Newbie's first seperates system
 

Hi -

After years of putting up with a gradually-dying twelve year old Aiwa midi
system, I'm thinking about picking up my first basic seperates system.
I've been reading around, and I plan to buy from Richer, because most of
the HiFi shops in Bristol tend to start rather significantly further up
the foodchain. I've also looked in a second-hand shop, but the only thing
that stood out as a possible bargain was a late Arcam Alpha for 100GBP;
everything else was ~50GBP per component and seemed to be in poor
condition and/or fairly unremarkable. :-]

My budget is somewhat flexible, but I don't want to spend more just for
the sake of it; I'd want fairly tangible increase in performance,
reliability/longevity or features (or all three!). My music tastes are
fairly diverse. I'd be lying if I didn't admit that a lot of it is
downtuned Metal of various sub-genres, but I also listen to some prog,
some jazz, some folk/acoustic/female vocals, and some classical. I
generally prefer a slight boost to low bass (300Hz), and a higher boost
to high treble (4kHz) so I can hear percussion clearly.

I'd welcome the group's collective input on the following systems. On all
systems, I plan to use a basic Teac V377 or W600 tape deck (for ad-hoc
recordings and access to my remaining few old tapes), a Cambridge M1+
learning remote control, and the turntable from my old midi (which has a
built-in phono preamp). Most of my music is on CD, but some will doubtless
come from my iRiver H3xx MP3 player (192-256Kbps VBR encoded using LAME),
and possibly a MythTV HTPC I'm thinking of building.

System 1
Teac AG790 Amp/Receiver
Cambridge CD36 CD Player
Gale Mini Monitor MkII Speakers
(I bought these a few years ago as an upgrade)

System 2
Cambridge 540A Amp
Cambridge 540Cv2 CD Player
Mordaunt-Short MS902i Speakers
(the above is a bundle deal Richer are running right now, for the price
of the amp and CD player alone)

System 3
NAD C352CT Amp
Cambridge CD36
KEF Qcompact or Wharfedale Diamond 9.1 Speakers

System 4
NAD 320BEE Amp
Cambridge CD36
KEF Qcompact or Wharfedale Diamond 9.1

My thinking is that whilst CD mechanisms wear out and get superseded,
amps and speakers essentially last forever if treated reasonably, and
therefore I probably won't regret investment in either of those two
components. Also, from playing electric guitar, I remember that the most
significant improvement in my sound came from an upgrade to my amp and
speaker, rather than the guitar or any effects units.

Thanks in advance,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
PGP/GnuPG ID:0x5010dbff http://www.assursys.com/

Newbie's first seperates system
 

I'd read as many posts as you can find (and follow up all the links) from
Keith G
You may already have a sneaky feeling that what you can make yourself is far
far better.
Take no notice of the 300B caper though, make a Gainclone.

I'll just give you the one link
http://www.diyaudio.com/

Jem

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Alex Butcher wrote:

After years of putting up with a gradually-dying twelve year old Aiwa
midi system, I'm thinking about picking up my first basic seperates
system. I've been reading around, and I plan to buy from Richer,
because most of the HiFi shops in Bristol tend to start rather
significantly further up the foodchain.

Right, just looking at the Richer web site now. Bought a lot of kit
there over the years (the Bristol branch in particular), and I still use
them quite a lot.

possibly a MythTV HTPC I'm thinking of building.

Until I read this part I was thinking of Cambridge Azur stuff, which
really is rather good. However, if you're thinking of home theatre, I'd
seriously consider going for an AV receiver right off the bat.

The Yamaha DSP-AX757 (£400) is really rather awesome. I have the older
DSP-AX620, which for the money (cost me £299 reduced from £399 about 4
years ago) was incredible. There's really nothing to match Yamaha for AV
under the £500 mark, and even music replay is pretty good for an AV
receiver.

Partner this up with a Toshiba SD-350 for £80 and you've got one
cracking system. The Toshiba has HDMI (so if you have or plan to buy a
flat panel display that'll come in handy), and plays all the usual, MP3
discs, and also does DivX. Only thing it doesn't appear to do is
DVD-Audio (my previous player was an SD-530, which does DVD-A).

You'll find with most AV receivers that a DVD player makes a perfectly
good CD transport, provided you use the DAC in the AV amp. Use a co-ax
rather than optical cable if possible, don't worry about spending vast
sums of money on a co-ax digital cable though. Just go down to Maplin
and get a metre or so of MIL-spec 75ohm co-ax (about £1.50/metre at the
last count) and a couple of gold plated phono plugs and make your own up.

If you want to move a bit further upmarket, cross over Whiteladies Road
from Richer Sounds, turn right, walk about 20 yards up the hill and
you'll find Sevenoaks Hi-Fi. From here, I would recommend without
hesitation:

Arcam AVR-250 AV receiver £1,000
Arcam DV-79 DVD/CD player £1,000

Now you're into a different league. This is the system I have, and it
blows the old Yamaha 620 into oblivion. The Yamaha receiver at the
£1,000 mark does sound a little more involving with movies, and again
does a pretty good job of music - but to quote What Hi-Fi, that would
always be qualified with the words "for an AV receiver". The Arcam needs
no such qualification, it's incredible with music, period. Even the DSP
modes for music actually work, for a change.

I'm running the AVR-250 into Mordaunt-Short Avant 908 floorstanders,
905C centre and 903S bipolar surrounds, and a B&W ASW-1000 sub.
Currently the system is running in 5.1 configuration with the fronts
bi-amped due to lack of space to install 2 pairs of surrounds (the
second set are boxed up in the spare room atm) but when I move into my
new house shortly I'll be setting up the full 7.1 system. Using Audio
Innovations Silver bi-wire cable for front speakers, currently
105-strand OFC for the surrounds (identical to Richer's Gale XL-105 but
bought on a 100m roll from CPC for £20!) which I'll be replacing with
the silver cable once I get the system properly set up in the new place.

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it's worth
spending a few quid on decent speaker cables (and interconnects for
analogue). Nothing completely over-the-top, the Audio Innovations silver
is damned good though.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Glenn Richards wrote:
Alex Butcher wrote:

After years of putting up with a gradually-dying twelve year old Aiwa
midi system, I'm thinking about picking up my first basic seperates
system. I've been reading around, and I plan to buy from Richer,
because most of the HiFi shops in Bristol tend to start rather
significantly further up the foodchain.


Right, just looking at the Richer web site now. Bought a lot of kit
there over the years (the Bristol branch in particular), and I still use
them quite a lot.

Same here, though only bits and pieces until now. I'm happy that Richer
are a no-nonsense vendor a good few steps up from the likes of
Currys/Dixons/Comet et al.

possibly a MythTV HTPC I'm thinking of building.

Until I read this part I was thinking of Cambridge Azur stuff, which
really is rather good.

Was that the 540A Amp/540Cv2 CD/MS902i speaker bundle for 400? Or some
other combination of components?

However, if you're thinking of home theatre, I'd
seriously consider going for an AV receiver right off the bat.

Damn. That's the decision I've been wrestling with almost from the
outset. I thought I'd had it settled, on the basis that I already have a
Samsung all-in-one HT system that does 5.1, dts and Prologic II well
enough for my needs. It also has a digital input that I can use for any
future HTPC. HT isn't really /that/ important to me (I feel that
surround sound is largely only being used by showy "effects movies" of
which I'm increasingly tiring, some impressive live music DVDs
notwithstanding), but a HTPC that can record DVB-T audio/video to HDD,
burn to CD/DVD, act as a fixed mp3/ogg jukebox, copy CDs etc. would be
useful to me, and more flexible, modular, functional and cost-effective
than dedicated units.

The Yamaha DSP-AX757 (£400) is really rather awesome. I have the older
DSP-AX620, which for the money (cost me £299 reduced from £399 about 4
years ago) was incredible. There's really nothing to match Yamaha for AV
under the £500 mark, and even music replay is pretty good for an AV
receiver.

Yes, I was looking at the next model down in Yamaha's range - the
RX-V657 for 300 notes. Or maybe, something at the bottom of the range
(e.g. RX-V357) with a plan to upgrade when the 757 is at the same
pricepoint.

Partner this up with a Toshiba SD-350 for £80 and you've got one
cracking system. The Toshiba has HDMI (so if you have or plan to buy a
flat panel display that'll come in handy), and plays all the usual, MP3
discs, and also does DivX. Only thing it doesn't appear to do is
DVD-Audio (my previous player was an SD-530, which does DVD-A).

I'm still watching TV and DVDs on a 4:3 ex-rental CRT, and I have no
plans to upgrade it unless it dies (and it's gone eight years since I
bought it now). The content just isn't significantly valuable to me to
justify the expense of HDTV, and it's looking like the early adopters
will only be penalised. Increasing energy costs might make me look more
closely at some kind of LCD, but it'll be a while before that's a
significant factor.

You'll find with most AV receivers that a DVD player makes a perfectly
good CD transport, provided you use the DAC in the AV amp.

Yes, that was precisely my thinking.

Use a co-ax rather than optical cable if possible, don't worry about
spending vast
sums of money on a co-ax digital cable though. Just go down to Maplin
and get a metre or so of MIL-spec 75ohm co-ax (about £1.50/metre at the
last count) and a couple of gold plated phono plugs and make your own up.

I used to make my own cables up, but these days, I just buy
cheap-but-serviceable ready-made cables - especially for fiddly
connectors like SCARTs. Maplin have a 75ohm ready-made co-ax cable for
5GBP which was what I had in mind - cheaper than optical, and saves two
domain conversions (i.e. electrical-optical and back again).

If you want to move a bit further upmarket, cross over Whiteladies Road
from Richer Sounds, turn right, walk about 20 yards up the hill and
you'll find Sevenoaks Hi-Fi. From here, I would recommend without
hesitation:

Arcam AVR-250 AV receiver £1,000
Arcam DV-79 DVD/CD player £1,000

Now you're into a different league.

I don't doubt it! No, based on my usage patterns, I can't really justify
to myself spending that much on HE gear. Each to his or her own, though.
After all, folks who compulsively upgrade mean that good gear gets
obsoleted quickly and sold in Richer for modest sums to us mortals! :-)

This is the system I have, and it
blows the old Yamaha 620 into oblivion. The Yamaha receiver at the
£1,000 mark does sound a little more involving with movies, and again
does a pretty good job of music - but to quote What Hi-Fi, that would
always be qualified with the words "for an AV receiver".

Yes, finding the point at which a DVD (used as transport only) plus a
decent AV receiver is better value than a CD into a regular amp is an
interesting exercise. A chap in Audio Excellence offered the rule of
thumb that if the CD player is less than 200GBP, a DVD player into a
200GBP AV receiver will probably sound better. What say you?

[snip]

Using Audio Innovations Silver bi-wire cable for front speakers, currently
105-strand OFC for the surrounds (identical to Richer's Gale XL-105 but
bought on a 100m roll from CPC for £20!) which I'll be replacing with
the silver cable once I get the system properly set up in the new place.

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it's worth
spending a few quid on decent speaker cables (and interconnects for
analogue). Nothing completely over-the-top, the Audio Innovations silver
is damned good though.

I'm pretty happy with the idea that using thick cables for speakers is a
good idea, given the current drawn. I got Richer to throw in a few
metres of Gale XL189 when I bought the Gale Monitors a few years back.
These days, I'd probably go with some XS84F/XS85G 12A speaker cable now.

Conversely, let's just say that I'm rather more skeptical about the
benefits of fancy interconnects (assuming no audible mains hum, etc) and
leave it at that. Maybe I might pick up one to test with. :-)

Best Regards,
Alex.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 14:21:08 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it's worth
spending a few quid on decent speaker cables (and interconnects for
analogue). Nothing completely over-the-top, the Audio Innovations silver
is damned good though.

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it doesn't
make any audible difference whatever - and unlike the nut from
Squirrel Solutions, I put my money where my mouth is on this one, and
will give anyone £1,000 if they can indeed tell cables apart by sound
alone.

That £1,000 would buy you an excellent SOTA AV receiver such as are
made by Denon and Pioneer, and another £150 or so will get you a
tiptop upsampling HDMI-connected 'universal' player to go with it.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 20:22:42 +0000, Jem Raid wrote:

I'd read as many posts as you can find (and follow up all the links) from
Keith G
You may already have a sneaky feeling that what you can make yourself is
far far better.
Take no notice of the 300B caper though, make a Gainclone.

I'll just give you the one link
http://www.diyaudio.com/

I'd kinda be up for the electronics (I've repaired a SS bass amp and
various other bits of SS tech in my time), but I know I'd make a lousy job
of the case aesthetics and general ergonomics. :-/

Jem

Best Regards,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
PGP/GnuPG ID:0x5010dbff http://www.assursys.com/

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it doesn't
make any audible difference whatever - and unlike the nut from
Squirrel Solutions, I put my money where my mouth is on this one, and
will give anyone £1,000 if they can indeed tell cables apart by sound
alone.

Stewart...

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain. If you want to
start another argument about cables, then please do so in another
thread, and don't hijack this thread about someone who is asking for
sensible advice.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Alex Butcher wrote:

Right, just looking at the Richer web site now. Bought a lot of kit
there over the years (the Bristol branch in particular), and I
still use them quite a lot.
Same here, though only bits and pieces until now. I'm happy that
Richer are a no-nonsense vendor a good few steps up from the likes of
Currys/Dixons/Comet et al.

Currys are great if you want to buy a fridge or freezer.

Dixons are ok for portable audio, laptops or lower end digital cameras -
that said I got my first digital SLR (Canon EOS-300D) at Dixons at The
Mall, but they seem to have a better range. Normally I'd go somewhere
like Jessops for camera kit, the staff at the Whiteladies Road branch
have always given me excellent service. I ended up buying a digital
compact camera (Canon A95) there, as well as a couple of lenses, Cokin
filters and various other accessories.

Comet... the one at Cribbs is pretty good, as long as you've got some
idea of what you're after. Got my telly there in the 2005 January sales,
32" Panasonic flat CRT for £399. Also got my Sky+ box there, and a lot
of other bits. Including an espresso machine (kind of essential for a
caffeine addict such as myself).

possibly a MythTV HTPC I'm thinking of building.
Until I read this part I was thinking of Cambridge Azur stuff,
which really is rather good.
Was that the 540A Amp/540Cv2 CD/MS902i speaker bundle for 400? Or
some other combination of components?

I think I was looking at the 640 series, although the 540s are still
very good.

Don't know what the 902 speakers are like, but I'd imagine they'd be
pretty good. I've got the 908s myself (floorstanders with a 10" sub-bass
driver built into the side) and they're awesome.

If you do go for this system, it might be worth seeing if you can
persuade the nice man at Richer Sounds to upgrade you to a higher
speaker in the Mordaunt-Short range if you pay the difference.

However, if you're thinking of home theatre, I'd seriously consider
going for an AV receiver right off the bat.
Damn. That's the decision I've been wrestling with almost from the
outset. I thought I'd had it settled, on the basis that I already
have a Samsung all-in-one HT system that does 5.1, dts and Prologic
II well enough for my needs. It also has a digital input that I can
use for any future HTPC. HT isn't really /that/ important to me (I
feel that surround sound is largely only being used by showy "effects
movies" of which I'm increasingly tiring, some impressive live music
DVDs notwithstanding), but a HTPC that can record DVB-T audio/video
to HDD, burn to CD/DVD, act as a fixed mp3/ogg jukebox, copy CDs etc.
would be useful to me, and more flexible, modular, functional and
cost-effective than dedicated units.

You'd be surprised actually. Once you get past the crash-bang-wallop
demo material, it's surprising that it's the subtle surround effects
that make the difference. On one particular DVD I have, the most
impressive surround moment is during an outdoor scene when you suddenly
realise there's bird song happening all around you.

Yes, I was looking at the next model down in Yamaha's range - the
RX-V657 for 300 notes. Or maybe, something at the bottom of the range
(e.g. RX-V357) with a plan to upgrade when the 757 is at the same
pricepoint.

As long as you get something with lots of digital inputs you'll be fine.
But if you're planning to get a basic model and upgrade later, then my
advice would be to get the better model straight away if your finances
will stretch. Otherwise it'll end up costing you just as much, perhaps
even slightly more.

Let's say that by waiting you get the 757 for £100 less. You're probably
going to lose at least that much on depreciation of the "lesser" model.
So you haven't actually saved anything, and if it depreciates more than
£100 you'll have ended up spending more.

Bear in mind with the 757 you're paying for the amplifier and
DSP/surround. (The model number starts DSP-AX, meaning there's no
tuner.) With the RX-V models you're paying for an AM/FM tuner, which you
may or may not want. There is an RX-V757 available, just as there was a
receiver version of my DSP-AX620, which surprisingly enough was called
the RX-V620. Expect to pay around £50 more for having the tuner.

I'm still watching TV and DVDs on a 4:3 ex-rental CRT, and I have no
plans to upgrade it unless it dies (and it's gone eight years since I
bought it now).

Yup, ex-rental stuff is often a good deal. We bought a Panasonic TX25T2
25" 4:3 set in 1993, which lasted (with one repair) until December 2004.
I replaced it with another Panasonic, the 32" widescreen one that I
bought from Comet (mentioned above).

I also have a Ferguson 3V43 VCR (rebadged JVC HR-D725), manufactured
June 1985, I bought it in December 1993 for £120 from Rumbelows
(remember them?), few repairs, new belts, new heads (£30, fitted them
myself), needed a new power supply in March 2001, but nearly 21 years on
it's still going strong. And the picture on it puts any modern VCR to shame.

You'll find with most AV receivers that a DVD player makes a
perfectly good CD transport, provided you use the DAC in the AV
amp.
Yes, that was precisely my thinking.

Other interesting thing - comparing using a Technics SL-PG590 as a
transport against a Toshiba SD-530, the DVD player actually sounds
better when the SPDIF signal is fed into an offboard DAC. There's more
detail, the sound is clearer and the soundstaging is more precise. Not
sure why this should be, but it's repeatable, have tested it using
several combinations of DAC, CD player and DVD player, using both
optical and co-ax digital connections.

I used to make my own cables up, but these days, I just buy
cheap-but-serviceable ready-made cables - especially for fiddly
connectors like SCARTs. Maplin have a 75ohm ready-made co-ax cable
for 5GBP which was what I had in mind - cheaper than optical, and
saves two domain conversions (i.e. electrical-optical and back
again).

If you can get a suitable 75ohm co-ax cable for a fiver, that'll do the
job just fine. I use a slightly more expensive one for one simple
reason... the plugs fit more firmly in their sockets, and are less
likely to fall out. When you've got as many cables behind your system as
I have, that's something that it's worth spending a couple of quid extra
for!

Arcam AVR-250 AV receiver £1,000 Arcam DV-79 DVD/CD player £1,000
Now you're into a different league.
I don't doubt it! No, based on my usage patterns, I can't really
justify to myself spending that much on HE gear. Each to his or her
own, though. After all, folks who compulsively upgrade mean that good
gear gets obsoleted quickly and sold in Richer for modest sums to us
mortals! :-)

Well, there is that factor!

Arcam kit is fantastic though. When I got the AVR-250 I happened to hit
it lucky as Sevenoaks had it on offer for £899 (so £100 off).

And when I got the DV-79... well I happened to be in the right place at
the right time. Radford Hi-Fi were closing down, and a bit of
negotiation secured me a DV-79 (worth £1,000) for about £530. :-)

A chap in Audio Excellence offered the rule of thumb that if the CD
player is less than 200GBP, a DVD player into a
200GBP AV receiver will probably sound better. What say you?

It's very difficult to say.

My Technics SL-PG590 sounded better going over SPDIF into the Yamaha 620
than over analogue (using the Yamaha's DAC instead of its own). But the
SD-530 sounded better than the Technics... and also had the benefit of
being able to play DVD-Audio.

I'd say that generally a decent DVD player into a £300 AV amp will sound
better than a £150 CD player. By "decent" I mean something like a
Toshiba or Cambridge Audio, not a "supermarket special". These will
generally have a high level of jitter on the digital outputs, which will
throw the error correction on the amplifier's DAC into overdrive. Which
in turn will make the sound... not so good.

I'm pretty happy with the idea that using thick cables for speakers
is a good idea, given the current drawn. I got Richer to throw in a
few metres of Gale XL189 when I bought the Gale Monitors a few years
back. These days, I'd probably go with some XS84F/XS85G 12A speaker
cable now.

The XL-189 is good stuff. I use that for the LF on the system here in
the office, which is slight overkill in itself:

Creative MP3 Blaster USB sound card
Arcam Black Box 50 DAC
Yamaha DSP-A592 AV amplifier
Eltax Symphony 6/Symphony Centre/Millennium Mini speakers

Using XL-105 for the HF and centre/surrounds.

Conversely, let's just say that I'm rather more skeptical about the
benefits of fancy interconnects (assuming no audible mains hum, etc)
and leave it at that. Maybe I might pick up one to test with. :-)

There's fancy and there's esoteric. Then there's snake oil.

If you went for the Cambridge system described above, you'd want to pick
up an Atlantic interconnect for a tenner. Try swapping between the
freebie and the Atlantic and you'll hear a world of difference.

Whether you'd hear a difference with higher spec cables is uncertain. I
did some experiments here swapping between a Cambridge Atlantic (£10),
Pearl (£15), Pacific (£30) and Chord Cobra II (£55). Amplifier in use
was a Technics SU-VX600.

First test, running between Technics SL-PG580 and amplifier. Swapping
freebie for Atlantic made a huge difference. Swapping Atlantic for
Pearl, Pacific or Cobra II made no audible difference.

Second test, patch digital out of Technics player into Arcam Black Box
50. Then try different cables between the DAC and amplifier.

This time around you could hear a significant improvement with each step
up, right up to the Cobra II.

The rule of thumb with cables is 10% of your budget, but this is just a
guideline. It's worth putting a decent interconnect between your CD
player and amp (if you're using the analogue out on your CD player). If
you're using digital, any decent well screened 75ohm cable will do the
job (as long as it's properly made).

For speaker cables, generally the thicker the better (thicker cable ==
lower resistance), although if you're using silver cables you can get
away with a thinner cable.

When I bought the Avant 908s Richer threw in two lengths of Audio
Innovations bi-wire (I was previously using XL-105 for HF and XL-189 for
LF). I really wasn't expecting a difference, as the XL-105/189 is good
stuff. But I figured as it was a freebie I'd give it a try...

I was absolutely blown away by the difference it made. I can only
describe it as like having a veil lifted off the music.

The bi-wire version is only about £4/metre, well worth it I'd say.

(For the record, I initially hooked the 908s up on the existing runs of
cable, and swapped the cables after a couple of days. Just in case
anyone interprets that description as "I swapped the cables at the same
time as the speakers" - which wouldn't be unheard of!)

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Glenn Richards wrote:

The rule of thumb with cables is 10% of your budget, but this is just a
guideline. It's worth putting a decent interconnect between your CD
player and amp (if you're using the analogue out on your CD player). If
you're using digital, any decent well screened 75ohm cable will do the
job (as long as it's properly made).

For speaker cables, generally the thicker the better (thicker cable ==
lower resistance), although if you're using silver cables you can get
away with a thinner cable.

Who's hijacked the thread now?

You claim vast differences between interconnects yet refuse to do any
controlled tests or claim your thousand pounds from Stewart.

The rule of thumb is that for most speakers, 2.5mm^2 cable is ok for 10 metres.
Silver, OFC and biwiring is a waste of money.
You can't hear the difference between interconnects if you don't know their price.

--
Eiron

There's something scary about stupidity made coherent - Tom Stoppard.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 23:23:22 +0000, Glenn Richards wrote:

Alex Butcher wrote:

Right, just looking at the Richer web site now. Bought a lot of kit
there over the years (the Bristol branch in particular), and I still
use them quite a lot.
Same here, though only bits and pieces until now. I'm happy that Richer
are a no-nonsense vendor a good few steps up from the likes of
Currys/Dixons/Comet et al.

Currys are great if you want to buy a fridge or freezer.

Generally, I'm a fan of John Lewis for white goods as they pricematch and
usually offer an extra year's warranty free. Their customer service is
always 'above average' too.

For cameras, I like Jessops or Bristol Cameras.

[snip]

possibly a MythTV HTPC I'm thinking of building.
Until I read this part I was thinking of Cambridge Azur stuff, which
really is rather good.
Was that the 540A Amp/540Cv2 CD/MS902i speaker bundle for 400? Or some
other combination of components?

I think I was looking at the 640 series, although the 540s are still very
good.

Don't know what the 902 speakers are like, but I'd imagine they'd be
pretty good. I've got the 908s myself (floorstanders with a 10" sub-bass
driver built into the side) and they're awesome.

If you do go for this system, it might be worth seeing if you can persuade
the nice man at Richer Sounds to upgrade you to a higher speaker in the
Mordaunt-Short range if you pay the difference.

Good point, seeing as they're all Richer Group-owned companies! Sadly,
though, the 902i are the top of the range of 'bookshelf' speakers that
Richer sell (unless you count the 903 rears and the architect wall
speakers).

[snip]

HT isn't really /that/ important to me (I feel that
surround sound is largely only being used by showy "effects movies" of
which I'm increasingly tiring, some impressive live music DVDs
notwithstanding)

[snip]

You'd be surprised actually. Once you get past the crash-bang-wallop demo
material, it's surprising that it's the subtle surround effects that make
the difference. On one particular DVD I have, the most impressive surround
moment is during an outdoor scene when you suddenly realise there's bird
song happening all around you.

Yes, I was looking at the next model down in Yamaha's range - the
RX-V657 for 300 notes. Or maybe, something at the bottom of the range
(e.g. RX-V357) with a plan to upgrade when the 757 is at the same
pricepoint.

As long as you get something with lots of digital inputs you'll be fine.
But if you're planning to get a basic model and upgrade later, then my
advice would be to get the better model straight away if your finances
will stretch. Otherwise it'll end up costing you just as much, perhaps
even slightly more.

It seems to me that AV amps, like lots of other technology, is on a rapid
development path, meaning that today's all-singing-all-dancing amp is next
year's 150GBP bargain special at Richer. In the meantime, I get to see
whether seperates are really for me, and earn interest on the difference
in price. I'll think about it. :-)

Let's say that by waiting you get the 757 for £100 less. You're probably
going to lose at least that much on depreciation of the "lesser" model. So
you haven't actually saved anything, and if it depreciates more than £100
you'll have ended up spending more.

Bear in mind with the 757 you're paying for the amplifier and
DSP/surround. (The model number starts DSP-AX, meaning there's no tuner.)
With the RX-V models you're paying for an AM/FM tuner, which you may or
may not want. There is an RX-V757 available, just as there was a receiver
version of my DSP-AX620, which surprisingly enough was called the RX-V620.
Expect to pay around £50 more for having the tuner.

I'm pretty sure I saw the DSP-AX757 for 399 in Sevenoaks on Saturday.

I'm still watching TV and DVDs on a 4:3 ex-rental CRT, and I have no
plans to upgrade it unless it dies (and it's gone eight years since I
bought it now).

Yup, ex-rental stuff is often a good deal. We bought a Panasonic TX25T2
25" 4:3 set in 1993, which lasted (with one repair) until December 2004. I
replaced it with another Panasonic, the 32" widescreen one that I bought
from Comet (mentioned above).

Yeah, I figure the rental companies will have access to better information
on reliability than I could hope to gather, since unreliable kit is
probably a sure fire way to lose their profit. I'm a bit more wary of
mechanical stuff after a Philips VCR I bought at the same time chewed a
tape and went back for a refund.

I also have a Ferguson 3V43 VCR (rebadged JVC HR-D725), manufactured June
1985, I bought it in December 1993 for £120 from Rumbelows (remember
them?)

Yup - that's where my first computer came from, a couple of decades ago. :-)

few repairs, new belts, new heads (£30, fitted them myself),
needed a new power supply in March 2001, but nearly 21 years on it's still
going strong. And the picture on it puts any modern VCR to shame.

Cost engineering; don'tcha love it? :-/

You'll find with most AV receivers that a DVD player makes a perfectly
good CD transport, provided you use the DAC in the AV amp.
Yes, that was precisely my thinking.

Other interesting thing - comparing using a Technics SL-PG590 as a
transport against a Toshiba SD-530, the DVD player actually sounds better
when the SPDIF signal is fed into an offboard DAC. There's more detail,
the sound is clearer and the soundstaging is more precise. Not sure why
this should be, but it's repeatable, have tested it using several
combinations of DAC, CD player and DVD player, using both optical and
co-ax digital connections.

Pass. Certainly, though, I've found that my DVD-Rom drives can rip CDs
(apparently flawlessly, though that could just be error correction) that
my audio CD players have problems playing.

[snip]

And when I got the DV-79... well I happened to be in the right place at
the right time. Radford Hi-Fi were closing down, and a bit of
negotiation secured me a DV-79 (worth £1,000) for about £530. :-)

Yeah, shame about Radford. Especially seeing as I wasn't in the market
when they were having their closing down sale. :-(

A chap in Audio Excellence offered the rule of thumb that if the CD
player is less than 200GBP, a DVD player into a 200GBP AV receiver will
probably sound better. What say you?

It's very difficult to say.

My Technics SL-PG590 sounded better going over SPDIF into the Yamaha 620
than over analogue (using the Yamaha's DAC instead of its own). But the
SD-530 sounded better than the Technics... and also had the benefit of
being able to play DVD-Audio.

I'd say that generally a decent DVD player into a £300 AV amp will
sound better than a £150 CD player. By "decent" I mean something like a
Toshiba or Cambridge Audio, not a "supermarket special". These will
generally have a high level of jitter on the digital outputs, which will
throw the error correction on the amplifier's DAC into overdrive. Which
in turn will make the sound... not so good.

Yeah, I was planning on using a Panasonic DVDS29 from Richer for 50GBP if
I went that route, and treat it as a consumable.

Incidentally, I suspect I might be doing this sooner rather than later
after a botched attempt to see if I could get sufficient access to replace
the laser PUH in my Aiwa midi (CPC Farnell sell the spare part for a
tenner...)

Cheers,
Alex.
--
Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
PGP/GnuPG ID:0x5010dbff http://www.assursys.com/

Newbie's first seperates system
 

In article , Glenn Richards
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it doesn't
make any audible difference whatever - and unlike the nut from
Squirrel Solutions, I put my money where my mouth is on this one, and
will give anyone £1,000 if they can indeed tell cables apart by sound
alone.

Stewart...

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.

Unfortunately, your sweeping assertion is somewhat misleading. The reality
is that a change of cables may well make no audible difference in various
'analogue' cases.

If you want to start another argument about cables, then please do so in
another thread, and don't hijack this thread about someone who is asking
for sensible advice.

If that was your concern, then perhaps you should have avoided writing:

On 28 Feb in uk.rec.audio, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it's worth
spending a few quid on decent speaker cables (and interconnects for
analogue). Nothing completely over-the-top, the Audio Innovations silver
is damned good though.

IIUC the OP wasn't asking about 'cables', and it was you who introduced
them to this thread - not Stewart.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Newbie's first seperates system
 

"Jem Raid" wrote in message
...
I'd read as many posts as you can find (and follow up all the links) from
Keith G


Streuth! I'll have to be a bit more careful what I post links to!! :-)


You may already have a sneaky feeling that what you can make yourself is
far far better.

Oh yes, nae doot aboot that....

Jim, I got some bad news (as of last night)......

......

:-(


Take no notice of the 300B caper though, make a Gainclone.


Nasty things those 300Bs - smoky, noisy and drip oil on the drive....

:-)

Newbie's first seperates system
 

In article ,
Glenn Richards wrote:
Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it's worth
spending a few quid on decent speaker cables (and interconnects for
analogue). Nothing completely over-the-top, the Audio Innovations silver
is damned good though.

The OP is clearly on a budget. Maplin's

http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...eNo=50&doy=1m3

will do fine for most domestic speaker runs. As will the interconnects
that come with the equipment.

Money saved on not buying snake oil products can then be spent on better
speakers.

--
*Am I ambivalent? Well, yes and no.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 22:34:13 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Contrary to what some people on this group will tell you, it doesn't
make any audible difference whatever - and unlike the nut from
Squirrel Solutions, I put my money where my mouth is on this one, and
will give anyone £1,000 if they can indeed tell cables apart by sound
alone.

Stewart...

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.

No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

If you want to
start another argument about cables, then please do so in another
thread, and don't hijack this thread about someone who is asking for
sensible advice.

He just got some sensible advice - but not from you.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

The OP is clearly on a budget. Maplin's
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...eNo=50&doy=1m3
will do fine for most domestic speaker runs.

Except for one small thing...

That cable at Maplin is 69p/metre, for 79-strand.

Gale XL-105 at Richer is 79p/metre. 105-strand OFC.

The Gale cable *will* sound better. For another 10p/metre. I don't think
that's going to break the bank.

As will the interconnects that come with the equipment.

cough

I think not. I would suggest the OP tries a £10 Atlantic interconnect
from Richer Sounds in place of the free rubbish that comes with equipment.

In fact, if Richer are quiet, they'll probably do that demo for you in
store. If you can't hear a difference, stick with the freebies. But I'm
sure you will hear a difference.

Money saved on not buying snake oil products can then be spent on
better speakers.

Yup, so no point buying anything from Russ Andrews then. :-P

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which
unfortunately makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of
using decent cables.

On each and every occasion, you resorted to name-calling, personal
insults and generally behaving like an antisocial bitter individual.

Perhaps if you didn't have such an attitude problem, someone might
actually take up your challenge and prove you wrong.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:30:33 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around,

Two right out of three is not too bad.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Newbie's first seperates system
 

In article ,
Glenn Richards wrote:
The OP is clearly on a budget. Maplin's
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...eNo=50&doy=1m3
will do fine for most domestic speaker runs.

Except for one small thing...

That cable at Maplin is 69p/metre, for 79-strand.

Gale XL-105 at Richer is 79p/metre. 105-strand OFC.

The Gale cable *will* sound better. For another 10p/metre. I don't think
that's going to break the bank.

But that's not what you recommended. You talked about some silver crap.

BTW - any evidence that your choice of speaker cable '*will*' sound better?

--
*Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

The Gale cable *will* sound better. For another 10p/metre. I don't
think that's going to break the bank.
But that's not what you recommended. You talked about some silver
crap.

No, I talked about some silver cable.

Just to recap...

When I upgraded my main speakers from Eltax Symphony 6 to Mordaunt-Short
Avant 908s, the guy at Richer threw in some Audio Innovations silver
bi-wire cable. Initially when I changed the speakers over I just left
the existing Gale XL-105/XL-189 in place, as it was quite difficult to
get to the back of the amplifier (and I couldn't find my wire strippers
at the time either).

After a couple of days (and I was seriously impressed with the Avants) I
figured it was worth a go changing the cables over. So I did. And heard
a massive difference.

Which I was *not* expecting. If anything, my expectations were that it
would sound exactly the same with the silver cable as with the OFC.

You can also rule out the "I paid lots of money for this so it'll sound
better" factor - I didn't pay anything for the cables, they were thrown
in for free when I bought the speakers.

BTW - any evidence that your choice of speaker cable '*will*' sound
better?

My ears. And various other experiments, including switching cables
around with other people in the room (who also heard the effects).

I've also done a blind test, swapping between a freebie and a Monster
Interlink 100. (I was doing the swapping on a friend's system.) He
determined with 100% accuracy which cable was in use, can't remember the
exact number of iterations but it was more than 10. 100% accuracy is too
good to be a lucky guess.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:30:33 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

It's hard to hear cable differences when your head is so firmly stuck
in the sand - or some other dark place.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - you just *imagine* that you can.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - that point occurs when the cable is long enough to bridge the
gap between the connectots.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which
unfortunately makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of
using decent cables.

Fact - you are one of them.

On each and every occasion, you resorted to name-calling, personal
insults and generally behaving like an antisocial bitter individual.

Perhaps if you didn't have such an attitude problem, someone might
actually take up your challenge and prove you wrong.

Fact - I'm only abrasive towards arseholes like you, and the challenge
has been on the table for six years, with no takers. All we get is
chicken****s like you who run their mouths, then run a mile when
challenged to *prove* their bull****.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Newbie's first seperates system
 

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference between
cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which unfortunately
makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of using decent
cables.

Rest snipped.
--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/


Sorry Glen, but I don't accept the above as "Facts". They may be for you,
but they certainly are not for me, therefore, they can't be facts, which
would surely be the same for everybody. They are your stongly-held opinion,
and should have been labelled as such.

This ng and others have debated the cable question endlessly, with no real
conclusion; those who believe cables sound different can't be swayed, and
those who make the measurements which show that cable differences are way
below the threshold of audibility won't be swayed into believing that some
people can hear the differences.

Can't we leave it there?

S.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about
cables, but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference between
cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which unfortunately
makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of using decent
cables.

Rest snipped.
--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/


Sorry Glen, but I don't accept the above as "Facts". They may be for you,
but they certainly are not for me, therefore, they can't be facts, which
would surely be the same for everybody. They are your stongly-held
opinion, and should have been labelled as such.

This ng and others have debated the cable question endlessly, with no real
conclusion; those who believe cables sound different can't be swayed, and
those who make the measurements which show that cable differences are way
below the threshold of audibility won't be swayed into believing that some
people can hear the differences.

Can't we leave it there?



Nope - only TODAY my friend Pat said he believes you *can* hear cable
differences.

He claims to have heard them himself and also went on to describe (at great
length) that he was working for an ultrasonics company and rigged up a
device to 'lubricate/clean' a wire-forming machine for a cable company
called Pirelli....

Pirelli contacted them to say not only had it improved the performance of
the wire-drawing apparatus, but that it had improved the properties of the
cable as well. It was generally agreed that it was due to changes in the
internal (crystalline?) structure of the wire itself....

??

Newbie's first seperates system
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about
cables, but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which
unfortunately makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of
using decent cables.

Rest snipped.
--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/


Sorry Glen, but I don't accept the above as "Facts". They may be for you,
but they certainly are not for me, therefore, they can't be facts, which
would surely be the same for everybody. They are your stongly-held
opinion, and should have been labelled as such.

This ng and others have debated the cable question endlessly, with no
real conclusion; those who believe cables sound different can't be
swayed, and those who make the measurements which show that cable
differences are way below the threshold of audibility won't be swayed
into believing that some people can hear the differences.

Can't we leave it there?



Nope - only TODAY my friend Pat said he believes you *can* hear cable
differences.

He claims to have heard them himself and also went on to describe (at
great length) that he was working for an ultrasonics company and rigged up
a device to 'lubricate/clean' a wire-forming machine for a cable company
called Pirelli....

Pirelli contacted them to say not only had it improved the performance of
the wire-drawing apparatus, but that it had improved the properties of the
cable as well. It was generally agreed that it was due to changes in the
internal (crystalline?) structure of the wire itself....

??
Perfectly possible, lubricating/cleaning a wire drawing machine could well
improve its performance, but why would it sound any better? What was the
cable - Pirelli make lots of different cables. No-one has ever found that
changing the internal structure of the cable makes enough difference to its
electrical properties that result in changes that can be heard.

That's the issue here. No-one claims that cables aren't different. Every
cable has differences in the well-understood electrical properties,
resistance, capacitance, inductance, dielectric losses. However, when used
in normal domestic lengths, for the transmission of audio frequency signals
from normal hi-fi sources to destinations, the measurable differences are
well below the threshold of human hearing. If someone, anyone, can genuinely
hear the differences under double-blind conditions, then let them come
forward, it would increase our understanding of human hearing mechanisms
enormously, but so far, nobody is willing to come forward and be tested.
Sadly, I think that the cable question has become an article of faith for
many people, so even if someone did try and stage the tests, and people were
willing to come forward and be tested, others would immediately claim the
tests to be invalid for a whole raft of reasons. You can't win an argument
against blind faith.

S.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about
cables, but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which
unfortunately makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of
using decent cables.

Rest snipped.
--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/


Sorry Glen, but I don't accept the above as "Facts". They may be for
you, but they certainly are not for me, therefore, they can't be facts,
which would surely be the same for everybody. They are your stongly-held
opinion, and should have been labelled as such.

This ng and others have debated the cable question endlessly, with no
real conclusion; those who believe cables sound different can't be
swayed, and those who make the measurements which show that cable
differences are way below the threshold of audibility won't be swayed
into believing that some people can hear the differences.

Can't we leave it there?



Nope - only TODAY my friend Pat said he believes you *can* hear cable
differences.

He claims to have heard them himself and also went on to describe (at
great length) that he was working for an ultrasonics company and rigged
up a device to 'lubricate/clean' a wire-forming machine for a cable
company called Pirelli....

Pirelli contacted them to say not only had it improved the performance of
the wire-drawing apparatus, but that it had improved the properties of
the cable as well. It was generally agreed that it was due to changes in
the internal (crystalline?) structure of the wire itself....

??
Perfectly possible, lubricating/cleaning a wire drawing machine could well
improve its performance, but why would it sound any better? What was the
cable - Pirelli make lots of different cables. No-one has ever found that
changing the internal structure of the cable makes enough difference to
its electrical properties that result in changes that can be heard.

That's the issue here. No-one claims that cables aren't different. Every
cable has differences in the well-understood electrical properties,
resistance, capacitance, inductance, dielectric losses. However, when used
in normal domestic lengths, for the transmission of audio frequency
signals from normal hi-fi sources to destinations, the measurable
differences are well below the threshold of human hearing. If someone,
anyone, can genuinely hear the differences under double-blind conditions,
then let them come forward, it would increase our understanding of human
hearing mechanisms enormously, but so far, nobody is willing to come
forward and be tested. Sadly, I think that the cable question has become
an article of faith for many people, so even if someone did try and stage
the tests, and people were willing to come forward and be tested, others
would immediately claim the tests to be invalid for a whole raft of
reasons. You can't win an argument against blind faith.


Don't confuse me with the 'faithful' - you *know* I use mains cable on my
speakers and cheap interconnects because I can't be arsed with the stiff QED
Silver Spirals I've got lying around somewhere!!

;-)

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Hi,

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

That's the issue here. No-one claims that cables aren't different. Every
cable has differences in the well-understood electrical properties,
resistance, capacitance, inductance, dielectric losses. However, when used
in normal domestic lengths, for the transmission of audio frequency
signals from normal hi-fi sources to destinations, the measurable
differences are well below the threshold of human hearing. If someone,
anyone, can genuinely hear the differences under double-blind conditions,
then let them come forward, it would increase our understanding of human
hearing mechanisms enormously, but so far, nobody is willing to come
forward and be tested.

For me, it's the degree of difference that gets claimed between cables
that seems unsupportable. This thread has already seen a claim that a cable
change resulted in hearing "a massive difference". If the difference is
really massive,
then it should not be beyond the wit of man to measure it.

I can measure a soundfield in my room with a cheapo omni microphone, then
throw a £7 bundle of Rockwool near one corner and easily, reliably, and
repeatably
measure a difference in the soundfield. This is also one blind test I can
ace every
time! However, I can't detect a difference in the soundfield when I swap
between two
'sensible' speaker cables, either with (crap) hardware or with my ears. How
massive
can the difference really be*?

Regards,

Glenn Booth.

* Assuming there is one, of course.

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Perhaps if you didn't have such an attitude problem, someone might
actually take up your challenge and prove you wrong.
Fact - I'm only abrasive towards arseholes like you, and the
challenge has been on the table for six years, with no takers. All we
get is chicken****s like you who run their mouths, then run a mile
when challenged to *prove* their bull****.

And yet again you prove me right by resorting to personal insults and
name-calling.

Fact - I've never needed to resort to the above in an attempt to gain
the upper hand in an argument.

Fact - I use the term "argument" with careful consideration, as your
attitude prevents this from being a "debate". A debate is where both
sides put their case forward, whereas you just rubbish anyone's ideas
that don't agree with you.

Fact - I've done blind tests on several occasions, and am satisfied that
the on every occasion the person doing the listening correctly
determined which cable was in use 100% of the time. Your response to
this, when confronted with this fact, was to shout "bulls***", knowing
full well you'd been proved wrong.

Fact - I'm not going to take your challenge for the simple reason that I
believe you would come up with some cock and bull reason for declaring
the result invalid. Plus I've got better things to do with my time. Like
actually enjoying the music... during a conversation I had with one of
the exhibitors at the Bristol hi-fi show last weekend we both came to
the conclusion that too many people have got into the mindset that it's
about the hi-fi, the technology. It's not. The hi-fi is the means to the
end, not the end in itself. What it really comes down to is the music,
and anything that means you enjoy the music more is worthwhile.

Now would you kindly crawl back into whatever hole you crawled out from
and go back to sleep, so the rest of us can have a civilised discussion
about whether or not cables make a difference, without having to filter
out all your obscenities, vulgarities and insults. There's a good boy.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Glenn Richards wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Go away, and leave the poor chap alone. You may be cynical about cables,
but they do make a difference in the analogue domain.
No, they don't, and you chickened out of proving your bull**** claims
about them, so put up or shut up. It's not cynicism, it's reality.

As I recall I told you on several occasions that I wasn't going to play
your juvenile games.

Fact - I (along with a lot of other people) can hear a difference
between cables. Both speaker cables and interconnects.

Fact - Above a certain point, changing cables will no longer make a
difference.

Fact - there are a lot of snake oil merchants around, which
unfortunately makes a lot of people cynical about the real benefits of
using decent cables.

On each and every occasion, you resorted to name-calling, personal
insults and generally behaving like an antisocial bitter individual.

Perhaps if you didn't have such an attitude problem, someone might
actually take up your challenge and prove you wrong.

If you look at Pinkerton's history, you'll find that someone already
did prove him wrong on cables. Stewart renegged, and never paid the
chap. It seems abundantly clear that to ever hope to separate Mr.
Pinkerton from his thousand quid, you'd have to pry it from his cold,
dead hands. Assuming he isn't lying about having the money in the first
place, which is what I suspect. You probably have a better chance of
getting the "Amazing Randi" to ever give you a million dollars.





--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Newbie's first seperates system
 

In article , Glenn Richards
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:



Fact - I'm not going to take your challenge for the simple reason that I
believe you would come up with some cock and bull reason for declaring
the result invalid.

As I think has been repeatedly explained on this ng in the past: Such a
test can be run by a 'third party', not Stewart. The results could then be
openly published and the cash awarded (if you were successful) outwith
Stewart's control.

If Stewart (or you) then come up with a "cock and bull reason" for the
results, others can then easily decide this for themselves. At least you
would have the cash, and the results that indicated some ability to do what
you repeatedly claim... if you belief is well founded and not a delusion.

Plus I've got better things to do with my time. Like actually enjoying
the music...

Like presenting your personal beliefs as "Facts", but refusing to put them
to a test which would have the ability to see if they are well founded or
not... :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Newbie's first seperates system
 

On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 08:17:04 +0000, Eiron wrote:

wrote:

If you look at Pinkerton's history, you'll find that someone already
did prove him wrong on cables. Stewart renegged, and never paid the chap.

Details? URL?

There won't be one, as this is a flat lie.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Newbie's first seperates system
 

Glenn Richards wrote:

That cable at Maplin is 69p/metre, for 79-strand.
Gale XL-105 at Richer is 79p/metre. 105-strand OFC.

I stand corrected, after popping into Richer Sounds yesterday.

XL-105 is in fact 69p/metre. So exactly the same price.

I would recommend this over the Maplin 79-strand stuff for several reasons.

1. It sounds better. (I've used the Maplin stuff in the past, it's ok,
but not as good as the XL-105.)

2. It's more flexible. 105 strands as opposed to 79.

3. It's easier to fit banana plugs onto it.

4. It looks cooler.

If you happen to want a lot of high quality speaker cable, CPC do some
105-strand OFC cable for about £20 for a 100m drum. As far as I can
ascertain it's the same stuff as the Gale XL-105, just has a different
name printed on it. I've got a few rolls of that kicking around, very
useful for in-car stuff and running through the ceiling so you can put
up surround speakers without having trailing wires everywhere.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation