Do mains cables make a difference??

[nonuffin]

But that's not what I'm saying... And I'm not "jumping to the wrong conclusions" either. I've reached the conclusions I have after 20 years of experimenting with mains and signal cables, the results of which have satisfied my judgement criteria. They may not be right, but they satisfy me, and so that being the case, I'm happy to believe they're true.

For me, that's a practical and realistic approach...

Marco.

I was going to ask how you arrived at the conclusion that your mains leads were doing their bit to keep the interference gremlins out of your system. 20 years of experiment and observation obviously works well for you and being right or wrong gives me no cause to challenge what you have said or your actions in arriving at that. My experience differs from that I will admit, but I must respect your opinion accordingly, as we might both be right without realising it.

[Marco]

I was going to ask how you arrived at the conclusion that your mains leads were doing their bit to keep the interference gremlins out of your system. 20 years of experiment and observation obviously works well for you and being right or wrong gives me no cause to challenge what you have said or your actions in arriving at that. My experience differs from that I will admit, but I must respect your opinion accordingly, as we might both be right without realising it.

Absolutely, Dominic. And I respect your contrary experience.

For me, however, there's a danger of allowing your natural senses and thought processes to become bogged down/governed by 'what is deemed as correct', based on currently accepted wisdom. It stifles free thought, which I'm vehemently against.

Maybe 9 times out of 10 currently accepted wisdom is right, but what about the other time when it might not be, or in fact isn't - or are we saying that we unquestionably know all there is to know about cables, and how they influence the behaviour of audio equipment: everything that needs proving has already been proven - and so there is nothing new to learn?

For me, that's far from the case and constitutes as lazy thinking, liable to stifle progress, just as much as blindly believing in any kind of 'foo', invented by and claimed as true, by cable manufacturers.

There has to be a point in the final analysis when, if for what you consider to be very good reason, you have the gumption to trust your ears. Quite simply, pooh-poohing everything that contradicts your belief system, and blindly obeying text books, is no way to learn.

Marco.

[nonuffin]

Absolutely, Dominic. And I respect your contrary experience.

For me, however, there's a danger of allowing your natural senses and thought processes to become bogged down/governed by 'what is deemed as correct', based on currently accepted wisdom. It stifles free thought.

Maybe 9 times out of 10 currently accepted wisdom is right, but what about the other time when it might not be, or in fact isn't - or are we saying that we unquestionably know all there is to know about cables, and how they influence the behaviour of audio equipment: everything that needs proving has already been proven - and so there is nothing new to learn?

For me, that's far from the case and constitutes as lazy thinking, liable to stifle progress, just as much as blindly believing in any kind of 'foo', invented by and claimed as true, by cable manufacturers.

There has to be a point in the final analysis when, if for what you consider to be very good reason, you have the gumption to trust your ears. Quite simply, pooh-poohing everything that contradicts your belief system is no way to learn.

Marco.

I think you been a bit too gracious towards accepted 'wisdoms' as to be honest they have only paid lip service to the subject, relying only on resistance, inductance and capacitance as the beginning, middle and end of the knowledge base which has remained virtually static since the 1940's. No, I am mistaken there, they actually realised that current flow direction was actually opposite to what the wisdoms said it was.

Those measurements being used to evaluate cable performance are flawed because they are primitive in the extreme. For a start, they are purely static measurements and bear no relation whatsoever in the measurement of complex frequencies, interactions and dynamics found in real music reproduction, because they are unable to do so and won't admit that. It is the very reason objectivists throw a smoke screen of pointless accusations like placebo and expectation bias to divert attention away from those shortcomings. No wonder I bristle plenty when they are aimed at me in these debates, because I may be placebo'ed a couple times at most, have some sort of expectation bias a few times perhaps, but after hundreds of times over several decades certainly not and I always challenge these people to show me evidence of prolonged, sustained and repeatable facts that these conditions can be maintained for hundreds of times and spanning decades. They can't, because that evidence does not exist.

I jokingly said earlier in this thread that a mains cable is not there just to convey electricity from the wall socket to the system without spilling any on the carpet and after deep cogitation for more time than I would admit to, I realised that a mains cable has more demands on it than just that simple job. If you think that it is no more than a narrow bore pipe for a steady trickle of leccy to keep your system well fed with the stuff, then you couldn't be more wrong. The current flow demand can change instantaneously from a mere trickle to a full blown call of 20 amps plus in a millisecond, but, "Aha" you might say, the power supply should provide that, but it doesn't and cannot because where exactly does all this power come from? I was taught many moons ago that a capacitor cannot discharge and charge at the same time and logic says that is true, so while the capacitor is trying to supply peak current for a transient or bass, what happens to the charge cycle for the next transient peak come from? There is always a delay and a poorly built mains cable just adds even more delay, longer in fact than the charge rate of the capacitor. It is the only sensible(ish) answer I could find that addressed the issue of bass boom and overhang from a loudspeaker which miraculously vanished when an upgrade mains cable was installed. This bass overhang is the signature for me that the mains cable is not up to scratch.

Metallurgy I say also plays a major part with mains cables, not just curing bass overhang but also hiss. I was at a dealers and we were trying out mains cables on a Consonance valve system with corner horns. I noticed that the noise floor and particularly hiss was considerably reduced almost to zero with the pure silver power cord, which shocked me as I thought that hiss was "one of those things" we all had to live with as it was inherent with amplifiers. It is known fact that silver is more conductive than copper but it must also have a different grain structure in the metal but this wasn't confirmed in my own mind until some nice chap in Japan was also similarly inclined to the grain boundary theory and took steps to manufacture copper wire without them. When OHNO cast cables came onto the scene a similar thing happened compared to a normal copper cable, the hiss was substantially reduced. The continuous casting process virtually eliminates the grain boundaries of the metal, so it is not unreasonable to assume that it is those same grain boundaries that gives rise to hiss. The theory is that hiss is a series of millions of microscopic 'explosions' or arcs as the electrical current jumps across these boundaries. Electricity isn't like water flowing through a pipe but an electromotive magnetic force which has no physical contact with the metal itself so I am told, although the evidence seems to contradict this. Here we go again.

It may be this trait often gets referred to as the music emanating from the proverbial "inky blackness" that many listeners enthuse over.

[Marco]

Not before, Dominic, I compliment you on your earlier (rather enlightened) post. Let's tackle the juiciest bits....

I think you been a bit too gracious towards accepted 'wisdoms' as to be honest they have only paid lip service to the subject, relying only on resistance, inductance and capacitance as the beginning, middle and end of the knowledge base which has remained virtually static since the 1940's.

...which is why, in isolation, it's simply too 'blunt' a tool to use for conclusively disproving the existence of effects people hear with 'fancy mains leads'. Yet the naysayers stubbornly cling onto it, as the basis for defending their position, in order to protect themselves from a fatal attack of cognitive dissonance

Those measurements being used to evaluate cable performance are flawed because they are primitive in the extreme. For a start, they are purely static measurements and bear no relation whatsoever in the measurement of complex frequencies, interactions and dynamics found in real music reproduction, because they are unable to do so and won't admit that. It is the very reason objectivists throw a smoke screen of pointless accusations like placebo and expectation bias to divert attention away from those shortcomings.

Yup, and I've witnessed that blinkered behaviour from them time and time again, over the years, whenever these types of subjects come up. Why can't they be more open-minded to new possibilities and admit that their argument is flawed? Real scientists would never be so arrogant as to assume they know it all, so these wannabe ones/self-appointed 'experts' you see on forums, lecturing to all and sundry about how right they are on subjects such as this, should learn to take a few humility pills...!

No wonder I bristle plenty when they are aimed at me in these debates, because I may be placebo'ed a couple times at most, have some sort of expectation bias a few times perhaps, but after hundreds of times over several decades certainly not and I always challenge these people to show me evidence of prolonged, sustained and repeatable facts that these conditions can be maintained for hundreds of times and spanning decades. They can't, because that evidence does not exist.

Indeed, and that is exactly my stance on the matter. Of course I've been fooled a few times over the years, when assessing things like cables, and been a victim of expectation bias, but not EVERY time I hear something that doesn't fit with accepted wisdom, or the contents of 'Johnny's Bible of Scientific Facts, from 1940'. Like you say, objectivists use it as a convenient smokescreen to deflect attention away from the vulnerability of their (often flawed) arguments.

I jokingly said earlier in this thread that a mains cable is not there just to convey electricity from the wall socket to the system without spilling any on the carpet and after deep cogitation for more time than I would admit to, I realised that a mains cable has more demands on it than just that simple job. If you think that it is no more than a narrow bore pipe for a steady trickle of leccy to keep your system well fed with the stuff, then you couldn't be more wrong. The current flow demand can change instantaneously from a mere trickle to a full blown call of 20 amps plus in a millisecond, but, "Aha" you might say, the power supply should provide that, but it doesn't and cannot because where exactly does all this power come from? I was taught many moons ago that a capacitor cannot discharge and charge at the same time and logic says that is true, so while the capacitor is trying to supply peak current for a transient or bass, what happens to the charge cycle for the next transient peak come from? There is always a delay and a poorly built mains cable just adds even more delay, longer in fact than the charge rate of the capacitor. It is the only sensible(ish) answer I could find that addressed the issue of bass boom and overhang from a loudspeaker which miraculously vanished when an upgrade mains cable was installed. This bass overhang is the signature for me that the mains cable is not up to scratch.

That's most interesting, and for me a credible explanation of what's happening. It certainly reflects my experience of the matter, particularly the bass overhang thing, which for me is almost always symptomatic of what you describe. Experience tells me that one of the first improvements heard when substituting a 'cheapo kettle lead' [let's just call it that for now, Andrew] with something better suited for use in hi-fi applications, is a tightening of the bass, which previously (in comparison) was a little bloated. There are other effects too, but that's almost always the main one.

Metallurgy I say also plays a major part with mains cables, not just curing bass overhang but also hiss. I was at a dealers and we were trying out mains cables on a Consonance valve system with corner horns. I noticed that the noise floor and particularly hiss was considerably reduced almost to zero with the pure silver power cord, which shocked me as I thought that hiss was "one of those things" we all had to live with as it was inherent with amplifiers. It is known fact that silver is more conductive than copper but it must also have a different grain structure in the metal but this wasn't confirmed in my own mind until some nice chap in Japan was also similarly inclined to the grain boundary theory and took steps to manufacture copper wire without them. When OHNO cast cables came onto the scene a similar thing happened compared to a normal copper cable, the hiss was substantially reduced. The continuous casting process virtually eliminates the grain boundaries of the metal, so it is not unreasonable to assume that it is those same grain boundaries that gives rise to hiss. The theory is that hiss is a series of millions of microscopic 'explosions' or arcs as the electrical current jumps across these boundaries. Electricity isn't like water flowing through a pipe but an electromotive magnetic force which has no physical contact with the metal itself so I am told, although the evidence seems to contradict this. Here we go again.

Again, all very interesting stuff, and the kind of input I enjoy seeing in these discussions: people relating their genuine experiences and 'throwing out' some ideas for consideration, which possibly helps explain what they've heard, thus stimulating discussion of the subject, rather than it being shot down by arrogant, blinkered objectivists who are more keen on massaging their egos and protecting their belief systems from scrutiny, than on entertaining the possibility of learning something new!

It may be this trait often gets referred to as the music emanating from the proverbial "inky blackness" that many listeners enthuse over.

It's definitely a possibility, and not something I've noticed being suggested before. Moreover, it's certainly the type of helpful lateral thinking we like to encourage on AoS, as opposed to the unhelpful closed-mindedness and relentless rubbishing of ideas, put forward by people for consideration, which we so often see instead elsewhere, when they don't fit with the established objectivist dogma.

Anyway, do hang around and keep up the good work. You're one of the most interesting new members we've had join us in ages!

Marco.

[nonuffin]

Not before, Dominic, I compliment you on your earlier (rather enlightened) post. Let's tackle the juiciest bits....



...which is why, in isolation, it's simply too 'blunt' a tool to use to conclusively disprove the existence of effects people hear with 'fancy mains leads'. Yet the naysayers stubbornly cling onto it, in order to protect themselves from a fatal attack of cognitive dissonance



Yup, and I've witnessed that blinkered behaviour from them time and time again, over the years, whenever these types of subjects come up. Why can't they be more open-minded to new possibilities and admit that their argument is flawed? Real scientists would never be so arrogant as to assume they know it all, so these wannabe ones/self-appointed 'experts' you see on forums, lecturing to all and sundry about how right they are on subjects such as this, should learn to take a few humility pills...!



Indeed, and that is exactly my stance on the matter. Of course I've been fooled a few times over the years, when assessing things like cables, and been a victim of expectation bias, but not EVERY time I hear something that doesn't fit with accepted wisdom, or the contents of 'Johnny's Bible of Scientific Facts, from 1940'. Like you say, objectivists use is as a convenient smokescreen to deflect attention away from the vulnerability of their (often flawed) arguments.



That's most interesting, and for me a credible explanation of what's happening. It certainly reflects my experience of the matter, particularly the bass overhang thing, which for me is almost always symptomatic of what you describe. Experience tells me that one of the first improvements heard when substituting a 'cheapo kettle lead' [let's just call it that for now, Andrew] with something better suited for use in hi-fi applications, is a tightening of the bass, which previously (in comparison) was a little bloated. There are other effects too, but that's almost always the main one.



Again, all very interesting stuff, and the kind of input I enjoy seeing in these discussions: people relating their genuine experiences and 'throwing out' some ideas for consideration, which possibly helps explain what they've heard, thus stimulating discussion of the subject, rather than it being shot down by arrogant, blinkered objectivists who are more keen on massaging their ego and protecting their belief system from scrutiny, than on entertaining the possibility of learning something new!



It's definitely a possibility, and not something I've noticed being suggested before. Moreover, it's certainly the type of helpful lateral thinking we like to encourage on AoS, as opposed to the unhelpful closed-mindedness and relentless rubbishing of ideas, put forward by people for consideration, when they don't fit with the objectivist dogma, which we so often see instead.

Anyway, do hang around and keep up the good work. You're one of the most interesting new members we've had join us in ages!

Marco.

Thank you Marco. I am delighted the entire thread stayed so positive throughout without corns getting stepped on.

Like you probably, I am the sort of person that asks the question "Why?" and it took me ages to work out that a mains cable change wasn't really putting something 'wonderful' into the system, I was in actual fact taking OUT what was flawed, hence the resultant improvement in sound quality because the inbound cable has less flaws that the outgoing one. That penny only dropped when I replaced the mains block with an upgrade one as well as the mains cable, so it had to be correct as no other logical explanation fitted exactly. My thought processes ever since have deduced that all cables are flawed in some way or other (there is no "perfect" cable) and our job is to find the right set of flaws that suits our systems (AKA synergy) and our own individual listening preferences which are infinitely variable. Hearing acuity is widely variable too, so that also has to be taken into account.

Making all 'freebie' cables the low point as being the ones with the most flaws really has untangled the complex cables question for me personally and I wish no more than other people make this their starting point too.

[Marco]

Thank you Marco. I am delighted the entire thread stayed so positive throughout without corns getting stepped on.

That would never be allowed to happen here, as we moderate *very strictly* to prevent that type of behaviour occurring, or anyone who thinks they're entitled to say what they like, in the most arrogant or obnoxious manner, without consequences.

Banishing that crap to oblivion (and those responsible for it) was one of the first goals I set out to achieve when AoS was born. And now that the forum is successful and well-established, it's a case of OUR way or the highway!

Like you probably, I am the sort of person that asks the question "Why?" and it took me ages to work out that a mains cable change wasn't really putting something 'wonderful' into the system, I was in actual fact taking OUT what was flawed, hence the resultant improvement in sound quality because the inbound cable has less flaws that the outgoing one.

Yup, that for me, is *exactly* what's going on. Therefore, you should always think of any cable 'upgrade' experienced, precisely like that!

My thought processes ever since have deduced that all cables are flawed in some way or other (there is no "perfect" cable) and our job is to find the right set of flaws that suits our systems (AKA synergy) and our own individual listening preferences which are infinitely variable. Hearing acuity is widely variable too, so that also has to be taken into account.

Indeed - exactly so!

I also agree with your point on hearing acuity, although acuity aside, I do also believe that some people can benefit from being 'trained' on how to hear subtle changes in musical presentation when, let's call it, 'less bad', cables are introduced into a system, before they 'get' what's going on, as some are inherently more attuned to picking up on those changes than others.

Making all 'freebie' cables the low point as being the ones with the most flaws really has untangled the complex cables question for me personally and I wish no more than other people make this their starting point too.

You just have to get your head around that notion, and most importantly of all, stop using cables as glorified tone controls!

Marco.

[nonuffin]

I also agree with your point on hearing acuity, although acuity aside, I do also believe that some people need 'trained' on how to hear subtle changes in musical presentation when, let's call it, 'less bad', cables are introduced into a system, before they 'get' it, as some are inherently more attuned to picking up on those changes than others.

Marco.

Glad you raised that matter because I was somewhat affeared from mentioning it in case it did tread on some corns.

Go to any hi-fi show and just listen to the comments people make as they come out of a demonstration and that gives an indicator to just how variable people's hearing acuity and listening preferences vary so widely. Some say it was "too bright", some say "not enough detail", or "too much bass for me", or whatever, even though it was one fixed system playing the same music to everyone. The mind boggles sometimes

I said in an earlier post I have two friends that join me for a listening sesh sometimes and one of them only notices a change in sound character when the system is off lol. While us two are talking about nuances and inflections, soundstage and microdynamics, he quips it has a lovely tone. Love the man to bits, but he is an example of someone who listens with a broad brush rather than chewing over and dissecting the finer points.

Taught a few people now how to really "get" into the music by listening in stages. I ask them to listen to a track and focus on one instrument in complete isolation, shutting everything else out completely. I then play the same track again and attention must be paid to another instrument in isolation. I repeat that process until there is no instruments left to hear, then play the track again and make no restrictions on what they are hearing. Amazingly, they can hear every instrument clearly in parallel despite being asked beforehand to listen to one instrument alone. I suppose without even realising it I must do the same as I notice a tad more sheen from cymbals, a bit more heft in the bass or whatever this way as I use my brain almost as a reel to reel tape recorder so I memorise each and every detail.

[Qwin]

I also agree with your point on hearing acuity, although acuity aside, I do also believe that some people can benefit from being 'trained' on how to hear subtle changes in musical presentation when, let's call it, 'less bad', cables are introduced into a system, before they 'get' what's going on, as some are inherently more attuned to picking up on those changes than others.

Marco.

Further to the trained ear comment - Ortofon use an independent "Golden Ears" panel that gives a subjective opinion on each type of cartridge produced, quite separate from the in-house evaluation. I was reading an article where Ortofon were saying they had to train each member of the panel and re-calibrate their hearing, as to what good sound was. As most had been subjected to poor sound, through effects/compression/ear buds etc for so long, they had forgotten what real music sounded like, so had false/poor references as a base line. Basically what they were getting at was, if you listen to one kind of sound, good or bad, for long enough, it becomes your reference to compare things against and anything different can be perceived as wrong or lacking.

It's been a great thread this, enjoyed it, lots of good ideas and points of view expressed.

[mikmas]

Making all 'freebie' cables the low point as being the ones with the most flaws really has untangled the complex cables question for me personally and I wish no more than other people make this their starting point too.

Must admit I tend to stick with the 'freebie' mains cable I get with an amplifier - I figure that it was chosen to complement the 'freebie' casing, 'freebie' transformer and 'freebie' volume control they supply with it.