree to disagree...imo, it will now depend on the person's hearing plus if they are willing to shell out the money...will rest my case to a topic where it will always be a very well debated piece.


----------



## Steve Eddy

karloil said:


> well, we can really just all agree to disagree...


 
  
 Not really, no. This isn't an issue that's just a matter of opinion, like "Who's the most beautiful actress?" There is an actual truth that exists here. Either there are actual audible differences between copper and silver or there isn't. There is no in between.
  
 se


----------



## Chris_Himself

steve eddy said:


> Not really, no. This isn't an issue that's just a matter of opinion, like "Who's the most beautiful actress?" There is an actual truth that exists here. Either there are actual audible differences between copper and silver or there isn't. There is no in between.
> 
> se


 
  
 Sofia Vergara.


----------



## Steve Eddy

chris_himself said:


> Sofia Vergara.




No no, Mila Kunis!

se


----------



## Chris_Himself

steve eddy said:


> No no, Mila Kunis!
> 
> se


 
 Tie game. We all win!


----------



## Steve Eddy

chris_himself said:


> Tie game. We all win!




Yay!

*sits on front porch waiting for Mila to show up*

se


----------



## karloil

steve eddy said:


> Not really, no. This isn't an issue that's just a matter of opinion, like "Who's the most beautiful actress?" There is an actual truth that exists here. Either there are actual audible differences between copper and silver or there isn't. There is no in between.
> 
> se




ahhh...well said, well said...


----------



## Mooses9

i dont think i have ever taken a subjective reasoning like price of a cable to buffer what i hear as far as sound differences. i know that is brought up alot, but i dont recall being like ''well i spent $300 on this cable and thats why its going to sound good'' personally i just listen.and come up with a conclusion that way.


----------



## StanD

steve eddy said:


> Not really, no. This isn't an issue that's just a matter of opinion, like "Who's the most beautiful actress?" There is an actual truth that exists here. Either there are actual audible differences between copper and silver or there isn't. There is no in between.
> 
> se


 
 Only if you want one to be there.
_I hear voices in my head and they're coming from my headphones. _


----------



## mcandmar

steve eddy said:


> Not really, no. This isn't an issue that's just a matter of opinion, like "Who's the most beautiful actress?" There is an actual truth that exists here. Either there are actual audible differences between copper and silver or there isn't. There is no in between.
> 
> se


 
  
 ...and there is. IMO
  
 Its easy to prove, take one copper and one silver interconnect and join an amp/dac together.  Trust me if one channel sounds different from the other you will notice.
  
 Granted things like resistance and capacitance do matter so a crappy $1 cable and a quality cable of the same material will sound different which will complicate matters even further. Therefore a truly scientific like for like comparison isn't really possible.
  
 Besides if you dont believe your better off, put your wallet back in your pocket and walk away.  Ignorance is bliss and all that..


----------



## Steve Eddy

mcandmar said:


> Its easy to prove, take one copper and one silver interconnect and join an amp/dac together.  Trust me if one channel sounds different from the other you will notice.


 
  
 If that's your criteria for proof, then you should also have photographs of yourself in your freezer, little bags of rocks taped to all your audio gear and other assorted silliness as those things are also purported to make your system sound different.
  


> Granted things like resistance and capacitance do matter so a crappy $1 cable and a quality cable of the same material will sound different which will complicate matters even further. Therefore a truly scientific like for like comparison isn't really possible.


 
  
 If there is an actual audible difference, it won't complicate matters at all and a scientific like for like comparison is indeed possible.
  


> Besides if you dont believe your better off, put your wallet back in your pocket and walk away.  Ignorance is bliss and all that..


 
  
 But when one tries to pass their beliefs off as fact, then they have the burden of proof. And in these past several decades, no one has ever demonstrated conclusively that cables produce audible differences unless they're very poorly designed or broken. And again, there's no "agree to disagree" here.
  
 se


----------



## proton007

mcandmar said:


> ...and there is. IMO
> 
> 
> 
> Granted things like resistance and capacitance do matter so a crappy $1 cable and a quality cable of the same material will sound different which will complicate matters even further. Therefore a truly scientific like for like comparison isn't really possible.




So all the scientific properties you mentioned are measurable, their effect on sound is not. How naive.


----------



## proton007

mcandmar said:


> Besides if you dont believe your better off, put your wallet back in your pocket and walk away.  Ignorance is bliss and all that..




Judgement without proof. Way to go.


----------



## karloil




----------



## kskwerl

I literally buy cables because they look cool. In my experience they usually sound the same or slightly better, but if that's all in my head then its all in my head and that's all that matters to me.

I also can't believe I just posted in this topic lol


----------



## Steve Eddy

kskwerl said:


> I literally buy cables because they look cool. In my experience they usually sound the same or slightly better, but if that's all in my head then its all in my head and that's all that matters to me.


 
  
 +1
  
 I mean, really all we have is the "sound in our head." So I just go for the most pleasurable, enjoyable experience, whatever the reasons for it may be.
  
 se


----------



## Chris_Himself

kskwerl said:


> I literally buy cables because they look cool. In my experience they usually sound the same or slightly better, but if that's all in my head then its all in my head and that's all that matters to me.
> 
> I also can't believe I just posted in this topic lol


 
  
 Lol I'm with you on this. I actually own a DHC 6-wire Peptide and Complement2 and a Q Cable because I like the way they look.


----------



## Lenni

proton007 said:


> Judgement without proof. Way to go.


 
  
 the proof is in the pudding....


----------



## Mooses9

lenni said:


> the proof is in the pudding....


 
 and only instant, other puddings have no shame, no truth, they cant be trusted


----------



## Happy Camper

chris_himself said:


> Lol I'm with you on this. I actually own a DHC 6-wire Peptide and Complement2 and a Q Cable because I like the way they look.


 I always wondered why Eddy's Q cables had a $325 value (3m) since they can't *sound* any better than stock. That beauty is also subjective but no one questions that?


----------



## Steve Eddy

happy camper said:


> I always wondered why Eddy's Q cables had a $325 value (3m) since they can't *sound* any better than stock. That beauty is also subjective but no one questions that?




How can anyone legitimately question someone else's subjective experience?

se


----------



## Happy Camper

It's done in every cable thread by the science templars. This forum is a subjective place for sharing subjective experiences yet here it is that wiseguys try to discredit others subjective experiences. A bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say?


----------



## Steve Eddy

happy camper said:


> It's done in every cable thread by the science templars. This forum is a subjective place for sharing subjective experiences yet here it is that wiseguys try to discredit others subjective experiences. A bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say?




Yes, this is a subjective place for sharing subjective experience, but as often happens, some people try and pass their subjective experience off as more than that. And in those cases their claims should no longer have the sanctity afforded pure subjectivism. In other words, many of those who would call themselves subjective, aren't.

se


----------



## Seann

Saw this some times ago
 "Don't forget that most recordings are done using copper wires."


----------



## Happy Camper

seann said:


> Saw this some times ago
> "Don't forget that most recordings are done using copper wires."


Based on economics and not ultimate performance. Copper was "good enough".


----------



## Steve Eddy

happy camper said:


> Based on economics and not ultimate performance. Copper was "good enough".




Silver would have been better in what respect exactly? And I mean with respect to actual performance. What exactly is the " bad" property of copper that silver improves upon in any meaningful way? If you do not have an answer to this, then your claim above is meaningless.

se


----------



## Happy Camper

steve eddy said:


> Yes, this is a subjective place for sharing subjective experience, but as often happens, *some people try and pass their subjective experience off as more than that*. And in those cases their claims should no longer have the sanctity afforded pure subjectivism. In other words, many of those who would call themselves subjective, aren't.
> 
> se


 

This is based on what (or who's) criteria? I have nothing to sell. I have no financial dog in the fight. MOTs typically refrain from these discussions for obvious reasons. Unless perhaps they only sell copper for higher profit margins and might have vested interests? This statement may have no truth, but neither do your accusations that anyone that has a different opinion than you has motives other than what's stated. 

Let's not forget the purpose of the question. Can copper be bettered sonically? Science says silver is a better conductor than copper. Some say it can sound better. Some say they can't tell a difference. Some say copper sounds better. That's subjective commentary. They each give their personal experience for their opinions. If you accept the premise that subjective review is acceptable in principle, then you can't pick and choose what it's definition is from topic to topic to suit your point of view. 

Proof is for the science forum, not subjective commentary & experiences of our members. Here, it's not on the members to lay out their lab credentials and show their DBT, calibrations, testing protocol, etc. It's not a court of science but a place of experiences and opinions offered without judgement of objective persecution. That drives some crazy and that's why they have their own playground.


----------



## gjc11028

steve eddy said:


> Silver would have been better in what respect exactly? And I mean with respect to actual performance. What exactly is the " bad" property of copper that silver improves upon in any meaningful way? If you do not have an answer to this, then your claim above is meaningless.
> 
> se




Not to enter the fray, but to ask a question. I have mostly silver cables -- audio note vx and sogon, as interconnects. I have had copper cables that I liked but never really have a/b'd comparable copper and silver cables in my system. I have however heard the audio note Lexus at a shop, which is described by audio note as the copper version of the sogon in that they have similar construction. They do not sound that much alike and if you let people choose even up I do not think many people would choose the Lexus straight up unless they were looking for warmth and less detail. Why is there so much more music and detail in the silver. I am not saying that you cannot make a copper cable of comparable quality to the sogon, but if the conductors are so close why are these so different. Thanks


----------



## Steve Eddy

happy camper said:


> This is based on what (or who's) criteria? I have nothing to sell. I have no financial dog in the fight. MOTs typically refrain from these discussions for obvious reasons. Unless perhaps they only sell copper for higher profit margins and might have vested interests? This statement may have no truth, but neither do your accusations that anyone that has a different opinion than you has motives other than what's stated.


 
  
 I already stated the criteria. It is when someone tries to pass off their subjective experience as something more than that. A good recent example comes from macandmar, when he stated, "Its easy to prove, take one copper and one silver interconnect and join an amp/dac together.  Trust me if one channel sounds different from the other you will notice."
  
 Here he is talking about "proving" that copper and silver are audibly different. That's going beyond simply relating one's subjective experience and should not be protected by the "subjective" umbrella and should be open to question or challenge.
  


> Let's not forget the purpose of the question. Can copper be bettered sonically? Science says silver is a better conductor than copper. Some say it can sound better. Some say they can't tell a difference. Some say copper sounds better. That's subjective commentary. They each give their personal experience for their opinions. If you accept the premise that subjective review is acceptable in principle, then you can't pick and choose what it's definition is from topic to topic to suit your point of view.


 
  
 Let's get back to your original statement. In response to Seann saying that most recordings were done using copper wire, you claimed "Based on economics and not ultimate performance. Copper was 'good enough'." I don't see this claim as being subjective. You say "economics and not ultimate performance" as if to be making some sort of objective claim, and then add "good enough" in some rather derogatory quotes. You say "Science says silver is a better conductor than copper." Well, silver does have slightly higher conductivity compared to copper, but when it comes down to a cable, that just translates into simple resistance. You could just use a little bit more copper and achieve the same resistance as a given wire made of silver. So would you say such a copper cable would have the same "ultimate performance" as a silver cable?
  


> Proof is for the science forum, not subjective commentary & experiences of our members. Here, it's not on the members to lay out their lab credentials and show their DBT, calibrations, testing protocol, etc. It's not a court of science but a place of experiences and opinions offered without judgement of objective persecution. That drives some crazy and that's why they have their own playground.


 
  
 What drives me crazy are people who say they are "subjective," but make objective claims.
  
 se


----------



## Steve Eddy

gjc11028 said:


> Not to enter the fray, but to ask a question. I have mostly silver cables -- audio note vx and sogon, as interconnects. I have had copper cables that I liked but never really have a/b'd comparable copper and silver cables in my system. I have however heard the audio note Lexus at a shop, which is described by audio note as the copper version of the sogon in that they have similar construction. They do not sound that much alike and if you let people choose even up I do not think many people would choose the Lexus straight up unless they were looking for warmth and less detail. Why is there so much more music and detail in the silver. I am not saying that you cannot make a copper cable of comparable quality to the sogon, but if the conductors are so close why are these so different. Thanks


 
  
 I don't know that there is any more music and detail in the silver beyond our own subjective biases (it's embarrassingly trivially easy to manipulate our subjective perceptions). No one has ever demonstrated any actual audible differences between copper and silver cables so at this point we can't point the answer toward anything actually going on within the cables themselves. In fact, in my nearly 30 years of being involved in this industry, I've not seen anyone even present a plausible theory with regard to the two being audibly different.
  
 Personally, with regard to the enjoyment of reproduced music, I really don't care what the reasons are. And to that end I don't make any assumptions as to the cause. But if someone were to put a gun to my head, I'd lay my money down on human beings simply being human with all the limitations that go along with that.
  
 se


----------



## Chris_Himself

Why spend the time on theory when it just takes the single audition? 
  
 Nobody really has actually been able to lay down conductivity and it's direct correlation into making things sound the way they sound actually, even with just plain ol' better copper. I can explain why a cable is better structurally, thermodynamically in the case of conduits, and electrically, but even though I legit went to school for materials engineering, I couldn't tell you why IMO copper sounds like X and silver sounds like Y despite full well knowing it.
  
 I mean you have to look at a lot of cable naysayers too.. are those particular members representing the bleeding edge of the hobby? Have they really done anything to further the study into cable science, or do they just regurgitate "information"? Steve you can't win the war for us all bro.. although I appreciate that you try your damndest..
  
 I know that personally, long before I became an MOT, I've actually spent good money on cables with Moon Audio. I pretty much have Drew to thank for starting me on this journey of mine. I've had cables of different conductor material side by side multiple times with my HD600's, and I can tell you as an audiophile with plenty of years of experience, that the difference was not subtle. I'm not saying night and day improvement and my headphones become god-tier, but as a hobby where gains can be scaled in the smaller percentages, that it was immediate that I got my money's worth.


----------



## JohnSantana

Steve and CHris, you both are an awesome people !

you nailed the exact conclusion on the cable differences 

even one of the custom cable maker in this forum said that there will be no audible difference apart from ergonomic and aesthetics in using a new cable other stock.


----------



## spook76

That is NOT the conclusion Chris Himself stated. Steve as an objectivist finds no sonic difference because it cannot be scientificly measured and Chris as a subjectivist does. So it is not merely ascetics and ergonomics to Chris. 

Not to stir the pot, but Steve's conclusions are based upon scientific measurements as of right now. Is that alone conclusive? Steve absolutely does believe it is conclusive. I am not ready to dismiss all of the claims of sonic improvement simply because current testing cannot detect it. 

Science is about inquiring. Most science (including audiology) is by no means a complete disciple. The amount we do know now can be outweighed by what we do not know. As an example, remember in physics all current cosmological models are based upon a certain amount of total mass in the universe, yet close to 80% of the mass cannot be detected. Leading to theories of dark matter or dark energy with neither of which has been found.


----------



## Steve Eddy

spook76 said:


> Steve absolutely does believe it is conclusive.


 
  
 Would you please care to quote me where I said such a thing?
  
 se


----------



## spook76

steve eddy said:


> Silver would have been better in what respect exactly? And I mean with respect to actual performance. What exactly is the " bad" property of copper that silver improves upon in any meaningful way? If you do not have an answer to this, then your claim above is meaningless.
> 
> se




Steve

This is just one example in this thread of your dismissing a claim unless it can be proved by the current science. The inescapable inference that one can draw from that statement is that you rely solely on scientific measurement to prove a hypothesis as that is exactly what you are asking the person to do.

May we just agree that the science of audio cannot provide all the answers and we must leave room for speculation as otherwise how is our knowledge to grow.


----------



## Steve Eddy

spook76 said:


> Steve absolutely does believe it is conclusive.


 
  
 Once again, would you please care to quote me where I said such a thing?
  
 se


----------



## Steve Eddy

spook76 said:


> This is just one example in this thread of your dismissing a claim unless it can be proved by the current science. The inescapable inference that one can draw from that statement is that you rely solely on scientific measurement to prove a hypothesis as that is exactly what you are asking the person to do.
> 
> May we just agree that the science of audio cannot provide all the answers and we must leave room for speculation as otherwise how is our knowledge to grow.


 
  
 First, i didn't see any speculation in HappyCamper's statement "Based on economics and not ultimate performance. Copper was 'good enough'."
  
 Second, even if it was speculation, it is meaningless unless you follow through and put your speculations to the test. You can sit and speculate for years, but unless you follow through, you'll not have advanced a single inch in terms of adding to our knowledge and understanding.
  
 se


----------



## spook76

True if you accept the premise that current testing methodology is conclusive and can prove or disprove his statement. That is where we disagree. Further, speculation is the wellspring of new ideas in science or anything else without it science becomes static.


----------



## Steve Eddy

spook76 said:


> True if you accept the premise that current testing methodology is conclusive and can prove or disprove his statement. That is where we disagree. Further, speculation is the wellspring of new ideas in science or anything else without it science becomes static.


 
  
 Well, he's the one who made the statement. All I did was ask him to substantiate it. So what exactly is your disagreement?
  


> Further, speculation is the wellspring of new ideas in science or anything else without it science becomes static.


 
  
 Yes, speculation is the wellspring of new ideas. But speculation is only half the equation. Unless you put those speculations to the test, then you're just as static as you were if you had not made any speculations.
  


> Steve absolutely does believe it is conclusive.


 
  
 And for the third time, please quote me where I said such a thing. If you can't, then please withdraw this statement.
  
 se


----------



## spook76

I think the inference I made is obvious so my statement stands. 

The reason I chimed in to begin with was Steve you are an overbearing bully on this thread with no room for any augment but your own. You dismiss any claim unless supported by your understanding of audio science and belittle and intimidate the messenger. Head-Fi exists for a free and open discussion not one person's opinion however well founded.


----------



## StanD

spook76 said:


> True if you accept the premise that current testing methodology is conclusive and can prove or disprove his statement. That is where we disagree. Further, speculation is the wellspring of new ideas in science or anything else without it science becomes static.


 
 Speculation may be a source of ideas, however, it becomes science when there is proof. Theorem alone is not enough. Remember in math or physics we ask for a proof of a theorem.


----------



## spook76

stand said:


> Speculation becomes science when there is proof. Theorem alone is not enough. Remember in math or physics we ask for a proof of a theorem.



Agreed. But I hope you agree that all theorems start as speculation and my point is dismissing all speculation will lead science nowhere. My first example is the best, for over 20 years cosmetologists have found no proof of dark energy or matter but the current models of the universe still stand.


----------



## manbear

spook76 said:


> for over 20 years cosmetologists have found no proof of dark energy or matter but the current models of the universe still stand.


 

 That is because the cosmetologists are busy applying makeup to customers while the cosmologists are looking through the telescopes.


----------



## StanD

spook76 said:


> Agreed. But I hope you agree that all theorems start as speculation and my point is dismissing all speculation will lead science nowhere. My first example is the best, for over 20 years cosmetologists have found no proof of dark energy or matter but the current models of the universe still stand.


 
 Not always, it can be the result of observation and possibly with some prevailing knowledge that is relevant. Thomas Edison utilized observation all too often, e.g. light bulb - lol.
 To me the basics of Electrical Engineering and properties of materials such as Copper and Silver and how they are applied in Headphone cables is pretty basic. We are not talking about rocket science so if one can hear a difference, the question is why? IMO, we as humans make poor witness to our senses and are subject to subjectivity which in this topic is the source of much controversy.


----------



## spook76

manbear said:


> That is because the cosmetologists are busy applying makeup to customers while the cosmologists are looking through the telescopes.




Hehe nice catch. Apologies my sloth and spell check are my ruin.


----------



## Mooses9

this thread is crazy. i dont know why cant people just accept some people like copper, some people like silver. and be done with it.


----------



## spook76

mooses9 said:


> this thread is crazy. i dont know why cant people just accept some people like copper, some people like silver. and be done with it.



AGREED!


----------



## Steve Eddy

> You dismiss any claim unless supported by your understanding of audio science and belittle and intimidate the messenger.


 
   
What claim have I dismissed? Quote me. I'm getting rather tired of your putting beliefs in my head and words in my mouth that are not there.

  
 se


----------



## Steve Eddy

mooses9 said:


> this thread is crazy. i dont know why cant people just accept some people like copper, some people like silver. and be done with it.


 
  
 Because some seem to need to take it over the line of the purely subjective into the objective. If it were left purely subjective, I wouldn't have had a thing to say in this thread.
  
 se


----------



## manbear

There's a middle ground between subjectivist and objectivist that I think a lot of people don't understand. Basically, suppose that the objectivists are right, and that the claims of subjectivists are due entirely to placebo effect and expectation bias -- does this really invalidate the claims of subjectivists? Even if they only think they are hearing something, why does it matter as long as they clearly have their own perceptions? If someone thinks they hear something, then they might as well really be hearing it.

 To make a medical analogy, suppose I feel chronically lethargic and a doctor gives me a sugar pill. Due to the placebo effect, I now feel more energized. If I really do feel more energized, then who cares if it's in my head? The sugar pill still gave me the effects I was looking for, so I'm happy. Trying to bust my bubble amounts to little more than being a busybody. You could even say that there is an objective explanation for my perceptions -- after all, the placebo effect can be measured. 

 A similar principle applies to objectivists -- if you don't hear a difference, then good for you. You just saved yourself some money. There's no need to try to make sure everybody hears things the same way you do. Be content with your own perceptions and accept that other people may have different perceptions. For all you know, your scientific beliefs may be their own source of bias.


----------



## Chris_Himself

I don't like using and/or reading big words in place of more easy to read words lol.
  
 You cannot challenge me to prove something as someone who sells this stuff for a living and not have it come dangerously close to crossing the line when it comes to how MOT members on Head-Fi are allowed to function. I can't sound like I'm "selling" you my particular product at all so I have to use other people's product as a baseline (but to be fair only if it's not slamming them) so regardless of if I'm telling the truth, I'm really limited by how much truth I can put down and obviously, there are two sides, someone is gonna disagree and I don't have all that much time to argue on Head-Fi when there are plenty of more productive threads.
  
 I can't just wave my .."arm" around and say "oh well look how successful I am, how could cables be a sham if I have repeat clientele" because that totally does not prove anything at all so I'm not gonna do that. I respect that a lot of times, my customers
  
 When it comes down to the science of it, the ones who are most fit to hash it out, cannot do it because it breaks policy, and the people trying to get it out of us all the time sometimes believe they have won the argument because we cannot straight up lay down how we feel a certain material performs.
  
 Now if we got Currawong and some other bros in here to finally say what they thought and we could provide supporting arguments and start something productive, that'd be great but I'm afraid I just cannot give you guys the answers you're looking for without sounding like I'm trying to sell you something and even if I really could, I wouldn't do it just because.. well I don't want to sound like I'm trying to sell you something regardless of rules.
  
 That being said, I am a patron of DHC, Q Audio, and Moon and have been for some time because they all bring something unique to the table sonically, aesthetically, and I just plain like most of my colleagues in the field.


----------



## Mooses9

manbear said:


> There's a middle ground between subjectivist and objectivist that I think a lot of people don't understand. Basically, suppose that the objectivists are right, and that the claims of subjectivists are due entirely to placebo effect and expectation bias -- does this really invalidate the claims of subjectivists? Even if they only think they are hearing something, why does it matter as long as they clearly have their own perceptions? If someone thinks they hear something, then they might as well really be hearing it.
> 
> To make a medical analogy, suppose I feel chronically lethargic and a doctor gives me a sugar pill. Due to the placebo effect, I now feel more energized. If I really do feel more energized, then who cares if it's in my head? The sugar pill still gave me the effects I was looking for, so I'm happy. Trying to bust my bubble amounts to little more than being a busybody. You could even say that there is an objective explanation for my perceptions -- after all, the placebo effect can be measured.
> 
> A similar principle applies to objectivists -- if you don't hear a difference, then good for you. You just saved yourself some money. There's no need to try to make sure everybody hears things the same way you do. Be content with your own perceptions and accept that other people may have different perceptions. For all you know, your scientific beliefs may be their own source of bias.


 
  
 Couldnt have said it better. and i like your placebo analogy. makes sense to me.
  
 i mean its the same grounds as faith, you can't prove or disprove someones faith, its what that particular person believes in. there Are people who dont have ''faith'' in cables making a difference. but you cant prove or disprove their faith in the cable considering its their perception of what is happening.
  
 let's say someone pray's about something going on in their life and they put their faith in their prayers to help the situation, and lets say that the problem going on subsides itsself....they would say its their prayers, their faith. where it could have been that reguardless of faith or prayers the situation might have subsided anyway.......
  
 i feel reguardless of if its subjective or objective, or if its just a placebo effect. good for the ones that are hearing something different reguardless of what the circumstance is...objective or subjective..
  
  
 obviously we have established a line straight down the middle. objective and subjective people.


----------



## AnakChan

Chaps, keep the conversation here civil. If there's any personal dispute on quotations take it offline. There's no need to muscle about publicly here on the thread, not to mention it's off topic.


----------



## Steve Eddy

manbear said:


> There's a middle ground between subjectivist and objectivist that I think a lot of people don't understand. Basically, suppose that the objectivists are right, and that the claims of subjectivists are due entirely to placebo effect and expectation bias -- does this really invalidate the claims of subjectivists? Even if they only think they are hearing something, why does it matter as long as they clearly have their own perceptions? If someone thinks they hear something, then they might as well really be hearing it.


 
  
 No, provided the claims made by the so-called "subjectivists" are in fact subjective. If someone simply says something sounds better/worse to them than something else, there's absolutely nothing to argue. My only problem has been with those who would call themselves "subjectivists," but go beyond that and start making objective claims. At that point, all bets are off and you are no longer covered by the subjective shield.
  
 se


----------



## Steve Eddy

chris_himself said:


> You cannot challenge me to prove something as someone who sells this stuff for a living and not have it come dangerously close to crossing the line when it comes to how MOT members on Head-Fi are allowed to function.


 
  
 I think all objective claims should be open to question and/or challenge by any member of the forum, MoT or otherwise.
  
 se


----------



## proton007

steve eddy said:


> I think all objective claims should be open to question and/or challenge by any member of the forum, MoT or otherwise.
> 
> se


 
  
 +10000000
  
 Saying  '_I find_ Silver/Copper to sound so and so'   VS  'Silver/Copper _sounds_ so and so'  makes all the difference. One is _an_ _opinion/experience, subjective_, the other is a _universal claim open to challenge/debate/proof_.
  
 To all those who extoll the virtues of cable materials, please consider that your experiences are yours alone. The only way to establish a cause and effect relationship is to have an objective observation that's repeatable with a six-sigma accuracy.
 Then you can claim a material affects the sound in a particular manner, and there will be no questions asked, no challenges thrown.
  
 Until then, please stop treating skeptics like 'non-believers'.   Its not that they don't want to believe, they just won't believe your subjective claims, just like so many other areas of life (UFOs, supernatural stuff, psychics etc etc).
  
*A belief is knowledge if the belief is true, and if the believer has a justification (reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance) for believing it is true.*
  
 Its very hard to establish the _truth_ of subjective experiences.
 Pure and simple.


----------



## StanD

All cables, Copper or Silver should come with a bottle of sugar pills. Then nobody can be sure of anything. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Buahaha
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




......


----------



## manbear

manbear said:


> There's a middle ground between subjectivist and objectivist that I think a lot of people don't understand. Basically, suppose that the objectivists are right, and that the claims of subjectivists are due entirely to placebo effect and expectation bias -- does this really invalidate the claims of subjectivists? Even if they only think they are hearing something, why does it matter as long as they clearly have their own perceptions? If someone thinks they hear something, then they might as well really be hearing it.


 


steve eddy said:


> No, provided the claims made by the so-called "subjectivists" are in fact subjective. If someone simply says something sounds better/worse to them than something else, there's absolutely nothing to argue. My only problem has been with those who would call themselves "subjectivists," but go beyond that and start making objective claims. At that point, all bets are off and you are no longer covered by the subjective shield.
> 
> se


 

 I suppose I should clarify that I'm talking about the subjective claims of the subjectivists. I certainly agree that objective claims about how the properties of a certain cable material affect sound require objective justification, as they are scientific claims that should be verifiable... I get the sense that you disagree with my post, but I don't think we are making incompatible statements here.


----------



## Happy Camper

stand said:


> Speculation may be a source of ideas, however, it becomes science when there is proof. Theorem alone is not enough. Remember in math or physics we ask for a proof of a theorem.


And that's what the Science forum is for. This forum is for common experience among hobbyists and to bring scientific demands here is not suppose to refrain other's commentary. That's why the "NO DBT" comments in the forum title. There are a lot of people who would chime in on their experiences with silver were it not for the constant badgering. When you demand proof of any person commenting they like silver because of any reasoning having to do with what they hear, it's the same as calling them liars and you bring science up as your hole card like that's the joker to your winning hand. But science is constantly learning and adjusting their understanding that was set in stone the last time it found the answer. For as much good and knowledge as science has given us, they are still grasping at the world around us for answers and audio is no different. To be so arrogant about it's results as to call all liars and nutjobs with insinuations is not going to hold muster any more than going into the science forum with opinions won't. It's called respect and some have none.


----------



## Steve Eddy

happy camper said:


> And that's what the Science forum is for. This forum is for common experience among hobbyists and to bring scientific demands here is not suppose to refrain other's commentary. That's why the "NO DBT" comments in the forum title.


 
  
 Then that's the forum where you should have made your statement "Based on economics and not ultimate performance. Copper was 'good enough'."
  
 But you didn't. You posted it here. And I didn't say a word about double blind testing. I asked you about the physical properties that would substantiate your statement.
  
 This is an example of what I have been talking about. Someone makes an objective claim, then when that claim is questioned, they try and hide behind the "No DBT" rule.
  
 Can't have it both ways. Either confine your objective statements and claims to the Sound Science forum or expect any objective claims made in these forums to be questioned or otherwise challenged. And as long as blind testing is not brought up, I see no reason why that should be in violation of the DBT rule.
  
 se


----------



## spook76

Happy,

There is no point in stating the obvious, the objectivists feel they are saving us from ourselves and it is their holy mission to bring enlightenment to us poor savages.


----------



## mcandmar

.../unsubscribe


----------



## Happy Camper

spook76 said:


> Happy,
> 
> There is no point in stating the obvious, the objectivists feel they are saving us from ourselves and it is their holy mission to bring enlightenment to us poor savages.


Thus the term Audio Templars.


----------

