VR4 HSE Silver Jumpers?

Well, I'm not going to argue the point, Dida. Albert Von Schwiekert is as accomplished a speaker designer as you'll find in this field. If he thinks silver jumper wire might make a difference on the speakers he designs, then I'm going to at least try it. I understand you wouldn't, and that's your perogative. Let's agree to disagree, shall we?

'Might' made a difference? No limb there :-) Of course it will make a difference. It is just a matter of degree, and/or relevance to priorities.

Though I believe when wires get so short as a 'jumper', or a component's internal connections, it may be difficult to discern between silver, gold, or a coathanger, if you get my drift.

You never heard me say it will not make a difference. Contrare. It is possible to discern a difference in just moving some furniture within the room.

To me that is the whole point. So a wire, tweak, or change of component results in an even discernable difference (though like holding a cross up to Dracula, just mention 'blind test' to the 'connoisseurs of coloration' and watch them dive for their coffin :-). Like I said, so does opening a window, the refrigerater running, or the air conditioning.

But if one aspires to 'true to the original'in playback, then one will discern whether that goal has been advanced, or not. You do not hear so much about that, in any terms, poetic or otherwise.

To quote:
'Regrettably, much misinformation and outright nonsense have been spread to promote certain "high-end audio" products. The power of suggestion works exceedingly well, when listeners cannot trust their own hearing. I recommend to re-calibrate yourself frequently. Listen closely to all sorts of un-amplified sounds in order to recognize and remember natural aural patterns. It becomes an endless and futile pursuit to listen for and try to evaluate differences between speakers, equipment and accessories without a reality based mental reference.' (SL)

I like to experiment. It's half the fun. Open curtains, close curtains. Turn on the AC, turn off the AC. I'll continue to experiment with wires, platforms, cords and whatever is available on a free trial basis. I like my equipment and the way it sounds. In fact, the system improves with each adjustment I make. I have owned SS equipment that has specs to indicate it's true-to-the-original reproduction. I have owned Monster wire. I like the way my system sounds now more than I did when I owned the uber-accurate SS gear. You will undoubtedly respond with another SL quote which will negate my positive viewpoint regarding my own system; a pattern that has already been well established by you. What else can I say? Let's agree to disagree, shall we? 'Nuff said.

You must know that I am familiar with your approach. It is the more popular one: the aspiration that your system attain a 'sound' you personally prefer. There is consensus among you all that it is subjective, and it only matters if 'you' like it. The mfgrs of inferior equipment love that you all think that way. Even the preowned market flourishes because of it. You all agree to that too.

But by contrasting that with a 'true to the original' approach, is not necessarily a hostile gesture. My complaint with radical Islam, is their inability to entertain or consider more than one thought or idea.

There is a down side to both approaches: the 'connoisers of coloration' approach tends to result in all material played back sounding the same. I believe that is the goal, whether realized or not.

Whereas, the transparency, or true to the original, approch necessitates serious listening be done with 'remote in hand' to adjust playback levels of individual tracks on the same recording to 'live' because you can hear how they vary so much.

In fact often times different tracks on the same recording list different personal, and/or differnt recording dates. (I do not refer here to compilations.)

There is a threshold reached along this path: when even a semblance of transparency is achieved the terrible, intolerable, sonic character of too many of even your favorite recordings are discerned. It can be a disappointment, and discouraging.

But at the same time, the superior sonic characteristics of well produced (sparingly mixed --the first albums rejected from my collection were those with excesses of 'echo' generated from the expander knob on the mixing console) properly engineerd source material can be enjoyed since you can now hear it as well. Also qualities having passed through the colored to taste systems will never be heard.

I know. Its an effective argument, and apparetntly a threat to some. But it conveted me. I have gone through most of what gets discussed here, and frankly, most of it is useless, nay, harmful, to the possiblity of ever attaining 'true to the original' in the playback experience.

No offence, and nothing personal. It is just my opinion, but I am sticking to it :-)

Dida, thanks for your cogent and unthreatening response. It was
refreshing.

I must admit that your description of what's required during an
Audiophile listening session( based on your definition of Audiophile), i.e.

the transparency, or true to the original, approch
necessitates serious listening be done with 'remote in hand' to adjust
playback levels of individual tracks on the same recording to 'live'
because you can hear how they vary so much.

...does not entice me to that destination. For me, it's too much work.
Sitting with remote in hand, adjusting each track to an appropriate
playback level does not sound like fun or relaxation. Does that make me
less than an Audiophile, or lazy? Perhaps so, based on your definition.
But, I'm comfortable with that. And, I'm comfortable with my goals for
my system. So, I thank you for better making me understand the
derivation of your viewpoint. Now that you understand my goals,
perhaps we can coexist peacefully in Audiogon cyberspace, yes?

By the way, the decor of your listenign room looks amazingly like it
could be an apartment in a building I used to live in. You don't reside in
North Hollywood by any chance, do you?