Re: Expensive cable!

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Lewis Gardner" <lgardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:480ca8b1$0$19784$d94e5ade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Robert Green wrote:
>
> >>>But I did hear a difference.
> >>
> >>I have a strong suspicion that if the changes had been made without your
> >>knowledge and participation (or had not been made, but you were told
> >>they were), you would have found it considerably *more* difficult to
> >>hear any difference. Impossible, even.
> >
> > While your point is well taken, it's very likely there was a difference.
> > Unless that SMF was pulling the old "Circuit City" trick of having much
more
> > expensive speakers accidentally also be switched on when you ask to
listen
> > to the sale price speakers, there's a very good chance that there was a
> > substantial, detectable difference in the ability to reproduce atypical
> > program material ( i.e. "non-musical" sounds).
>
> For me the key was "non-musical" sounds. Even though we played some
> classical samples I could not hear a difference. It could be that my
> ears are not "developed" enough but I do hear the bus on The Trinity
> Sessions.

I said "non-musical" sounds with great trepidation because fans of groups
like "Art of Noise" might take serious exception.  I just read an article
somewhere that claimed that overall, musical fidelity expectations have
become quite low since so many people listen to music exclusively through
MP3 player headphones.  If you know where to listen, MP3 compression has
some serious limitations, and ironically, they're in the quietest of
passages where it's easy to hear compression artifacts.

> No tricks. Just the two of us and equipment. No switching devices were
> used. When speakers were switched we physically moved the speakers in
> and out of position and swapped wires. This did not allow AB testing but
> what we were listening for was the ability to hear additional background
> sounds like distant birds and insects. You either heard them, didn't
> hear them or heard something but couldn't make it out.

I'll bet that acoustically speaking, that a far-away insect looks a lot like
a noise transient that needs filtering!  There was a time when I could hear
the difference between an Alan Parsons LP and a CD, but that was a while
back.

The format I chose wasn't about audio fidelity as much as overall audio
quality.  LPs that had very quiet opening passages were virtually impossible
to keep pristine.  The "landing" of the needle, no matter how gentle, was a
landing nonetheless.  Unless you could handle LP's as adroitly as a juggler,
after a while, the pops would appear.  Not so with CD's.  Quiet passages
aren't as quiet as they could be, but they stay quiet a lot longer.  More
importantly, you can make perfect copies of CDs, but not LPs.

> > All that said, I believe the *worst* place to start trying to improve
your
> > sound quality is with horribly overpriced and overhyped Monster cables.
>
> The cables are the worst place to start.

I'd probably start with the speakers and the amp, and maybe filtering or
conditioning the power input.  I'd also use oversize cables with gold-plated
connectors because I'm in a high humidity area where nickel-plated
connectors eventually get a hazy corrosion "crust" on them.

--
Bobby G.