Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:23PM EST
See Comments (16)
Skeptics (including me) love to laugh at people who claim they can hear the difference between stereo components hooked up with one cable vs. another. Can wires really be that important in the audio experience?
The Wall Street Journal put the question to the test at a recent audio show, renting a booth, and hooking up two sets of identical components, differing only by the speaker cable. One set used off-the-roll, 14-gauge speaker cable from a hardware store. Another used a pair of Sigma Retro Gold cables from Monster, $2,000 for 16 feet of cable total and "as thick as your thumb." The writer couldn't tell the difference and figured no one else could either.
Surprise: People who visited the booth and listened to both sets of equipment (not in view) preferred the expensively cabled audio equipment 61 percent of the time.
What's happening here? For starters, jokes and skepticism aside, speaker cable really does make a difference, at least up to a point. Try hooking up speakers with a single aluminum-wire strand vs. a real braided-copper cable (even a hardware store cable) and you'll easily hear the difference; the cheap cable will make the speakers pop and hiss. It makes sense then that continuing to move up the cable quality ladder might keep making a difference. But how far? Maybe gold connectors will improve quality another 1 percent. Thicker gauge a further 1 percent. I'm not sure I'd buy $2,000 speaker cables for an extra few percentage points in quality (in fact, I'm sure of it), and I am far from stumping for mega-expensive cabling, but it does seem plausible that the high-tech speaker cables might really make a difference, even if it's a small one, just by continuing to refine the connection from point A to B.
Also at work: For audio junkies (like those who visit a big stereo convention) who've fine-tuned their listening rooms, the difference may be even more noticeable than to those of us who have to watch movies and listen to music in noisy environments, surrounded by screaming children. This helps to explain how testers might prefer one cable over another at a rate of nearly two to one.
On the flipside: The WSJ found virtually identical preference for high-end CD audio (played from a $3,000 CD player) vs. a WAV file played from a standard iPod. The shocking lesson: Cables may actually matter more than the source of the music, at least while it's still in digital format.
LINK: If You're Not Insane About Sound, Maybe You Can Just Go Crazy
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
Thats an interesting experiment - was it a blind experiment where they were not told which cables were which that they were listening to until AFTER they made their choices? Or were they told "this is the cheap one, this is the expensive one?" If it was an actual blind test, this would be pretty important. Personally I really have not heard much of a difference even when comparing wired versus wireless systems - but that could just be me. But yes I use braided copper cables myself for stereo wiring, but I am transitioning to a pure wireless digital environment at this point.
so lets get this straight, they were comparing a 14 gauge cable against something well over 3 times as thick, and at what volume levels? PEAR cables have a $7000 set of cables which is currently under a competition by James Randi to give 1 million dollars to the person who can tell the difference in a double blind test, between the $7000 cables and the cheaper ones (ironically from monster). up to a point i agree it does matter, but in the end physics is the final word in this and for the most part over a certain limit and at certain values it makes no difference at all. of course it is in the preception of the listener, i remember the same argument numerous times about interconnects too, of course i need a $200 interconnect to transfer the 2V of electrical signal, it makes so much difference to the way the music sounds.... i even tried a buddies who had the real expensive ones and neither of us could tell the difference. oh well
It doesn't just need to be a BLIND test but a DOUBLE-BLIND test. If the tester knows which is which, he'll either purposely or inadvertently give some cues to the subject which will skew the results. Also, I didn't read the attached article, but do they do the statistics right? If their sample is small and their margin for error is better than 11%, their results mean little if anything.
I just scanned the article...39 people, total, took the test, and it was clearly NOT a double-blind test. That's not a very scientific test, and not a big enough sample size to be meaningful. Another thing he doesn't mention is how long the garden-variety cable was. Did he just grab a couple of 50-foot spools and leave the rest of the cable rolled up? That would add inductance, which would have a great affect on the speaker's impedance, and therefore the sound.
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 Posted by theyowman on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:06PM EDT Report Abuse
I wish i had the problem of being obnoxiously rich, apparantly MONSTER thinks a lot of people have this problem.