I agree with you on the concept...the reality is that once I swapped cables the differences was impossble not to notice...it has nothing to do with expectations as I am very critical about what I hear (by being an electronic engineer as a background). There was a night and day difference, this is the reality. Suddendly I stopped complaining about how distort a few pieces could sound and just started to put one vinyl after the other to see what else I was missing.
I found this statement amazing until I realised that we've gone off track as normal. Unless you have a usb connected TT? In which case I retract my comment.
ZP90 > SIA2-150 > SCM40
Not you are right, I don't have a USB connected TT
Sorry for going off topic indeed.
Just because you are an electronic engineer does not mean you are not affected by any type of bias. I don't think expectation bias is the best term for what audiophiles can experience when hearing differences in SQ where there should not be any. It is just we do not as yet have a commonly recognised term for such a thing. Here are studies on the senses and SQ
There is one from Sennheiser and their annual report in 2010, where Heroit Watt Uni found a link between sound and taste.
There is a link between all our senses and for audiophiles to claim hearing stands alone and so when they hear a SQ difference it is unaffected by anything else and is down to hearing alone, I am sorry, but the evidence syays otherwise.
I think that it is odd that there is supposedly a physical consistent element of cable construction that is completely objective, that has a subjective affect on the non physical inconsistent element that is sound quality? I also think it is odd that all different types of cable materials and construction are objectively supposed to cause subjective affects on SQ. Lastly I think it is odd that there is no correlation, let alone causal link between the objective electrical properties of cables and subjective SQ.
The fact I am an engineer has nothing to do with the fact that I have expections or not indeed. I was referring more to the fact that I am not a simple "believer" but I need hard proof before changing my way of thinking.
As said in another post I have sent back a lot of stuff because I felt it made no difference but not this time...and not with these cables. Don't want to start another cable discussion, it was just to clarify my statement on the engineering background.
I was referring more to the fact that I am not a simple "believer" but I need hard proof before changing my way of thinking.
Now you've gone and dunnit......that door, once opened, is impossible to shut..
Getting the cables and listening to them is not good enough......it's not until you can pass a barrage of ABX, blind and double blind tests, that your findings will pass muster.
Personally, I believe you, as one Audiofool to another, and also as one who is beyond redemption.
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." André Gide
Personally I think everything in this domain is very subjective...for example I swapped now the power chord of my amp for the thicker one Francis gave me whilst waiting for the Siltech and Shunyata...can't spot any remarkable difference...
Also bees cannot fly according to the science...go and tell them (the bees) that
Do you know what it is?
If you wait long enough, science usually catches up......as it has now in this case.
Please provide links to any reputable scientific research (or links to any scientific paper containing such research) that has ever concluded that bees shouldn't be able to fly.
According to this piece on the Institute Of Physics website...
"The persistent rumour that bumblebee flight escapes scientific explanation has been traced back by some to an aerodynamics research group in Gottingen, Germany, in the 1930s.‘Supposedly someone did a back of the envelope calculation, taking the weight of a bumblebee and its wing area into account, and worked out that if it only flies at a couple of metres per seconds, the wings wouldn’t produce enough lift to hold the bee up,’ explains Charlie Ellington, Professor of Animal Mechanics at Cambridge University."
Marantz M-CR603 + AirPlay • Rega R3 loudspeakers • iPhone 5 • iMac • Apple Airport Extreme 802.11n • Apple iPad Mini • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390 • Ruark Audio R1 Deluxe • Humax HDR-Fox T2
Exactly!. Regarding the cable is a Kemp Plus power cable.
Can't comment, as never heard of it........did Francis say if he thought the other two cables would be better?
Yes, he gave me this as it couldnt find the other one yesterday night (as it was the wine tasting open door so a lot of people around) and the SIltech was ordered as the one he had in stock was bought by his partner in the wine business who has a stunning all macintosh setup. Need to visit him one day to check it out!
In response to shafesk...
Yeh will do. Will probably have a punt on the kimber after my holiday. The last thing i want is to debate the issue, but the more i read the more i think its a usb power problem than a data-getting-through issue. This is my opinion.
Im gonna play it safe and do as the OP says which is "share my experience". At the moment i dont have a kimber so i cant comment - when i do - i will let you all know.
I have a usb powered dac and a mains powered device so if theres a difference on one and not on the other then we're getting somewhere. If theres no difference on either then we are all where we all knew we were anyway.
Hi-Fi: Beresford TC-7520 Dac --> Marantz PM7000 Amp ---> B&W CM1
PC Setup / Headphones: B&W MM-1, Audio Technica ATH-ES7, Philips Fidelio X1
There is a MAJOR difference between USB cables. I previously used a Monster/HP usb cable I bought from Walmart that gave me excellent results. However, when compared to the Chinese audiophile usb cable that I bought in China for the same price as the Monster, the sound is so much more detailed, clearer, refined, and the bass is significantly tighter. The biggest difference was the BASS. The monster cable, although thicker, produced a bass that was loose and bloated. Also, the treble of the Monster was gritty. I kept switching back and forth, closed my eyes, and always could point out which cable was used. The Chinese audiophile usb cable is beter built with thick teflon sleeve and 6N purity copper is used. Same price as the Monster's and at least 3x better in sound.
USB->Hegel HD2->Coaxial->Onkyo A-9070->Klipsch RF-62 II
I have my PC connected to a Musical Fidelity V-Ling with a 10m extention and 3m USB cable (13m in total) and I cant tell the difference to a CD.
Source: Marantz BD5005 & PC into V-Link into a Musical Fidelity KW DM25 DAC. Project RPM4/2M RED, speed box.
Amplification: Onkyo TX-NR818 A/V only, MF KW500 (JS mod), Arcam P7.
Speakers: Monitor Audio PL300, GS-LCR, GS-W12, GS-FX, Silver FXi. TV: LG 50PK350/Sky HD. Cables: Van Del Hul, Chord. Also: Little Dot mk V
so even though we can prove scientifically and accurately that there are no differences with usb/hdmi cables, people still believe there are
Indeed, that is very true in the hi-fi world. If measurements were the be all and end of all then speaker manufacturers wouldn't need to finalise a crossover or driver by ear. Most of us have experienced upgrades that don't necessarily point towards science but we know that it makes a difference. Like I said, I don't want to start a cable debate and get into the nitty gritty of why/whynot it should/shouldnot make a difference.
Denon DNP-720AE network streamer, Mordaunt Short Mezzo 6, Cayin A-55 T, Technics-SLQ210, Denon DP-29F turntable, 540p, Dac-magic, Marantz 5004CD and 6025 Turntable, Mac ,Pure AV interconnects, QED Revelation speaker cables, QED Performance interconnects.
Akg K702, Grado SR60i, UE Triple-fi, Musical Fidelity X-cans, HRT Music Streamer 2+
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing