Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Debunking cables... (Read 14625 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Debunking cables...

Anyone have some spare cash, enough to do a serious debunking?

What I'd like to see is someone buy the Cardas (or other) replacement cable for the Sennheiser HD-580/600 headphones, and strip it down completely.  Strip off the insulation, desolder the plugs, and have a good look at the whole thing.  Copious hi-res pictures at each step would be good.

I want to know if a capacitor, resistor or other crap like this was inserted in the cable to alter the sound from the standard HD580/600 cable.

This could make for a loud uproar in the 'audiophile' community if something was discovered, and since reverse engineering is perfectly legal I don't think Cardas or the other manufacturers could win any lawsuits.

I would be willing to pitch in some cash for a venture like this!  If about 7 or 8 of us got together it might not be too bad ($25/apiece).  The whole thing should include measurements of capacitance and impedance as compared to the stock HD580/600 cable sold by Sennheiser, and any other possible comparisons.

Any fellow HD580/600 users interested?  A used cable could be purchased for ~50% of the typical retail price, although something straight from the manufacturer would be a better proof.

Why the interest?  Well, a lot of HD600 people end up buying an aftermarket cable -- almost as a knee-jerk reaction to the statement "it makes the headphones sound better."  I think many people just assume that it does, and so spend the ~$150-$200 on the cable on top of the ~$250-$300 for the headphones.  And many even say the HD600s don't sound good at all without it.  Imagine if this "improvement" could be gained with a 25 cent ceramic cap...

Debunking cables...

Reply #1 –
I don't think that the presence of a capacitor would shock any audiophile. Many expensive cables feature and advertise filters in the path of the signal, so as to remove noise, correct the group delay, the phase response, etc , many audiophile also advise to use cheap ferrite rings, capacitors etc instead of expensive cables.
Cardas defense would be the same pseudo scientific discourse as always : the capacitor is an audiophile grade one, the copper is 99.9999 OFC, the dielectric is pure PTFE, the solderings are pure silver soldered under vacuum...

Debunking cables...

Reply #2 –
But it would be fairly easy to prove via measurements that those cables alter the signal much more than the regular stock cables. Hey, for that, even no dissection of the cables would be needed.

Debunking cables...

Reply #3 –
I believe Headrooom offers a 30-day money-back guarantee (http://www.headphone.com/layout.php?topicID=6&subTopicID=51), so if you're so inclined and have the proper measuring tools, the whole deal would run you less than 10 bucks to cover the return shipping.

That said, I think it would be a rather useless experiment. You cannot logically argue with audiophiles, and as for this forum's regulars, it'd be preaching to the choir.

Debunking cables...

Reply #4 –
Forgive my n00b-ness with expensive cables...other than consumer-grade Monster, I've never tried anything else.  But is it true that many of these fancy, expensive cables really alter the sound somehow, and cheaper cables generally don't?  Wouldn't this go against the whole "transparency" and "uncolored sound" sales-points I'm always hearing from "audiophile equipment" manufacturers?

I'm not experienced with a variety of cables, but I think I'd prefer (audibly) raw, unfettered sound passing between my components.  If I need to alter anything, I'll use EQ/DSP/etc, as I can control it with some level of granularity that way, rather than having a permanent sound-altering component in my cable path.

Fewtch's experiment would be interesting in this respect.  But it'll take a monetary donation.....from me?.....ummm........Oh!  Someone's calling me!  I gotta go.....

Debunking cables...

Reply #5 –
The problem is that many of these so-called "audiophiles" really don't care what's happening. They know the cable costs some good bucks, they know it makes the headphones sound different, so they assume the logic conclusion, which is that the cables improve the sound. But since stock cables are already transparent, it's clear it's the other way around. But most of them won't accept this simple explanation, because it's totally confrontational with their beliefs, experience, and well spent buck$. And if they did, they should acknowledge it in public, so all their "audiophile" reputation would be ruined.

Debunking cables...

Reply #6 –
Quote
But most of them won't accept this simple explanation, because it's totally confrontational with their beliefs, experience, and well spent buck$. And if they did, they should acknowledge it in public, so all their "audiophile" reputation would be ruined.

I'd think of it the other way around...if they'd step up and admit that they've been wrong, that many high-dollar cables are actually less transparent (i.e., lower fidelity) than stock cables, or otherwise provide no improvement is fidelity, then it might salvage their "audiophile reputation".

Sticking with a flawed concept about audio fidelity once it's shown to be flawed is a sure way to never get real respect among real audiophiles.  Then again, their circles are usually peopled with "audiophiles" that measure sound quality with their wallets rather than with their ears, right?  The old more money = more fidelity approach. 

Debunking cables...

Reply #7 –
Quote
The problem is that many of these so-called "audiophiles" really don't care what's happening. They know the cable costs some good bucks, they know it makes the headphones sound different, so they assume the logic conclusion, which is that the cables improve the sound. But since stock cables are already transparent, it's clear it's the other way around. But most of them won't accept this simple explanation, because it's totally confrontational with their beliefs, experience, and well spent buck$. And if they did, they should acknowledge it in public, so all their "audiophile" reputation would be ruined.

Many people are willing to pay for something they neither need or use. Possessing objects improves self and impresses others. Why should the audio business be any different?

Debunking cables...

Reply #8 –
Quote
I'd think of it the other way around...if they'd step up and admit that they've been wrong, that many high-dollar cables are actually less transparent (i.e., lower fidelity) than stock cables, or otherwise provide no improvement is fidelity, then it might salvage their "audiophile reputation".

Sticking with a flawed concept about audio fidelity once it's shown to be flawed is a sure way to never get real respect among real audiophiles.  Then again, their circles are usually peopled with "audiophiles" that measure sound quality with their wallets rather than with their ears, right?  The old more money = more fidelity approach. 

Trust me on this.  Any test performed for these pseudo-audiophiles will most likely be declared FUD. Going after Zealots can be fun, but don't expect them to change their stance.  Ultimately, they'll simply respond by saying, "You're wrong.... You have to be"

Debunking cables...

Reply #9 –
Quote
Trust me on this.  Any test performed for these pseudo-audiophiles will most likely be declared FUD. Going after Zealots can be fun, but don't expect them to change their stance.  Ultimately, they'll simply respond by saying, "You're wrong.... You have to be"

Amen, brother!  I've learned this the hard way only a couple of times, and if you even lay out your method and tools for all to use to reach their own unbiased conclusions, it's the same as attacking their very nature.  Their defensiveness spikes drastically, and like you say, they'll do anything to hold their position.

The "zeolot groupies" that follow them generally polarize in an argument...most will stand by their "messiah" no matter what is said.  And then a few you can "pry away" with logic.  But it's still not worth the effort.  The more logical minds will find HydrogenAudio of their own accord.

So, I gave up on trying to convince anyone of anything.  I'll give answers when asked a question, but that's all.  Like atherean stated, you can't argue with "audiophiles", and around here it's just preaching to the choir.

Debunking cables...

Reply #10 –
Quote
Trust me on this.  Any test performed for these pseudo-audiophiles will most likely be declared FUD. Going after Zealots can be fun, but don't expect them to change their stance.  Ultimately, they'll simply respond by saying, "You're wrong.... You have to be"

I don't know if the term 'zealots' is applicable (there are some, but probably in the minority)... many seem to be 'escapists' and 'avoiders' however, from what I've found hanging on some of those boards -- the sort of people who believe what they want to believe (often based purely on a group consensus), and don't think in a very organized, logical way.  The general level of education tends not to be too high, either -- this isn't hard to determine from checking out people's user profiles/bio's, etc. so I'm not making a snobby sort of judgment here.

There are exceptions, of course... it doesn't do to label people too much, and painting a picture of 'a typical audiophile' is more than a little specious... but certain things can be said.  I still have fun hanging on a few 'audiophile' boards (my enjoyment of discussing audio hardware), but it can get very irritating at times -- particularly as relates to cables, power cords and anti-soundcard bias.  Ah well...

Debunking cables...

Reply #11 –
Sometimes I don't get people at all...

The professor running the course I'm taking is a PhD in EE... and he's going to buy megabuck cables for his audio setup too!

Debunking cables...

Reply #12 –
Quote
There are exceptions, of course... it doesn't do to label people too much, and painting a picture of 'a typical audiophile' is more than a little specious... but certain things can be said.  I still have some fun hanging on 'audiophile' boards on a casual/entertainment basis, but it can get very irritating at times -- particularly as relates to cables, power cords and anti-soundcard bias.  Ah well...

Ahh... I hang out and sometimes participate in Creationism/Evolution flamewars (as well as political discussions). To my knowledge, no one has ever changed their opinion based on evidence.  And in terms of debates, these are like shooting fish in a barrel, yet they still cling to their beliefs.

@Joe Bloggs, that's nothing new.  There are accreditted medical schools that teach 'alternative medicine,' (or as I like to call it, the placebo effect).

Debunking cables...

Reply #13 –
Quote
Ahh... I hang out and sometimes participate in Creationism/Evolution flamewars (as well as political discussions). To my knowledge, no one has ever changed their opinion based on evidence.  And in terms of debates, these are like shooting fish in a barrel, yet they still cling to their beliefs.

Yep... that's the nature of beliefs anyway (afaic), they provide an illusory feeling of comfort and safety, and/or some faux sense of knowledge.  Most people are completely unwilling to give them up, and once that's accepted it gets easier to mix with 'belief-based' crowds without getting into flamewars and such (unless you enjoy those ).

I generally try to stay out of the cable/tweaks related discussions, but occasionally get involved in one and try to drop a few gentle hints.  Mostly I just enjoy talking about audio hardware, in the same way some people enjoy talking automobiles (whether or not they can afford a good one ).

Debunking cables...

Reply #14 –
Quote
Sometimes I don't get people at all...

The professor running the course I'm taking is a PhD in EE... and he's going to buy megabuck cables for his audio setup too!

Oh there could be other reasons for spending big on cables.  If I won the lottery, I'd have the most expensive cables money could buy for one reason:

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Aesthetic Value[/span]

They'd have to be beautiful...and match the carpet perfectly!  I'd venture to say that this is one of the most measurable effects that big-buck cables provide.

Once you spend just enough to get acceptable construction, good connectors on each end, and enough shielding, then honest reasons to have more costly cables might include:

--- Brand-related status (keeping up with the Joneses)
--- Because you're best friend owns a company that produces expensive "audiophile" cables (in which case, I'd expect some free "samples")
--- Because you received them as a gift from an "audiophile" friend, and to be gracious you should just nod and tell them "You're right...they do sound better!  And more importantly, they match my carpet perfectly!" 

Debunking cables...

Reply #15 –
LOL  I don't think he is eligible for any of the criteria (except rich)... unless you count some people on an audio forum as the 'Joneses'

Debunking cables...

Reply #16 –
Quote
Oh there could be other reasons for spending big on cables.  If I won the lottery, I'd have the most expensive cables money could buy for one reason:

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Aesthetic Value[/span]

They'd have to be beautiful...and match the carpet perfectly!  I'd venture to say that this is one of the most measurable effects that big-buck cables provide.

That, and build quality (although it's not expensive at all to reach good build quality... afaic, Radio Shack "Gold Series" has already reached it).  ~$30 or less for a pair of RCA interconnects seems reasonable to me, even on the generous side.

There's some kind of audiophile 'wisdom' that says you should spend something like 10% to 20% of the price of a system on cables... as if somehow it's a matter of price matching.  I guess if it makes people feel better about their system... 

Debunking cables...

Reply #17 –
You think you've seen insane speaker cables?

  You ain't seen nothin'  yet. 

Debunking cables...

Reply #18 –
Quote
You think you've seen insane speaker cables?

You ain't seen nothin'  yet. 

OMFG!!!

OK, this has got to be a load of sh*t...
>>>
8 ft. quadruple Single Crystal Magic Tweeter Speaker cable (12 AWG each) : $1,450.00
8 ft. quadruple Single Crystal Magic Woofer Speaker cable (10 AWG each) : $2,000.00
3 Meter Magic Power Cord : $2,500.00
1 Meter Pair, Single Ended Single Crystal Copper Link One Interconnect Cable : $700.00
<<<

So for a very basic two woofer and two tweeter stereo setup, and two system components needing an interconnect and AC power, you're talking some $9100 for the wires.

And if the percentage that some people justify for cabling (as noted by fewtch) is 10% to 20% of the total system price, then anyone who buys these wires are spending (at minimum) in the range of  $91000 to $182000 on one audio system.  Sheeesh!!!  Where I live, you can have a nice house and a nice car within that price range.

I'll bet that no "audiophile" could ABX such an extraneous wet-dream setup that would cost >$100000 from an entire system I could put together for less than the cost of their cabling alone.

In fact, I'm in the wrong business.  I'm a pretty decent salesman...If people are paying this much for wires, I wonder what I could sell them.  I'll bet all you need is charisma and a bunch of impressive technical terms...and a bank account to deposit all the suckers' money in. 

Debunking cables...

Reply #19 –
Quote
In fact, I'm in the wrong business.  I'm a pretty decent salesman...If people are paying this much for wires, I wonder what I could sell them.  I'll bet all you need is charisma and a bunch of impressive technical terms...and a bank account to deposit all the suckers' money in.  

Not quite that easy (if it were, everyone would be selling cables).  I think what you also need are industry connections, which aren't easy to come by (in fact, your best bet in getting a start would be to hang around subjectivist audiophile forums for a few years!  ).  The more you believe your own hype, the easier to write good advertising copy... 

Debunking cables...

Reply #20 –
Hmmm, so if you're spending $2,500 dollars on a 3 meter power cable, I suppose you'd want to re-wire the entire power circuit in your house, to justify it?

Debunking cables...

Reply #21 –
Quote
Not quite that easy (if it were, everyone would be selling cables).


Having been in audiophile circles in my town, I rather think that to succeed in selling audiophile gear what you need is reputation. You need to be known for a very long time by the highest audiophiles of the town, that would trust you, and spend all their time in your auditorium.

Quote
You think you've seen insane speaker cables?

You ain't seen

What ? These ridiculous tiny pieces of wire are speaker cables ? You must be joking ! Here are speaker cables :




Quote
But it would be fairly easy to prove via measurements that those cables alter the signal much more than the regular stock cables. Hey, for that, even no dissection of the cables would be needed.


[The devil's advocate]
Audiophile would answer that numbers don't tell you how the cable sounds, that there are things that can't be measured, and the proof would be the sound of tube amps, much better than transistor amps while the distortion is much higher, or vinyl, that sounds better than CD...

Well, the ones that would read your technical analyses, that is, because a true audiophile can just HEAR that the cable sounds MUCH BETTER than a cheap one. That's all. You can hear it, what else do you need ? If the distortion is higher, then your experiment can't measure the distortion in the other cable. It's old news, no device in the world can measure the musicality of a cable.
If you don't hear the problems in the cheap cable, you're deaf, that's all.
[/The devil's advocate]

Debunking cables...

Reply #22 –
  And this is why I like hydrogenaudio so much.  Only scientific fact is allowed, no psuedo-science!

It is remarkable that so many people "fall" for buying expensive cables.  I mean, if you are buying expensive cables based on looks, then go for it, but its just too bad that those making a decision don't perform a simple DBT to see if the differences are real or not 

Debunking cables...

Reply #23 –
Quote
[The devil's advocate]
Audiophile would answer that numbers don't tell you how the cable sounds, that there are things that can't be measured, and the proof would be the sound of tube amps, much better than transistor amps while the distortion is much higher, or vinyl, that sounds better than CD...

Well, the ones that would read your technical analyses, that is, because a true audiophile can just HEAR that the cable sounds MUCH BETTER than a cheap one. That's all. You can hear it, what else do you need ? If the distortion is higher, then your experiment can't measure the distortion in the other cable. It's old news, no device in the world can measure the musicality of a cable.
If you don't hear the problems in the cheap cable, you're deaf, that's all.
[/The devil's advocate]

Re: "...there are things that can't be measured...", I completely agree.  What they're hearing indeed can't be measured because it's placebo.

Your points are so true.  These are exactly the kinds of things I hear these people saying.  My common response would be, "If you really can just HEAR a difference then you should definitely spend $9000 on wires."      They deserve to be seperated from that much money for something the rest of us spend much less on.

I'll bet that some of the same people that "hear" the difference between a $250 cable and a $2500 cable are the same people that can amazingly "hear" a difference between FLAC and uncompressed audio. 

Debunking cables...

Reply #24 –
Quote
You think you've seen insane speaker cables?

  You ain't seen nothin'  yet. 

That's nothing, I've seen cables half as thick as my arm... with an RLC network box in the middle  I think