Proof by Measuring that Expensive speakers cable are total BS?

[SL4P]

Many years ago - we built pro-audio (and TV) studios using good quality cable & connectors (e.g. Belden and Canare at the time).
These were a mix of analog and digital technologies - with the results usually going to digital masters.
Send it home on any media you like, and it won't sound better than the analog paths it took to get there through the production process!

[Someone]

And the "digital is digital it works or it doesn't" is also untrue for HDMI, visible artefacts become visible well before the video drops out:
http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf
Its a nightmare trying to find the magic combination of discount products that will work reliably together, cheaper to get something quality in the first place.

Someone (no pun intended) busted the HDMI one by capturing the output frames and comparing every pixel with the source.

I've captured frames to measure the bit error rate also like in the above document, there is a real difference between off brand cheap cables and a mid priced brand name option not just in the theoretical numbers measured by test equipment but also by looking critically at the image and it doesnt need 5m or 10m cables to show up. Not all consumers care about single pixel errors so the majority don't even notice it and just repeat the wrong assumption that digital is digital and if you see any picture then its perfect. Going further you can buy outrageously expensive HDMI cables that will produce an even lower error signal, at some point the result is sufficient for purpose and different people and situations will expect different levels of quality.

One of my favorite quotes from another forum (GearSlutz):

A $200 cable is better than a $2 cable.  But not better than a $5 cable.

Yes, there are really horrible cables made from shoddy materials and assembled haphazardly with zero quality control.
But once you exceed "sensible" pricing, you get into the esoteric and self-induced realm of audiophools.

There can be more "quality" or value beyond the mid priced cables, but we should be highlighting the "fool" products that add cost (or just price) for no additional benefit, rather than making sweeping statements on price.

Being just sufficient for a digital link is a bad way to start as any changes in the environment, cable, or equipment and you could then be back to inadequate. There needs to be a significant overhead beyond visually acceptable to ensure it remains that way in use. Another reputable source shows some extreme examples of BER in HDMI/DVI signalling:
http://www.extron.com.au/company/article.aspx?id=digitaldesigntc

I didn't like it at the cinema when they had some stains on the projection screen, no-one else noticed or could even see it during the showing when prompted. At another cinema the audio tracks were swapped left to right. Neither would entertain a refund. Whats considered acceptable varies wildly and there are products providing a range of levels of quality, please point out the charlatans but most of whats on this forum is just as ignorant of the world of high quality reproduction.

[anfang]

Maybe this is already done (youtube)? 

We (well i assume most of us here) all know that very expensive speaker cable is kind of marketing BS. Together with interconnects.

Now, what woud be the best way to proof that it is indeed is utter BS? I mean, you should be able to see the "music" and conclude that the signal is hardly different? I''m not so keen to put my scope on to a amplified signal

Any thoughts what would be the best approach?

This thread and the motivation for creating it ---> 

[Elf]

Just as your eyes automatically adjust between widely varying color temperature (indoor candle-lit <3000°K to glaring outdoor sunlight >5000°K)  You can watch a video camera "auto-tracking white balance" between indoors and outdoors, but you never perceive your eye-brain system doing it.

Special case of course, but after near two decades of doing photography and cinematography (mostly on film, with no automatic white balance), I find that I'm very consciously aware of color temperature. Sometimes gaps in the spectrum as well (i.e. leading to poor color rendition), but more in a way that something looks "off" with colors rather than anything I'd be able to quantify. Most people seem completely oblivious to color temperature and color rendition though!


Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm

"Makes digital sound analog"

[HighVoltage]

Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm

"Makes digital sound analog"

I had no idea that they also sell high end power cables?
But for $ 1499 ?
Some people just have too much money, I guess

[Rerouter]

having a nude virgin rub it with snake oil won't change that.

You know, every time i hear the claim about "X by naked virgins" They almost never say female, so for all you know to meet the claim some 20 year old guy could be flossing his but cheeks with the cable prior to shipping.

[onesixright]

Since this thread, entertaining as it was, quickly took the turn towards "snake oil" and $$$. Its safe to say we all agree (=BS).

Unfortunately, this is no what i was after. Maybe i phrased the question wrongly  So, let me try to rephrase it:

If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?

[RayRay]

Personally, I think there is (and isn't) a difference at the same time.
And what I mean by that is, the material of which the cable is made of (copper, silver, silver and copper combo, copper clad aluminum), shielding and wire gauge can definitely make an audible difference in sound quality. But if you take two cables that are identical in that regards (material and gauge) then wouldn't be any difference between em. Expensive cables are definitely a rip off (and I wouldn't buy/recommend those to anyone!), but there's absolutely is a difference among different cables due to the reasons stated above.

[Rerouter]

You would use a spectum analyser with a frequency sweep function / VNA to catagorise phase and gain of the cable across the desired frequency range, and depending on the equipment either directly or with a distortion meter measure the distortion added to the signal,

Next up shielding, build something that can pulse out large EMI spikes at broadband frequencies, measure the spectrum on the wire with the other end connected to a dummy load of the standard speaker resistances (not a speaker but a resistor) this is common mode immunity,

And finally if its multiple pairs in the same wire, inject those pulses down one pair while testing the other, this is crosstalk immunity,

There are a few more things you can worm out, but the VNA option gives you impedance, phase and gain (loss) across a frequency band of your choosing, which i would say is one of the most definitive ways to describe a cable,

[Elf]

If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?

A vector network analyzer might be a good place to start. I think they go down into the audio frequencies although I don't know if you even see transmission line effects down there. The wavelength of audio frequency stuff is so large in comparison to your average speaker cable length (15km for 20kHz).

Otherwise you could quantify the LCR-type parameters of the cable. Shielding can be measured "inside out" which is easier than "outside in" -- that is to say, you can put a signal on one end of the cable, terminate the other end, and measure the leakage, maybe inductively?

[Avacee]

I'm definitely a "young player" and am fascinated by threads like this and learn a lot .. and for this I thank you all.

However, coupled with the expensive cables are invariably the claims regarding the sockets and connectors.

Just how important are those solid gold connectors that have been rubbed in snake oil by vestal virgins for reproducing that angelically perfect sound?
And closely linked(new topic?), how much marketing rubbish is involved in the connectors for test leads?

[CJay]

It seems a bit like water sold at the supermarket. Some bottles cost up to 5 times the cost of petrol. I don't doubt there is a perceptible taste difference between brands but people don't buy $8/liter water for the taste. It is a lifestyle and status statement.

All I know is I can neither afford it nor taste a difference. Although Someone has told me I was gullible and I believed them.

Sad to say but there are definitely flavour differences between brands of water, you're not dealing with pure water after all's said and done so it's not as ridiculous as it may sound (my palate can tell the difference, what it can't do repeatably is tell me which is more pleasing so I just buy the cheapest when I have to buy it at all)

Where I would agree with you entirely is that it's absolutely not worth the money they expect you to pay and it is, as you say, a brand loyalty/status choice.

I am lucky though, in the NW of England we have very pleasant, soft tap water which tastes good and makes excellent tea

[borjam]

In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.

Not really. Dishonest vendors exist, and you can find poor quality cables that suffer a significant signal degradation.

Never underestimate the ability of some manufacturers to make, for example, laughable clones of well known connectors. I have a good sample of toy N connectors here.

Of course, what I say doesn't mean that HDMI cables not costing a fortune are crap. But cables below a reasonable price will probably be of poor quality. Can they cause trouble? Depends on the length, etc. A friend bought a long HDMI cable for 2 euro or so and the signal degradation was really visible. A 10 euro cable of the same length worked perfectly.

[borjam]

Anyway, my favourite audiophoolery regarding cables is not the cables itself, but the cable stands to prevent them touching the floor!

[Ian.M]

If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?

A vector network analyzer might be a good place to start. I think they go down into the audio frequencies although I don't know if you even see transmission line effects down there. The wavelength of audio frequency stuff is so large in comparison to your average speaker cable length (15km for 20kHz).

Otherwise you could quantify the LCR-type parameters of the cable. Shielding can be measured "inside out" which is easier than "outside in" -- that is to say, you can put a signal on one end of the cable, terminate the other end, and measure the leakage, maybe inductively?

You'll be hard put to find anything measurable except the cable resistance, which is in series with the source impedance of the amplifier and directly affects the damping of a moving coil driver.

The saner and more technical end of the 'golden ears' brigade will claim that cable inductance and capacitance are also important, but if you do the maths, you will find that for any practical cable not designed to be pathologically bad, driving commercially available moving coil speakers (or even ones with pizeoelectric tweeters), the effects of cable capacitance and inductance are several orders of magnitude below the effect of the changing drive unit parameters as the coil moves in the gap, working against the forces of its suspension and its coupling to the air in the cabinet and room.

There's also the problem of correlating measurable electrical parameters with sound 'quality'.  Even if you set up a randomised double blind trial, with an automatic switching device, that at the press of a button by the listener, momentarily mutes the audio and randomly selects one of two cables, logging the selection, when presented with the expected result that cables with the same resistance and closely similar other parameters are indistinguishable, the audiophool market pundits will claim your test methodology has compromised the performance of the supposedly superior cable - maybe it hasn't 'bedded in' or 'equilibrated' or 'harmonised' or some other unquantifiable woo-woo property that can only be satisfied by some lengthy ritual process that usually involves its undisturbed connection while playing particular types of music for an extended period - all carefully designed by the cynics who produce this s--t to make it impossible to conduct an A-B comparison!

[kaz911]

My x-x-x Father in Law was the lead engineer/designer for Peerless Speakers in Denmark. One of his favourite stories was when they DID do a double blind test study with all the Audio/Hi-Fi magazines and geeks.

They borrowed B&O's sound-dead room - set everything up - played the music requested by the Hifi guys with all kinds of cables. They Journalists then voted on the sound quality in each instance. And the winner was "220v Electrical Wire" from an extension cord....

None of them ever published that test despite they had agreements with all the journalists that they HAD to publish it. The journalists had many excuses....

[borjam]

Anyway, my favourite audiophoolery regarding cables is not the cables itself, but the cable stands to prevent them touching the floor!

That is classic. Where can I get those? Will Lego stands work as well? Lego has the disadvantage that it hurts like buggery when you stand on it.

I am pretty sure that Lego would not be appropiate. Look at the sharp corner of lego blocks. I am sure they will diffract electrons like crazy and completely smear the phase and timing of the sound, making it less articulate and out of focus. 

You need to use proper smooth ceramic pieces. Be gentle to your travelling electrons, dude!!

[alexanderbrevig]

Noncorroding interconnects has audible benefits after the corroding ones stop working.

Psycho-acoustics is a real science and has nothing to do with confirmation bias or placebo.

I never shy away from a short and entertaining discussion with an audiophool. Likewise I take up those who become phools the other way around and disregard anything beyond what they can hear while being totally satisfied with Dr.Dre Beats and their iPhone. Phoolery is never good.

[Alex Nikitin]

Unfortunately, there is no way by either measurements or by a blind testing ("double" or not) to "objectively" evaluate the perceived sound quality beyond very simple and easily sensed differences (loudness, noise, large amounts of distortion etc). Blind testing in audio has very low sensitivity - and it is well known but not widely advertised fact  , as in the vast majority of documented and properly performed DBTs the statistically valid positive results are only obtained for this kind of differences. The usual claim is that any other differences we think we hear do exist only in our imagination. It is about the same as to measure 5mV DC voltage with a 3.5 digits meter set at 1kV range, and to claim there is no voltage present. A blind test is not a suitable instrument in this situation, but in the absence of anything better it is used to "prove" that there is no difference. There might be a difference or might be not but with that tool we wouldn't know, it is that simple. And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.

A couple of side notes - 1) I am not using any expensive cables in my home audio system  . 2) I did design hi-fi audio equipment for number of years and my designs did received a number of awards. One of my amplifier designs was rated as Class A by Stereophile magazine (about 2002 IIRC). So I am not exactly a novice in that field.

Cheers

Alex

[borjam]

And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.

Although not applicable to fairy tale cables, I understand that an important difference in audio gear is distortion. Most people will consider it something deletereous to music but, actually, it's heavily used either on purpose or more or less unknowingly as part of the creative process when producing music.

What's the appeal of many vintage microphones with a valve preamplifier? Its distortion sounds "beautiful", "rich" in a certain way. What makes you choose a preamplifier or mixer over another one? More than the particular curve of its equalizers, it's the way it distorts.

I own a very good audio interface made by Metric Halo. And one of the options it offers is several flavors of digitally modeled analog distortion for the input channels. I don't use that option because I prefer to use that kind of trickery when mixing (and the result is the same of course, bits are bits) but I certainly do use some distortion plugins that emulate old analog circuitry. You select a distortion model and the amount of overdrive you can apply (which is the equivalent of inserting an analog amplifier and overdriving it). Doing it in a very subtle way really does add some "sparkle" to the mix.

This is an example of an intentional "saturator" to add distortion.

http://www.pspaudioware.com/plugins/dynamic_processors/psp_mixsaturator2/

Some studios or audio engineers will do it blatantly, using digital distortion, and others will do it in a more "covert" way, by inserting "nice sounding" old analog gear. The end result is similar anyway.

[Assafl]

Unfortunately, there is no way by either measurements or by a blind testing ("double" or not) to "objectively" evaluate the perceived sound quality beyond very simple and easily sensed differences (loudness, noise, large amounts of distortion etc). Blind testing in audio has very low sensitivity - and it is well known but not widely advertised fact  , as in the vast majority of documented and properly performed DBTs the statistically valid positive results are only obtained for this kind of differences. The usual claim is that any other differences we think we hear do exist only in our imagination. It is about the same as to measure 5mV DC voltage with a 3.5 digits meter set at 1kV range, and to claim there is no voltage present. A blind test is not a suitable instrument in this situation, but in the absence of anything better it is used to "prove" that there is no difference. There might be a difference or might be not but with that tool we wouldn't know, it is that simple. And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.

A couple of side notes - 1) I am not using any expensive cables in my home audio system  . 2) I did design hi-fi audio equipment for number of years and my designs did received a number of awards. One of my amplifier designs was rated as Class A by Stereophile magazine (about 2002 IIRC). So I am not exactly a novice in that field.

Cheers

Alex

So how would you ratify the divide between pro audio and consumer audio? Are pro audio not interested in the emotional aspects of music?

It is the spending pattern that is different.
They spend a ton on their mixing consoles and speakers and room treatment. A bit less on amplification and recorders and equalization. Even less on Mogami microphone wire and Neutrik connectors for interconnects.

Meanwhile home audio - equalization is out (never understood that - even baxendall controls, let alone parametric, are out), room treatment is rare (WTF), loudspeakers are small, highly compromised, and WAF targeted, and then the spend is amplifiers and sources and wires and racks and remote controls.

[Ice-Tea]

Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm

Beyond awesome. And beyond this 2m cryogenic awesomeness, there's miles and miles of crappy cables, lowest cost transformers, your neighbours hairdryer and everything else injecting noise onto the lines. "produced the most analog and realistic sound I've yet to hear from digital" Who makes that shit up??

[dimkasta]

Playing devil's advocate here (only to some extent, because I do not have silly money to waste)

For anyone that wants measurements, here is an article by N. Pass with measurements. It dates back to 1980.

http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_spkr_cable.pdf

The question is, are such differences audible?

Perhaps we are just spotlight measuring stuff and not the whole picture.
I won't try to guess anymore. I am as ignorant as anyone else in the industry (and I am not even part of it).
I try to keep an open mind. Not spending silly money though

[onesixright]

Since everybody went off topic. 

How about a 2.000 USD speaker (pair) vs a 20.000 USD speaker (pair)? Any snake oil there?

[Elf]

How about a 2.000 USD speaker (pair) vs a 20.000 USD speaker (pair)? Any snake oil there?

I don't know about $2 vs $20, but $2 vs $200 or $2000 -- like a cheap boombox speaker vs. a quality PA speaker or line array setup -- has immediately measurable, quantifiable differences just in terms of basic things like frequency response. That at least is also obvious enough to be directly audible!

Whether or not high end "boutique" or professional audio manufacturers charge too much for their equipment is another question, though.