Right, I'm sick of this argument coming up constantly, so I just set up
a little test. Hardly pure science, but it's enough to make the point.

System - SPDIF output from Creative MP3 Blaster USB sound card (one of
the few that outputs at native 44.1kHz and doesn't resample to 48kHz)
connected to Arcam Black Box 50 DAC.

Yamaha DSP-A592 amplifier, Eltax Symphony 6, Symphony Centre and
Millennium Mini surrounds. No sub in use on this test.

All the phono sockets were cleaned using isopropyl alcohol and allowed
to dry before any connections were made.

The BB50 has two analogue outs. One connected to one input of the
amplifier using Chord Cobra II interconnect, the other connected to a
different input (the adjacent one on the input selector) using a freebie
crappy one of the type that comes in the box. Got a friend to connect
the cables, so I had no idea which way around they were connected. I'd
told him which inputs to use, but not to tell me which cable was
connected to which input obviously.

Both cables were connected to audio only inputs to prevent video
switching from affecting the tests. I refer to the inputs as 1 and 2
below, in fact input 1 was the CD input and input 2 the tuner input.
Both are electrically identical inside the amplifier, the labelling is
just for convenience.

I left the room while my friend connected the cables up then pushed the
amplifier back into the cabinet. I then returned to the room. The cables
were not visible. If anyone doubts this then I'm prepared to take a
photo of the equipment in-situ to prove that cables weren't visible.

Friend then stood out of my sight (to eliminate bull**** claims of
"psychological telepathic communication", which is much more far-fetched
than the idea that the cable in use just might make a difference) but
where he could see me, to ensure I didn't cheat by looking around the back.

Played a high quality VBR MP3 (ABBA's "The Day Before You Came", ripped
from the 1994 4 CD box set "Thank You For The Music", if it matters) and
swapped between the two inputs.

On input 1 the sound was muddy, lacked focus, almost sounded like it had
been brute-force compressed.

On input 2 the sound was open, detailed, had a lot more presence and
generally sounded much more life-like, and more to the point much more
musical.

Before looking around the back I repeated the test several times, with
other tracks, and with the amplifier set to Pro-Logic mode (first test
was in straight stereo). Each time input 2 sounded noticeably better.

Once I'd played about 4-5 tracks in stereo and Pro-Logic modes on each
input (obviously using the same track and comparing) I determined that
input 2 was the Cobra II and input 1 was the freebie.

I looked around the back of the amplifier and indeed input 2 was the
Cobra II.

So as far as I'm concerned that proves that cables do make a difference,
and I now consider this matter closed.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 09:40:26 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Right, I'm sick of this argument coming up constantly, so I just set up
a little test. Hardly pure science, but it's enough to make the point.

System - SPDIF output from Creative MP3 Blaster USB sound card (one of
the few that outputs at native 44.1kHz and doesn't resample to 48kHz)
connected to Arcam Black Box 50 DAC.

Yamaha DSP-A592 amplifier, Eltax Symphony 6, Symphony Centre and
Millennium Mini surrounds. No sub in use on this test.

All the phono sockets were cleaned using isopropyl alcohol and allowed
to dry before any connections were made.

The BB50 has two analogue outs. One connected to one input of the
amplifier using Chord Cobra II interconnect, the other connected to a
different input (the adjacent one on the input selector) using a freebie
crappy one of the type that comes in the box. Got a friend to connect
the cables, so I had no idea which way around they were connected. I'd
told him which inputs to use, but not to tell me which cable was
connected to which input obviously.

Both cables were connected to audio only inputs to prevent video
switching from affecting the tests. I refer to the inputs as 1 and 2
below, in fact input 1 was the CD input and input 2 the tuner input.
Both are electrically identical inside the amplifier, the labelling is
just for convenience.

I left the room while my friend connected the cables up then pushed the
amplifier back into the cabinet. I then returned to the room. The cables
were not visible. If anyone doubts this then I'm prepared to take a
photo of the equipment in-situ to prove that cables weren't visible.

Friend then stood out of my sight (to eliminate bull**** claims of
"psychological telepathic communication", which is much more far-fetched
than the idea that the cable in use just might make a difference) but
where he could see me, to ensure I didn't cheat by looking around the back.

Played a high quality VBR MP3 (ABBA's "The Day Before You Came", ripped
from the 1994 4 CD box set "Thank You For The Music", if it matters) and
swapped between the two inputs.

On input 1 the sound was muddy, lacked focus, almost sounded like it had
been brute-force compressed.

On input 2 the sound was open, detailed, had a lot more presence and
generally sounded much more life-like, and more to the point much more
musical.

Before looking around the back I repeated the test several times, with
other tracks, and with the amplifier set to Pro-Logic mode (first test
was in straight stereo). Each time input 2 sounded noticeably better.

Once I'd played about 4-5 tracks in stereo and Pro-Logic modes on each
input (obviously using the same track and comparing) I determined that
input 2 was the Cobra II and input 1 was the freebie.

I looked around the back of the amplifier and indeed input 2 was the
Cobra II.

So as far as I'm concerned that proves that cables do make a difference,
and I now consider this matter closed.

Good - so we won't be hearing any more of this kind of ******** from
you then. We can all breathe easier.

Kindly don't renege on your promise.

d

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

Don Pearce wrote:

Good - so we won't be hearing any more of this kind of ******** from
you then. We can all breathe easier.

trollWhat, no "oh, your friend must have communicated telepathically
which way round he'd plugged them in"? No "it's all in your imagination"
or "lucky guess"? Come on, you can do better than that!/troll

Note extreme sarcasm in the above paragraph - I have to spell it out
because certain people in this group (not yourself I might add) might
not realise that I'm being incredibly ironic in the above paragraph...

Seriously though, as far as I'm concerned that experiment proves beyond
reasonable doubt that cables do make a difference to the sound. And
while I wouldn't advocate going out and spending £100+ on a set of
interconnects, spending £15 or so is a worthwhile investment for a
decent mid-range system, or possibly a bit higher for a higher end system.

And plus there's the "is it worth it" argument. A set of Cambridge
Pacific interconnects at £30 are about as far as most people need to go.
I'm only using a Cobra II because I got one for less than half price at
last year's hi-fi show. It's worth £24, but wouldn't be worth £55 - the
difference over the £30 Pacific isn't worth the extra £25.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...

Seriously though, as far as I'm concerned that experiment proves beyond
reasonable doubt that cables do make a difference to the sound. And while
I wouldn't advocate going out and spending £100+ on a set of
interconnects, spending £15 or so is a worthwhile investment for a decent
mid-range system, or possibly a bit higher for a higher end system.

That doesn't make sense. You're suggesting there is a difference between a
"no cost" cable and a £15 one, but no difference between a £15 and a £100
one. So just where is this cut off point. You need to do more experiments
before presenting your conclusion.

Which is why this argument will neve die. Personally I couldn't give a
stuff - I use decent quality mic cable on Neutrik connectors.

Roy.

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 11:06:36 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Good - so we won't be hearing any more of this kind of ******** from
you then. We can all breathe easier.

trollWhat, no "oh, your friend must have communicated telepathically
which way round he'd plugged them in"? No "it's all in your imagination"
or "lucky guess"? Come on, you can do better than that!/troll

Note extreme sarcasm in the above paragraph - I have to spell it out
because certain people in this group (not yourself I might add) might
not realise that I'm being incredibly ironic in the above paragraph...

Odd that you didn't include "I just made up this fairy tale because I
had a couple of minutes to spare at my keyboard".

Seriously though, as far as I'm concerned that experiment proves beyond
reasonable doubt that cables do make a difference to the sound.

Well, you're wrong. What you should have done was to get your friend
to try this again, but with the cables the other way round. However,
since you now consider the case closed, I'm happy that you're not
going to repeat this ********.

Interesting that you 'consider the case closed', but have no interest
at all in collecting £1,000 for doing the same trick with an
independent witness........

Just another lying chicken****!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Odd that you didn't include "I just made up this fairy tale because I
had a couple of minutes to spare at my keyboard".

That would come under "etc etc"...

Well, you're wrong.


What you should have done was to get your friend to try this again,
but with the cables the other way round.

Except we'd then know which cable was which, so you'd start crying about
"psychological effects".

Interesting that you 'consider the case closed', but have no interest
at all in collecting £1,000 for doing the same trick with an
independent witness........

I can make that much in half the time it would take to carry out this
test you keep rattling on about.

Or to put it another way, if I took time off work to do your challenge,
and won, I wouldn't be any better off. Because I'd have lost that £1,000
by taking time off work.

Plus no doubt you'd probably come up with some cock and bull reason to
declare the test "invalid" and refuse to pay up.

Just another lying chicken****!

Yay, personal insults again.

I have nothing whatsoever to gain by bull****ting people about cables.

1. I don't make interconnects.

2. I don't sell interconnects.

3. I don't sell or make hi-fi.

I make a living from computer consultancy etc, not hi-fi. As far as I'm
concerned the hi-fi is for enjoying the music, not the other way around.
And if using decent interconnects and speaker cables helps achieve that,
then fair enough.

Note that I don't advocate spending £100+ on interconnects. Indeed the
biggest difference can be heard between the crappy one that comes in the
box and something like a Cambridge Atlantic for £10. Probably the best
tenner you'll ever spend.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Roy wrote:

That doesn't make sense. You're suggesting there is a difference
between a "no cost" cable and a £15 one, but no difference between a
£15 and a £100 one. So just where is this cut off point. You need to
do more experiments before presenting your conclusion.

No, I didn't say there was no difference, I said the difference wouldn't
be worthwhile.

For example, I'm using a Chord Cobra II between the DAC and amplifier on
the system down here. Had I paid full price for this cable (£55) it
wouldn't have been worth the extra over a Cambridge Pacific (£30). But
as it cost me £24, it was worthwhile.

It's called the "law of diminishing returns". That point depends greatly
on the kit that's at either end of the cable - eg between bargain
basement Technics CD player and amplifier you'll get a difference
between freebie and Atlantic, but not much (if anything) above that
point. Certainly not worth spending more than a tenner on a cable.

Go up the scale (and I've tested this myself) either with a better CD
player or by hanging a top-notch DAC off the digital output and you'll
hear an improvement with each step up the "cable scale". Again, you'll
get to a point where you either can't hear an improvement or the
improvement doesn't justify the cost. And once you reach that point,
money's better spent elsewhere, better speakers, better source etc.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Roy wrote:

That doesn't make sense. You're suggesting there is a difference
between a "no cost" cable and a £15 one, but no difference between a
£15 and a £100 one. So just where is this cut off point. You need to
do more experiments before presenting your conclusion.

No, I didn't say there was no difference, I said the difference wouldn't
be worthwhile.

For example, I'm using a Chord Cobra II between the DAC and amplifier on
the system down here. Had I paid full price for this cable (£55) it
wouldn't have been worth the extra over a Cambridge Pacific (£30). But as
it cost me £24, it was worthwhile.

It's called the "law of diminishing returns". That point depends greatly
on the kit that's at either end of the cable - eg between bargain basement
Technics CD player and amplifier you'll get a difference between freebie
and Atlantic, but not much (if anything) above that point. Certainly not
worth spending more than a tenner on a cable.

Go up the scale (and I've tested this myself) either with a better CD
player or by hanging a top-notch DAC off the digital output and you'll
hear an improvement with each step up the "cable scale". Again, you'll get
to a point where you either can't hear an improvement or the improvement
doesn't justify the cost. And once you reach that point, money's better
spent elsewhere, better speakers, better source etc.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Glenn, did I understand correctly that you're saying that with a top-notch
DAC, you hear an improvement by changing the digital cable between source
and DAC, or did you mean on the analogue outputs of the DAC?

Another point:- I don't doubt the sincerity of your conclusions on the tests
you did, but I have done similar tests using two identical inputs and a
common source, and I failed to hear any difference on any cables, between
the freebies and anything else. So, either our ears are very different, or
our expectations are different; you expected to hear a difference, so you
did, and I expected to hear none so I didn't. Have you been able to try an
ABX test, where you could be listening to the same cable twice? That would
be a way of eliminating the inherent bias between what you expect to hear
and what you believe you hear. I can't think of a way of eliminating my own
bias for not expecting to hear a difference as ABX won't help prove
negative.

S.

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 11:11:48 -0000, "Roy" roy wrote:

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...

Seriously though, as far as I'm concerned that experiment proves beyond
reasonable doubt that cables do make a difference to the sound. And while
I wouldn't advocate going out and spending £100+ on a set of
interconnects, spending £15 or so is a worthwhile investment for a decent
mid-range system, or possibly a bit higher for a higher end system.

That doesn't make sense. You're suggesting there is a difference between a
"no cost" cable and a £15 one, but no difference between a £15 and a £100
one. So just where is this cut off point. You need to do more experiments
before presenting your conclusion.

Which is why this argument will neve die. Personally I couldn't give a
stuff - I use decent quality mic cable on Neutrik connectors.

Probably can't be beaten on technical grounds - at any price. I use
similar in my TV system, but just thin unshielded twisted pair in my
main music system - but with Neutrik XLRs.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 12:24:09 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Odd that you didn't include "I just made up this fairy tale because I
had a couple of minutes to spare at my keyboard".

That would come under "etc etc"...

Well, you're wrong.

What you should have done was to get your friend to try this again,
but with the cables the other way round.

Except we'd then know which cable was which, so you'd start crying about
"psychological effects".

You do both tests *before* you call which one you think is the 'good'
cable. Sheesh!

Interesting that you 'consider the case closed', but have no interest
at all in collecting £1,000 for doing the same trick with an
independent witness........

I can make that much in half the time it would take to carry out this
test you keep rattling on about.

Yeah yeah, sure you could - it would take less than a couple of hours,
so you're just lying again.

Or to put it another way, if I took time off work to do your challenge,
and won, I wouldn't be any better off. Because I'd have lost that £1,000
by taking time off work.

Liar. Chicken**** liar. You think that *anyone* reading this thread is
dumb enough to believe your fairy tales?

Plus no doubt you'd probably come up with some cock and bull reason to
declare the test "invalid" and refuse to pay up.

The impartial observer holds the money. You've been told this before,
so you're just trying to weasel your way out of your lies and
chicken**** again.

Just another lying chicken****!

Yay, personal insults again.

I have nothing whatsoever to gain by bull****ting people about cables.

Sure you do - you get to brag about your golden ears.

And of course, that's why you're a lying chicken****.

BTW, didn't you say that you consider this case closed? Liar.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering