DO CABLES REALLY MATTER?

There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self. 

--Aldous Huxley 

"Usually good engineers would have a technical hypothesis that can be measured.If we are talking about sound engineers (not EEs or whatever) simply selecting new cables because "they sounded better to us" then that’s just the same anecdotal evidence that any other audiophile uses to select cables. And anyone is susceptible to bias effects. " (1) Given that there IS NO metric given, by current science, OR any electrical engineering standard, by which we can MEASURE what exactly results in a wider, deeper sound stage, the natural bloom of instruments, more detailed/realistic/cleaner highs with less stridency(at the same time), allows for more separation between voices(better imaging) and/or whatever else, those of us that hear those improvements appreciate AND (2) given that the owners of the studios that have proven track records, of putting out superior sounding products to my, as well as many other’s ears(judging by their clientele and rewards), obviously agree that better cables matter: I’ll stick with OUR, "biases". (WHEW- How’s that for a run-on sentence?) My ears have served me faithfully(even saved my life in a couple scenarios), as well as made many customers and musicians very happy, over the past few decades and I trust them. ’Nuff said, and I don’t expect all those keystrokes changed anyone’s opinion anyway, so I won’t waste any more on this thread(was that an, "AMEN", I heard?). ps: As mentioned, it doesn’t have to be expensive!

I just made this post in another thread, about sibilance. It appears it actually belongs here:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It can start right at the source point itself. Issues in microphone power supplies, bad microphone circuitry, bad microphone choices, bad microphone preamps and circuitry, bad mixing board wiring, bad mixing board power supplies, bad mixing board circuitry, and so on, down the line. It’s a very involved set of subjects.

Certain aspects of the human voice can emphasize this, and if the recording engineers are not cognizant of this issue being possible in each stage as mentioned.... then each part of this chain can be bad. Then it all adds up... and we get "screech-mud" for a a sonic result.

How much music have you heard that sounds like ’screech-thump, screech-thump’, on and on and on?

Sometimes good recordings are an accident, sometimes it’s intentional.

It’s a crap shoot, as they say. Bad? Bad we can find anywhere.

Bad is so easy to find that people have come to think that gear and recordings all sound that way. That the distortions are inherent to the situation and they don’t actually listen, they project what they know into it. (the human body is wired for this automaton behaviour)

Teaching people otherwise is a monumental task.

It’s the very heart of the audiophile conundrum. Some get it, some don’t.

It’s why we have such threads as cable debates. Some people live with an outward projection only, and some have a two way path of awareness, which is what is required to build a self beyond the basics.

Life is too short and we are only marginally learning and cognition machines...... we are principally unconscious mimic, copy, and mirror -- absorption machines.

If you watch yourself carefully you can see it in action.

Thus: "Give me the child for the first seven years and I will give you the man."

(Voltaire falsely attributed it to Ignatius of Loyola, as a barb at him - Voltaire was not fond of such, the correct origin is Aristotle)

Intelligence is a long slow walk back through the cluttered forest you came from.

The main reason cables matter is to promote the  eristical behavior of audiophiles.

The more difficult the problem is to solve, the more fundamental the error in the formulation of the question.

A restatement of the last line in my prior post.

Which is, in turn, a restatement of the Aldous Huxley quote.