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.
I remember comparing standard component video cabling with S-Video cabling. It seemed odd back then since the component had better quality than the S-Vid. I understand it a bit better now. Analog is better in terms of quality than digital will ever be.
Having worked in acoustics measurements for NASA and on high fidelity audio equipment for in excess of 30 years, I would bet you that I could solder up a set of cables from the hardware store , (without gold connectors), that could not be identified in a true double-blind test from those costing any amount of money. When it comes to the size (guage) of the wire, it does make a difference in extra high power speakers (hundreds of watts) at very low frequency. As it does in the size of the wire in auto jumper cables when jump starting a car with a dead battery.
two things would go much farther than good speaker cables: First, use *short* connections from the amplifier outputs to the speakers. At high frequencies, the capacitance of the cables will alter the impedance that the amplifier has to drive the speaker signal into. So the amp will see the speaker impedance, plus the 'effective' parallel capacitance and series inductance of the cable both of which increase as cable length increases (of course, those large diamter cables will have a bit lower capacitance than power line 'zip' cord from the hardware store, but not much. *Best rule*: keep the wires as short as possible, in any system, no matter how good it is. Second, you will get probably far more bang for the buck by adding $2000 to the amplifier and/or speakers themselves, than to the cables (unless you've already bought stratospherically expensive amp and speakers to begin with).
one more thing.... (regarding the WSJ conclusion): if you really want to hear the difference between a CD played in a good player versus a WAV or MP3 file, all it takes is a good set of headphones (say something like DJ monitors, $100 or so), and the results will startle you. MP3 and WAV are clearly inferior when you listen with 'phones on. .. that is, unless you've already blown your eardrums with too much time in concerts.
.wav is the same as a CD. if they had used an mp3 then the results would have been quite noticeable. Lesson? if you iare going to use digital storage, rip everything as .wav.
perhaps the previous poster mean .wmv (windows media)?
A very interesting experiment. I agree that the study is not sufficiently scientific. A detailed spectral analysis would be better. Also it would be important to move the cables back and forth between the two "identical" systems and see if the preferred system shifts accordingly.
One would want to control for the "hearing" of the test subjects as well. Some who notice no difference may be simply be incapable of doing so due to existing hearing loss/lack.
Some recent research shows that in fact cables do make, or at least can make, a difference to the sound. The following factors apply: 1: the cable acts as an AM radio antenna, and audio amplifiers can act in unpredictable ways when AM frequencies are fed into their output. 2: the cable will tend to move under the influence of the sound waves, thus changing its impedance slightly. The ear is very sensitive to relative changes in level between frequencies, and in this case, the level changes will be correlated with the higher energy sounds, thus acting as a kind of intermodulation distortion. Coaxial cables may be more strongly affected by this. 3: the cable will to some extent act as a trasmission line, affecting the impedance seen by the amplifier particularly at high frequencies. Combined with the AM pick up and the physical motion effect, this can affect the high frequency performance of the amplifier. Note that none of this means that the more expensive cable is better - only that it may sound different. Roland
Thats very interesting considering Engadget (via BoingBoing) just posted this: http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/03/audiophiles-cant-tell-the-difference-between-monster-cable-and/ Participants could not hear the difference between a Monster Cable and a coat hanger. The coat hanger was deemed "excellent". Anyway - With 39 participants, 23 of them saying they can hear the difference is not statistically significant. Those are the only two things worth commenting on.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 Posted by j_alexfleury on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:45PM EDT Report Abuse
I have been installing A/V systems for 25 years. We have tested larger gauge wire running a true sine wave thru systems and looking at the outcome on an oscilloscope, larger gauge wire, quality connectors AND proper installation techniques DO make a difference up to a point. If you learn a little about OHM'S law, which is definetly NOT rocket science, and compute the maximum current capability of your amp at an 8 OHM load, you can easily compute the maximum current capability of your system. You can easily find the tables that will tell you the max conductor size that you need. The biggest advantage of buying pre-made cables is the construction methods insure that a quality connector is used that is installed properly. Check out http://www.hometheatermag.com/ for more info. Enjoy listening, I'm glad there are audiophiles that are concerned about quality.