You may be right. I’ve never bought into OFC or directional cables or cable “burn in.” Alotof audiophiles are out of their skulls. Green pens on the edge of CDs? Even if it did make a difference, who on earth has the time to do that? I would never spend $12,000 on speaker cables, that is just bat-shit crazy.
I might, someday, play around with some silver cables just to see if I can hear anything out of it. For me, I have about $6-700 (I try to buy used) tied up in cables, and that is for a pretty complicated system with an electronic x-over and two amps, stereo subs and speakers, tuner, 3 CD-players (don’t ask), turn table etc…
Not all of my cables are exotic, but even a 2M Monster or Tributaries will set you back $25. I could easily sell them on ebay or audiogon for just about the same as I paid for them. It seems that the poor guy who buys the new high-end cable loses 50% right off the top, but then you can sell them again and again for the same $$.
Well, I have one nice single drawer CD-P that I use for serious listening, actually it is the one I use most of the time. Then I have a 5 disk changer for background music, and then I have a free standing CD-R/W recorder, which I really only use for making copies, though it is also technically hooked up and a player in its own right.
The CD changer feeds the digital in on the CD-R/W recorder, so I can make compilations by programing the changer, but of course the recorder is also hooked up to the tape outs on the pre amp so I can record from LP. So, just in terms of cables for CD players, I have 3 1M runs, one 2M run, and one 2M optical digital cable. Quite the snake’s nest I can tell you.
On the subs, I run the pre-amp line level outs into an active electronic cross over set at 80hz. (It is a 24db/octave unit) So, the x-over splits the line level signal and sends 80+ to the main amp which in turn powers the main speakers. Everything under 80 gets sent to a second amp which powers a par of 12" passive sealed subwoofers. So, there is one RCA cable from the pre to the x-over, and then two more runs to the two amps, and then four speaker cables.
The advantages of the actively bi-amped system are many. I get to use smaller monitor speakers which tend to image better than floor standers, but I still have very deep controlled bass from the big subs. Also, by using two amps the main amp doesn’t have to struggle to provide all the power (The net power of the two amps is 350 w/channel, 700 total). Plus my main speakers are a two-way design, and use a 7 inch mid-woofer, but by crossing over at 80hz, that little 7 inch driver doesn’t have to work nearly as hard and so it can play much more cleanly across the mid-band, which is the most important anyway. Can you tell I have put some time into this? Having messed around with active cross-overs, I don’t think I would ever go back to a simple one speaker/channel system.
Remember, this is just a conventional 2-channel system. No surround sound or anything like that. Left and right stereo.
A cable with mega resistance effectively diminishes your overall amplitude, but I’ve yet to read any research anywhere which proves that a hi-fi component’s eq response is affected in any way.
I once had an arguement with a guitar nerd who tried to tell me that cables with mega resistance actually slow the speed of your signal down to your amp - as in, you hit a chord, and there’s a delay before your amp produces the sound.
Try as I might, I couldn’t explain to him that the delay was being caused by the CPU’s in the 4 pedals he was driving his signal through - that is, each pedal has a CPU doing it’s own bit of signal processing, which was adding a about 2 or 3 milliseconds of delay along the way. The guy in question argued to the point of ridiculousness that the delay was being caused by overwhelming resistance in his cables and that the signal was being held up as a result.
It’s pretty hard to talk rationally with people like that…
So… getting back to my original point… and that of Mort Furd as well… with a guitar amp, if I overdrive the valves to get a gnarly sound, as a muso I’m doing that on purpose to define a certain style of playing which I want YOU the listener to hear.
Conversely, as a producer, after I’ve mixed everything down and fully mastered my work, if you then choose to use a tube power amp which implements a degree of valve distortion (to a lesser or greater degree) then what’s happening is that YOU the consumer are introducing a sound artefact which I, the producer, certainly did NOT want you to hear. All I wanted you to hear was a faithful reproduction of my finished mastered down recording. Anything that you, the consumer, choose to implement yourself after the fact is your business, but to do so theoretically removes yourself further and further away from the ideal definition of being a purist.
In short, keep it simple… the simpler the better.
Personally, and this is just a preference of MINE, but my favourite works are those which never went through the digitisation process - like ever. A magnificent recent 200 gram audiophile vinyl LP of a recording made prior to 1983, recently cut to laquer from the original production master tape, through a $3000 turntable and moving coil cartrdigde, into a pre amp, then into an Aardvark 24/96 Direct Pro soundcard in my PC (about $1500 in Aussie dollars for that sucker) and then you have a magnificent SACD standard personal digital recording of an analogue masterpiece which will never degrade. THAT particular wave file is MY digital file, and the only time the music ever went digital is when I put it onto my harddrive in 24/96 Scarlett Book wave format.
My grumble with modern music is that every bloody idiot along the way is over cooking the digital manipulation of music. Over limiting, over multi band compressing blah blah blah. At least if I know that I’m dealing with a fully remastered limited edition audiophile standard vinyl pressing of a truly analogue recording, then I can rest assured I’m hearing the real thing, and not some current exploration into what the marketing people RECKON sounds good.
After the 24/96 wave file is on my portable hard disk, I can then play it back through the Aardvark Sound Card into any hi fi system anywhere - and obviously some hi fi’s are better than others.
Personally, I prefer to listen to such recordings straight from the Direct Pro’s breakout box into a $350 pair of Sennheiser headphones. That’s the most honest, least complicated of the lot. It’s a rare hi fi indeed which can sound THAT good. But you can’t share it unfortunately.
But something to note… the Aardvark Direct Pro 24/96 soundcard is a very expensive, dedicated professional bit of equipment. And most importantly, not all soundcards are created equally, either. The Analogue to Digital converters, and the D > A converters in cards like MOTU or Aardvark are way superior to something like a Soundblaster card for example. The soundcard is shielded in a lead casing etc with a squillion dedicated bits of circuitry buried underneath. Effectively, the combination of my portable harddisk and the Direct Pro soundcard in my IBM lap top gives me the perfect “take anywhere” hi fi system. All I need from there is a power amp and speakers. The preamp and various functions like that is actually built into the Direct Pro card.
It’s an interesting, and alternative way of going about hi fi to be sure, but it works for me.
Yeah, but that was touched by electricity every step of the way. REAL audiophiles ONLY listen to mechanical recordings (most pre-1925) on mechanical systems. Especially recordings made before methods were made to reproduce the cylinders and each one was recorded directly, with the cutter moved by nothing more than the singer’s voice. Anything less is for pussies.
