Posted on 10/04/2007 9:32:58 AM PDT by Notary Sojac
Our rant about those $7,250 Pear Anjou speaker cables found its way to the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF), and Randi offered $1 million to anyone who can prove those cables are any better than ordinary (and also overpriced) Monster Cables. Pointing out the absurd review by audiophile Dave Clark, who called the cables "danceable," Randi called it "hilarious and preposterous." He added that if the cables could do what their makers claimed, "they would be paranormal."
We see that the Pear Cable company is advertising a pair of 12-foot "Anjou" audio cables for $7,250; that's $302 a foot! And, as expected, "experts" were approached for their opinions on the performance of these wonders ... Well, we at the JREF are willing to be shown that these "no-compromise" cables perform better than, say, the equivalent Monster cables. While Pear rattles on about "capacitance," "inductance," "skin effect," "mechanical integrity" and "radio frequency interface," - all real qualities and concerns, and adored by the hi-fi nut-cases - we naively believe that a product should be judged by its actual performance, not by qualities that can only be perceived by attentive dogs or by hi-tech instrumentation. That said, we offer the JREF million-dollar prize to - for example - Dave Clark, Editor of the audio review publication Positive Feedback Online.
This is not Randi's first clash with audiophile reviewers who claim to hear differences between various pieces of exotic equipment. He promises a million dollars (which he has waiting in an account for them) if any can prove in double-blind scientific testing that their extraordinary claims are true. None have stepped up so far.
Bingo. After having been involved in every phase of the audio electronics business over the years I can say that the weak link is the speakers.
The ones in your vehicle at best, when brand new have a frequency response of 20-20,00Hz. As time and environment does their thing on the rubber surrounds and other elements of the speakers, this reduces their efficiency.
They simply can be no match for the Bose headphones you use where a newer speaker is in close proximity to your ear.
It is possible too that at higher volumes used in a car environment, the amp is clipping a bit (not reproducing higher frequencies) and this would easily affect the sound reproduction. That would depend more on the source and your listening habits.
I'm inclined to agree with you that it's the headphones.
Given the same source material, my guess is that most of the variation in perceived quality results from the last link in the chain..whatever you use to produce the final output to your (analog) ears.
May be other factors, but music does lose clarity each time it is digitally transcoded. Multiple points of transcoding is also one of the challenges in VoIP networks. It is hard to put in words the subtle difference - some say tinny, distant, "chambered", etc. - but there is a difference.
Without knowing the exact parameters of your A/B test you’re talking about the difference between listening to an mp3 version of a tune versus listening to a “full” WAV file of the same tune. Major difference. The mp3 is in most cases perfectly adequate for headphone or portable use and is an “abbreviated” format designed to conserve disk/memory space. Which it does...at the expected expense of dynamic range and etc etc.
Ya think?
The iTunes files are reduced in spectral range so they will sound reasonably clear in earbuds. When played over a bigger stereo system the difference is audible and definitely not HiFi by older standards. It’s like pop tunes intended to be played over AM radio: HiFi they are not, but you can hear the screeching and caterwauling for a block.
Your first problem is that music offered on itunes is at a significantly lower bitrate (meaning it has less of the original digital data describing the sound) than a purchased CD. Granted, on most crappy equipment including those tiny earbuds sold with iPods it is nearly impossible to hear a difference. But on good equipment with a ear for music you will definately hear a difference.
You can send higher bitrate music to your iPod but you need much more disk storage.
If you are making cd’S from your iTunes downloads they, too will be at the lower bit rate.
“Personally, I find nothing captures the authenticity of perfomance, the essential “you are there” je ne sais quoi-ness of musical experience, quite as well as the Edison Wax Cylinder.”
That’s because you had to be THERE to record one!
Don’t laugh, you’d be amazed at how good a wax cylinder in good condition, played on vintage (non-electric) phonograph actually sounds.
Most of the ones you hear are badly scratched and worn. Those in “like new” condition, played on a machine in good condition are impressive. Not a single transistor or vacuum tube, not even an electic motor.
Of course devices sound different...I can readily tell the difference between various sound cards, set up as identically as possibly, on the same speakers or headphones, or the same music played on my iPod Shuffle or from the original cds on a portable player. You learn the characteristics of a device over time and get used to it and can easily identify the familiar quirks it has, the same as you can identify the sound of your own car’s engine.
I’m pretty skeptical about cables making any real difference, though, figuring all cables being compared are of a reasonable minimal quality and undamaged.
The difference between a $200 rig and a $2000 rig? Absolutely!
Between $2000 and $10000? Probably.
Between $10000 and infinity? I doubt it very much. The law of diminishing returns starts to kick in big time when you reach the high four figures.
Suckah be born ebry minnit, you know what I’m talking about?
I’ve seen people wire their stereo or hi-fi speakers with eentsy wires, like 22 ga telephone wires. That’s clearly wrong, speakers being driven with real power require current, sometimes considerable current, and tiny conductors indeed act like resistors, the longer they are, the worse.
In professional sound-reinforement applications, like traveling rock shows, another consideration is that the cables undergo a lot of flexing when they are put in place and taken down multiple times. So, not only do they have to carry a lot of power, they have to not degrade by losing conductors under rough treatment.
That said, with the proviso that it’s possible to make crappy connections using even mil-spec wire and connectors, once you have adequate gauge cables, the obsession with welding-gauge speaker wires is laughable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.