It's Simple

@mr_m - I'm a long time lurker. A post mentioning a fuse that has directionality and another about letting 'overburned' cables rest were the last straws. Directionality? On A/C? As far as lions, bring 'em on. I love skewering.

@dave_b - Spot on. For those who don't know, those networks are LRC. My current cables have them :-)

@almarg - Isn't science great!

I have a bin of cables in the garage. Silver, Litz, MultiGuage, OFC, Linear Crystal, PE, PEP, PET, PP. Everyone of them sounds different. More than 40 years ago I realized that they are not universal across all systems. I use 'video' cables with my sub because they SOUND BEST of all 6 foot lengths in the bin in that application.

When consulting for Monster Cable Pro, we took cables to many top LA studios. At ALL BUT ONE, the MCP made a difference. Some better, some not.

I ran a cable audibility workshop at AES in the mid 80's. It was run as A/B. For each pass, cables were removed and either swapped or replugged with a timed [30s?] interval. Participants were able to learn as we ran several passes identifying A and B. Participants included a wide range of engineers and audiophiles. During several tests Rod[?] from SOTA and I wrote C because it was not A or B. After a couple of days of standing and talking, I wrote "too tired to tell" Ditto Rod, unbeknownst to me.

Some achieved better than 80%. YHS 84% prior to 'too tired to tell.'
When the results were tabulated, overall it was a wash. For some, cables make a difference, some not.

Later we investigated 'C - neither' and determined multiple factors:
- Line voltage and noise
- 80's error correction sometimes got lost
- Thermal effects

Later,  c. 1990, I was involved with modelling a well regarded analog mic pre for a digital console. IIRC, 24 bit ADC, 32bit DSP, 20 bit DAC. Only by getting the correct balance of frequency response, harmonic distortion and phase shift of the original transformer and circuit were we able to get very close, but only close. Technically, it was inferior.

In the mix, we could manipulate the 'sound stage' by adjusting the ratio of odd and even harmonics and phase. IIRC, more ODD made the image come forward of the speakers and narrow to a shallower triangle behind the speakers. More EVEN moved the image plane to between the speakers and extended directly and farther back, more like a stage. These levels were in the bottom few bits of 20bits, i.e. the bottom couple of bits of CD 16bit resolution. Phase adjustments could affect image height but were very speaker and amplifier dependent.

When we reintroduced the analog version of the mic pre, management wanted surface mount. While this would make sense from cost and reliability standpoints, I demurred. We needed the LRC from PTH parts, including iron leads on some components rather than tinned copper to replicate the sound. Or we'd spend years attempting. 

EVERY recording has frequency and phase artifacts from microphones, cables, electronics. On any given system, choice of source material may enhance or detract interacting with playback system colorations. Unless one keeps a library of cables and components, changing per recording, the best one can hope is 'pretty good' across all programs. Sometimes one has to choose between the music and the sound.

When auditioning a new component, it must pass with a great multitude of cables and other components. Otherwise, one can build a superb system that could fall apart with the change of a single component.

A topic which receives little ink is thermal. I have a customized CD player that requires about 1 hour playing to sound its best. Not just on, playing. The best metaphor as it approaches thermal equilibrium is adjusting the focus on a camera whilst changing the illumination and color temperature with a dimmer.

It is instructive to log ambient and internal conditions along with perceptions. Not only electronics, but speakers and to a much lesser extent cables change with temperature. Like wine and whisky, people have preferences and some are better suited to summer and others winter. I love Burgundy and Islay's, the missus not so much. Vive la difference!

An instructive test is to play a particular favorite which has good dynamic range on a well warmed system. Make notes and sketches of the soundstage. Now put a low dynamic range selection on repeat, turn it up LOUD and leave for an hour or more. Come back and immediately replay the original at the original level [�±0.05 db max delta @ 1kHz measured at the pre-out]. Repeatedly play it and note the changes as the amp changes. If impatient, use a fan to cool rapidly. Dollars to donuts changes are evident. Class A amps not invited ;-)

As little as 3°C change in heat sink temperature on some amplifiers can subtly change its sonics. How many here note heat sink temperature, or anything for that matter, before prattling on?

Bottleheads are not thermally immune. I have thermally controlled fans just ticking over to maintain tube and transformer temperatures at what I consider the sweet spot. Citation II, multiple ARC, custom KT-88, PrimaLuna, etc. all benefit.

I did not say cables do not make a difference. I said cables have properties and those properties can have consequences. Only you can judge.

Oenophiles may relate: Jordan makes an excellent, well regarded cabernet. However, in Jordan cabs I always taste Dill, which I detest. Once a pal tried to fool me by putting Jordan in an another well regarded bottle. Nice try.

For years after the LA Auto Show, we'd all go out to a fine dinner. Everyone brought a favorite wine. The others paid for the meal of bringer of the wine judged best. One year I took a chard that cost $2.99. Against wines up to $200, it was judged best by a mile. I got my meal for free, but had to buy the cognac. The point? $$$$ does not always equate to better and there is no free lunch.

Of course cables make a difference. Sometimes audible, sometimes not. Sometimes preferable, sometime not.
.
Whether a difference is an improvement is system, program, ambient condition and most of all, LISTENER dependent.

Two of my favorite audio acronyms:
YMMV - Your Mileage May Vary
YOYO - You're On Your Own - no one else is wearing your ears!

Pax,

- Ian

@shadorne  

“faithful to the source recording”

Ain't no such thing. Sound suffers the death of a thousand cuts. I once missed out on a Grammy nomination because the record company head ordered Bernie to add 3db of compression overriding the producer and I. The disk you get is often not the music recorded. A pal on the nominating committee said we were a shoo-in but for the compression.

I recently did a bit analysis of Fagan's Nightfly. Pals and I have pre & post IMEI versions covering multiple decades. The post version I have is markedly inferior. It has been eq'd and compressed. Happens all the time that marketing types order changes and 'engineers' who've never been in a studio make arbitrary changes because "Anything I do will make this .... better"

I recently purchased a replacement Moby Grape CD. It sounds like it was made from MP3. Record companies can be butchers!

Speaking of MP3, either it is turned off or I leave. Here's why:
http://www.ielogical.com/Lossy/LossyEncodingSoundsBad.html

A high fidelity setup will allow you to hear what the mastering engineer intended.

The mastering engineer is just another colorist in the chain. Depending on the project, Doug and his setup could work wonders. On another, not so much. His 'Direct to Disk' work was incredible.

If the budget would support it, we'd master at Doug's, Bernie's, Steve's, etc. The monitor system itself alters the sound. It could expose or mask, turning a feature into a flaw or vice versa. Sometimes, we'd cut multiple lacquers [refs], each from a different manufacturer, at the same place. The lacquer itself added coloration. As did the tape deck, desk, EQ, cables and cutting head. 

Once the refs were cut, they were checked in the studio for fidelity to the mix and also on multiple home systems. On cheap systems to make sure they would play and mega systems to make sure they had as close to studio quality sound as possible. On one project, Side 1 was cut at one lab and Side 2 at another.

If the artist had enough clout, we'd request the pressing be done at a specific plant and limit the number of impressions per stamper.

All of the above added far more coloration than decent cables.

Sadly today, too much "music" is done on a laptop and for a phone.

@people - please be civil.

@shadorne 

However a system’s degree of fidelity can be quantified in how faithful it is to the actual recording it is presented

Who's on first? 

The instant the sound wave hits the microphone diaphragm, absolute HiFidelity is gone.

Alan Turing [of The Imitation Game] devised a test for computers: the machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human.

There isn't a studio in the world where the sound is the same on both sides of the glass. By the time it gets to the consumer, it is all Lo-Fi by Turing Test standards.

The true test of any playback system is does it involve the listener in the music of their choosing. That is all that matters. Arguing about relative merits with the ill-educated is pointless.

I was a recording and electronic design engineer and invented the Vocal Splicer. I quit recording in the late 80's with the rise of drum machines and computers. I had a business installing recording studios and manufacturing electronics for the recording industry. We also modified recording electronics. Later I worked for a recording console manufacture as head of Analog R&D.

I'm pretty certain that a great many audiophile products could be shown to have no or even negative effects in terms of absolute amplitude and phase coherence. Those that do affect phase and amplitude may improve some systems, have no effect in others and be down right negative in still others. It astounds me that there is so little proof and so much hyperbole.

As far as understanding LRC and "minimize any artefact from bits of wire", yes I understand LRC. And yes, it is possible to design to minimize wire effects. However, that may be counter productive. If I design an amplifier or loudspeaker that sounds better and better with every better and better designed cable, I'd say mission accomplished. An amplifier or loudspeaker that showed no improvement with better cable, I'd class as mediocre. When I say better cables I mean better in terms of design to maintain phase and amplitude so that the signal is the same on both ends with a wide range of driver and load topologies.

@shadorne

I’m sorry if I’m not making my self clear.

Seriously, please explain how one judges "faithful to the recorded music."

I am truly interested because countless engineers have busted their asses for more than a century to bring playback ever closer to being in the room with the artist.

An appropriate plain cable or wire is not going to change amplitude or phase in any meaningful way.

This link shows Phase and Impedance for 3 speaker wires:
Bob Carver’s Music Ribbon, Rega Duet and a development prototype.
http://www.ielogical.com/Audio/TriWireZ.jpg

Every component, be it tube, transistor, transformer, resistor, capacitor, connector, wire affects the signal passing through it. Surface mount parts sound different because they have vastly different inductance.

I once replaced 3 inches of wire in a recording console main mix buss module with a better one. I did not tell anyone. I was in my shop next to the studio and the engineer came in and said "What did you do?" Why? "It’s effin’ amazing. The bottom is tighter, there’s more punch, the mids are cleaner and the pain is gone, highs airier." I showed him what I’d replaced "You’re sh.....n’ me! It maybe the most significant improvement you’ve ever made."

What exactly is a plain cable?

@yping 

such as IMD, etc

Distortions like TH, IM, TIM are active components faults.

There are numerous other cable properties: Proximity Effect, Skin Effect, Purity, Metal, Plating, Insulation Dielectric, Fatigue, etc. All these properties have an effect, but well below LRC.

For all intents and purposes, cable R can be ignored as it is a minor fraction of speaker R. Longer runs, say 25 feet or 30 feet, cable R can equal amplifier R, cutting Damping Factor in half. Additional length also increases L & C, which can cause stability problems.

Cables should be as short as reasonably possible, of the same length and as straight as possible [Bends increase L, but this is more theoretical than practical].

In general, the more current, the shorter the wire should be. Therefore, amps should be as close as possible to the speaker with long inter-connects from the low level electronics.

@kijanki

I’m not going to correct all your errors, but this the level math:

Assuming 0.02Ω in each cable lead [12’ of Belden 1311A or almost any equivalent gauge cable] with a 1V drive at the amplifier terminal:
4Ω: 4 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.990V across the speaker
8Ω: 8 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.995V across the speaker
db: 20 * log ( 0.990 / 0.995 ) = -0.043db

Doubling the lead resistance, +3 AWG numbers, only has 0.086db loss.

On a speaker with an impedance that varies from 4 to 16Ω, the total delta across the 20-20k is 0.13db or ±0.065db which is extremely difficult to hear on a dynamic signal.

Some might find this Cable Snake Oil Antidote interesting with respect to LRC, the signal and the system.

As originally stated, cables affect the sound and the effect is system dependent.

Another's opinion on a cable in a vastly different system may not be valid.