2. cables
  3. 1014149717

7500 for USED cables? Are they joking?

I've been out of high-end audio for about 8 years, and the thing I am most struck by on my return is the apparent acceptance of power cables, interconnects and speaker cables that cost as much or more than heavy-duty high-end components.

As a now-outsider of sorts, this really looks like the Emperor's New Clothes big-time. Especially power cords, considering the Romex that delivers the A/C to the outlet isn't exactly audiophile quality.

Are people really paying $500 and up for wire? Is this foolishness of the highest order, or is this what people now believe it takes to extract the last percent or two of definition from their components?

What happened? Even buyers of what are now considered "modestly priced" cables would be laughed out of the professional audio world, so why do audiophiles think they need something better than was used to make the original recording? MOST professional recording engineers scoff at the difference between microphone cables that cost $19.95 vs. those that cost $49.95 -- most anything higher is rarely considered at all (the most expensive microphone cable might be $125 for a 20 foot run, and it's laughed at by most of the pros).

I'm not criticizing -- I'm too stunned to draw any conclusions -- I just wondered if anyone has given this much thought.

(At least I understand the home theater revolution -- thank heavens something came along to save the high end manufacturers, although it makes me chuckle to think of someone spending $30,000 to watch the Terminator. It's OK with me.)

Thank you for your consideration,

Mark Hubbard
Eureka, CA
Ag insider logo xs@2xmark_hubbard
paulwp
585 posts
 
Really? Typical, and ridiculous. I said nothing about "all" studios, and nothing about electronics or speakers. I made specific reference to the "Golden Age of Stereo" (not my own idea by the way but one stolen from an anonymous source). Sure, some studios and engineers pay attention to cable, but right now, the vast majority of recording engineers still rely on generic cable.

My question stands. How is it that designer cables improve what goes into a recording via cheap generic cable? But this is just food for thought. I really don't have an answer, or for that matter a dog in this fight.

I did not address that question to you Sean, and I have no interest whatsoever in your point of view, so I'd appreciate your ignoring my posts.
flex
292 posts
 
Paul,
I want to address your last post specifically. Anyone who has ever worked in recording knows that the sound available at the recording/mastering level is frequently FAR superior to what eventually appears on the release format.
The ratty cables used in many pro audio venues do indeed contribute to the progressive loss of detail and quality from the original sound. The cables used by consumers only serve to preserve what is encoded on the disc as well as possible - not to recreate what is already lost.
But as many above say, the better the recording equipment in the first place, the better the disc quality.
paulwp
585 posts
 
Good point Flex. Actually, many many cds and records are terrible, and I'll trust you if you say some of the really good ones are made with better cables. So if cables in consumers' systems make any difference, you say, they function to minimize further loss.

What about those great old recordings?
sugarbrie
3,854 posts
 
Paulwp: not talking about you (the OEM/Vahalla comment).
See Fizgig above; and I am referring to other posts as well.
Regards...
aroc
760 posts
 
Cables are all about losses, IMO. No cable can put more info back into the signal. A better cable should allow MORE of the original signal to pass, without adding its own signature.

Yes, according to my experience some cables sound better (to me) that other cables in my system. And yes, the prices are out-of-wack for all cables. You'd think the best single-ended interconnect 'in the world' _should_ only cost $100 for 1.0m. Sadly this is not true.
More to discover