Author Topic: The great cable debate  (Read 11458 times)

jamster

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #45 on: October 02, 2007, 10:22:25 pm »
Well... we can see after I did the review. I dont think I'll keep em.

Dewald
Thanks for the (non) offer - I'll get my own set ...

Gliding Dutchman

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #46 on: October 03, 2007, 08:35:58 am »
Thanks for the (non) offer - I'll get my own set ...

Good... High End Audio is the official SA agent. Give Roy a shout. ;-)

Hi-Phibian

  • Trade Group
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,038
  • I really prefer email, see my banner for address..
    • Croak Audio Exploration
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #47 on: October 04, 2007, 12:26:13 am »
Oh well... I am loving the Cardas Twinlink that just went on to the speakers, replaced Analysis + Theatre 2 which replaced Transparent Music Wave which replaced Esoteric Audio Premier which replaced QED 79 which replaced Monster XP and some Cable Talk and Van Den Hul in between.

Oh, in case no one gathered, good cable is a must imo, though it is not a fix....

GD, if you like them Anti's, I have a roll of 2.5 mm coil wire in the cupboard to brew your own...

Viagara

  • AVF Mods
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,921
  • Flying High, Digging Low
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #48 on: October 04, 2007, 08:27:09 am »
Oh, in case no one gathered, good cable is a must imo, though it is not a fix....

Now this sounds like sound advice.
Don't take life too seriously, you will not make it out alive.....

(Location Cape Town)
_________________________

DevillEars

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #49 on: October 04, 2007, 09:47:50 pm »
Virtually everyone approaches a discussion weighed down with the baggage of one or more preconceptions on the subject(s) under review.  This is entirely natural as our views and opinions are formed from our experiences and inputs over the years.

Just how significant these preconceptions can be has been brought home to me quite patently over the last couple of months.

Up until ~2 months ago, I was a confirmed sceptic on power conditioning and after-market power cords and, as far as interconnects and speaker cables were concerned, was convinced that there was benefit in the initial step up from those crappy interconnects tossed in with most Pacific Rim "systems" and from lamp-cord as speaker wiring, but beyond that first step lay a few kilolitres of snake-oil.

The first inkling I had about these preconceptions came along when - on an impulse - I bought a second-hand mains conditioner and four used power cords (it was one of those "bargains" that come along every now and then when some dude sells his software company, buys a yacht and a seafront property on a tropical island and, just before sailing off into the wild blue yonder, also sells his audio gear).

I used this mains conditioner to power the CDT/DAC (on one isolated socket-pair) and the preamp (on the second isolated socket-pair).  I noticed some minor, but distinct improvements in the overall presentation - lower noise floor, clearer treble, better soundstaging and tighter bass.

This perceived improvement was in conflict with a major preconception as far as power cords were concerned - mains conditioning I'd always accepted (having been in IT for >38 years, I KNOW about crappy power).

The next problem lay in the mains conditioner's configuration (only 4 sockets), so managed to obtain a 10-socket unit on a home trial.  This was supplied with three additional power cords of varying "quality".  So, I switched out the conditioners and connected both monoblocks in addition to the CDT/DAC and preamp (using the entry-level power cords).  Hmmm... Better!

Next, I decided to try the best of the supplied power cords (on the pre-amp, as it was the "hub" of the system).  Even better!!
I contacted the supplier and arranged to trade in the 4-socket conditioner on the 10-socket unit and decided to keep the "best power cord".

Next, a friend came 'round (he's in the audio game) and made an observation that, while nothing was patently wrong with the system, there was something "not quite right".  This turned out to be my paranoid reaction to losing 2 x TV's, 2 x VCRs 1 geyser, 1 alarm system and an intercom to a power surge - I'd left an el cheapo MOV-based surge protector in the mains circuit.

So, out came the surge protector and the mains conditioner was then plugged directly into the wall socket using some 60-amp three-core shielded cable.  Much better!!!

Back to the preconceptions I went...  If my preconceptions about power cords had been brought into question by this "best power cord", then just how valid were the preconceptions about interconnects and speaker cable?

Some background: 10 years ago, I bought 2 x Cable Talk Broadcast 2 balanced interconnects for DAC-Preamp and Preamp-Power Amp links and 2 x 5m of Cable Talk Concert 4 bi-wire speaker cable.  The initial system at the time (excluding vinyl/tuner/CDR):

- Theta Data Basic II and DSPro Prime IIa
- Classe' CP-50 and CA-100
- Tannoy D700

In the subsequent 10 years, the system has evolved as a result of "affirmative shopping" and currently comprises:

- Theta Data Basic II and DSPro GenVa
- Classe' CP-500 and Jeff Rowland Model 201 monoblocks
- Tannoy D700

The current set-up is a lot more resolving of detail than the original and the comments about something being "not quite right" made me question whether or not the problem lay in the 10 year-old cables.

So, I contacted my pet supplier and obtained a decent pair of balanced interconnects on trial. Installed between preamp and monoblocks, they made a significant and clearly discernible difference - much lower noise floor, much clearer treble, clearly delineated soundstaging and really crisp bass.  I contacted the supplier and informed him that these interconnects had just become family members and would not be returning.

At this stage I examined the budget and decided that it was time to do a "once and for all" wiring upgrade - to return to a level of balance between the system electronics and the wires that supply them and link them.

The system now consists of the following:

a) 3 x PS Audio Statement SC power cords (Classe' Preamp and Jeff Rowland monoblocks)
b) 2 x PS Audio Prelude power cords (Theta CDT & DAC)
c) 2 x PS Audio Resolution Transcendent balanced audio interconnects (DAC-Preamp & Preamp-Monoblocks)
d) 1 x PS Audio Resolution Reference Bi-Wire speaker cable-set (Tannoy D700's)

Also fed from the PS Audio Quintet mains conditioner are a Linn LP12, a Rotel tuner and a Yamaha CDR-HD recorder.

Despite the fact that there will need to be a fairly extended "break-in period" for the speaker cables, the system now sounds much better than it's ever sounded before.

So, back to the issue of preconceptions...  I've had to acknowledge that they were there!  I believe I've managed to resolve some aspects (these audio-related ones anyway), but I'm pretty certain that there are others that I'm not even aware of...

Maybe its an "age-thing"?
 ::)
« Last Edit: October 04, 2007, 09:53:26 pm by DevillEars »

Hennie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,109
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #50 on: October 04, 2007, 10:28:50 pm »
Do you know whether your Rowland amps have transformer balanced inputs? I think some Rowlands amps do, but I don't know about these ones.

DevillEars

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #51 on: October 04, 2007, 11:02:46 pm »
To be quite honest, I have no idea how they've implemented the balanced input circuitry.
What I DO know is they only support balanced input and make no provision for single-ended inputs at all.

You may want to check out the JRDG website and, maybe, log a query with their contact service.

Gliding Dutchman

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #52 on: October 05, 2007, 12:20:18 am »
Do you know whether your Rowland amps have transformer balanced inputs? I think some Rowlands amps do, but I don't know about these ones.


They are direct coupled as these are they employ B&O's ICE class D amplifier units as far as I know...

Certainly not Micky Mouse toys...  ;D

GD

GearSlave

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Mine's bigger than yours.
    • Studio B
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #53 on: October 05, 2007, 12:37:40 am »
While I will retain my view on this matter, the important thing is that you are happy with the results ;D

I've come to the realization that I cannot understand why I try and vehemently argue the usefullness of this (or lack thereof)? It's not like they are spending my money. It's their money. If they feel that they made a valuable purchase, who am I to argue? ;D

DevillEars

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #54 on: October 05, 2007, 08:00:48 am »
GB wrote:

Quote
I've come to the realization that I cannot understand why I try and vehemently argue the usefullness of this (or lack thereof)? It's not like they are spending my money. It's their money. If they feel that they made a valuable purchase, who am I to argue?

Three cheers for that man!!

Human history contains far too many examples of intolerance of differing opinions and beliefs - these examples have taken the form of religious persecution, wars (and "police actions") and even genocide.

So, the more of us that learn to understand this and to become more tolerant of other different beliefs, value systems, opinions and behaviours, the better.

Can you imagine how unbearably dull life would be if we all subscribed to precisely the same views on everything?

Differences are "good" - let's accept and understand that and move forward...

So, GB, welcome to the brighter future!   :D

joel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 657
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2007, 12:39:42 pm »
So we all agree that as long as we are happy with spending our money cables do, don't, can, can't, might and might not make any difference to a system. 

Viagara

  • AVF Mods
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,921
  • Flying High, Digging Low
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #56 on: October 05, 2007, 12:48:19 pm »
So we all agree that as long as we are happy with spending our money cables do, don't, can, can't, might and might not make any difference to a system. 

Amen!
Don't take life too seriously, you will not make it out alive.....

(Location Cape Town)
_________________________

GearSlave

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Mine's bigger than yours.
    • Studio B
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2007, 01:09:19 pm »
And the smile on my face when listening to my system will not be from hunger pains for spending silly money on silly cables ;D ;D ;D

Sorry, I just couldn't resist...

skinnyfat

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2007, 02:22:31 pm »
And the smile on my face when listening to my system will not be from hunger pains for spending silly money on silly cables ;D ;D ;D

Sorry, I just couldn't resist...

I agree with the each to his own (even if the Vinyl brigade are a tad militant in their defense of their medium ;D ) but I have agree with Gert ;D ;D

Cleansound

  • Guest
Re: The great cable debate
« Reply #59 on: October 05, 2007, 02:33:09 pm »
I agree with the each to his own (even if the Vinyl brigade are a tad militant in their defense of their medium ;D ) but I have agree with Gert ;D ;D
You see,the way I see it,the whole thing is like two boxers in a ring,the guy who throws the fist punch will get a defensive move from the other party,William Kelly threw the first punch  ;D ;D
To cut a long story short,I have spent a fair amount money on cables and I am still smiling  :)