How accurate are cable descriptions for your system?
Steve Huff, whose videos I typically like on YouTube is now reporting this about some cables:
SVS Ultra Cables can be found at Amazon for just about $100 for an 8 foot pair. These will bring a bit more bass to your sound but are less refined.
Tuneful cables are light and have a nice design. They are leaner, and faster but also very good. You can find them for $79 for a 12 foot pair at Amazon HERE.
QUESTION: To what degree can his descriptions be taken as "likely true" for any given (sufficiently resolving) system?
I ask this for people who have found that cables DO make a difference (to their ears, in their system) and deniers will be ignored.
https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/my-fave-speaker-cables-under-100-hifi-quality/
So cable believers only, deniers not allowed. If a difference is never heard possibly your acute face-saving imagination sets in…that’s grounds for acceptable opinions. Sounds like more boring cable conversation can’t prove it 90% of the time so let’s spend the money, make up a special language then carry the BS pass the cash register. Wonder how long any of this stuff actually sits in the same household working a system, now there’s a study. Cheers |
A vocabulary based on subjective impressions is not enough... But we must correlate our impressions about sound with an objective background, which is acoustic and psycho-acoustic vocabulary... If not, "tasting" cables is, unlike tasting wine which is some form of a learned art, is an arbitrary description which no one could related to...Because of all the difference between room/system and hearing history and experiences between us... But if i say this "cable" improve the " listener envelopment" / "source width ratio", LV/ASW ratio, without unbalancing the relation between high frequencies and bass but increasing timbre perception, i will buy it ... If not, keep it.... By the way the worst thing to do is calling people cables believers or cables naysayers.... The two groups are wrong...Like the few objective zealots versus some subjective fetichists... We must learn to listen before speaking.... Acoustic is the only encompassing objective background here, not mere electrical measures... By the way if a cable change a too " tubby" sound in a more brightier one in one system , or vice versa, it is not enough to be proof that this cable is good in general , because his impact is related to a precise system unbalance problem which this cable help to forgot about but do not really solve, then a change here will not be a proof of an improvement at all for all system and for everyone... It will only be a change which will seems for the better for someone...An improvement must be based on objective general solution and device control...An improvement is not a change...A improvement increase the way you relate to all aspect of sound, it is not a different "color"... This is why we need to use acoustic vocabulary not an audiophile vocabulary inherited from gear engineering tasting marketing...
|
Word descriptions can subjectively define the quality of any suitable cable, though to arrive at a universally accepted consensus on a clear definition of what makes any well-constructed cable channel music the way it does without coloration is a matter of degree and is often irrelevant to the source music and the preferred sound the listener finds contentment. |
Hilde: The following link is how cable discussions/reviews by users went down 20 years ago here @ A'Gon. I still use the 47 Labs OTA cable in my main tube based setup and also as speaker cable for our living room CD based "mini system" setup. I installed a duplicate "mini system" in our spare bed/computer room 3 months ago, or so, and am trying Canare 4S11 as speaker cable. Mini system = Sharp SD-EX111/Polk RT15i. I used to obtain my most valuable cable info/feedback here, but unfortunately times have changed.
DeKay |
@dekay Thanks for the link.
Right, because I'm asking people who hear a difference whether it corresponds to how they have heard the supposed difference described. Follow that? If someone does not hear a difference, then it is already obvious that they would not hear a difference from the supposed difference described. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. Cheers
|
