Ethan Winer may be on the verge of proving expensive interconnects don't matter.

[User211]

The truth is the difference is small and never amounting to much more than 1DB to 2 DB in some areas. That should be enough to detect a difference subjectively. I'd expect to see much more difference with speaker cables because I hear more variance in speaker cables. I've only got Nordost Red Dawn to hand, bar making up some bell wire cables.

 

[Bernard]

Justin, I hope the crossover components you're playing with are well burnt-in.....something else that is bound to raise scepticism here.

 

[User211]

Bernard they aren't - probably 30 hours max. But the plot variance on measuring the same cable rules that out I believe.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

Fyi.

 

[Bernard]

Bernard they aren't - probably 30 hours max. But the plot variance on measuring the same cable rules that out I believe.

I was thinking more in terms of application in your crossovers; I have heard improvements as capacitors have burnt-in. I don't need measurements on cables to tell me there are differences; I believe my ears.

 

[User211]

1K to 2K at 1/24th TEAC versus ACE.

 

[amey01]

1K to 2K at 1/24th TEAC versus ACE.

I don't really know enough about this to comment, but I can assume that most of the variance in this graph is down to the speaker-room interface. Variance from ruler flat, that is.

That being the case, it is interesting that any variance that supposedly comes down to the cable follows (almost exactly) the variance induced by the other factors.

By way of example, look at the dip at 1.9k. While the cheap wire and the TEAC control have almost identical performance from 1.8 - 2k (and beyond), the cheap wire has an accentuated dip at EXACTLY the same point as the other components.

Coincidence?

 

[User211]

Adam, here's what the mic sees (no smoothing).

Here is what is typically used in frequency response plots (1/3) for the same region with the same scaling.

So actually in the normal FR test scenario of 1/3 smoothing the response is excellent i.e. +/- 1DB between 1 to 2K.

I offer no insight into why they are different. I have no explanation other than some of it will be sample variation, and some would appear to be due to the electrical difference in the interconnect wire and plugs.

 

[amey01]

Adam, here's what the mic sees (no smoothing).

Here is what is typically used in frequency response plots (1/3) for the same region with the same scaling.

So actually in the normal FR test scenario of 1/3 smoothing the response is excellent i.e. +/- 1DB between 1 to 2K.

I offer no insight into why they are different. I have no explanation other than some of it will be sample variation, and some would appear to be due to the electrical difference in the interconnect wire and plugs.

I can't see your pics.

Although - I challenge you.

Do you want to post a THIRD graph (superimposed, of course)] - one of those wires measured a third (and most importantly, independently) time.

Are you up to the challenge?

That is - are these results repeatable?

 

[User211]

I can't see your pics.

Although - I challenge you.

Do you want to post a THIRD graph (superimposed, of course)] - one of those wires measured a third (and most importantly, independently) time.

Are you up to the challenge?

That is - are these results repeatable?

You can see them now. I was trying to host them in OneDrive and had a few snags as you actually have to use an "embed" option which generates a special link to place in a site like this.

I have said over and over again I repeated the tests over and over again. Read back. It IS reproducible.

 

[Bernard]

You can see them now. I was trying to host them in OneDrive and had a few snags as you actually have to use an "embed" option which generates a special link to place in a site like this.

I have said over and over again I repeated the tests over and over again. Read back. It IS reproducible.

Justin, I believe you!

I was just wondering, though....could you run this test using the good cable, with and without Mooks on your MF SACD? :devil:

I'm sure our buddy Kedar would gladly lend you a set.

BTW, I don't believe Mooks are foo. I heard a non-audiophile describe the same differences I heard, without my saying anything.

 

[Rich]

I have said over and over again I repeated the tests over and over again. Read back. It IS reproducible.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't ... make him accept the validity of your water quality tests?

In this thread:

"Cables can't sound different because there are no measurable differences in output between cables."
*shows measurable differences in output between different cables*
"Your tests are invalid because of the way you measured / room interactions"
*tests were conducted under identical conditions with cables being the only variable, and results were repeatable*
"Yeah, but are the results repeatable?"
*ummm? Yeah. Multiple times. As mentioned multiple times*
". . ."
*sigh*

 

[Rich]

Coincidence?

You say this like it is some mystery that somehow invalidates the test. But isn't this exactly what you would expect? I mean, do you really expect small frequency differences between cables to completely nullify the overwhelming larger frequency trends caused by the room effects? The question is: are there measurable frequency response differences between two different cables? And these tests prove pretty clearly that, in this case at least, there are. At this point, the only valid scepticism should be based on whether these variations are audible/perceivable to the human ear/brain.

 

[User211]

The most difference is at HF. I know I can't hear much above 14K at 53 years old.

Below that the differences are really very small but occur over a wide range. Just detectable by ear? Maybe.

I tried living with ACE between my pre and power amps. I could not. I actually use Furutech which is more expensive, with rhodium plugs. Better by a good margin. I will probably do one more set of tests there.

Bernard I don't think Mooks will be measurable. I use a Lampizator Big 7 these days anyway.

 

[C.A.P]

Well for what its worth Its close in topic and this thread has wandered every side of cables so!

I just replaced **** RCA that were 6 ft standard comes with a everyday receiver cable with a balanced cable set that is of average quality,.. from my Krell DAC/Media Player and I let someone else who is NON audiophile educated but has well trained ears as she has listened to this set up intensely listen to the exact same tracks and it was Immediately apparent in sound difference.. Now we all know Balanced to RCA is a bit different but its valid..

Will a esoteric Balanced sound better than what I have now? Maybe but I WOULDNT BE CLOSED MINDED ENOUGH TO NOT AT LEAST TRY !

 

[User211]

For Bernard - Mook mpingos might make a measurable change in valve driven devices that suffer from pretty intense microphonics... as the Mooks will damp the chassis to some extent. But then so will a telephone directory

 

[Bernard]

For Bernard - Mook mpingos might make a measurable change in valve driven devices that suffer from pretty intense microphonics... as the Mooks will damp the chassis to some extent. But then so will a telephone directory

Yes, but a telephone directory will cause serious airflow problems, whereas Mooks will not.

In any case....a telephone directory? Do you guys seriously still use those across the pond?

 

[Gordon Gray]

For those who care, this is my final observation about the Shunyata Research Alpha HC Power Cable (SR) versus the Cardas Audio Gold Reference PC (CA) based on numerous back and forth comparisons over the past three weeks or so using a wide variety of musical genres.

Bottom line is that the SR clearly outperforms the CA in every category that is important to me. Clarity, dimensionality, tonal saturation without being too prominent, ability to better portray / hear the recording venue, etc.

The CA is a good PC. The SR is simply much better to my ears in my system.

Suffice to say that the SR will remain moving forward.

Based on this, I'm coming to the conclusion that power cables can impact a system's sound more than interconnects and I will continue the PC replacement process over the next several months as funds become available.

 

[timm]

For those who care, this is my final observation about the Shunyata Research Alpha HC Power Cable (SR) versus the Cardas Audio Gold Reference PC (CA) based on numerous back and forth comparisons over the past three weeks or so using a wide variety of musical genres.

Bottom line is that the SR clearly outperforms the CA in every category that is important to me. Clarity, dimensionality, tonal saturation without being too prominent, ability to better portray / hear the recording venue, etc.

The CA is a good PC. The SR is simply much better to my ears in my system.

Suffice to say that the SR will remain moving forward.

Based on this, I'm coming to the conclusion that power cables can impact a system's sound more than interconnects and I will continue the PC replacement process over the next several months as funds become available.

Sorry. So these outperform the Pangea I assume. Do you have a power regenerator as well or are you plugging into the wall? Some folks swear by the power regenerators by ps audio and other companies.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

I will choose to remain silent at this time.