Has Anyone Found Shunyata Cables Sounding Thin?


I have noticed this with the introduction of some of Shunyata's latest offerings into my system. They are great cables but they need help in my system. I run cables in series to solve the problem and the results are stunning -- while going against audio principles and accepted audio "wisdom".
sabai

Showing 25 responses by sabai

Hi Zd542 and Guidocorona,

The tonality/harmonics are not what I like to hear. I would call the sound thin. There is definitely something lacking. Maybe it's just my system.

I have been using DIY Furutech PCs, ICs and digital cables in my system, on and off -- not in series. But I have experimented with series cabling in the past. Since the Furutech wire is OCC cryo-ed copper, just like Shunyata cables, I figured the synergy might be good. So, I tried the Shunyata digital and IC cables in series with my Furutechs. Wow! Stunning. So, I tried my PCs with the Shunyatas. Equally stunning.

How does this work? Since I run AES/XLR it's easy. Just piggy-back the cables. With PCs I use a burn-in adapter. Which cable goes downstream? Ah, there's the rub. It depends on which sounds better. This part is all trial and error.
Douglas_schroeder,

If you could hear my system you would change your mind. There is no loss at all of precision or information -- contrary to accepted audio "wisdom". The fact is that my system is at no "disadvantage" whatsoever. On the contrary, it has gained an advantage -- better SQ.

You are speaking from the point of view of audio theory -- not from the point of view of someone who is actually listening to my system. You have never heard my system. The ears tell the story -- not the theory. It is not a matter of changing my mind. This has nothing to do with the mind. It is all about the ears. My ears have been tested to hear 16,000 Hertz. Neither my system nor my ears are "disadvantaged".
Psag,

You have stated "People in audio often say 'trust your ears', as if that's the end of any and all arguments. I don't believe that to be the case."

Audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear". Rene Descartes said "cogito ergo sum" -- "I think therefore I am". In audio this would be the equivalent of "I think therefore I hear". I do not feel that anything should or can replace a good set of ears.
Douglas_schroeder,

Sorry, your logic is completely off track. You have not "tried this" in my system using the specific Furutech and Shunyata configuration that I use. You speak from "experience" but your experience is limited to the cables that you used in your system. "Trying this" -- series cabling -- in your system, and finding "it" does not work, is meaningless because I am not talking about your system. I am taking about what works in my system.

You have missed the point completely. The point is what works in my system, not what does not work in your system. You have no idea about what works in my system. So, dismissing what I have done by trying series cabling in your system is irrelevant because it does not duplicate my system and my experiment.

The important thing is not that "this" did not work in your system. Because your "this" is not the same "this" that works in my system. The important thing is that "this" works very well in my system. "This" may be "counter-productive" in your system. But "this" is not "counter-productive" in mine. You are talking apples and oranges. For you to take your experience and generalize it is as false as if I were to generalize my experience.

I have neither used the words "holy grail" nor have I implied anywhere that I am suggesting a "holy grail" for others. If you read my OP carefully I have simply asked if others have experienced thin sound with Shunyata cables. And I have let people know what works in my system to overcome the problem.

You have already come to a conclusion as to what is "not possible" -- and therefore what is possible. For you, improving SQ is not possible with series cabling. Well, you can talk about your own system here with authority. I would not presume to do so. But to talk about others' systems with equal authority is a whole other matter. You do not have the authority to do so, IMO. Your experience is limited to your system and to your experiment.

The problem is that you have generalized your conclusion based on your experience. Well, the conclusion you have reached may be valid for your system. But once you start to assume that what is true for your system is therefore true for all systems, you tread on ground you have no experience with.

For you, the theory calls the shots. Your theory tells you what is possible and what is not possible. For me, the ears call the shots. They tell me what is possible and what is not possible. Since you have not heard my system you have no actual basis for making judgments about what is possible and what is not possible with my system.

You only have iron-clad, indisputable theories that may, in fact, not be so iron-clad or so indisputable. But you would have to hear my system to find that out. Obviously. But you already know this is not necessary -- and that you would be able to improve the SQ of my system without ever having heard it. I find this quite amazing.

Series cabling is an art. It is like choosing the right component, but even more complicated because it is necessary to test dozens of cables in various configurations. How you can be convinced that you could improve the cabling and SQ in my system without knowing about this from first-hand experience is as presumptuous as my saying that I know how I could improve the cabling and SQ in your system without first-hand experience. Based only on theories and accepted "wisdom".

You may feel you have "exceptional" cables but to presume they would do anything for the SQ in my system is to be completely off track. It is beyond me how anyone can make cable assumptions and pre-decisions about another person's system with no experience at all with the other person's system.

I find it interesting that you already know that you would be able to make the sound of my system more to "your liking" -- without ever having heard my system in the first place to see if it is to your liking before the making the changes you have already decided it needs! You know beforehand that there "must" be "degradation" and "disadvantage" happening because your theory tells you so -- not your ears, but your theory.
According to Psag, it looks like I am not the only one with the same perception -- thin-sounding Shunyata cables.

Psag,

Running cables in series is no more about tone controls than running single cabling is, IMO. You expect tone with a single cable, do you not? If the tone is thin, if the harmonics are not there with a single cable, then what do you do? You join the cable bandwagon and buy and sell and buy and sell in the hopes of reaching your sonic goals.

I do not see the problem in trying to find a way to restore harmonics by using cables in series. The problem is a theoretical one. The problem is not an actual one if the ears say yeah. If the ears say yeah then what's the problem? You say "... your ears will eventually tell you that [this is not so]." Really. So, what you are saying is that I cannot trust my ears -- and that you know the answer about my system without ever having heard it!

You say " I would not run cables in series, ever. Its [sic] a mistake." Well, this is an interesting statement. How do you know it's a mistake if you have never tried it? Does dogma take the place of the ears in audio? It's like people who nay-say various tweaks and accessories but have never tried them. They know in advance the answer. Really? In which case the mind closes the ears before they have a chance to listen. This is not the way I built my system.

Onhwy61,

I don't think that listing my components will be any help at all. How can it be? You cannot taste the food by reading the menu. If I tell you that I have Raidho C1.1 speakers, a Shunyata Triton power conditioner, etc. what will you possibly learn from that about what my system sounds like with cables in series?
Psag,

I forgot to comment on your other statements.

You stated that "People in audio often say 'trust your ears', as if that's the end of any and all arguments. I don't believe that to be the case."

The word audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear." It seems to be putting things backwards to state that your cannot trust your ears when it comes to matters that ultimately concern nothing more than our hearing -- unless, of course, one's hearing is impaired.

And you stated that "My priority has been to use components in such a way as to convey the signal as it was recorded." In such a way? What way is that, exactly? Are you presuming that your way of using components, whatever that may be, is the only valid way of using components to "convey the signal as it was recorded"?

The signal is transduced into sound. How do you know what combination of elements will faithfully transduce the sound in all possible audio systems? Cables are just another element in the chain of electronic components that contribute to making the signal audible. Would you say an audiophile should not use a pre-amp -- and all the cables attached to it -- because it makes the signal path longer and therefore must introduce distortion into the signal and must therefore distort the sound?

And how about the addition of a power conditioner with filters? All power conditioners do not produce identical sound. One may fairly assume that distortion is one of the elements being produced by some of the power conditioners on the market. Are we to eschew the notion of using a power conditioner -- and all of the cables attached to it -- because some power conditions produce unacceptable distortion? Is the length of the signal path the ultimate deciding factor or is the sound the deciding factor -- or none of the above?

You started your discussion on this topic with a conclusion based on some sort of theory (that is not completely clear to me) that displaces the importance of the ears in an area where hearing is actually the most important thing. Your comments here reminded me of a post I read recently on a PS Audio forum:

"I do love the "I don't care what it sounds like, if it doesn't measure great it's crap. If it measures great then I have to buy it even if it sounds like crap because if it measures great it must be great." "Audiophiles"."

In your case it does not seem to be a matter of not measuring great. It seems to be a matter of not measuring up to some sort of theory -- some sort of mental measurement. In both cases the mind short-circuits the ears. I do not allow any mental intervention between the music and my ears. I let my ears make the audio decisions. After all, audio comes from the Latin. It literally means "I hear".
Audiolabyrinth,

You're right. One size does not fit all. What works for one person may not work for another. We have to discover through trial and error what works and what does not work in our systems. Suggestions from others may produce little gold nuggets -- or little brown turds. Ultimately, your have to rely on your own experience and your own ears.
Charles1dad,

You stated "To appreciate music requires listening and in order to listen we need our ears." It's as simple as that.

Of course, the brain is involved. The brain is involved in everything. But worrying about mental models makes for an intellectual exercise -- not a listening session. Music begins and ends with the ears. Yes, I noticed that the ears are attached to the brain. And therefore there is presumably some processing going on up there -- I hope. But to make this into an intellectual thing about mental models distances this from the music and the listening experience. And the further away from the ears the discussion drifts the further away it moves from that experience.

We can get into all sorts of intellectual discussions about psycho-acoustics and where the music actually is -- in the room -- in the brain -- in the ears -- and how we perceive music. And how we may not be able to trust our ears, or to fully trust them, or how we cannot trust them in this or in that way. And we must therefore doubt what we are hearing. But this solves nothing. Because it all does come back to what we hear -- with no second guessing or intellectual intervention.

Otherwise, listening becomes either an intellectual exercise or a game that begins to sound like the old Abbott and Costello "Who's on first, what's on second" routine. Some people may prefer an intellectually-informed music experience. I prefer a music experience on the feeling and emotional level.

Regarding listing my system, no one will be able to do anything except speculate about my system if I go to the trouble of listing everything, which I will not do. I will say that I have Raidho C1.1 speakers, an Audio Horizons TP 2.3 preamp fully loaded, a PS Audio PerfectWave transport with PS Audio DS DAC on the way, an isolation transformer, a Monarchy power regenerator, a Shunyata Triton power conditioner, and an Atma-Sphere S-30 power amp.

I will not list all my cabling except to say that I use mostly Shunyata cables in series with my own DIY cables that feature some of the best Furutech wire and connectors. I have the prototypes for 2 new products in my system. This information is proprietary. There are also other things I do that I do not care to divulge.
Omsed

Every element in a system imparts tone -- components, cables, accessories. I have no idea why there is special emphasis placed on cables in this regard. Perhaps because they are easier to add and subtract in a system which leaves them more vulnerable to the accusation of being agents for tone control. True, some people may focus on tone when looking for cables for their system. But for me, cables are just another element in the system. They contribute to tone, but also to detail, sound stage and imaging and all the other sonic parameters.
Unless you've eaten there before it's hard to know how the food will taste simply by reading the menu. Which does not stop some folks from claiming they can.
Cerrot,

"I know I have not heard your system but if you tell me you put water in your engine instead of gas, I would not need to hear your car to know what you have."

If you Google water-powered engines you will discover some amazing things.

Congratulations. Glad to hear you have everything figured out. By the way, here's a hypothetical situation. Your best audiophile friend invites you over. He's been doing some odd experiments, much to your surprise. He tells you he's running a cable or 2 in series and would like you to have a listen. Your response:

1. You're not interested in hearing this crap. You already know it's a crock of BS.
2. OK, why not, power up and let's give it a go.

Would you choose #1 or #2?
Psag,

I love it -- "It may sound good, but its not." I got a good laugh when I woke up this morning.
Psag,

I got a second good laugh this morning -- "They stay away from things that don't make sense, regardless of how they may sound."
Douglas_schroeder,

You stated "I suspect Sabai may not have even tried the Shunyata cable alone ..."

Really? Sorry to disappoint you.
Douglas_schroeder,

You stated "I don't need to hear anyone else's rig ..." Congratulations. I'm glad to hear you've got it all figured out.

But you got it right when you stated "you can't judge because you haven't heard my system". I think this is quite an obvious observation -- clear, direct and to the point. Although there may be "no solid ground" for you with "such methods and logic".

By the way, here's a hypothetical situation. Your best audiophile friend invites you over. He's been doing some odd experiments, much to your surprise. He tells you he's running a cable or 2 in series and would like you to have a listen. Your response:

1. You're not interested in hearing this crap. You already know it's a crock of BS. You have it figured out already.
2. OK, why not, power up and let's give it a go.

Would you choose #1 or #2?

I am not taking about a "philosophy of audio" in any respect -- let alone one that is "superior" to another. I am only talking about what works and what does not work in my system. As stated clearly in the OP. Plain and simple.

Zd542,

You got it right when you stated "That sounds to me like he tried the cables both ways." I have done extensive testing with Shunyata digital, IC and PC cabling alone. In my system, may I repeat "in my system", the series cabling I use is superior to the Shunyata cables used alone. I suspect this may be because of the synergy created -- both cables using identical OCC copper wire that has been cryogenically treated. Series cabling with my Elrod cables does not work at all. The sound seriously degrades in this case.

Knghifi,

You make a good observation about the S-30 driving my speakers. But since I use Paul Speltz auto-transformers I have headroom of about 30db -- often more -- on most recordings, and headroom of 15db to 20db on the "worst" recordings. There is no distortion at all in the SQ.

Charles1dad,

I just loved the Raidhos when I heard them. I already had the S-30 in my system. I knew it would be a gamble with the Raidhos. Michael Borresen (Raidho) and Ralph Karsten (Atma-Sphere) both expressed concerned to me about this. And, in fact, there was little headroom when I first paired them up. But the addition of the Paul Speltz auto-transformers solved the problem. I am more than delighted with the sonic results.
Douglas_schroeder,

You stated "a so-so wire" when referring to top-of-line Furutech cables. Well, as I have already stated, the facts are that all Furutech products use only top-quality OCC copper -- deep cryo-ed -- identical to Shunyata cables. In an attempt to differentiate them from Shunyata cables these important facts are tossed out your window. Sorry, there are no brownie points for this sort of thing.

As I said earlier I am glad to hear you have it all figured out. This is like listening to naysayers who are experts in snake oil and BS meters. We all know how this manifests itself on the forum. I remember the old days when Jack Bybee was considered a voodoo practitioner. Do you know how many people sneered and scoffed and LOL-ed at the mere mention of the name Bybee? Now Jack Bybee is venerated as the grandfather of the "tweak" era.

But some people don't need to hear things -- they simply know in advance what is worthy and what is not thanks to iron-clad theories -- theories that are beyond question. As I said earlier, I'm glad you have it all figured out. Congratulations.
Charles1dad,

You're welcome. Paul Speltz auto-transformers are a marvel. I highly recommend them for systems with a similar mismatch -- one that is easily rectified.
Knghifi,

Thanks for your opinions. Come visit some time. Theories and opinions are be important but the ears always win out over here.
Knghifi,

I forgot to mention that Ralph was the one who recommended the Paul Speltz auto-transformers. If you do a little Googling you will discover that many people have taken his recommendation and the results have been unanimous -- the same wonderful results that my ears have witnessed in my system.
Charles1dad,

If you like cello you may also like Starker, du Pre and Fournier.
Knghifi,

You're welcome. There are 3 connection levels with Paul Speltz auto-transformers. Paul has detailed information on his site. If you have any questions about how to use the auto-transformers with your own speakers I am sure Paul Speltz and Ralph Karsten will be glad to respond to your messages.