|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I respect Jon Risch.Now that I have that out of the way.Here is what I have been doing over the last few months.I have been reading and trying just about all of the D.I.Y. projects that have been posted here.I do not have a mega buck system But! I can honestly say I can not hear hundreds of dollars worth of quality sound from the Jon Risch cables to the Greg Weaver cables..If you think you can hear it....You Will! If you think it is a waste of time...It probably is...I honestly beleive that cables are system dependent.....Your room acoustics play a much more role in good sound than cables or such...I blistered my fingers on the cat5 cables.(well worth the time,But! I just tryed some SO cable and it sounds just as good as the cat5)and all I had to do was terminate it....This is a great hobby! Just dont spend all of your money on reviews because They say it sounds better or this is better because it has a lower inductance.If you think it sounds good.....It Does! If you think it sounds like Sh*t than it does.....You and Only you can decide what works for you and your system...The money you have been spending on all of the hype and voo doo could have been spent on some quality cd's..You are only get the best sound from the best recorded cd's....If you get a crappy recorded cd.you get a crappy sound..I have many cd's.I can put one cd in and you would say..Damn! that sounds sh*tty.But than again I could put another one in and you would say Damn! I wish my system sound that good.The sound that comes out is only as good as the sound that goes in....Piss on wires,cables,etc.......It starts with the recording.....start the flaming!
Speakers, amps, CDs... what it boils down to is that if you think you hear a difference and you like it, then you like it and it's great. If you think there's no difference, then there's no difference and it still great.
Audio is cool!
Thank you for your good comment. I like mine too.
Well, if you don't want the cables I will be happy to take them off you. In fact, you can make the bass cables and sell me those too. Seriously!!?? Name your price! Seriously!!
DIY cables of this caliber means you can try what would have been close to a thousand dollars worth of retail cables or more (while only spending a hundred or so), and see what they get you.I have been meaing to post a note on how to listen critically, and conduct a controlled comparison that would allow any one at home to have an even chance of hearing what is going on.
Don't sell those DIY cable quite yet. Do what was suggested in another post, put them in your system, and leave them there for several weeks. I should have posted the listening instructions by then, and you can take it to the next step.
Don't give up because of one simple listening experience, that may or may not have been what was needed to allow you to hear what is going on.
Jon Risch
In reply to John Risch's post. I built my first hi-fi in 1949. That should give you an idea of how old I am! Life never seizes to amaze me as I now have to learn how to listen to music critically. This is the most amazing statement I have ever heard. I have never considered myself to be what one would call an audiophile, but rather someone who enjoys his music through a GREAT HI-FI SYSTEM. For many months I have been reading posts on the audio websites and it seems that no one ever listens to the music. They're either testing new wires, tubes, equipment or other paraphernalia. We have now come full circle from tubes to transistors to tubes. Fifties technology revitalized and so we must consider exactly what hi-fi was at the time. Nothing more than an appliance, just like a refrigerator or stove. A means by which to enjoy the music of the day. We have now lost sight of this goal and spend our time listening to our equipment Music is not about listening to equipment, nor to testing every aspect of our system, but to communicate the artists intention to entertain and amaze us. Audiophiles are now paying hundreds of dollars for records that were recorded in the early fifties (A.S.Z.) pressed on RCA Living Stereo. A record that in its day cost $1.98 and now brings $500.00 to its owner. Only because H.P. has placed this record on his absolute sound must have list. Records that were optimized for the equipment back in the 50's (that little appliance that your parents kept in their living room) which brought musical pleasure into their homes. Stop listening to the equipment before it's too late to enjoy the music.
i am almost as old as you, and i am surprised to hear you say that. Hifi
started out as a cottage industry, enthusiasts had to work much harder.
I keep a few old mags in the cellar for laughs; fireplaces turned into woofers, speakers the size of a small shed in typical 50's living rooms (diy, of course). DIY is hardly new!
As to the "full circle" comment, this could be characterised as an overgeneralsiation. I have no tube gear, it's too damn expensive. What i see as happening there is what is called market segmentation. Products that
appeal to every sort of taste can be had ( take a look at SET gear! (Single Ended Tube)).
As to the theme, i have to admit you have a point. The people here ( usually reffered to as inmates) are audiophiles. We are blessed, and cursed, by our equipment. To be brief:
1) yes, we can get too involved with the gear
2) the gear of the 50's was not good enough to routinely inspire this sort of obsession
3) pretty much everything i buy, i get on sale. I wouldn't call that being a slave to some reviewer. Actually i am hoping to see a review (one worth reading) of my last purchase to see how well it meets spec.
4) Picked up a Toscanini Pines of Rome 2 days ago for 59 cents at a Goodwill. It is in great shape. In the last few months i have bought somewhere between one and two hundred records.
5) After i clean 'em, the wife and i listen, or dance. This is wonderful!
6) my name is "late", it is NOT 'too late' (couldn't resist that one)
BRAVO !
BRAVO !
(nt)
Jon,Please post on how to listen criticaly...I will take it to heart.Thanks for your post.....
Here is some information on how to listen during component listening comparisons, taken from my AES paper, preprint #3178, "A User Friendly Methodology for Subjective Listening tests" . What earlier sections covered is summarized and condensed here:Don't try to do too many listening trials at one sitting.
Listen to the same section of music, no longer than a minute,
preferably about 45 seconds long, no shorter than 30 seconds. Repeat it for each set of trials exactly. When moving on to a new set of trials (ABA), use a fresh section of music, or rotate several different sections through so that you are not listeneing to the same musical segment over and over, it is too easy to become overlyt familiar and therefore bored with the selection if too many repeats occur in a short time frame.CONCENTRATE while listening, as listening for comparison purposes is not the same as listening to music for pleasure. You must be in an analytical mode at all times. This will take some practice. Casual listening will not pick up on anything but major differences.
Use a set defined pattern of component switching. Instead of just switching back and forth between components being compared, listen to A, then B, then A. If doing a comparison that will not be reversable (or readily reversable), such as coating a CD with green ink around the edges, use an A, A, then B pattern, or in the case of the CD, listen to it twice, THEN coat it and listen again.
DO NOT keep switching back and forth, A, B, A, B, A, B, as this WILL lead to listening fatigue quite quickly. Listen just a few times VERY INTENTLY, and make them count. Use the suggested method for listening to details below.
If you wish to make this a blind test, have the forced choice X at the end of the chosen sequence, e.g., A, B, A, X. OR A, A, B, X
Obviously, if you wish to perform the comaprison blind, some assistance will be needed.Do not use switchboxes, tape loops, etc, BUT swap cables or cables to the components. Keep the volume control the same, and switch temporarily to a dead source to avoid any switching transients when swapping cables.
Finally, do not take notes or talk to others during the trails, wait till after the whole session is done, and you have made you choices or written down your notes. Focus on the task at hand during the musical segment playback, and take mental notes of what is going on.
AES PAPER EXCERPT
4.4 What To Listen For During Musical Test Passages4.4.1 General
Focus on specific musical events within the musical segment, such as a cymbal crash or a specific phrase in the vocals, etc. Listen for different aspects at different points within the music, but try to limit your selection of specific items to be listened for a second time around. Beginners should limit themselves to just one or two musical events to remember from test run to test run, until practice has improved their audio memory and concentration. With practice and experience, 3 or 4 musical events can be examined from run to run.
4.4.2 Suggested Specifics To Listen For
Low Level Detail - Listen for the presence of minute details that are on the verge of getting lost in the midst of the rest of the music, such as subtle string noises, hall ambience, the breathing of the musicians, or even air conditioning noise recorded along with the music. These low level details are some of the first musical specifics to suffer with less than top quality equipment.
Transient Impact - Listen to the transient events in the music. Do they have a razor sharp sense of impact? An 'over before they are started' Kind of effect? Or are they smeared and drawn-out in time? Live musical transient events have virtually no smear or blurring.
Bass and Treble Quality - listen to the quality of the bass
and treble, not just how much of it there is, but how clear are the notes and sounds? Solid, tight bass notes with distinct pitch definition are in contrast to loose or boomy bass notes hard to pin down in pitch. There may be an apparent extension of low frequency response, a sense of musical foundation provided that is absent from the other component. Is the treble region sweet, clean and clearly delineated, or is it hard, hashy and distorted? An apparent extension of high frequency response typically doesn't sound like more high frequencies, but as though the music had an airy quality to it.Stereo Spatial Phenomena - many subjective listening tests will be performed in stereo (or perhaps more appropriate: 2 channel reproduction) and therefore will include some spatial or pseudo spatial information. Theoretically, if both channels are changed by a component in the same way, then very little effect should be noted on true stereo spatial information. However, due to the fact that much of modern music has it's 'stereo' generated artificially in the studio, based on some rather crude level, phase, and time manipulations. it takes rather less deviation from linearity to disturb something even as seemingly solid as the pseudo-monophonic image generated in such manner. Listen for image shifts of back-up vocals, and shifts in the apparent position of a specific instrument from component to component, as well as shifts in the overall soundstage character of the musical passage.
Overall Tonal Balance - This has traditionally been the most questionable of changes to listen for, as a 'simple' linear error, such as a minor frequency response difference, can be responsible for the difference heard. It is, however, the most powerful and useful change to listen for when there is every reason to believe that the frequency response has not been changed to a significant degree within the audio band. Evaluation of most IC chips (those suitable for audio use according to their specifications) would be a good example of this type of situation: substitution of one IC chip for another in an audio component, say the output stage of a CD player, normally will not alter the frequency response significantly. If a change in tonal balance occurs when switching the IC chips in and out of the unit, then it is very likely that the tonal change is due to some difference in the signal handling accuracy other than frequency response errors. Of course, the frequency response should be checked to verify that it does measure 'flat'.
Another example would be listening to interconnect cables. In most modern sound systems, the substitution of one grade or type of line level interconnect cable will not significantly affect the measured frequency response within the audio band, so that if tonal balance changes are heard, they are most likely to be due to some other factor associated with the cable itself, for instance, dielectric effects of the insulators.
It must be pointed out that there are always 'special' cases where the above assumption will no hold, such as an IC chip not truly suited for audio use that actually does affect the audio band frequency response, or interconnects used with equipment with a very high output impedance (some tube gear) that will roll-off the high frequencies with certain high-capacitance cables.
******************************
END OF AES PAPER EXCERPT
Copyright Jon M. Risch, 1991, 2000. All rights reserved.I hope this helps those wishing to try some high resolution comparisons of components.
Jon Risch
.....
if you cant hear a difference in cables, they why do you honestly think they're system dependant?
You and I are on the same path, only you are a few months ahead of me. I don't know how you did your listening tests, but perhaps I could suggest some ideas that I got from doing my "day job," in which I need to resolve very subtle differences in an entirely different line of consumer products.What I'm doing with my system is to upgrade all of the cables ala Jon and Chris, and then I'm going to listen to music (without changing the system in any way) for a couple of months. After I'm deeply familiar with the way the system sounds, I'm going to put all the original cruddy cable back in and listen to the results. I'll let you know, probably sometime in June-July-August.
Since you have already decided that your original cable is "cruddy", you have predetermined the outcome of this "test". So why bother!{B^}
Fair enough... but the old wires and interconnects I'm referring to are ugly small guage zip cord and gray plastic interconnects that came with stuff I bought in the '60s and '70s. So "cruddy" is anatomically correct.Now, the critical question in July will be, "How does this old wire sound, now that I'm used to the good stuff?" I'll try hard to be wide open to whatever happens. One thing is for sure. If I thought the outcome was a predetermined "no difference", I wouldn't spend the time or money (both in limited supply) fooling around with wire.
Peter
I think this is perhaps the best way to test any components because the differences for some reason are more glaringly obvious when you downgrade than when you upgrade.When I got my outboard DAC I plugged it in and liked the music, compared it to the standard CD output and was pleased, but only pleasantly so. After about 6 months I got the urge to mess around and plugged the CD back in in analog mode. Now I noticed what a huge difference the DAC made.
I think this is just perhaps human nature. If it is then let's use it to our advantage, especially when reviewing.
Shawn Harvey
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: