2. cables
  3. 136769-457

DO CABLES REALLY MATTER?

Yes they do.  I’m not here to advocate for any particular brand but I’ve heard a lot and they do matter. High Fidelity reveal cables, Kubala Sosna Elation and Clarity Cable Natural. I’m having a listening session where all of them is doing a great job. I’ve had cables that were cheaper in my system but a nicely priced cable that matches your system is a must.  I’m not here to argue what I’m not hearing because I have a pretty good ear.  I’m enjoying these three brands today and each is presenting the music differently but very nicely. Those who say cables don’t matter. Get your ears checked.  I have a system that’s worth about 30 to 35k retail.  Now all of these brands are above 1k and up but they really are performing! What are your thoughts. 
calvinj
glupson
1,794 posts
 

clearthink,


I was probably not clear enough in my previous post. I am aware that $500 is almost a joke of a price in "audiophile" circles. That does not make anyone out of those circles wrong for wondering if paying so much money is worth it. Is it, indeed, cheap for such a wire will depend on opinion of the buyer, not on some universal "audiophile" understanding.


As far as you never seeing a $10 cable being as good as some dedicated audio cable costing much more, I keep my mind open that it is true and that you are absolutely correct about that. On the other side, just following this thread, there are many other people who would dispute that to the end of the world. Not the part of you not seeing it, but the fact that there is or there is not a difference. I stay out of that debate, partly because of my lack of experience.


My previous post was narrowly, although obviously unsuccessfully, aimed at "newbies, undecided, and curious (the word I added as it described me in that case)" and their possible approach to cables pricier than a regular restaurant meal or something like that. I only intended to point out that for such customers, $500 is the price they would initially consider quite high, but not obscenely so, for a cable and was correctly placed in the initial post. That was all that my post was about.


You are partially correct that my circle of acquaintances is not representative of universe of audiophiles in general. Mostly because none of my acquaintances would ever consider themselves as "audiophiles". Otherwise, my circle of acquaintances is perfectly representative of that universe of audiophiles in general. It is very broad with different approaches, personality traits, heights, weights, and whatever else could come to one’s mind. In this thread, you could see that universe of audiophiles in general consists of those who think that expensive cables are as close to a snake oil peddling as it gets and those who think they are one of the most important pieces in the reproduction equipment chain. How much wider could that universe in general be?

chemman
15 posts
 
glupson,

Spot-on man.  I am not even an audiophile.  I love music and just like good sound.  OK, I also want to get "my" money's worth. I really don't even care all that much about the issue at hand.  I am just enjoying the discourse, whether I am right or wrong, and listening to some quiet tunes until my little boy wakes up.  Then I can increase the volume.
chemman
15 posts
 
@cleeds 
Good call on the "borrowing."  My current dealer won't, so I shall endeavor to expand my horizons.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
2,065 posts
 
chemman
I understand the test very well.
Statements such as:
... confirmation bias is not ordinarily found in an experiment that focuses on empirical data ...
and:
... You can’t quantify listening skills ...

show you don’t understand scientific listening tests well at all.

"ranking listener acuity" is not empirical per se. You are assigning numbers to a qualitative result. You are attempting to control for variability by using a double-blind method of testing. The key is the word attempting. You are in no way controlling for human variability.
Actually, you are very much controlling for human variability. That’s the purpose of the testing. Those who have used scientific, carefully controlled double-blind listening tests to design things such as audio codecs have done this with considerable success. You simply don’t know what you are talking about. You also seem rather obsessed with the word "empirical" without actually knowing what it means. It means something based on observation. That’s as opposed to based on theory, which is the basis of your argument.

Can knowledge be gleaned from such tests? Yes. Is it definitive? No.
Oh, I agree absolutely. There are limits to the value of double-blind listening tests. But to understand those limits, it’s important to understand what they actually can do. That’s where you’re confused or, perhaps, just misinformed.

No singular test is absolutely definitive, by the way, so you raising that issue is a bit of a red herring.




geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
chemman
@geoffkait

But I will agree that not everyone, in the whole world, is susceptible to confirmation bias in regard to a purchase.

>>>>That’s mighty decent of you. So, I take you still don’t see what’s wrong with your argument.

then chemman wrote,

There have to be a few people out there that would be unaffected. Not me mind you, if I bought a cable, for virtually any amount of money, that was supposed to improve the sonic capabilities and did not, I would be disappointed. Because I would have been super hopeful and probably could have even talked myself into the belief the sound was better. I will try it some day soon, probably, but not now. I am too busy enjoying the music. Enjoy it yourself. I imagine you have a nice set up!

>>>>>Whatever.
More to discover