Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Glenn Richards wrote:

Eiron wrote:

But of course if there was no difference you would claim that the
effect was masked by the a/d conversion in your sound card. If you
want to try, I'm sure we could agree a valid test method.

The A/D conversion on a PC sound card is indeed fairly crap.

I haven't yet set my CD recorder up since moving house, but as soon as I
do I'll make an analogue recording onto this, same track, one with
freebie cable and one with Chord Cobra III. Then compare.

A recording of what ?

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Glenn Richards wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

One thing that may confuse the casual listener is that studio
monitors aren't meant to 'flatter' music, they're meant to be like a
critical lens on it, so they'll show up a poor recording. That's
their raison d'etre.

Many years ago when I worked in a recording studio we'd often put a CD
on for some background music when things were quiet. We'd ALWAYS use the
NFMs (Near-Field Monitors) for this, as these were basically a
bomb-proof version of a standard hi-fi speaker. The main studio monitors
were ATC SCM80A (I think, it was a few years ago... 3-way, 12" bass
driver, active). Lovely transparent sound,

I'm familiar with them.


but the NFMs were much warmer and much more "hi-fi" and "musical".

Not the shocking NS10s I hope ?

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Eeyore wrote:
Tim wrote:

Uncopyrightable wrote:
Have just upgraded to a Pioneer VSX1016 and Mordant Short 90X's

An considering going to bi-wiring, or should it be more expensive 2 core
wire. want to spend around £20.00 per metre, too much? not enough? plus
banana clips, but I have never used them before, do they fit into both
amp and speaker or are they different sizes for either end? checked
manual for amp and cannot find the size of the output terminals for
plugs. also do you need to solder the clips?
One other thing, the VSX1016 has phase adjustment, so I 'think' that
means I do not have to have the same length for each of the front set,
so might save £'s there (1x1m 1x2m 1x3m)

Any recommendations on the wire? site links for reputable suppliers.
Sorry its a lot of questions.

I must say you'll only get one side of the speaker cable arguement
here, people can't be arsed to deal with all the flames they'd get if
they recommend anything other than cheap stuff available in a tip nr
your local builders.

BTW - to all the people who say "recording studios don't use expensive
cable" 90% of studios playback sounds terrible compared to a half decent
domestic HIFI , and most studios use terrible amps and speakers - so
that's no recommendation.

Your experience of 'studios' must be very low-end if you can believe that !


I'm not saying you should spend £20m (£5m is what I'd spend) but if
you want a balanced view then also look elsewhere..

Unbalanced would be more like it.

What is it with you ppl who want to believe in the alleged 'magical properties'
of just one piece of wire in the entire recording / reproduction chain ?


What people believe in magical properties of cables?


Scott

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

John Phillips wrote:

There are demonstrable differences in frequency response between different
cables in an amp-cable-speaker system. There's even a peer-reviewed
JAES paper which shows this. And you don't have to invoke any of the
mystic technical explanations of certain cable manufacturers - it's down
to fully accepted basic physics.

It's fundamentally down to cable resistance. Which in turn is down to the
cross-sectional area. The brand of cable makes no difference.

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Tim wrote:

Wally wrote:
Tim wrote:

BTW - to all the people who say "recording studios don't use expensive
cable"
90% of studios playback sounds terrible compared to a half decent
domestic HIFI , and most studios use terrible amps and speakers - so
that's no recommendation.

So, are their cables expensive or not, and what has that got to do with them
having crap amps and speakers?


--
Wally
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.

They don't care that much about playback in general - it's pretty
obvious isn't it?

It's pretty obvious you don't even have even the remotest tiniest clue what you're
talking about.


Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Tim wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Wally wrote:
Tim wrote:

BTW - to all the people who say "recording studios don't use expensive
cable"
90% of studios playback sounds terrible compared to a half decent
domestic HIFI , and most studios use terrible amps and speakers - so
that's no recommendation.

So, are their cables expensive or not, and what has that got to do with them
having crap amps and speakers?

A couple of studios I know use ATC kit. It sounds good enough to me. Here are
some of their users.
http://www.atc.gb.net/client_list.html

Tim might care to peruse their crappy terrible-sounding **** speakers.

These guys are good too.
http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/index2.html

BTW Tim, an NS10 isn't a monitoring speaker.

Graham

They are in a minority

They aren't a *monitoring* speaker - finito.


have you spent much time recording in studios?
Yes ATC is superb but most studio owners would laugh if you told them
how much.

How much what ? Money ? Yes they're expensive. I'm not talking about 'toy' studios
here but the the 'real thing'.

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Tim wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

What is it with you ppl who want to believe in the alleged 'magical properties'
of just one piece of wire in the entire recording / reproduction chain ?

Printed circuit boards aren't made with 'magic copper' for example but then you
can't change that. It's only because *you* can change 'that bit of wire' and
believe it makes such a huge difference that this nonsense continues to exist.

Graham

What is it with you people who refuse to accept that 000's of people
hear and enjoy an improvement when upgrading cables.??

You mean changing their resistance by changing the diameter ? You can do the same by
using say 4mm2 cable and adding a low value rheostat in series ( say 1 ohm ) and
tweak it every day if you like.


You stick to what you like and I'll stick to mine, but don't tell me I can't hear
it.

You can hear 'magic copper' in preference to 'ordinary copper' ?


You are Stewart Pinkerton and I claim my £5

No I'm not.

Graham

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Tim wrote:

So, are their cables expensive or not, and what has that got to do
with them having crap amps and speakers?

They don't care that much about playback in general - it's pretty
obvious isn't it?

Your argument is ****e.


--
Wally
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Call me a saint, call me a sinner - just don't call me... late for
dinner.

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Glenn Richards wrote:
Eiron wrote:

But of course if there was no difference you would claim that the
effect was masked by the a/d conversion in your sound card. If you
want to try, I'm sure we could agree a valid test method.


The A/D conversion on a PC sound card is indeed fairly crap.

I haven't yet set my CD recorder up since moving house, but as soon as I
do I'll make an analogue recording onto this, same track, one with
freebie cable and one with Chord Cobra III. Then compare.

If you want to demonstrate the effect, many of us would love to be able
to hear what you can. But you should discuss the test method first.

I suggest that the best method of comparing interconnects is to take
a mono source and feed it into the 2-channel recorder in three ways:
1. Through the stereo expensive cables;
2. Through one expensive cable to the right input and one cheap cable to the left;
3. Vice-versa

Then it's a doddle to subtract left from right and show how much difference
there is between cables. The first test is to calibrate the rest of the system;
you might need to slightly adjust the level of one channel to get the minimun
difference. Then by applying the same adjustment to the other tests,
any increase is due to the cables.

--
Eiron

No good deed ever goes unpunished.

Speaker Wire advise pls
 

Bob Latham wrote:

I suggest that the best method of comparing interconnects is to take a
mono source and feed it into the 2-channel recorder in three ways:
1. Through the stereo expensive cables;
2. Through one expensive cable to the right input and one cheap cable
to the left;
3. Vice-versa


Well for me at least this would not do at all. I would agree that under
these test conditions I would be surprised if anyone could tell any
differences. This is not how differences show up.

I have no idea if I'm alone or not but in my experience, interconnects
tend to change spacial imaging and not tonal balance. Remove them from a
stereo situation and all is equal.

You seem to be saying that there is more to music than the electrical signal.
Still, if we stick to Glenn's original suggestion, then take the two samples,
synchronize them and find them identical (electrically subtract one from the
other and find the result is similar to the original but 60dB or so down),
to what would you attribute your perceived differences? Does the music have
some spiritual dimension, passed by quality cables but blocked by cheap ones,
despite the electrical signal being the same at the far end?

--
Eiron

No good deed ever goes unpunished.