1. Home
  2. tech-talk
  3. 198483-137460

Audiophiles and Our Chase for Perfection

I'd like to solicit some thoughts and responses regarding some of our idiosyncrasies, taboo's and philosophies as audiophiles, specifically with regards to cabling.

Even if there was some magical fairy dust material that could coax protons and electrons into behaving differently or better; your signal is still going to be subject to the limitations of the “weakest component” in the signal path.

A perfect example of this is speaker cable. You can spend $50 to $100K or more on them, but as soon as they hit the next connection, junction or conductor, for example, the speaker terminal, you’ve fundamentally nullified any “perceived” benefit from those cables. Not to mention the soldering materials and their impact.

And the cycle goes on through the entirety of the circuit; including the connector/lug, back of the lug terminal, more soldering, wiring from the internal lug to the next component, to the next component and so on until you finally come to the wire or cable connecting to the driver, and even then you hit another junction at the terminal at the speaker itself as well as the subsequent wire from the terminal connecting to the voice coil, then the voice coil wire itself.

The bottom line is, there are so many contributors in the path that, unless you tear the entire speaker apart and replace them all with your idea of the “gold standard” or perfect material/component, you're still only going to be as good as the weakest component in the path. At the end of the day, just get some reasonably good 14 to 8 Gauge cables that are made of sound conducting material (e.g. 99.99% copper, or Silver if you prefer) because that same logic can be applied to ALL of the materials in the signal path.

The scenario above doesn’t even consider the influence or impact of all of the predecessor components in the signal path coming from the Amp, CD transport, DAC or any and all upstream components, as they all influence the integrity of the signal.

It should also be noted that the length the signal travels in that speaker cable (perhaps 6’ to 15’ or so) is a very short path in comparison to the rest of the system both pre and post cable connection.

The following is used with permission from Eric Alexander, Founder & Lead Designer, Tekton Design, LLC

"I truly believe audiophiles are chasing illusions, constantly attempting to fill an acoustic void that standard high-end audio simply cannot satisfy. When a flashy new component or wire comes along, the industry reacts with predictable, superficial hype. My 'In Real Life' (IRL) technology directly proves this theory—it delivers the authentic sound and visceral connection that audiophiles have been destitute and desperate for.

jijoh123
xmbw4
38 posts
 

ghdprentice,

You're right. The problem is these type of posts have nothing to do with cables, or any other similar product. Certain aspects of high end audio offend some people to the very core of their being. They will argue for decades and dream up complicated, technical theories as to why they're right and never come 1% closer to answering any questions, or solving a problem. Its a never ending cycle where the goal is to continue the argument, not getting to the truth. If you wanted to get to the truth on cables, it is not hard to set up a test that meets scientific standards. You have to test for something real and it has to be objective. For example, "Is there an audible difference between cable A and cable B?". That's a valid test. Its objective and will prove an audible difference exists if done properly. From a scientific standpoint, that's all you can do. Things like, "Are more expensive cables better than cheap ones?", or taking measurements with the assumption that they will prove or disprove what a person hears, with out actually doing the listening tests to back it up, is pure nonsense. Junk science. Simple, objective testing that meets scientific standards could have been done years ago. The deniers refuse to do any of it. Their go to argument is, its our job to do the test because we're the one's making the claims. Its not our job to do anything for anyone, but I understand their point. The problem is they will never accept a test, regardless of how well it's been done, unless the results show what they want to see. I've tried many times. They just get caught up in all the subjective, nonsense arguments that never end. 

My point is, its not a level playing field. Someone like you may just want to get to the truth, regardless of what it is. If someone can prove to me that cables really don't make a difference and its all in my head, great. They'll save me a lot of money, and have my thanks. Unfortunately, its not about cables making a difference. They don't WANT the cables to make a difference. And that's a whole different standard. There's no scenario where you can make any progress. The issue has nothing to do with cables.   

gkelly's avatar
gkelly
1,009 posts
 

All I can say is, I’m glad I drink the Kool-Aid. 

ghdprentice's avatar
ghdprentice
9,434 posts
 

@xmbw4 

Funny you should mention my interest in truth. I am writing a book on the subject. I’ve put out a draft of the first 14 chapters on substack.

 https://substack.com/@georgeprentice

mahler123
3,998 posts
 

@xmbw4 

 

Most audio isn’t objective.  Your example of listening consecutively to two components to decide which sounds better is not objective.  What if you have two experienced audiophiles who disagree on which sounds better?  Who is “objectively “ right?

   Measurements are objective, but I will be the first to tell you that measurements are not adequate to describe how something sounds.

  Subjectivity rules the day in audio, as it does in many areas-Art,Cinema, Oenophilia, Literature-and on it goes.

mitch2
4,740 posts
 

“Subjectivity rules the day in audio”

@mahler123 - I agree, and that is why, along with other constraints (economic, environmental, personal preference, and more), in this hobby “perfection” is a moving target. Satisfaction is a better goal (regardless of what Mick says).

More to discover