From: M.Willis@ee.surrey.ac.uk (Mike Willis)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Very expensive cables
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:33:56 GMT
Organization: University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK. GU2 5XH

In article <1992Sep9.150741.141@scic.intel.com>, sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep9.050303.18554@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> MATGBB@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU (BYRNES,Graham) w
|> >
|> >Ok, the world is not linear, strange things can happen. What we really need
|> >is a signed guarantee that, under certain circumstances a rep of the maker
|> >can distinguish the cable from 12g lamp cable in a double-blind test. And
|> >that if s/he fails to do so when challenged, the maker will refund a 
|> >multiple of the purchase price. A multiple of 10 would be my suggestion.
|> 
|> Well, lets see: we can submit samples of various wines to mass spectrum
|> analysis.  Therefore, we can tell exactly which proportions of each
|> element exist in each sample.  We can conclude that this will enable
|> us to determine which wines taste better than others by objective means.
|> What?  You mean to say we CAN'T tell which is better by the method?
|> But surely we know what to measure!  I guess that the vineyard that
|> produces a wine that costs $50 bottle should offer the same 10X guarantee
|> if the purchaser can't tell it from Ripple.  I suppose we should ignore
|> the empirical evidence that different wine judges tend to produce like
|> ratings (a similar state of affairs exists in high-end audio).  There is a 
|> word for those who assume all that is known is all that will ever be known: 
|> hubris.  If you can't tell the difference between Ripple and a fine
|> Auslese, then fine, buy the Ripple.  But to state that others can't tell 
|> the difference is supreme arrogance.

Not true. Wine has very many different elements in it and even more different
molecules. The problem with identifying a good wine from its chemical make up is
that the data set is so enormous. Our sense of taste is also very complex.

Speaker cable has less relevent parameters and we can measure all of them more
accurately than we can hear. There is the resistance, the capacitance, the
inductance, the linearity, the impedance etc etc. What we measure is the signal at
one end of the cable compared to what we put in. If moden technology can not
measure any difference then we certainly can not hear one. However moden technology
does indeed measure a difference. The question is does it sound better or worse?
This is hard to tell. A solid core thin speaker cable will sound different from a
good thick multicore as it will have a higher impedance to high frequencies. No
doubt the manic reviewers will say it sounds smoother or sweeter! Perhaps it will
enable the speaker to present an easier load to the amplifier. If you like it, then
use it but do not be conned into paying $300 per metre for it. Perhaps someone will
start painting pink spots on bell wire and selling it as high end cable. The usual
rent-a-reviewer will be employed to give it a good write up, the price will be set
high so people decide it sounds better, it must at that price, and a hefty profit
will be made.

Did you know your hi-fi will sound better when you are standing on one leg to
reduce the transmission of vibrations from the floor?

In contrary to popular philosophy the best sound can be had by spending most on
good speakers from a good maker, buying a decent high current FET/Bipolar
amplifier, and a sub $400 CD player. Current UK mags seem to think you can buy a
$600 CD player, a $400 Amplifer and $100 speakers and expect it to sound good.
Connect the speakers with heavy duty multicore and simple tinned (or silver plated)
bannana plugs. If the speaker cable totals more than $2/m you are being conned.

For the price of some high end hi-fi you can buy a house with better acoustics.
Newsgroups: rec.audio