SoftwireEngineer;152988 Wrote:
I have used Mapleshade Silclear silver paste. Even though inital effect
is very good, the sound seems to deteriorate over time. So I have now
just cleaned my contacts with Caig DeOxit and lightly treated with
ProGold. The Extreme Gold silver paste looks like
rajacat;152758 Wrote:
The contacts were very clean. Contacts do make a difference but
following the same logic, if contacts can make a difference so should
cables especially if they are of different metals. It's easy to turn
that logic around. BTW have you tried any of the contact enhancers
P Floding;152893 Wrote:
Sure, I use SST, and the difference is staggering.
I'm not sure what is the original -Walker SST? (Why didn't he patent
it?)
Anyway, I didn't like the woodoo type stuff on the page you linked to.
Crygenically treated? Give me a break.. A shame when you get put off
P Floding;152978 Wrote:
That customer must have applied a massive amount of enhancer!\
Being an EE I'm aware of the risks.
What brand of SST do you use? Walker?
Do you have a link handy?
Raja
--
rajacat
rajacat's
P Floding;152328 Wrote:
That could possibly be because they are identical, and the Monster label
costs the additional $40.
The $30 cable was glass optical fiber, and the $70 Monster was plastic
fiber, so obviously they weren't identical. I am well aware of Monster
Cable's huge markups. That's
I have used Mapleshade Silclear silver paste. Even though inital effect
is very good, the sound seems to deteriorate over time. So I have now
just cleaned my contacts with Caig DeOxit and lightly treated with
ProGold. The Extreme Gold silver paste looks like will not go bad
easily. BTW, these
TiredLegs;152981 Wrote:
The $30 cable was glass optical fiber, and the $70 Monster was plastic
fiber, so obviously they weren't identical. I am well aware of Monster
Cable's huge markups. That's why I was actually expecting the cheaper
glass fiber cable to sound better, but to my ears, they
SoftwireEngineer;152988 Wrote:
I have used Mapleshade Silclear silver paste. Even though inital effect
is very good, the sound seems to deteriorate over time. So I have now
just cleaned my contacts with Caig DeOxit and lightly treated with
ProGold. The Extreme Gold silver paste looks like
rajacat;152993 Wrote:
I just ordered the Mapleshade SST because their price was the lowest. It
probably all comes from the same source- just relabeled. How often do
you have to reapply? Why would the Extreme Gold last longer?
There are devices that burn-in cables which supposively is
rajacat;152980 Wrote:
What brand of SST do you use? Walker?
Do you have a link handy?
Walker SST Extreme is cryo treated!
http://www.musicdirect.com/products/detail.asp?sku=AWASSTULTIMATE
Raja
Yes, Walker. For no other reason than that it was the first i heard
of.
LOL, I didn't
SoftwireEngineer;152989 Wrote:
Hold on...The Dodson DAC is supposed to have some jitter reduction built
in because of memory based buffering. Also, your transport also could be
very low jitter. Now the changes brought in by the cable are miniscule
in comparison. Good that you mention, I
rajacat;152597 Wrote:
I studied Classical guitar for 10 years and definitely agree that there
is a clear difference between a rosewood sound box, such as my Ramirez
had, and the spruce used in most flamenco guitars. I doubt that any
luthiers use measurements and numbers to predetermine what
tomjtx;152691 Wrote:
I think there is a fallacy in that reasoning. A study of the
effectiveness of a drug doesn't rely on the psychological state of the
subject(excluding drugs for depression etc.)
That's not true - the placebo effect is important in all trials, not
just those for
opaqueice;152697 Wrote:
That's not true - the placebo effect is important in all trials, not
just those for psychoactive drugs, which is the reason they must always
be controlled with placebo as well as double-blinded.
The subjects of those trials know they are being subjected to a
opaqueice;152710 Wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure there is *always* a placebo
control, even in those tests. Don't underestimate the power of
psychology - taking a sugar pill and believing it is a cholsterol
lowering drug may actually lower your cholesterol... and even if it
Differences between digital cables of varying quality/type are very
easily discernible. I dont know with what 'coax/toslink' opaqueice did
not find differences. The forum also needs to know his/her setup. If
you cannot hear differences in jitter in a digital playback setup. One
will be
In my opinion cables can make a difference especially in a system
capable of hight resolution. Last night I substituted some pure silver
speaker jumpers in my Omega Super 3 Bipoles for the stock copper wire
jumpers in my continual quest for even better sound quality. Much to my
surprise I
The contacts were very clean. Contacts do make a difference but
following the same logic, if contacts can make a difference so should
cables especially if they are of different metals. It's easy to turn
that logic around. BTW have you tried any of the contact enhancers such
as
Craig;152457 Wrote:
That'll be me then :-)
Actually we regularly put many different 'coloured' 10 GBps signals
over hundreds of miles down a single fibre.
Craig
In terms of $/ft, I bet the cables you use cost far less than
audiophile cables! :-)
BTW how long can you typically go
Mark Lanctot;152492 Wrote:
In terms of $/ft, I bet the cables you use cost far less than audiophile
cables! :-)
You'd be right there I'll see if I can find out how much we pay for
100M of the stuff
Mark Lanctot;152492 Wrote:
BTW how long can you typically go without repeaters?
I know of
mschlack;152393 Wrote:
I did not do a blind fold test, but what I did do was observe the
ability to hear low-level details that are right on the edge of
resolution. I used A Case of You from Diana Krall's Live in Paris and
If I Were Blue from Patricia Barber's Verse. The former has a lot
opaqueice;152560 Wrote:
I use that track from Verse as well - it's an extraordinarily well
recorded album.
I know it's irritating to be told this, but even when you're quite sure
there's a difference in, say, detail, there's really no way to know
without doing it blind (which doesn't mean
P Floding;152563 Wrote:
This is a hobby. People must be allowed to have opinions.
The ABX-fetichism has gone too far for my taste. I think most people
here know by now that some people are unable to have opinions without
doing blind tests. How boring life must be for them.
Exactly. One can
Did you in any way blind this test? How can you be sure your
expectation of better sound from the high-dollar cable didn't color
your perception of sound quality?
What factors could possibly affect signal transmission over a short run
in an optical cable enough to produce an actual audible
jeffluckett;152305 Wrote:
Did you in any way blind this test? How can you be sure your
expectation of better sound from the high-dollar cable didn't color
your perception of sound quality?
What factors could possibly affect signal transmission over a short run
in an optical cable enough
I can't understand how there can be differences in digital cables.
As I understand it, in an optical cable, the S/PDIF reciever is looking
for a change in state between bright and dim, not bright and dim
themselves, but the transition. I suppose a sub-par cable would make
this job difficult and
Mark Lanctot;152320 Wrote:
I can't understand how there can be differences in digital cables.
As I understand it, in an optical cable, the S/PDIF reciever is looking
for a change in state between bright and dim, not bright and dim
themselves, but the transition. I suppose a sub-par cable
P Floding;152326 Wrote:
You are probably posting in the wrong forum.
Jitter is well known to cause nasty digititis.
OK, post edited, but I stand by the rest of it.
The Squeezebox/Transporter are very low-jitter devices and they sound
better than most other audio sources, so there must be
P Floding;152328 Wrote:
That could possibly be because they are identical, and the Monster label
costs the additional $40.
I recently purchased an HDTV, and was agape at the cost of HDMI cables
that were readily available, so I started reading reviews of the
various cables to see if the cost
Mark Lanctot;152331 Wrote:
OK, post edited, but I stand by the rest of it.
The Squeezebox/Transporter are very low-jitter devices and they sound
better than most other audio sources, so there must be something to it.
I guess I don't know enough about it to comment. However I'd think the
jeffluckett;152334 Wrote:
I recently purchased an HDTV, and was agape at the cost of HDMI cables
that were readily available, so I started reading reviews of the
various cables to see if the cost could at all be justified.
I found a review that tested a range of cables from a $10.00
P Floding;152337 Wrote:
Obviously!
There is no need to test HDMI cables. Either they work or they don't.
The whole business of testing them is stupidity.
There are no timing issues with HDMI that can affect picture quality.
Well, my point here was that HDMI is a digital cable ... as are
jeffluckett;152340 Wrote:
Well, my point here was that HDMI is a digital cable ... as are toslink
and coax.
As long as it's capable of transparently delivering the bits from one
end to the other, there should be no effect on the delivered sound.
I'd be surprised if a cable could
P Floding;152335 Wrote:
Almost everyone with just a little experience of hifi thinks speakers
are the most important component. In my experience the source
components are usually the real bandits when sound is bad. That and
bad connectors (even internally in the speakers). Surprisingly good
Mark Lanctot;152343 Wrote:
Yes but it's likely been many, many years since you had/heard
entry-level speakers. I would imagine you're going from $5000/pr
speakers to $6000/pr speakers now, surely the gains are smaller than
going from $100/pr Cerwin Vegas to $1000/pr Energy Cs like I
jeffluckett;152340 Wrote:
Anyway, you could more easily sell me on there being problems from
induced currents in a coax than you ever could on an optical cable.
Either the bits arrive at thier destination or they don't.
Not all digital standards are created equal - S/PDIF is synchronous,
First, let me agree that there's way too much emphasis on cables. I am
every bit the skeptic.
I did not do a blind fold test, but what I did do was observe the
ability to hear low-level details that are right on the edge of
resolution. I used A Case of You from Diana Krall's Live in Paris and
If
mschlack;152393 Wrote:
First, let me agree that there's way too much emphasis on cables. I am
every bit the skeptic.
I did not do a blind fold test, but what I did do was observe the
ability to hear low-level details that are right on the edge of
resolution. I used A Case of You from
Part of the benefit of using Toslink or other fiber connections
is electrical isolation.
To properly evaluate Toslink vs Coax cables, you should disconnect the
Coax cable when listening to the Toslink.
All Toslink transceivers are not created equal, and like any
electronic devise, they benefit
39 matches
Mail list logo
