John Dunlavy On "Cable Nonsense"

It is interesting that two well - established audio engineers and designers such as John Dunlavy and Frank Van Alstine appear to disregard much of the claims of cable manufacturers. However, both of these gentlemen do admit to there being some audible difference in some cables. I think that what Mr. Dunlavy is objecting to is the outrageous and irrational claims made by some cable manufacturers (whereas Mr. Van ALstine objects mainly to the prices charged).
An interesting addittion to this discussion can be found at John Risch's DIY cable web site (at www.audioasylum.com under "FAQ"). The subjective blind and double blind tests that he conducted found that the best SOUNDING cable also had the best scientific measurements - subjectivity backed up by science! It would seem that a good starting point, then, might be to build his best DIY cable, and use it as a reference when comparing cables in your system.

Most Audiophiles would probably agree that somewhere between 60 and 90 percent of the cable manufacturers have technology based on snake oil and other magic potions. The problem is we (at least I) don't know which 90 percent. There are a few that I do know use sound physical measurements along with listening tests. John Dunlavy has apparently taken it on himself to conduct an independent survey (tests) of a variety of cables. I really wish he would publish this, so that we can see, not from opinionated and potentially biased listening tests, but from independent measurements. That's not say that some people won't find that brand X with high capacitance doesn't work well in their system. As Mr. Dunlavy pointed out, equipment problems are sometimes rectified (or covered up) by cable design. It would be very interesting just to get the facts from that survey--then we might be able to better draw our own conclusions.

John Dunlavy's reputation notwithstanding, the proof is in what I hear, and I hear a difference. I would not consider myself a "Golden Ear", nor are all others that have experienced the same noticeable differences between various manufacturers' interconnects and (to a lesser extent) speaker cables in my system. I would respectfully suggest that the "Food for Thought" is why a reputable speaker manufacturer (and Dunlavy is not alone here) and respected engineer opts to dispute many a persons listening experience, instead of attempting to find out why their experience isn’t supported by the measured data. Certainly the quest would be a noble one. The “Holy Grail” of audio? Perhaps not, but it could put an end to a lot of posts and flames here.

When I was first beginning to explore beyond the realm of Monster Cable, I switched from Monster's heavy speaker wire to Tributaries wire at $3 a foot. In the first minute of listening something was apparent when listening to my reference CD. What I had previously thought was a real instrument was in fact a sampled reproduction. Did someone say they can't hear a difference between cables? I don't have a problem with that until they say there is no difference, simply because they didn't notice it. Some people don't know a horse from an ass, and I have no problem with that either, until they try to sell me an ass claiming they are all the same.

Dunlavy wins again