I would go absolutely nuts and throw backflips watching a youtube channel on cables. I would probably have to hit my head with a frying pan to calm myself down.
A fresh approach to cable analysis
Here’s an interesting idea that I wish someone would do. Start a YouTube channel in which you take full range of power cords, interconnects, and speaker wire ranging from cheap to top-of-the-line and carefully dissect them and expose how they are constructed and with what. In the past, we have been through all the arguments about measurements and subjective evaluation, and that gets us nowhere. I think, looking at the physical construction of these chords, which I assume almost no one ever does, especially on the more expensive ones, would produce some surprising results and really be hard to argue with. I’m sure manufacturers would hate this idea, but I don’t think there’s any way legally that they could challenge it.
- ...
- 91 posts total
unproven assumption. So your saying open 1 cable represents all possible materials, weave structures, metal alloys…? I have not seen the insides of some $10k+ cabling, have you?
You’re mixing apples and oranges. Isn’t this thread about opening up and looking? You’re talking about measurements. Also, assuming it is measured, how do we know what is measured is all we hear? Finally, consumers reports tests and compares against other “known” products. Quite different from looking at a sample then proclaiming the entire population follows the same pattern
|
Interesting idea, unfortunately it has lead to the inevitable arguments as is usually the case on this topic. My only input is to share this Video covering a product from a Japanese brand called TiGLON that I have been enjoying lately. It is not in english but subtitles are available and seem accurate. At about the 2:30 mark he shows a cut open cross section as the original poster was talking about. It lets us see the unique magnesium shielding system which is not something I've seen anywhere else. They have a patent for it so that makes sense. We can debate whether cables matter or not until the end of time, I suspect not many minds will be changed. I just wanted to show this example of the sort of thing OP was describing as it does seem interesting. I'd love to see other similar examples. The pictures posted above by @mclinnguy are useful but it would seem better to get a real world view like the TiGLON video shows, rather than just CGI or AI generated pictures. |
Missing from that video is a listening test. Those home-made cables might sound good. But his opening assertion: "The best cable or wire for audio might be hiding right underneath your nose..."
And some people eat it up. He has lots of fancy equipment behind him, so naturally he has to be right. Right? Where is his stereo? Where are the Audioquest Sky interconnects to conduct an actual listening session between his home-made cables an the Sky interconnects. Nothing wrong with going the "do it yourself" route. But you will not be getting the results that Shunyata Alpha-X interconnects will give you. I doubt that you will get the results that my once-owned Quicksilver interconnects gave me. Watching and being fascinated by the equipment and the testing gear and the hands-on tutorial is compelling -- especially to people that do not have revealing stereos and have never demoed top-tier, quality signal cables. Without hearing the final product, then what is the point? The stereo is the lab. The entire point of better signal cables is to have better sound quality. And that core purpose is absent from that video. It is like someone building a car in a video, and he looks competent, and has a fancy garage with all kinds of equipment, and the car looks great. But he never takes it for a drive. Would you buy a TV from someone that showed you how to build them yourself, but never showed you it playing a movie? Never showed you the picture quality? |
The notion that a double blind test is needed is a fallacy. When you compare two sets of speakers, do you need a double blind test? For any double blind cable testing sessions that have been performed, I have never seen them list the lab equipment (also known as the stereo). Reputable reviews, such as from Stereophile and The Absolute Sound, always list every component in the review system. They also list room treatments. They also list the specific source content (which digital files and which streaming service and which vinyl pressing, etc). I have never seen any cable blind testing list the above. And we do not know who set up the stereo. How did they chose the speaker's location? How did they choose the songs? For the stereo that they used, did the speakers disappear? A blind listening test is pointless when the stereo is not up to the job; when the stereo is not revealing, and when compressed, sub-par quality songs are played (and that accounts for over 80% of all songs). If I turned your speakers to face the wrong way, would you need a double blind test to hear the difference? Well, you do not need a double blind test to hear the difference between mass produced cables and Audioquest WEL Signature cables. Of course, turning speakers in the wrong direction will be more noticeable than cable changes. I was illustrating a point. People that claim that you need double blind testing for cables have never heard a revealing stereo. That is what is revealing -- their absence of any such experience. A person deaf in one ear can hear the difference between mass produced cables vs quality, high end cables -- on a revealing stereo -- with proper speaker placement, in a room not full of echoes. There will be no "I think I hear a difference". The difference will be stark. The difference will be immediate. No supposed fooling ourselves, or imagining that we hear a difference. It will be akin to a system upgrade (because it is). Folks that claim that there will not be such a difference, or that you would have to struggle to hear a difference, or that others imagine and hear what they want to her, are revealing their own lack of ever having listened to a revealing stereo. The double blind, cable listening tests are flawed. Nothing else explains how something so obvious and so easy to hear is not heard. Clearly the stereo used was not up to the job, and neither were the people who set up the testing. I would like to see a breakdown of such a double blind test that lays out everything about the stereo used, and who set it up, and how they chose to do so, and the recordings that they used (and why). Playing crap recordings on a low-end system is no way to do double blind listening tests. |
- 91 posts total