do cables make a difference in sound?

[JanusZarate]

Aside from capacitance (which is usually a negligible concern unless you're running long lengths of cable), the brand shouldn't make a noticeable difference in sound unless there's something wrong with the cable. Monster Bass Cables are deliberately "colored" however, so they're a unique oddity in the cable world.

With that being said, cheap cables can suffer from shoddy build quality. Some are obvious (i.e., Hosa), while others become apparent when you find yourself replacing or repairing it earlier than you'd like. As far as I'm concerned (and most working musicians, for that matter), the money I spend on cables should be going towards something that's solidly built, durable, properly shielded, and just the right length I need.

If you're paying the cost of a decent effects pedal (or more) for your cable, you'd better be buying a really long cable, or you've just been ripped off.

 

[serein2j]

Yes they do. but you won't notice them in live

 

[vespasian1]

"Of course, there are hundreds, musicians and (more often) audiophiles who drank the marketing Kool-Aid who'll claim that some cable has magical tone improving capacities, and that "they can totally hear it being better". Before you start wasting your money on that kind of stuff, ask yourself: "Can this be proven NOT to be the listener's bias?" In my experience, it never can."

Consider the can of worms opened.

I can't say if guitar cables make a diffference, but for a decently transparent, resolving audio system, they make a HUGE difference, as huge as a major component upgrade. And, since an instrument cable is carrying a line-level signal, my guess would be that a better cable will make a difference. You should hear it when you're practicing by yourself. Power cords make a big differeance too. You probably won't hear a difference when you're playing with a band, though.

For a long time, I didn't believe this, so I used Radio Shack cables. When I got my first pair of decent interconnects, it was a revelation. Then I got better speaker cables, and greater transparency, focus, sound stage diminsionality, etc..

My last hold out was power cords. I tried a very reasonable Kimber power cord, from wall to power conditioner, and it made a bigger improvement than the upgraded interconnect and speaker cables.

With better cables, I could listen to music I've been listening to my whole life (Sgt. Pepper, Stones, Yes, Jethro Tull, ELP, Pink Floyd, Old Genesis, Steeleye Span, etc.), and could hear entire instruments I never heard before, such was the improvement in transparency, and low level resolution.

This is not a "Golden Ears" thing. My sister could hear the difference, and she doesn't even listen to music. Nor am I an "audiophile". Audiophiles will listen to the most Godawful stuff (Dead Can Dance?), if it's well recorded and allows them to show off the sonic capabilities of their system.

It's mostly about shielding (eliminating EMI and RFI). Purity of the copper or silver in the conductors makes a difference too. And copper generally sounds different (warmer) than silver.

You don't need to have scientific data if your ears work, and you have a decent system to begin with.

As far as Monster goes, they really make pretty mediocre audio cables, unless you go with the very top of the line $$$. There are far better cables out there for the money.

"Listener bias"?

Hogwash. :scowl:

Get a real stereo pal, and stop wasting money on that downloaded MP3 crap.

 

[Woodwolf]

I have enough to worry about so I use whatever the best available one I can get is, usually the problems...if any are at the plug ends. I don't care for the tone of high ends cables, but maybe when using one I should use a longer cable to shunt some high end? I don't think Jamerson used a high end cable, or any Iconic player commonly studied. It seems the modern players are way more concerned about technical anomalies? That's not bad...it's just different than the way these Iconic tones wer born from. As long as the cable holds up without extra noise...I am happy.

 

[guizzy]

You don't need to have scientific data if your ears work, and you have a decent system to begin with.

No need for scientific proof? The problem is not your ears; it's perception psychology. Essentially, it's been demonstrated many times; just knowing which cables are which can convince you (or anyone) that they are actually hearing a difference that isn't there. This is exactly why double-blind tests are crucial!

"Listener bias"?

Hogwash. :scowl:

Get a real stereo pal, and stop wasting money on that downloaded MP3 crap.

My Paradigms (hooked to a Marantz amp) would be understandably upset.

I'm all for people getting a real stereo, and got knows I can't stand badly-compressed MP3, iBuds and most big store audio gear (Bose for the lose!); but the money needs to be put where it actually matters: the speakers, the amp and the source. Not the cables.

 

[EricF]

If a cable is a cable then wood is wood. I don't care if Jesus himself rolled it on the thighs of Havana virgins.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but I don't agree with it. There's a LOT more craftsmanship that goes into making a bass than goes into making a cable. Sure there's some technique required in assembling a cable that is durable and transmits a good signal, but attaching a couple of end connectors to a length of wire is not particularly complex.

 

[drden]

depends on what kind of pickup covers you are using...

 

[Zureta]

This is a touchy subject because when you start entering the high-end "audiophile" world you'll find being objective about it gets harder and harder as the price tags rise.

There are many, many examples of absurdly overpriced equipment that are no better than the normal, reasonably constructed "non-cheapo" stuff, sold with fantastic claims that simply can't be proven scientifically.

Much of it can be simply called "fraud", but still there is a market for Invalid Link Removed. Some people just want to believe, and are absolutely convinced the $485 magic wooden knobs or whatever they just bought really do improve sound quality by leaps and bounds.

It's really more of a belief thing... Some "audiophiles"have convinced themselves so thoroughly of these lies that they feel personally attacked if you try to discredit it, and are willing to defend this stuff with their lives apparently. No amount of real world testing can convince them that they made really bad purchase decisions. Self-delusion is a powerful thing.

Here's an interesting, skeptical point of view about the lunatic fringe of "audiophiles".

That doesn't mean monster cables are a scam (they're just, arguably, way overpriced and marketed dubiously), but it does mean that discussing the perceived and real value of expensive audio gear that supposedly makes a tiny little bit of difference is always going to be a bit pointless.

Because it's all much less objective and more subjective than we think, being hugely affected by our perceptions, positive or negative. And if your opinion is radically different from the other guy's, you're just going to argue it forever.

 

[xbrandonx]

The one reason I'd buy a Monster cable is it's simply amazingly reliable. Sure, if a product has a lifetime warranty you've got nothing to worry about, but you'll have to wait a few weeks before you can get a new one usually.

The store I get mine from replace them with an off the shelf item right then and there. No receipts needed. that's why I go with monster because I don't have to wait to ship something off, and usually it's out of your own pocket to ship it out.

 

[mongo2]

The store I get mine from replace them with an off the shelf item right then and there. No receipts needed. that's why I go with monster because I don't have to wait to ship something off, and usually it's out of your own pocket to ship it out.

Yup, my guitarist has done that several times with his Monster cables in the last couple of years.

But then again my old Spectraflex cables have never busted or given me a reason to replace them in considerably more years of use.

 

[Sonicfrog]

Please do not buy Monster Cables.

Cables can make a difference, but for instrument cables the only thing that really affects the sound is the capacitance/foot - the cable acts as a lowpass filter, and the higher the capacitance (and the longer the cable), the more treble gets lost on the way to the amp. Low capacitance cables do not necessarily cost more, and may or may not be desirable - some people prefer the "traditional" sound and find low capacitance cables "harsh", and with a bass you may not even notice the difference. What's more, if you have an active bass, the low impedance output means the cable has practically no effect.

Other factors, like the outside wrap, connector type, look, and so on, are pretty subjective. Obviously construction can affect durability, and that may be more of a factor in your buying decision.

Basically what he said. A standard, mid priced cable will be fine. The thickness of the wire is the thing. If the wire is too thin, you will get more impedance per foot and will experience signal loss, something like this. This effect is on a logarithmic peak curve. If you use a very thin wire, signal attenuation is great even over short distances. As you move to thicker wire, you do see great improvements at first. But you soon get to a point where the improvement becomes almost mathematically imperceptible and the difference undetectable to human hearing. At that point Monster and other companies like them see a profit ratio that looks like this.

My rule on cables. - Don't buy cheap, Don't buy expensive. Go middle of the road.

 

[onlyclave]

I understand the point you're trying to make, but I don't agree with it. There's a LOT more craftsmanship that goes into making a bass than goes into making a cable. Sure there's some technique required in assembling a cable that is durable and transmits a good signal, but attaching a couple of end connectors to a length of wire is not particularly complex.

Not really. Taking a trunk from an alder tree and reshaping it doesn't alter the structure of the wood. It's still wood.

A cable's design includes choices of conductors, dielectrics, connectors, terminations, etc. and the combination of those elements creates a complex analog filter with capacitance, resistance and inductance.

I love it when this topic comes up and all of the "Electrical Engineers" like to post the articles written by other "Engineers" about the folly of audiophiles and the irrelevance of cables. Those guys must enjoy crappy sounding audio.

 

[ggunn]

"Of course, there are hundreds, musicians and (more often) audiophiles who drank the marketing Kool-Aid who'll claim that some cable has magical tone improving capacities, and that "they can totally hear it being better". Before you start wasting your money on that kind of stuff, ask yourself: "Can this be proven NOT to be the listener's bias?" In my experience, it never can."

Consider the can of worms opened.

I can't say if guitar cables make a diffference, but for a decently transparent, resolving audio system, they make a HUGE difference, as huge as a major component upgrade. And, since an instrument cable is carrying a line-level signal, my guess would be that a better cable will make a difference. You should hear it when you're practicing by yourself. Power cords make a big differeance too. You probably won't hear a difference when you're playing with a band, though.

For a long time, I didn't believe this, so I used Radio Shack cables. When I got my first pair of decent interconnects, it was a revelation. Then I got better speaker cables, and greater transparency, focus, sound stage diminsionality, etc..

My last hold out was power cords. I tried a very reasonable Kimber power cord, from wall to power conditioner, and it made a bigger improvement than the upgraded interconnect and speaker cables.

With better cables, I could listen to music I've been listening to my whole life (Sgt. Pepper, Stones, Yes, Jethro Tull, ELP, Pink Floyd, Old Genesis, Steeleye Span, etc.), and could hear entire instruments I never heard before, such was the improvement in transparency, and low level resolution.

This is not a "Golden Ears" thing. My sister could hear the difference, and she doesn't even listen to music. Nor am I an "audiophile". Audiophiles will listen to the most Godawful stuff (Dead Can Dance?), if it's well recorded and allows them to show off the sonic capabilities of their system.

It's mostly about shielding (eliminating EMI and RFI). Purity of the copper or silver in the conductors makes a difference too. And copper generally sounds different (warmer) than silver.

You don't need to have scientific data if your ears work, and you have a decent system to begin with.

As far as Monster goes, they really make pretty mediocre audio cables, unless you go with the very top of the line $$$. There are far better cables out there for the money.

"Listener bias"?

Hogwash. :scowl:

Get a real stereo pal, and stop wasting money on that downloaded MP3 crap.

I have a copy of an article from Stereo Review from a few years ago which is a report of a double blind study they did on speaker cables. They rounded up a set of golden ear product reviewers and had them listen (on a very high end system) to an array of low oxygen, exotically braided, hideously expensive speaker cables, plus some cheap zipcord they bought at a hardware store. Not a one of their test subjects could tell one from the other, or even which was the zipcord. :scowl: right back atcha, "pal".

Hearing is extremely subjective; if you hear a difference then it's real to you. Spend your money on whatever you want, but I most assuredly won't be buying Monster cable, exotic speaker cables, special power cords, or wooden tone knobs for my gear.

 

[guizzy]

One thing I've always found really funny about audiophiles is how they're willing to pay much more for their equipment than professional studios do.

 

[cnltb]

cables make a difference
do you need that difference?

Get Elixir cables if you're going to go for a nicer cable from a store.
Go to Bayou if you're going custom

Want the best? Evidence Audio.

Chances are, you don't need this.

When you only want the best everything, then spend the money.

I'd be careful talking about "the best"... there's just too much out there.

 

[Munjibunga]

For a long time, I didn't believe this, so I used Radio Shack cables. When I got my first pair of decent interconnects, it was a revelation. Then I got better speaker cables, and greater transparency, focus, sound stage diminsionality, etc..

Whoa! Them's some purty high-tech words you're usin' there!

"Sound stage diminsionality [sic]" I steal that to infinity.

My last hold out was power cords. I tried a very reasonable Kimber power cord, from wall to power conditioner, and it made a bigger improvement than the upgraded interconnect and speaker cables.

I assume you rewired your house with the same wire and replaced all the three-dollar wall outlets with something of comparable quality.

... and could hear entire instruments I never heard before ...

There's nothing worse than hearing only half an oboe.

It's mostly about shielding (eliminating EMI and RFI). Purity of the copper or silver in the conductors makes a difference too. And copper generally sounds different (warmer) than silver.

Again, I assume you shielded your entire house. You do realize that the air is loaded with the RF, VHF and UHF of every radio and TV station in your area? And what do you think it is that changes the fundamental character of electrons in silver wire as opposed to copper?

Anyway, we have the likes of Long Ly, Jonathan Herrera, Victor Wooten and many more for perpetuating this folklore and enriching the snake-oil salesmen out there.

You don't need to have scientific data if your ears work, and you have a decent system to begin with.

You don't WANT to have scientific data. It might controvert your superstitious preconceived notions.

"Listener bias"?

Hogwash. :scowl:

A true believer.

 

[Zureta]

This thread is starting to remind me of this:

Coat hangers vs. Monster Cable (a very non-scientific study)

I'm telling you guys, this kind of discussion about subjective sound quality has happened many, many times before, and it never goes anywhere useful.

It always ends up getting very angry and personal, with the "golden-eared snobs" pointing fingers at the "cloth-eared gits" that can't even tell the difference between obviously good sound and bad, and the "cloth-eared gits" saying that the "golden-eared snobs" are dupes for scams and nonsense because the difference is all in the head and they simply want to believe.

Is it all worth the anger and unpleasantness?

 

[cnltb]

Whoa! Them's some purty high-tech words you're usin' there!

"Sound stage diminsionality [sic]" I steal that to infinity.



I assume you rewired your house with the same wire and replaced all the three-dollar wall outlets with something of comparable quality.




There's nothing worse than hearing only half an oboe.



Again, I assume you shielded your entire house. You do realize that the air is loaded with the RF, VHF and UHF of every radio and TV station in your area? And what do you think it is that changes the fundamental character of electrons in silver wire as opposed to copper?

Anyway, we have the likes of Long Ly, Jonathan Herrera, Victor Wooten and many more for perpetuating this folklore and enriching the snake-oil salesmen out there.



You don't WANT to have scientific data. It might controvert your superstitious preconceived notions.



A true believer.

You're funny!!
Thanks for this post!

 

[ggunn]

This thread is starting to remind me of this:

Coat hangers vs. Monster Cable (a very non-scientific study)

I'm telling you guys, this kind of discussion about subjective sound quality has happened many, many times before, and it never goes anywhere useful.

It always ends up getting very angry and personal, with the "golden-eared snobs" pointing fingers at the "cloth-eared gits" that can't even tell the difference between obviously good sound and bad, and the "cloth-eared gits" saying that the "golden-eared snobs" are dupes for scams and nonsense because the difference is all in the head and they simply want to believe.

Is it all worth the anger and unpleasantness?

Who's angry? Not me.

 

[guizzy]

This thread is starting to remind me of this:

Coat hangers vs. Monster Cable (a very non-scientific study)

I'm telling you guys, this kind of discussion about subjective sound quality has happened many, many times before, and it never goes anywhere useful.

It always ends up getting very angry and personal, with the "golden-eared snobs" pointing fingers at the "cloth-eared gits" that can't even tell the difference between obviously good sound and bad, and the "cloth-eared gits" saying that the "golden-eared snobs" are dupes for scams and nonsense because the difference is all in the head and they simply want to believe.

Is it all worth the anger and unpleasantness?

The problem is, this is not a debate where both sides cannot be proven right or wrong. There is a clear methodology that exists specifically for this situation; the double-blind test.

One side refuse to submit their claims to scrutiny, and is consistantly proven wrong when they try, all the while claiming that proof is irrelevant. The other side sticks to reasonable scientific methodology to eliminate bias.