1. Home
  2. cables
  3. 127600-2130

Who thinks $5K speaker cable really better than generic 14AWG cable?

I recently ordered high end speaker, power amp, and preamp to be installed in couple more weeks. So the next search are interconnect and speaker cable. After challenging the dealer and 3 of my so called audiophile friends, I think the only reason I would buy expensive cable is for its appearance to match with the high end gears but not for sound performance. I personally found out that $5K cable vs $10 cable are no difference, at least not to our ears. Prior to this, I was totally believe that cable makes a difference but not after this and reading few articles online.

Here is how I found out.

After the purchase of my system, I went to another dealer to ask for cable opinion (because the original dealer doesn't carry the brand I want) and once I told him my gears, he suggested me the high end expensive cable ranging from $5 - 10K pair, depending on length. He also suggested the minimum length must be 8-12ft. If longer than 12ft, I should upgrade to even more expensive series. So I challenged him that if he can show me the difference, I would purchase all 7 AQ Redwood cables from him.

It's a blind test and I would connect 3 different cables - 1 is the Audioquest Redwood, 1 is Cardas Audio Clear, and 1 my own generic 14AWG about 7ft. Same gears, same source, same song..... he started saying the first cable sound much better, wide, deep, bla...bla...bla......and second is decently good...bla...bla...bla.. and the last one sounded crappy and bla...bla...bla... BUT THE REALITY, I NEVER CHANGED THE CABLE, its the same 14AWG cable. I didn't disclosed and move on to second test. I told him I connected audioquest redwood but actually 14AWG and he started to praise the sound quality and next one I am connected the 14awg but actually is Redwood and he started to give negative comment. WOW!!!! Just blew me right off.

I did the same test with 3 of my audiophile friends and they all have difference inputs but no one really got it right. Especially the part where I use same generic 14awg cable and they all start to give different feedback!!!

SO WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK? OR I AM THE LAST PERSON TO FIND OUT THAT EXPENSIVE CABLE JUST A RIP OFF?
sautan904
stfoth
435 posts
 
Recently switched 10 gauge stranded copper Emotiva X series speaker cables to Audioquest bi-wire Gibraltar.  There was a very subtle and slight change, which, for me, was an improvement.

Could the money have led to a bigger improvement elsewhere?  probably.  Is the difference drastic enough that I could accurately guess 18 out of 20 times in a single-blind test?  doubtful.  Could the difference be attributable to a million subjective or objective factors?  Sure.  Perhaps removing the Cardas jumpers helped.  Perhaps there is something to the dbs thingy.  Maybe bi-wire on these speakers and amp actually do something.  Perhaps it's all in my head.  Maybe there is a better connection with the AQ bananas.  Maybe they do better since I don't use lifters.  Maybe there is no difference and, even a skeptic, can experience bias.  Maybe the difference is actually YUGE, and I'm subconsciously minimizing it.

Anyway, seems like they took an ever-so-slight edge off.  A hair smoother.

Always fun.
knownothing
1,298 posts
 
@randy-11 thanks for your reply.  I think you are talking about this: http://www.analog.com/media/en/analog-dialogue/volume-41/number-1/articles/hgh-speed-time-domain-mea...

I am talking about the speed of audio signal rise and decay as experienced by our ears in our listening rooms. Perhaps better termed "attack", more like is described here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Sound/timbre.html

While you could conceivably use sensitive instruments to measure this in your listening room, it would be interesting to see if such devices can be parameterized to show subtle differences in attack, decay and timbre across a full spectrum of instruments and sounds presented by a jazz or classical orchestra simultaneously. Taken to the extreme, can an automated system be set up to evaluate gear more productively for auditioning and decision making on a possible purchase than humans with trained and acute hearing?

And assuming you could measure some of these characteristics with electronics more effectively than our ears, most of us (except one of my in-laws) don't currently have highly portable acoustic measuring systems we can take to the brick and mortar or set up in the sweet spot on the couch at home to tell us what sounds best and what we should buy or pass up, and therefore most of us must rely on our ears to make these decisions.  I know that sounds like heresy to some, but there you have it, stuck with our ears to sort out all this controversy about what sounds good to us and what doesn't.  

And speaking of bad ears, the link from @willemj is a hoot.  Did most of the participants have crappy hearing.  Had they all been in the artilary division in the military?  Were there synergy problems with the higher end gear chosen, with the higher end amp-speaker-cable combination compared with the budget amp?  Did all the participants run out to dump their multi-thousand dollar rigs for a Beringer amp and an old Sony DVD player based on the results?  A hifi dealer's worst nightmare!

Instead of fancy measuring devices or old men's clubs, How about a double blind cable test where only one parameter is changed and done with all adolescent female acoustic musicians who have yet to attend a rock concert?  I might believe those results...


willemj
1,036 posts
 
I agree that that link was real fun. However, it reflects exactly what has been found in other double blind tests. Personally, I was once Peter Walker of Quad fame's guest at a blind demonstration of his three famous amplifier designs. At the time people were arguing that his tube design sounded better than his 303 and that the 303 sounded better than the 405. Against such nostalgia he argued that they all sounded the same, if used within their specification. So he had this rig where levels had been carefully matched (this is crucial, and has to be within 0.2 dB), and you could listen, blind. I thought I could hear differences, but he cheerfully demonstrated that I had not been better than random in my identifications. The norm for amplifiers is a straight wire with gain, and that target has been reached a long time ago.
willemj
1,036 posts
 
The Wireless World publication of the underlying research is here: http://www.keith-snook.info/wireless-world-magazine/Wireless-World-1978/Valves%20versus%20Transistor...
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
As the reviewer for Stereophile reported in his 1997 article regarding "the geek meet in the desert" - CES 97, to the uninitiated - "most of the exhibitors have not yet figured out how to get up out of the noise floor." Here we are twenty years later and you still don’t have to look very far to find some professionals somewhere who cannot hear the difference between amplifiers or systems that are still stuck in the noise floor. 
More to discover