Even after auditioning 3 separate AVR's, the same ambient sound of the room was still present! That told me the unwanted faint background signal noise I had been experiencing had nothing to do with the actual units. Therefore, my attention changed to the cables. And even then It was only on the third occasion after I finally purchased shielded cables that the noise floor within my small room finally came down to satisfactory levels. Cables often act as antennas for attracting RF, and the longer the cable, the better the antenna. Probably explains why when I used to disconnect my heights and surrounds within 10 minutes, the faint background signal noise (RF/EMI) within my small room used to disappear/dissipate. Trying to achieve a totally silent room sadly has turned into a bit of an obsession for me. Doesn't help when ones 2-channel stereo also entails an extra 7 channels that are externally amplified (5.2.4) The more cables I shield, the quieter my room becomes, and the better the shielding, the more the chance the cables are likely to disappear. If one has the same sensitivities and is looking to address this matter, but is also hoping to notice the incremental differences. I would suggest analogue cables of length first before moving on to digital and power cables. When friends or guests come over, I used to show them how loud the system goes. Now I prefer to press mute and show them how my quiet it goes. None of them gets it, of course 😂
Great story. I lucked out a bit. My system is also dead quiet without too much chasing. When I had an all tube system, I would have ground noise and rfi noise played through the speaker. Since changing to a high-quality solid state, all the noise disappeared, and the silence is impressive. I can still hear very faintly that rfi noise produced by the router, once in a while, though (but not through the system), so it's there still. Once heard, it's a signature you don't forget.
I would imagine that at the beginning of the journey, the router wouldn't even be in ones mind. The fact that it's now able to become noticeable is impressive in itself. Crazy how one knocks one down and a lesser one becomes apparent 😄
Audiophiles say cables make a difference. Sceptics say, show me measurements. Audiophiles produce measurements. Sceptics refute, saying values are below hearing thresholds, and do a blind test. Goes round and round. Remember, the nature of Psychoacoustics and placebo can also cause sceptics due to their beliefs/understandings to perceive there are no differences when differences are perhaps real 😂
It is not psychologically just decent experimental physics. But not below the audible, not even subtle. So called sceptics invariably lack seriously in physics knowledge...
This is brilliant. Bravo!! Did you happen to test the speed of the cables with different frequency pulses? (I haven't checked your article yet) It would be interesting to see if the timing of pulses varies if the frequency of the signal is altered. (I'm writing this just a touch before the end of the video so hopefully you're not about to discuss it and I've gone too soon) EDIT: sounds like you can't measure this at audible frequencies based on what you're saying in the changing signal amplitude section
Hi there, First of all thanks a lot for the long and thorough work, kudos for doing this. As a physicist I appreciate that you measure impulse response. You notice yourself that differences in Impulse response are very audible. This is of course so because impulse response actually represents the F transform of the phase transfer ( over the audible domain). That phase transfer will eventually determine the spatial resolution of your soundstage due to coherence of the soundwaves. If that phase transfer is oscillating within the audible domain, that will result in lack of coherence and concomittant dampening of selective frequencies leading to particular colouring and precision. So I am quite enthusiastic about this time domain measurement.
Thanks for sharing! Very interesting. I knew that wide bandwidth cable designs were important. I can see the correlation between energy loss and bandwidth extension. What’s surprising is the frequency propagation speed as a function of voltage variance. That last measurement seems to track with musical dynamics, as you indicated.
You mentioned cable resistance seems to make little or no difference in listening tests. This makes sense, as most HiFi devices will have resistance on the input. Look at most input circuits, signal feeds via a Resistor. At a factor, many times or hundred of time higher than a cable. Also output circuits drive via a resistance. Great work on your testing. Interesting stuff. Thanks for investing so much time and effort.
I learned that when I was a young man, not every expensive cables are worth the price. I use cables made of silver and copper for my loudspeakers, from amplifier and inside the loudspeakers, building my own speakers. Oehlbach 2x3 mm² OFC/SPOFC Rattle Snake 3, can handle up to 250 watts. Silverplated copper
Y make Me Happy and curious at the same time…… and I think there is a big future for Y in this matter…. And a BIG thumbs UP to Y and The Team Best Regards from Denmark DK ☺❤👌
Cables do make a diffetence and i do not know why. Your great work certainly helps to start to understand. As you say you will be doi g more work on this. Thank you for this.
Here in USA bought Grimm audio tpr rca , wow , clean sound , dark background, neutral but still exciting . I was wrong about twisted pair . Blew away my morrow audio cables away
Very interesting! Cable design has for years depended (and will for some time to come) on guys experimenting and listening to infinitesimal differences. I'm quite excited about these results because they show that something physical is happening. Perhaps in some years there will be a generally accepted recipe how to make good signal cables, how to make good digital cables, how to make good speaker cables etc. Having a changing delay depending on the amplitude cannot be good for distortion (however miniscule) and also phase integrity. It would be very interesting to compare geometries and materials of these cables and see what correlation they have with spectral decay, overall high frequency (10 MHz) behaviour and amplitude-dependent pulse delay. Maybe there are some lessons to be learned through analysis of these factors. Very good work. All the best, Rob in Switzerland
Cables do make a difference and I should have measured them. I purchased 2 2meter lengths of speaker cable to run between my power amp and my speakers. It was futile, no signal reached my speakers. So, I measured the distance from the power amp to each speaker. It measured 2.5meters. So I purchased 2 3meter lengths of speaker cable. This time it worked. Always make sure your cables measure correctly, prior to installing them.oh, and if you still don’t believe cables make a difference, remove them from your system. I guarantee that even the tone deaf amongst you, will notice the difference. Most of all, enjoy the music.
Just fantastic. I have been exploring internet cabling, even I am writing an eBook about audio, with a chapter on cabling. On-line there is such a debate about whether there are differences, and the scientific types argue that there is no test to provve any difference, therefore, it is just Audiophiliac imagination. Here it is. I love this, to show these measurable characterics of harmonics in spectral decay, roll-off differences, and internal propagation/speed variance. Thanks, so much.
There are two arguments. Do cables measure differently, and can humans hear those differences. I dont know anyone arguing over the measurable differences, but if the differences are significant enough to be audible. So far no one has presented double blind tests or ABX tests to prove the measured differences are audible.
Suggestion: You might try measuring an eye pattern (aka eye diagram) for On-Off-Keying (OOK) on the cables to eliminate the timing variation being o-scope trigger level and signal amplitude dependent. Although eye diagrams are usually used to characterize digital signals, they can be viewed as a square wave characterization for analog cables. From a mathematical perspective, an eye pattern is a visualization of the probability density function (PDF) of the signal, modulo the unit interval (UI). In other words, it shows the probability of the signal being at each possible voltage across the duration of the UI. Typically a color ramp is applied to the PDF in order to make small brightness differences easier to visualize. Several system performance measurements can be derived by analyzing the display. If the signals are too long, too short, poorly synchronized with the system clock, too high, too low, too noisy, or too slow to change, or have too much undershoot or overshoot, this can be observed from the eye diagram. A simple way to have the eye pattern display jitter in the signal is to estimate the symbol rate of the signal (perhaps by counting the average number of zero crossings in a known window of time) and acquiring many UIs in a single oscilloscope capture. The first zero crossing in the capture is located and declared to be the start of the first UI, and the remainder of the waveform is divided into chunks one UI long. This approach can work adequately for stable signals in which the symbol rate remains exactly the same over time, however inaccuracies in the system mean that some drift is inevitable so it is rarely used in practice. Using a reference clock to determine UI boundaries allows the eye pattern to faithfully display the signal with only jitter between the signal and the reference clock displayed. The downside: Large amounts of data may be needed to provide an accurate representation of the signal; tens to hundreds of millions of UIs are frequently used for a single eye pattern.
I am a longtime audiophile. I have experimented with cables - mainly USB and/or RCA - and have found each brand to produce a different effect - and price did not determine whether it was better or worse. The best ones for my computer-based system were not very expensive. I upgraded a friend's home entertainment system from the standard HDMI cable to an inexpensive component brand. The improvement was truly astounding. She is a musician, but no audiophile, and she can hear the great increase in: dynamic range, sound stage, clarity, detail.
@DanielByers-qf9qi I'm not saying that this was positively the reason for the differences, but there are A LOT of different specs and "levels" or features within the HDMI standards, and if the previous cable was not rated for the latest spec or capabilities of the AVR (or the Source), the Source or AVR may not have taken advantage of either components' full capabilities with the original cable. i.e. the source or AVR may have been limited to 16bit/44.1kHz or 16bit/48kHz throughput rather than 24bit at a higher sample rate via the DACs, or may have transferred the audio via analog instead of via digital, etc. The largest differences are in regards to the HDMI cable's bandwidth or "data throughput" capabilities, but there are MANY other differences outlined in the HDMI specification. e.g. ARC vs. eARC, HDMI 1.4 vs. 2.0a vs 2.0b vs. 2.1b...etcetera. There are MANY different limitations and/or capabilities/features within the HDMI specification that allow for different audio as well as video capabilities. Just take a look at the HDMI ORG website to see all of the mindboggling variables. They CAN make a difference as to what you might hear (and see) when using a particular HDMI cable between any two or more components.
Bravo on you, I have no test to backup my experience but I've used a lot of different brands of cables over the years and I've come to the usual conclusions. Cables do sound different, most notably I found speaker cables to offer the widest variability in terms of sonic differences, but interlinks as well as power cables equally have sonic distinctions as well, just not too as obvious an effect. It's always been my thought that speaker cables offer this larger variability because of the electrical interaction that happens between amplifier and speaker is manipulated by cable design. I forget why I read it, an article online somewhere, but the design of cables in terms of inductance and capacitance and their construction was shown unequivocally to contribute to varying electrical properties in the cable itself which of course contributed to sound quality. The reason speaker cables create a larger audible distinction, then say interlinks, is because they carry higher volts through them than the extremely low level signals that pass through interlinks. Of course having greater amounts of an electrical signal it's easier for that signal to be manipulated on its way from one place to another. Congratulations on creating some meaningful data in terms of what it is a lot of us hear and know.😊 Also one other thing I wanted to add is if you want to get a great understanding of the relationship of the frequency range from 20 HZ to 20,000 HZ comparison to the upper range of 100,000 HZ then all you have to do is go look at the great work that was done by Sony in the '80s and '90s as they were developing the sacd. Another article which I had read on the development of the sacd, Sony showed through research that upper level frequency range harmonics flood down into the audible range and can affect the audible band. Which is why I typically point to that research when somebody says that we can only hear up to 20,000 HZ or they say that anything above that doesn't matter.
Ive been buying audio for best part of 50 years and i know cables sound different. Ive seen the, they dont make a difference crowd. If thats there belief thats upto them. Makes no difference to me because it do. Simple. Great channel btw.
Yes, nice work. Great efforts. A respect! Bravoo!! But I personally hear significant differences just between interconnects. With speaker cables are so minimal that I would not spend/loose my money on speaker cables. Maybe there will be some surprise in a future, but I doubt. Power cables is a real audio woodoo - psychoacoustic to me. We did blind A-B tests and especially with power cords it was pure guessing, with speaker cables a bit less so, significant results just with interconnects. Any good designed amp should have a decent filtration between AC to DC and then DC goes again to low capacitance AC. I just tested again four different power cords from basic, cheap generic one to 2000 Eur one with my new amp - JLH1969 copy, pure class A amp, with minimalistic topology , and the result is the same as with SS or Tube integrated amps - no difference at all. If the speaker have poor, common thin copper wires, (which usually is the case even with quite expensive speakers) in it and other parts it is idiotic or selffoolish to expect that a special audiophile wire from amp to speaker would do a "miracle" or something significant different than just plain copper wire. I am now in a process of making my own speakers with full range drivers and what counts is the same quality wire from amp, directly connected to speker's driver with no plugs and such rubbish. Just plugs usually adds - 1 Ohm. What Mark Levinson with Daniel Hertz systems is doing have a sense - I guess - the whole system. My hearing is medical tested twice in the last two years and it is perserved 98% on one ear and 92% on other ear and I am 54. So I can hear pretty damn good and i Know what is a soundstage and 3D dimensionality in it with good systems. Kind regards.
Thanks a LOT for your scientific quest, to find the "origin of good sound" in cables :) Just a short note :) You concluded, "fast propagation" makes cables sound better... Quite logical as a slower propagation indicates "something tries to stop the signal". For those who don't know: Propagation actually means "move out", thus used by technicians to mean the SPEED of that EM wave, which IS the music signal in a cable, or any other "signal through cables"... In some cables it is near 90% of "the speed of light in vacuum tanks, when using standard test lamps". In some other cables it is only around 70% of the lightspeed. While electrons move MUCH slower! So the fast moving EM field, is made by a domino EM effect amongst the electrons. But are you aware, that teflon insulation allows faster propagation, than PE (polyetylen) and PP (polypropylen) ? And those two materials, allow a faster propagation than PVC ? That is a well proven fact. But there may be additional causes, for a slower propagation, and one is obviously... Inductance. The "very clear sounding" Supra Ply 3.4, has PVC insulation... However the "flattened woven hose" construction of the copper, gives unusually low inductance, being 0,20uH/m, according to Supra's datasheet. The flattened "hose" is only 1.5 mm thick, but there is still a gap, between the "two layers"... It seems a flattened hose, gets smaller inductance, than a round hose, IF there still is a small gap between the two layers. From Supra only the "FlameRetardant" versions, have PE. All others have PVC insulation :( The Supra Classic 4.0 can be bought with PE, as I did... But has a higher inductans, around 55uH/m Both of those cables are tinned OFC. The tin is said to reduce electron jumps between threads, which would have caused noise... A high frequent noise, which "nobody can hear" but it WILL distort the audible signal! If that theory is true, then silverplated copper cables should suffer MOST from electron jumps, unless each thread is isolated. Regarding inductance... One thing is, it causes more or less phase shifting... But with the pretty small value, I hardly think that is important. Much more important is: Overall the inductans can be understood, much like the hysteresis in loudspeakers, caused by Eddy Currents in the magnet... Just in a "much lower scale" in copper cables... Still it is an evil circle: Music signal creates a secondary EM field, which then creates "the 1. false signal current" which then creates a tertiary EM field, which then creates "the 2. false signal current, and so on. This evil circle dies out MUCH faster in a cable, than in traditional loudspeaker magnets. Purify Audio and DALI now use "SMC" magnets, constructed to block the Eddy Currents, and the result IS a lower distortion! But in both traditional loudspeakers and cables, we can say the inductance result in an "EM ecco effect", which will smear and distort the "next few voltage swings". And as the created (induced) EM fields, get stronger, when a stronger current change happens, (as in high frequencies, and in sharp transients), the induced EM field, will actually dampen the following voltage swings much, AFTER each strong TRANSIENT. Like if a tiny monkey turned the volume down, and then gradually up again, after each strong transient. It will not only create distortion, but it also destroy the natural dynamic, basically killing the natural decay, after a start transient... Especially audible, from drums and string instruments. This effect makes the transient "stand out" more, than it really should... You can be fooled to think "this recording has better dynamics"... As the "little drum" and the highhat, sound more "snappy"... I wondered WHY it sounded like that, with Supra Classic 4.0! But with Supra Ply 3.4, all suddenly sounded more natural! I finally concluded, it was the lower inductance in Ply 3.4 which enabled the more natural (and softer) sound. Also... The higher inductance in a cable, which especially the higher notes and sharp transients produce, will NOT only reduce the high notes, as some believe, but also the bass notes... Except if you run Bi-Wire, obviously! Perhaps you heard a number, starting with a bass only... The bass sounds strong and clear... Then the other instruments start... THEN it sounds like the bass is turned down! Perhaps it was the mixer man who did that? If not, it was caused by the inductance, which the higher notes created. Also: The science rule is: With larger distance betwen surfaces, the inductance becomes stronger. And it is strongest in the core region of a cable. Then elecrons are forced away from the core threads, so they flow close to or even on the surface of the cable. This happens no matter of the "cable" i one massive wire, or 300 thing wires bundled together, to be one CABLE. Then the threads in the core region "is a waste of copper". SO... A thicker cable gives less resistance, to DC voltage... BUT will give stronger inductance! Which is why a flat cable, or simply a thinner cable, or four seperated thin cables, or indeed a "hollow tube cable", should have less inductance. Finally a fun fact: The John Linsley Hood Class A amp, designed 1969, is totally linear up to more than 200.000 Hz... Many would say: What does that matter, when we only hear up to 20.000? Well it simply shows, it can reproduce 20.000 with the same small distortion, as at 1.000 Hz !!! Which might be why, it became famous, as the best sounding amp "ever build". Closely followed by the best TUBE amp, at that time! So measuring the "ridiculously high frequencies" is surely very important. However, a cable which transmits VHF extremely well, might pick up a lot of radio noise, which distorts lower frequencies! This MIGHT be why YOU found, that those which rolled of at lower frequencies, sounded best! I can't wait, till you publish the resulst from loudspekaer cables ;)
Hi, great video, thanks! Can you tell me if you tested the cable(s) laid out as opposed to coiled? I'm curious as to whether having some coiled introduced any unintentional influence given the sensitivity of some of the measurements; or whether that can be ignored?
Really impressive on your true scientific spirit. Practice is the Sole Criterion for Testing Truth. This is a great work trying to find correlation between measurement and accoustic signature.
@@TheAlphaAudio I am EE engineer working on widebandgap semicondutor. There could be another consideration for the pulse part, the pulse generator can not generate an ideal pulse with infinite dv/dt and there is always a finite dv/dt value there so same pulse with different amplitude may have difference distribution in frequency domain. You can use FFT function on scope or spectrum analyzer to verify this, but the bandwidth of instrument need to be 10GHz(since your pulse is 2ns width), also probe need to be a high bandwidth probe(＞10G), So the cost will be very high for this investigation purpose. (or you can borrow some instrument for RF purpose)
Of course cables sound different, any serious audiophile has known this for years from listening and comparing, Your tests however are the first explanations of why they sound different, it was interesting to hear that cables transfer energy at different speeds dependent on frequency, this could explain why some cables sound more natural than others.
This was an excellent video that a lot of work has been put into. The big take away from this for me is that, sometimes magic happens in audio that can’t always be explained, but can be heard and felt. Well done for this tremendous effort in trying to find out how to measure that magic though.
Sorry but what was the complete equipment that you used for the listening tests from the source amp or preamplifier to the speaker cables and speakers i assume the you have everything constant except the interlinks si you can catch the differences. In what section of the article is ? I found it section 4 interpreting Thanks data
I’ve only ever compared analog RCA interconnects. When I set up my system I tried about 8 different analog interconnect cables and they all had a different sound. I could hear not only a difference in tone but also in quality. Settled on Chord Company Cobra.
@@Melkitzedeq Wow, you still try to defend yourself. Not all people need to lie to themselves with the results of forever inaccurate blind tests. Some actually have the money to buy and be happy with the performance gain or the balance found in the system with a good and matching cable.
@@AudioThingslol "forever inaccurate" xD you do know how medical studies are conducted, don't you? DOUBLE-blind. always, or they have no scientific relevance
I am happy that you are shedding light on the sound quality of interlinks. Hope that the endless discussion will stop now that we know cables have different properties and will change the sound accordingly. Now we just have to start relying on our ears, they are the reference.
@RudieVissenberg I highly doubt that this test will stop the endless discussion and debate, regardless of how extensive The Alpha Audio's tests were. However (IMO), I feel that "cable-swapping" is the absolute least useful and effective way to "change" or "adjust" the sound of any audio system. There are Many, Many far more important variables that have Exponentially more effects on the outcome of any given systems' audio quality. Try suggesting this in a professional recording/mixing/mastering studio environment and you'll be sure to get at least few raised eyebrows and SMDH responses, LOL.
Thank you for this. I have a Luxman amp and Audio Physic Avanti (the new ones) speakers. The differences between interconnects are evident. Their role for the overall sound is not small.
@RainerErnst44 I'm interested to know all of the different brand/model interconnects you tested and which ones you kept? Are any of them included in The Alpha Audio test?
Supra EFF, Oehlbach, Viablue, Inakustik Reference… the last one was very good. The Supra a bit too thick in lower mids for my system. The Oehlbach is more linear sounding but soundstage is more flat. The supra was included in an earlier test.
@@RainerErnst44 Thanks for the replies. Other than my Grimm TPR & TPM and Sommer Cable, the only others I've used in the past are Kimber Kable, MIT, and Inakustik (I have quite a few of their reference recordings as well). Good luck on your search.
When non-technically trained people speak using technical terms. This is hilarious. Rich in inference. At audio frequencies, historisis, attenuation, VSWR are of no consequence. Use high purity copper cable 16-12 awg and spend your time on listening room acoustics.
@theomindschrddr7983 While I'm not disagreeing that Signal and Speaker Wire/Cables may affect sound quality, please keep in mind that all of the highly sensitive and extremely PRECISE Test Equipment being used to perform all of these minute nano-second, microvolt, and LCR measurements must have infinitely better specs than the equipment they are testing, otherwise the test equipment itself is a limiting factor. Can we agree on that? If so, then take note that all of these Uber-Precise Test Equipment devices are supplied with Standard "plain Jane" UL/CE/ISO listed and certified power cables directly from their respective manufacturers, similar to what you'd receive with a name brand flat-screen HDTV, desktop computer or UPS, and/or 99% of electronic medical equipment. The manufacturers of the Test Equipment being used DO NOT insist on or supply these incredibly sensitive and precise electronic measurement devices with any type of power cables with exotic special geometries, cryogenically-treated magic alloy, uniquely formulated insulation jackets, or "audiophile grade" plugs, etc. The manufacturer supplies you with good old basic UL/CE/ISO listed power cables, nothing "fancy", and guarantees their product to perform to the high tolerances and specifications as claimed with said power cable. That, in and of itself, should be telling and speak volumes. ;-)
@@bbfoto7248well they are selling their equipment short for the reasons of economics, check out shunyata research supplying power cords for hospitals heart measuring equipment, because of increased resolution and the following increases in accuracy
You mention the timing behaviour of the cables in the site and it is clear from the measurements that there are differences between the cables' phase responses within the audio band. Did you not find any correlation between the phase response differences and the subjective assessments from listening to the cables?
I’ve never even touched an interlink that was more than $60 but I find this interesting. Do manufacturers market their cables as warm,cool,fast or slow? It seems with the proper measuring tools they could have multiple cables with proven attributes for the customer to choose from.
If they didn't, it's because either they got no tool, or they always got the same results. When you are left only with words (see religions), you can bet it's a scam. But beware, your betting is based on perceptions, to measure it you must die, so no one tries, and that's fine, all left with their consolatory "My god sounds better than yours to me". Yeah, it does...
It would be interesting to evaluate these properties with two unconventional cable topologies, such as Verastarr Grand Illusion audio foils (flat silver foil conductor) and the Teo Liquid Metal fluid-based conductor cables.
I'm sure a roll off at 195Mhz makes a huge impact on audio frequencies... 🤔 I think you may have left out a very important point and failed to mention that quality of the material such as purity of copper. I sense a little conjecture here.
You’re measuring artifacts on a 10 nanosecond scale and they aren’t even a whole division long meaning, they are above 100 MHz. There is no way the human ear can hear that. Please, just stop with using this as evidence for audible differences.
If you take the time to comment, please also take the time watch the whole video. That way you would know why we use these signals. I also explain it extensively in the written article.
Hi thanks for your effort and dedication One question maybe you have to specify the output impedance of the source and the input impedance of the integrated or preamplifier Because sources as cd players have different output impedances and this influences in the micro and macrodynamics "Most mid range CD players priced below $2000 (even some over) will have a very simple output stage with nothing more than a pair of Op-amps. That will result in higher output impedance (typically 150 ohms to 500 ohms that limits Macro and Micro dynamics. Thanks for your response
So, youre trying to base objective measurements off of subjective listening results at frequencies several orders of magnatude above the human ability to hear?
So, you're trying to give an opinion on a study without actually reading the study? It would be like judging a hifi component without listening to it. It would be absurd. Oh, wait a minute ....
@@TheAlphaAudioit is not fair to answer with another click bait. We lose time for nothing. I understand it is marketing technique but it isn't a good one IMHO.
Regarding testing speaker cables, I'd be interested to see what difference makes f.e. the copper quality of a cable, if there is an effect in loudness, dynamics or whatever. there are now so many different types of cables out there, different concepts of cable-designs including material-mixes. I don't really understand what a cable test is good for, if the test not points out differences in the making of a cable and delivers clues about the effects. Just to proof that there are differences in cables, you can compare an alu-wire with a copper-wire, everybody will hear the difference.
@davidzoller9617 While not a "scientific" review or listening test of speaker cables, the following listening test was conducted in a blind manner: Search for "$8000/pair Speaker Cable vs. $14 DIY Speaker Cable A/B Test: Vintage Audio Review Episode #87" Note that they listened to just One speaker in Mono while instantly switching between the 2 different speaker cables. You and others may feel that this is the wrong way to conduct such a listening test. However, IME it is MUCH easier for us to distinguish any minute differences when our brain only needs to concentrate and process sound that is emanating from a Single Source, JUST like we do in the Real World (i.e. a chirping bird or birdsong, a rooster crowing, a cow's "moo", a horse "whinny", an airplane flying overhead, ANY acoustic instrument or vocal at a live acoustic performance, our spouse yelling at us, etc.). IME, it is also MUCH easier to distinguish any audible differences when you are able to INSTANTLY SWITCH between the two different DUT, rather than the significant time of silence and "downtime" that it took the Alpha Audio testers to switch between each of their speaker cables. In addition, from over 20 years of DIY speaker building and measurements using multi-driver loudspeakers for both high end home audio, studio, and high end car audio systems with 3-way front speakers + subwoofers where all of the Crossovers, Time Alignment, Phase, and EQ are optimized and accomplished via a multi-channel professional DSP unit, what Matters MOST in regards to achieving Excellent IMAGING (width/depth/height/focus/separation) and 3D SOUNDSTAGE performance is perfectly Matching the Frequency Response between the Left & Right Speakers AT your listening position... All to say that IME, listening to just One speaker in Mono does not make the listening test any less valid. What I find ironic and truly revealing, is that the gentleman who initiated this test unknowingly chose inexpensive speaker cable that was made with Copper-Clad Aluminum wire (CCA) when he thought he was buying Pure OFC speaker wire... So, this blind listening test is between what all of us probably consider the absolute worst speaker cable ever made (Aluminum based) vs. the $8K "high end" speaker cables. 😛 I'm sure everyone will find at least some type of "flaw" in their testing method, but IMO it is still at least as valid as The Alpha Audio test simply due to Alpha Audio not being able to instantly switch between the cables. It has also long been proven that discerning any audible differences is much easier to detect when we can repeat and instantly switch between just a very short (
@@bbfoto7248 Well, I would not pay more then 10$ per Meter for a speaker cable, and if it's not just another rip off, one should hear the difference to a standard 1$ cable from the mall, specially if you have dynamic speakers powered by a solid class A amp. We are talkin high end, not slim column-speakers powered by a cheap digital amp fed by mp3. People spending x-1000 bucks on an amp and x-1000 bucks on the speakers and then not buy a high purity copper cable from the audio shop but go to the mall to get a cheap copper cable with a pvc jacket? Would you do that? There are differences in cable quality and you can hear them. I know it, so I don't need somebody telling me different.
Thanks for the effort. We still don't know for a fact though, that well made less expensive cables (under $100.00) actually sound different than more expensive cables.
This can be settled right now. Answer this question. In one hand you have a pair of cables that cost $100, and in the other hand you have a pair of cables that cost $500. What are the differences between those 2 cables? And when I say difference, I'm not talking about listening. I'm referring to the differences in the design and the materials used to make them.
Read the article. Cables that "propogate" faster, are good (Gee, thanks Grimm), they're "open, fresher and more energetic", cables that fall off faster are bad. OK, I have to get some of those open, fresher, energetic cables. I won't bother you anymore with cynicism, but the comment section is open.@@TheAlphaAudio
@@AT-wl9yq Obviously, no two different cables will measure the same. Isn't listening, or what you hear, the only thing that matters? Unless you have a cable that is so poorly made that it just fails.
@TheAlphaAudio So much work! Time for a holiday, mate! LOL. I'd want to hibernate for a week after all of that, haha! Forgive me as I haven't had time to read the full written article/test. It's on my agenda. What I'm most curious about is IF All of the Same Attributes of Each Interconnect Cable Remain IDENTICAL when used in an equally resolving but completely different HiFi system with a different source and signal chain as well as speakers??? IOW, will ALL of us have the Same Experience when each of these cables are used in WHATEVER system we may have? Before anyone else chimes in, I want to stave off any arguments that "you will Only hear the differences IF you have a high-end system that can resolve the differences". RUBBISH. The Alpha Audio's own Livestream Multi-tests have proven that a wide majority of their listeners can hear identical or at least similar differences as they hear live in the studio, even when we are all listening over TH-cam's lossy compressed audio, and through all of our widely different computers, smartphones/tablets, speakers/headphones/earbuds/IEMs and audio systems. So there's that. - - - - - - - - - - - BLOODY LONG RAMBLING: Just for reference, 90% of my studio equipment, microphones, and studio monitors are all connected using Grimm Audio TPM & TPR in addition to Sommer Cable SC Peacock MK II XLR or 6.3mm TRS wiring. I purchased all of these in bulk many years ago, so the cost difference wasn't dramatic compared to let's say, Mogami, etc. The Grimm & Sommer Cable were both suggested to me by the engineer & manufacturer of some of the high-end ribbon microphones that I purchased, which you probably realize must carry and transfer Extremely Low MilliVolt audio signals over distance without being prone to inducted EMI/RFI noise and without influencing/affecting their inherent properties (the electrical audio signal). In the studio, if we desire, we can easily adjust the spectral balance and "character" of the microphone by adjusting the Input Impedance on the microphone preamplifier, or with any number of outboard analog or digital rackmount or DAW plugin EQs. TBF, I also have some standard, good-quality Mogami XLR & TRS cables on-hand as extras or backups, and I've never really found that they sound particularly different to any "Ohhh...WAIT a Minute" degree of revelation. But if they did, I would probably be more inclined to simply correct any anomalies using EQ or other tools. Imaging width, depth, focus, "space", etcetera, are all attributes that mixing and mastering engineers control and adjust by using L/R panning, independent levels, Frequency Response, and Phase/Timing tricks (and not in such minute nano-increments). And to start, IF the Frequency Response between your Left & Right SPEAKERS do not closely match at your listening position, image focus & separation, width, depth, and "3D space" will suffer... Note that this DOES NOT mean that your Speakers must Both Measure "FLAT", only that they must MATCH in Frequency Response as closely as possible at your listening position. The better you match the Left vs. Right Frequency Response at your Listening Position, the better the Imaging and Soundstage performance will be. This is one reason that it's ridiculously easy to at least achieve a decent Center Image even with cheap headphones or earbuds, even when they have terrible tonality/spectral balance. And, you can obviously have a pair of Loudspeakers that offer great imaging and soundstage performance even when they do not measure well in regards to FR. IF the Directivity of the Loudspeakers is Smooth & Even, you'll find that it is easy to adjust the FR or overall spectral balance using EQ to address specific room issues and for your personal preference. These adjustments can either improve or deteriorate the imaging/soundstage performance. And IME, the attributes of different speakers, their FR, their placement, and your room's acoustics have FAR MORE influence on the resulting sound quality of "your system" compared to any cable swapping differences. At least in the recording studio, the absolute LAST thing that a professional tracking, mixing, or mastering engineer will do in order to improve any metric of the system's sound quality is reach for a different cable. With that, I am not saying that "all cables sound the same". But I AM saying that in the real world, there are Much Easier ways to "affect" or "adjust" the real world performance of your system rather than "cable swapping". Keep this in mind as well: Suppose you find "the perfect cable" for your system that provides for perfect "synergy". If it is not a "neutral" or "agnostic" cable, it may no longer have good synergy with your system if you decide to "upgrade" or change any single component in that system at a later date. So, then you might be back to "square one" again, and you might need to go through the entire and potentially expensive and time consuming cable-swapping exercise all over again....until the next change. No Thanks. If you enjoy that aspect of "Experimenting" and "Playing" with cable-swapping, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. But recording engineers just need a consistent and reliable product so they can get their work done with the least amount of fuss or issues. And personally, I would rather spend my time listening and Enjoying my Music rather than "listening to my equipment". I guess I'm lucky in that I suppose my "decent" choice of cables from the start allows for that. IDK?
I guess the character would remain the same, yes. The thing is: some cables will accentuate bass, mids or treble. And some sound larger than others. That will always be the same in my opinion. Whether that will fit your system, is the question.
Given that all recordings and sound processing are done in studios, using professional equipment, I would be very interested in the differences (if any) that exist between professional cables and those intended for home reproduction. I would be interested in just tests of professional cables alone, since these already contain a lot of variations. The questions is of course what exactly constitutes a professional cable apart from it being obviously marketed as such. I mean, is this the only criterion for making this distinction? Another thing is that I noticed that all cables came fitted with what seemed to be factory fitted connectors. That would make comparing professional cables against consumer cables harder as the former are usually available in bulk mostly. The final thing is what effect do connectors have if any? To assess that, it could illustrative to test just one cable against a variety of connectors (i.e. having many lengths of the same cable type fitted with different connectors) and even testing for variation in the making of the electrical connections within the connector (e.g. poor soldering vs. good soldering, mechanical only vs. soldered joins, etc.).
Good work! My brother and I did these tests and more, many years ago. We had hell getting people to accept the results back in 1997 😂. Anyone that tells me that cables do not affect sound quality gets the same response; "Oh I see.... so you have a mid-fi system that isn't optimally set up"? Ends the debate usually 😆🤣
I’ve compared some of my cables through headphones , and yes I can hear differences, the cables I thought were my reference cables sounded closed a bit narrow neutral, compared to let’s say my blue jeans lc1 , it sound wider , livelier, don’t know if that is from it’s low capacitance , 12pf foot compared to my reference cables at 100 pf foot . Yes , cables have sound variations
As Nelson Pass said (as well as Khomenko) - if cables change sound of your system, the components are not properly designed or cables are not shielded. Or have old type of schematics (say, Audio Note) with high output impedance so they are obviously sensitive to the cable capacitance and induction. Modern solid state designs - as long as the cable is properly shielded and soldered, there should not be any difference.
@@TheAlphaAudio Who said they are properly designed? There are Chinese products at 1/5 prices sounding better. They might have been properly designed when he said that - decades ago. Now they mostly sell brand names. In business of making money, that is.
@@jmtennapel Social net discussion derail 101 - switch to "you simply can't afford this, this is why" or something else, like personal appearance, age, etc. Congratulations.
I always ask myself why some people are in this hobby when proclaiming simply EVERYTHING sounds the same! Ignorants & idiots in my book… Thanks for your great work. Even so I only trust my ears - not measurements. Nevertheless interesting
@@DaveJ6515 Either that, or they simply don’t have gear that can show differences/ they never experienced it. But they nevertheless have a STRONG opinion and know everything better. Idiots
This is very interesting, IMO mostly because we have all been in the dark on the subject of WHY and HOW cables can sound different. I mean, the measurements we have used for cables up till today, gave us no clues what so ever. I have a feeling I am on the right track, in that sense that I prefer neutral equipment all over, cables included. I use Chord Shawline cables everywhere, except power cables (Pangea) and my phono interconnects (Furutech). I am looking very much forward to your measurements on speaker cables!
I'm ONLY commenting in regards to POWER CABLES here, but FYI, the Test Equipment that Jaap is using to actually objectively measure these nanosecond and other uber-minute properties of the different interconnect cables in the test are supplied by the manufacturer with common UL/CE/ISO listed power cables. That alone SHOULD BE telling. IF the actual manufactures of all of this test equipment that must be ultra-low noise, ultra-precise, and 100% perfectly neutral in order to properly measure the electrical properties of the devices they are connected to do not require some type of exotic power cable with a specific wire alloy, cable geometry, cryo-treatment, insulation, plugs, etcetera, then I THINK you'll be fine as well. 😉 Of course I do realize that most women, as well as some men, do appreciate "jewelry" and "bling" in order to enhance their "beauty", cosmetic look, and aesthetics. I mean, yeah, basic black power cables are boring. 😛 But at least in my systems, the power cables are not visible so it doesn't matter to me.
@keldherbst Looks like you Edited your post so as not to include the Separate comment regarding "Power Cables"? FYI, for anyone reading, that is what I was specifically basing my comment on with my previous reply.
@TheAlphaAudio Hello. Those papers have been lost long ago. I own a lot of siesmology and labratory testing equipment. I've spent 42 years working on the "why" of audio sound quality differences. There are cable construction techniques that eliminate a lot of the issues you've measured. I worked on this for 7 years. I'm a retired engineer. I have owned systems with over $80,000 in cables (Tara Labs vacuum cables, Valhalla, etc). All were sold and I've used my own cables for the past 14 years.
Sounds interesting. Can you send me a pair and tell me how you measured them? I am pretty curious. Also: let's continue via e-mail. YT is not really the place for this. You can drop me an e-mail via the wbsite: www.alpha-audio.net
I just got a chord c-line based on what I heard in the videos with comparisons. Unfortunately this cable cripples my system taking away the air and detail in favor of a relaxing experience. When listening to a crappy source it must be a Godsend, but in my tube system, which is already smooth It takes away from the realism of the instruments. In the end a 15e cordial cable sounds better for me even if the soundstage is narrower. Instruments are more full bodied and voices sound more nuanced. The c-line puts a filter over everything and tames the sound too much. I would recommend it in a harsh transistor only environment. I assume this is why people transitioning from c-line to clearway are so excited, but maybe try a pro-audio cable before shelving out another 60e for a chord cable.
Interesting video, thanks for all your work. On your noise tests, I am wondering why you did not use the Bryston as the source? It has a much lower output impedance, which I would think would significantly lower the induced noise.
Cables make a good difference to people who ACTUALLY know how to build a resolved system. Ive had plenty of high end gear mashed together, and my room was the let down unfortunately. But once you have a magical system, the right cables can be a big cherry on the top. And you cannot go back! Its easy to be a flat earther and run your mouth about cables not making a difference. All you're really doing is screaming out your ignorance AND exposing not only your crappy ears, but your very average system too.. at the same time Two birds one stone
@Music_time82 Your comment seems quite curious to me, in that I would think it would be the "NON-Flat Earther" types (science based folks) who would be the ones "running their mouth about cables NOT making a difference", and not the Flat-Earther crowd as you suggest. (head scratch/chin rub) To directly quote a sentence in your post: "Its easy to be a flat earther and run your mouth about cables not making a difference." Isn't a "Flat Earther" one who denies scientific measurements and observations that are presented to them, such as those that The Alpha Audio have performed in this test? Your comment comes off as a bit elitist as well. The Alpha Audio's own Live Multi-Test TH-cam Livestream listening tests have indicated that Regardless of the vast differences in all of their viewers' and listeners' own playback systems, nearly ALL have been able to quite easily hear the differences in the DUT despite using different sources, individual electronic components, and speakers/headphones/IEMs/earbuds during the Livestream. TBF, during at least one of their Livestream MultiTests, I was out of town on business and just used my smartphone to watch the video while connected to my Wireless Bluetooth Headphones in order to participate and comment in the Live Chat during the livestream. Even via my smartphone and wireless ~$300 Bluetooth headphones I could easily hear the differences, and I would say that at least 80% of my impressions and comments correlated quite well to what the Alpha Audio gentlemen were also hearing Live in their listening room and confirming with their listeners. Keep in mind that there are no less than 2 Levels of inconsistencies/generations in quality between what they were hearing Live in their studio and what all of their listeners were hearing: 1. We are hearing their speakers through Microphones that are capturing the sound of the speakers and their room, not listening directly to the speakers as they were. 2. We are all listening over the Internet via WiFi AND completely different Sources, as well as it being over TH-cam with its compressed lossy audio codec. 3. In my case, I was also listening with yet another layer of lossy audio compression via the wireless BT connection between my smartphone and my "average quality" ~$300 BT headphones. (I'm not going to travel with and/or risk the loss or damage of my much better Hifiman Susvara headphones. They stay at home in the studio). This smartphone/wireless BT headphone "system" was obviously NOT anything approaching a "resolved system" using high-end gear. I wasn't even using a USB DAC/headphone amp connected to my smartphone. AND YET, I was still FULLY CAPABLE of hearing the minute differences in sound quality and I also described them accurately ~80% of the time in my Live Chat comments to the Alpha Audio boys during the Livestream. NOTE that this "system" ironically required NO cables whatsoever, and was "plagued" by at least 2 levels of lossy audio compression (TH-cam and Bluetooth). Would a direct wired cable connection to my headphones using a well-regarded USB DAC/headphone amp and cable have improved the overall sound quality? Most Likely. However, my inexpensive, average, every-day, wireless Bluetooth headphones streaming from my smartphone still allowed me to easily perceive and discern the differences in sonic character in the Alpha Audio Live MultiTests events. Does this mean I am "exposing my crappy ears"? 😛 Contrary to popular belief, you DO NOT need a "high-end ultra resolving system with special cables" to hear clear differences in Sound Quality. This has also been further demonstrated by the irrefutable fact that a vast majority of recording & mixing engineers for many years (and still some to this day) used the admittedly "Low-Fi" Yamaha NS-10 "studio monitors" (actually designed as HiFi speakers) that had $10 tweeters & $15 7" midwoofers with a cheap passive crossover network to produce a sh!t ton of AMAZING music that both you and I still listen to this very day. I'm fairly certain that Jaap, Yung, and Martijn (sp?) know me by my user name and can confirm that I have participated and commented in the Live Chat of quite a few of their Live MultiTest events. They can also probably either confirm or deny that my observations and sound judgements and comments during these Livestream events were relatively accurate, or not. 😛
How did you measure the ‘sound’ of the cable? Did you test the cables in an audio system vs a signal measurement ; so how did you relate these two elements? Where is the audio system you used?
Most of the better cable difference is at the dac to preamp section. Amp to speaker not so much. My all silver jewerly 9999 solid core diy with fiberglass sleeves 80$ xlr cable made the most difference. And with my magnapan lrs+, schitt is so coherent that i can hear immediate cable differences. You are nuts to be forking out hundreds if not thousands for cable, just learn to diy your own and none of those fing manufacturers even give you the real stuff solid silver until you hit the 1k mark.
The naysayers who say everything sounds the same is because they are/have one of these things: - cheapskates - mediocre stereo components (amplifier, preamplifier, DAC, streamer/transport) - medicore cables/interconnects - limited hearing ability - compressed music source like Spotify instead of using a lossless source like Apple Music - bad room acoustics - bad setup (speaker placement, angle, other objects in the room)
@@TheAlphaAudio I've recently upgraded from my Parasound 2125v2 amp to the NAD C298 (like you). I too own and love the GoldenEar BRX.... I also have 2 sealed subwoofers helping them. My video th-cam.com/video/ncwCopnHJqA/w-d-xo.html
Bingo! These naysayers most likely have vintage Pioneer or sansui receivers with Cerwin Vega speakers. They’re not critically listen for sure. They wouldn’t even know what to listen for when swapping cables out.
But maybe, just maybe they are/have fourty years of recording experience, a degree in electronics/physics and access to equipment/studios on a daily basis, where the glass between recording booth and control room alone cost more than most setups of so called "audiophiles". They will tell you a completely other story about the "sound of cables" than those who believe in cable voodoo. And they will tell you a story about the importance of double blind tests, that no cable sound zealot wants to listen to.
@TheAlphaAudio Jaap, can you be more specific with what you mean in regards to using the term, "DRY" and any of the other subjective adjectives you use in the video? I find that especially between different cultures and languages many adjectives and descriptive words are interpreted to mean very different things to different people. In addition, in a recording/mixing/mastering studio environment, when we say "Dry" it usually refers to an individual track of a vocal or instrument with no processing or EFX added to it...i.e. a "dry" vocal straight from the microphone/mic pre output as opposed to one with Reverb added to it, which might be referred to as "Wet", LOL. Cheers
Another video about cables with a couple of screenshots showing nothing significant. Did you just say a bump showed why a cable sounded dry? From the screenshot it looks like its a signal at 195mhz ? And yet no real showing of the actual test equipment, or at what level this artefact is. Its almost like pictures we seen in the 90's adverts claiming a difference, despite being an inaudible test tone at -120db. Can we have a more informative detailed test with the equipment and all parameters present? So far most people with equipment that can measure are showing us these sort of differences are so miniscule and at such a low noise floor we medically cannot be hearing them, yet we still get sellers peddling fat cables with more bass, thin silver cables with more treble, shorter cables sounding faster and other such nonsense. Weird how so much of a cables look influences sound. I have pretty much given up on HiFi cables due to just how underhanded the industry is.
Now you have to make a video subjectively testing and comparing some of the better ones to advise your subscribers 😀 (i home for some good value/ affordable ones as well)
A good cable, interconnect, is the less resistance, the less inductance and the less capacitance., basically is 0ohms, 0uH and 0pf. All is about phase shift between frequencies at the end you will have musical information loss, this result in less soundstage, less details. You cannot mesure cables with an oscilloscope, sound is not an image.... Also it depend of the source impedance and the receiver impedance. Try cables on a turntable with a good moving magnet and you will have big differences in high frequencies because MM need low capacitance cable. A moving coil have a lower impedance so less difference between capacitance cables. Also, you need a very open system that let the musical informations flow to speakers, again some audio equipment can have good musical tones, good bass with control but having no soundstage, it is.like 2D and 3D explained. Why an oscilloscope probe have a capacitor trimmer ? To get the probe matched to the oscilloscope impedance and a square wave perfect on the scope display, without round edge or overshoot edge, so now think all cables have different capacitance, different inductance and different resistance ! I am in the highend audio field since 30 years and I am a electronic technician.
Why nobody analyse the sound signature instead of the characteristics of the cable by itself? If we push the analyse of the sound as his technical level… we will see the real difference from the speakers… isn’t?🤷🏼
Even after auditioning 3 separate AVR's, the same ambient sound of the room was still present! That told me the unwanted faint background signal noise I had been experiencing had nothing to do with the actual units. Therefore, my attention changed to the cables. And even then It was only on the third occasion after I finally purchased shielded cables that the noise floor within my small room finally came down to satisfactory levels.
Cables often act as antennas for attracting RF, and the longer the cable, the better the antenna. Probably explains why when I used to disconnect my heights and surrounds within 10 minutes, the faint background signal noise (RF/EMI) within my small room used to disappear/dissipate.
Trying to achieve a totally silent room sadly has turned into a bit of an obsession for me. Doesn't help when ones 2-channel stereo also entails an extra 7 channels that are externally amplified (5.2.4)
The more cables I shield, the quieter my room becomes, and the better the shielding, the more the chance the cables are likely to disappear.
If one has the same sensitivities and is looking to address this matter, but is also hoping to notice the incremental differences. I would suggest analogue cables of length first before moving on to digital and power cables.
When friends or guests come over, I used to show them how loud the system goes. Now I prefer to press mute and show them how my quiet it goes.
None of them gets it, of course 😂
Great story. I lucked out a bit. My system is also dead quiet without too much chasing. When I had an all tube system, I would have ground noise and rfi noise played through the speaker. Since changing to a high-quality solid state, all the noise disappeared, and the silence is impressive. I can still hear very faintly that rfi noise produced by the router, once in a while, though (but not through the system), so it's there still. Once heard, it's a signature you don't forget.
I would imagine that at the beginning of the journey, the router wouldn't even be in ones mind. The fact that it's now able to become noticeable is impressive in itself.
Crazy how one knocks one down and a lesser one becomes apparent 😄
Audiophiles say cables make a difference. Sceptics say, show me measurements. Audiophiles produce measurements. Sceptics refute, saying values are below hearing thresholds, and do a blind test. Goes round and round. Remember, the nature of Psychoacoustics and placebo can also cause sceptics due to their beliefs/understandings to perceive there are no differences when differences are perhaps real 😂
Indeed!
@@sleepyf1 same goes for addicts
It is not psychologically just decent experimental physics. But not below the audible, not even subtle. So called sceptics invariably lack seriously in physics knowledge...
Unbelievable amount of work and effort and all for us. Many thanks
Welcome!
Wow, guys! Thank you very much for doing this. Cables matter, and I’m so done arguing about it.
Me too
We all are my friend 🙏
@@staceymangham No doubt! Geez… it’s getting to be such a petty argument. Then use a coat hanger, I don’t care….or don’t, I still don’t care….😂🤣
This is brilliant. Bravo!! Did you happen to test the speed of the cables with different frequency pulses? (I haven't checked your article yet)
It would be interesting to see if the timing of pulses varies if the frequency of the signal is altered. (I'm writing this just a touch before the end of the video so hopefully you're not about to discuss it and I've gone too soon)
EDIT: sounds like you can't measure this at audible frequencies based on what you're saying in the changing signal amplitude section
The fastest and simplest way to prove this to nay-sayers is to use mismatched rca or xlr.
You make it fun and useful because you don't have a strong bias. We want to enjoy the music and building a system. You help with both!
Thanks!
Hi there,
First of all thanks a lot for the long and thorough work, kudos for doing this. As a physicist I appreciate that you measure impulse response. You notice yourself that differences in Impulse response are very audible. This is of course so because impulse response actually represents the F transform of the phase transfer ( over the audible domain). That phase transfer will eventually determine the spatial resolution of your soundstage due to coherence of the soundwaves. If that phase transfer is oscillating within the audible domain, that will result in lack of coherence and concomittant dampening of selective frequencies leading to particular colouring and precision. So I am quite enthusiastic about this time domain measurement.
@@RudyDeblieck Thank you! You can see all the results in the articles we wrote about it.
Thank you for doing exploratory science into audio equipment. Long may it continue!
Your so dedicated
Your a Star !
It’s all very much appreciated
room>speaker>amplifier>dac>cables if you exclude record and codec quality
That simple guideline is enough if you dont make a science out of it
Thanks for sharing! Very interesting. I knew that wide bandwidth cable designs were important. I can see the correlation between energy loss and bandwidth extension. What’s surprising is the frequency propagation speed as a function of voltage variance. That last measurement seems to track with musical dynamics, as you indicated.
From your tests, and with my budget, I will probably get some Ricable Magnus speaker and RCA cables. Thanks for your excellent work!
@@jacobpaternostro9109 welcome!
You mentioned cable resistance seems to make little or no difference in listening tests.
This makes sense, as most HiFi devices will have resistance on the input. Look at most input circuits, signal feeds via a Resistor. At a factor, many times or hundred of time higher than a cable. Also output circuits drive via a resistance.
Great work on your testing. Interesting stuff. Thanks for investing so much time and effort.
I learned that when I was a young man, not every expensive cables are worth the price.
I use cables made of silver and copper for my loudspeakers, from amplifier and inside the loudspeakers, building my own speakers.
Oehlbach 2x3 mm²
OFC/SPOFC
Rattle Snake 3, can handle up to 250 watts.
Silverplated copper
Y make Me Happy and curious at the same time…… and I think there is a big future for Y in this matter…. And a BIG thumbs UP to Y and The Team Best Regards from Denmark DK ☺❤👌
Thank you!
Cables do make a diffetence and i do not know why. Your great work certainly helps to start to understand. As you say you will be doi g more work on this.
Thank you for this.
Yes they do, yet so many intellectual idiots will tell you otherwise - all in the name of science and double blind tests.
This obviously was and is a lot of work and I appreciate your teams efforts.
Welcome!
Here in USA bought Grimm audio tpr rca , wow , clean sound , dark background, neutral but still exciting . I was wrong about twisted pair . Blew away my morrow audio cables away
Thank you for this, it is much appreciated
Thanks to take the effort.👍 It would be nice if we as the public knows more why we hear differences.
Thanks! Check the written article for more details.
Again this is more audio science then any freaking media outlet. Great testing!
Thank you for your kind words.
Very interesting! Cable design has for years depended (and will for some time to come) on guys experimenting and listening to infinitesimal differences. I'm quite excited about these results because they show that something physical is happening. Perhaps in some years there will be a generally accepted recipe how to make good signal cables, how to make good digital cables, how to make good speaker cables etc. Having a changing delay depending on the amplitude cannot be good for distortion (however miniscule) and also phase integrity.
It would be very interesting to compare geometries and materials of these cables and see what correlation they have with spectral decay, overall high frequency (10 MHz) behaviour and amplitude-dependent pulse delay. Maybe there are some lessons to be learned through analysis of these factors. Very good work. All the best, Rob in Switzerland
Thanks!
Cables do make a difference and I should have measured them. I purchased 2 2meter lengths of speaker cable to run between my power amp and my speakers. It was futile, no signal reached my speakers. So, I measured the distance from the power amp to each speaker. It measured 2.5meters. So I purchased 2 3meter lengths of speaker cable. This time it worked. Always make sure your cables measure correctly, prior to installing them.oh, and if you still don’t believe cables make a difference, remove them from your system. I guarantee that even the tone deaf amongst you, will notice the difference.
Most of all, enjoy the music.
Funny !
Just fantastic. I have been exploring internet cabling, even I am writing an eBook about audio, with a chapter on cabling. On-line there is such a debate about whether there are differences, and the scientific types argue that there is no test to provve any difference, therefore, it is just Audiophiliac imagination. Here it is. I love this, to show these measurable characterics of harmonics in spectral decay, roll-off differences, and internal propagation/speed variance. Thanks, so much.
Very welcome. Speaker cables are on the way as well.
There are two arguments. Do cables measure differently, and can humans hear those differences. I dont know anyone arguing over the measurable differences, but if the differences are significant enough to be audible. So far no one has presented double blind tests or ABX tests to prove the measured differences are audible.
Suggestion: You might try measuring an eye pattern (aka eye diagram) for On-Off-Keying (OOK) on the cables to eliminate the timing variation being o-scope trigger level and signal amplitude dependent. Although eye diagrams are usually used to characterize digital signals, they can be viewed as a square wave characterization for analog cables.
From a mathematical perspective, an eye pattern is a visualization of the probability density function (PDF) of the signal, modulo the unit interval (UI). In other words, it shows the probability of the signal being at each possible voltage across the duration of the UI. Typically a color ramp is applied to the PDF in order to make small brightness differences easier to visualize.
Several system performance measurements can be derived by analyzing the display. If the signals are too long, too short, poorly synchronized with the system clock, too high, too low, too noisy, or too slow to change, or have too much undershoot or overshoot, this can be observed from the eye diagram.
A simple way to have the eye pattern display jitter in the signal is to estimate the symbol rate of the signal (perhaps by counting the average number of zero crossings in a known window of time) and acquiring many UIs in a single oscilloscope capture. The first zero crossing in the capture is located and declared to be the start of the first UI, and the remainder of the waveform is divided into chunks one UI long.
This approach can work adequately for stable signals in which the symbol rate remains exactly the same over time, however inaccuracies in the system mean that some drift is inevitable so it is rarely used in practice.
Using a reference clock to determine UI boundaries allows the eye pattern to faithfully display the signal with only jitter between the signal and the reference clock displayed.
The downside: Large amounts of data may be needed to provide an accurate representation of the signal; tens to hundreds of millions of UIs are frequently used for a single eye pattern.
That is an interesting approach. Thank you.
You are doing the lords work. Thank you
I am a longtime audiophile. I have experimented with cables - mainly USB and/or RCA - and have found each brand to produce a different effect - and price did not determine whether it was better or worse. The best ones for my computer-based system were not very expensive.
I upgraded a friend's home entertainment system from the standard HDMI cable to an inexpensive component brand. The improvement was truly astounding. She is a musician, but no audiophile, and she can hear the great increase in: dynamic range, sound stage, clarity, detail.
@DanielByers-qf9qi
I'm not saying that this was positively the reason for the differences, but there are A LOT of different specs and "levels" or features within the HDMI standards, and if the previous cable was not rated for the latest spec or capabilities of the AVR (or the Source), the Source or AVR may not have taken advantage of either components' full capabilities with the original cable. i.e. the source or AVR may have been limited to 16bit/44.1kHz or 16bit/48kHz throughput rather than 24bit at a higher sample rate via the DACs, or may have transferred the audio via analog instead of via digital, etc.
The largest differences are in regards to the HDMI cable's bandwidth or "data throughput" capabilities, but there are MANY other differences outlined in the HDMI specification.
e.g. ARC vs. eARC, HDMI 1.4 vs. 2.0a vs 2.0b vs. 2.1b...etcetera.
There are MANY different limitations and/or capabilities/features within the HDMI specification that allow for different audio as well as video capabilities.
Just take a look at the HDMI ORG website to see all of the mindboggling variables. They CAN make a difference as to what you might hear (and see) when using a particular HDMI cable between any two or more components.
@@DanielByers-qf9qi just try a aes/ebu cable when possible over the USB for me it was a nobrainer
Hey Jaap, amazing video (as always) I hope to meet you at the Munich show this year.
We will be there!
Bravo on you, I have no test to backup my experience but I've used a lot of different brands of cables over the years and I've come to the usual conclusions.
Cables do sound different, most notably I found speaker cables to offer the widest variability in terms of sonic differences, but interlinks as well as power cables equally have sonic distinctions as well, just not too as obvious an effect.
It's always been my thought that speaker cables offer this larger variability because of the electrical interaction that happens between amplifier and speaker is manipulated by cable design.
I forget why I read it, an article online somewhere, but the design of cables in terms of inductance and capacitance and their construction was shown unequivocally to contribute to varying electrical properties in the cable itself which of course contributed to sound quality. The reason speaker cables create a larger audible distinction, then say interlinks, is because they carry higher volts through them than the extremely low level signals that pass through interlinks. Of course having greater amounts of an electrical signal it's easier for that signal to be manipulated on its way from one place to another.
Congratulations on creating some meaningful data in terms of what it is a lot of us hear and know.😊
Also one other thing I wanted to add is if you want to get a great understanding of the relationship of the frequency range from 20 HZ to 20,000 HZ comparison to the upper range of 100,000 HZ then all you have to do is go look at the great work that was done by Sony in the '80s and '90s as they were developing the sacd.
Another article which I had read on the development of the sacd, Sony showed through research that upper level frequency range harmonics flood down into the audible range and can affect the audible band. Which is why I typically point to that research when somebody says that we can only hear up to 20,000 HZ or they say that anything above that doesn't matter.
Will look it up!
Awesome work. Can u describe the test setup
You can read all about that in the written article. Check www.alpha-audio.net.
@@TheAlphaAudio I'm new to your channel, thanks for the link, I've started to consume your articles. Very nice work.
@@hardware4200 thanks!
When are you planning to do speaker cables?
Also, do you intend to do interconnect cable tests again in the future?
We plan to publish the speaker cable test at the end of April. We will keep testing cables. But a mass test like this is not planned anytime soon ;-).
Makes perfect sense an interconnect cable would make more difference than a speaker cable in sound. Closer to the source.
This is great. Thank you 👍
Good work. I hope you go on to write a technical paper for peers review. Wish you luck.
Thinking about that...
Ive been buying audio for best part of 50 years and i know cables sound different.
Ive seen the, they dont make a difference crowd. If thats there belief thats upto them. Makes no difference to me because it do. Simple.
Great channel btw.
Thank you!
Yes, nice work. Great efforts. A respect! Bravoo!!
But I personally hear significant differences just between interconnects. With speaker cables are so minimal that I would not spend/loose my money on speaker cables. Maybe there will be some surprise in a future, but I doubt. Power cables is a real audio woodoo - psychoacoustic to me.
We did blind A-B tests and especially with power cords it was pure guessing, with speaker cables a bit less so, significant results just with interconnects.
Any good designed amp should have a decent filtration between AC to DC and then DC goes again to low capacitance AC.
I just tested again four different power cords from basic, cheap generic one to 2000 Eur one with my new amp - JLH1969 copy, pure class A amp, with minimalistic topology , and the result is the same as with SS or Tube integrated amps - no difference at all.
If the speaker have poor, common thin copper wires, (which usually is the case even with quite expensive speakers) in it and other parts it is idiotic or selffoolish to expect that a special audiophile wire from amp to speaker would do a "miracle" or something significant different than just plain copper wire.
I am now in a process of making my own speakers with full range drivers and what counts is the same quality wire from amp, directly connected to speker's driver with no plugs and such rubbish. Just plugs usually adds - 1 Ohm.
What Mark Levinson with Daniel Hertz systems is doing have a sense - I guess - the whole system.
My hearing is medical tested twice in the last two years and it is perserved 98% on one ear and 92% on other ear and I am 54. So I can hear pretty damn good and i Know what is a soundstage and 3D dimensionality in it with good systems.
Kind regards.
Thanks a LOT for your scientific quest, to find the "origin of good sound" in cables :)
Just a short note :) You concluded, "fast propagation" makes cables sound better...
Quite logical as a slower propagation indicates "something tries to stop the signal".
For those who don't know: Propagation actually means "move out",
thus used by technicians to mean the SPEED of that EM wave,
which IS the music signal in a cable, or any other "signal through cables"...
In some cables it is near 90% of "the speed of light in vacuum tanks,
when using standard test lamps".
In some other cables it is only around 70% of the lightspeed.
While electrons move MUCH slower!
So the fast moving EM field, is made by a domino EM effect
amongst the electrons.
But are you aware, that teflon insulation allows faster propagation,
than PE (polyetylen) and PP (polypropylen) ?
And those two materials, allow a faster propagation than PVC ?
That is a well proven fact.
But there may be additional causes, for a slower propagation,
and one is obviously... Inductance.
The "very clear sounding" Supra Ply 3.4, has PVC insulation...
However the "flattened woven hose" construction of the copper,
gives unusually low inductance, being 0,20uH/m, according to Supra's datasheet.
The flattened "hose" is only 1.5 mm thick,
but there is still a gap, between the "two layers"...
It seems a flattened hose, gets smaller inductance, than a round hose,
IF there still is a small gap between the two layers.
From Supra only the "FlameRetardant" versions, have PE.
All others have PVC insulation :(
The Supra Classic 4.0 can be bought with PE, as I did...
But has a higher inductans, around 55uH/m
Both of those cables are tinned OFC.
The tin is said to reduce electron jumps between threads,
which would have caused noise...
A high frequent noise, which "nobody can hear"
but it WILL distort the audible signal!
If that theory is true, then silverplated copper cables
should suffer MOST from electron jumps,
unless each thread is isolated.
Regarding inductance...
One thing is, it causes more or less phase shifting...
But with the pretty small value,
I hardly think that is important.
Much more important is:
Overall the inductans can be understood,
much like the hysteresis in loudspeakers,
caused by Eddy Currents in the magnet...
Just in a "much lower scale" in copper cables...
Still it is an evil circle:
Music signal creates a secondary EM field,
which then creates "the 1. false signal current"
which then creates a tertiary EM field,
which then creates "the 2. false signal current,
and so on.
This evil circle dies out MUCH faster in a cable,
than in traditional loudspeaker magnets.
Purify Audio and DALI now use "SMC" magnets,
constructed to block the Eddy Currents,
and the result IS a lower distortion!
But in both traditional loudspeakers and cables,
we can say the inductance result in an "EM ecco effect",
which will smear and distort the "next few voltage swings".
And as the created (induced) EM fields, get stronger,
when a stronger current change happens,
(as in high frequencies, and in sharp transients),
the induced EM field, will actually dampen the following voltage swings much,
AFTER each strong TRANSIENT.
Like if a tiny monkey turned the volume down,
and then gradually up again,
after each strong transient.
It will not only create distortion,
but it also destroy the natural dynamic,
basically killing the natural decay,
after a start transient...
Especially audible, from drums and string instruments.
This effect makes the transient "stand out" more,
than it really should...
You can be fooled to think "this recording has better dynamics"...
As the "little drum" and the highhat, sound more "snappy"...
I wondered WHY it sounded like that, with Supra Classic 4.0!
But with Supra Ply 3.4, all suddenly sounded more natural!
I finally concluded, it was the lower inductance in Ply 3.4
which enabled the more natural (and softer) sound.
Also...
The higher inductance in a cable,
which especially the higher notes and sharp transients produce,
will NOT only reduce the high notes,
as some believe,
but also the bass notes...
Except if you run Bi-Wire, obviously!
Perhaps you heard a number, starting with a bass only...
The bass sounds strong and clear...
Then the other instruments start...
THEN it sounds like the bass is turned down!
Perhaps it was the mixer man who did that?
If not, it was caused by the inductance,
which the higher notes created.
Also: The science rule is:
With larger distance betwen surfaces,
the inductance becomes stronger.
And it is strongest in the core region of a cable.
Then elecrons are forced away from the core threads,
so they flow close to or even on the surface of the cable.
This happens no matter of the "cable" i one massive wire,
or 300 thing wires bundled together, to be one CABLE.
Then the threads in the core region "is a waste of copper".
SO... A thicker cable gives less resistance, to DC voltage...
BUT will give stronger inductance!
Which is why a flat cable,
or simply a thinner cable,
or four seperated thin cables,
or indeed a "hollow tube cable",
should have less inductance.
Finally a fun fact:
The John Linsley Hood Class A amp,
designed 1969,
is totally linear up to more than 200.000 Hz...
Many would say: What does that matter,
when we only hear up to 20.000?
Well it simply shows, it can reproduce 20.000
with the same small distortion, as at 1.000 Hz !!!
Which might be why, it became famous,
as the best sounding amp "ever build".
Closely followed by the best TUBE amp, at that time!
So measuring the "ridiculously high frequencies"
is surely very important.
However, a cable which transmits VHF extremely well,
might pick up a lot of radio noise, which distorts lower frequencies!
This MIGHT be why YOU found, that those which rolled of at lower frequencies,
sounded best!
I can't wait, till you publish the resulst from loudspekaer cables ;)
This is HUGE and very useful research! Thank you!
Hi, great video, thanks!
Can you tell me if you tested the cable(s) laid out as opposed to coiled?
I'm curious as to whether having some coiled introduced any unintentional influence given the sensitivity of some of the measurements; or whether that can be ignored?
Great video. Would love to see a comparison on the effects of digital cables aside from speaker cables, too.
Maybe later.
Really impressive on your true scientific spirit. Practice is the Sole Criterion for Testing Truth. This is a great work trying to find correlation between measurement and accoustic signature.
@@hecateshiki Thank you!
@@TheAlphaAudio I am EE engineer working on widebandgap semicondutor. There could be another consideration for the pulse part, the pulse generator can not generate an ideal pulse with infinite dv/dt and there is always a finite dv/dt value there so same pulse with different amplitude may have difference distribution in frequency domain. You can use FFT function on scope or spectrum analyzer to verify this, but the bandwidth of instrument need to be 10GHz(since your pulse is 2ns width), also probe need to be a high bandwidth probe(＞10G), So the cost will be very high for this investigation purpose. (or you can borrow some instrument for RF purpose)
Thanks for this, awesome work! Do you have any experience with Wireworld cables?
Unfortunately not.
Of course cables sound different, any serious audiophile has known this for years from listening and comparing, Your tests however are the first explanations of why they sound different, it was interesting to hear that cables transfer energy at different speeds dependent on frequency, this could explain why some cables sound more natural than others.
Cables do not only make a diference, cables can change a system to some steps up.
Yes! I even go further and listen only to cables! My system consists only of cables! The difference is HUGE!
@stefanschuchardt5734 And imagine if you stop connecting them from your ass to your mouth and start connecting to real hi-fi gear.
This was an excellent video that a lot of work has been put into. The big take away from this for me is that, sometimes magic happens in audio that can’t always be explained, but can be heard and felt. Well done for this tremendous effort in trying to find out how to measure that magic though.
Excellent work !
Thank you for your efforts.
Welcome!
Sorry but what was the complete equipment that you used for the listening tests from the source amp or preamplifier to the speaker cables and speakers i assume the you have everything constant except the interlinks si you can catch the differences.
In what section of the article is ?
I found it section 4 interpreting
Thanks data
Hard work gives amazing results, fascinating content ! Thank you for this amazing video!
Welcome!
I’ve only ever compared analog RCA interconnects. When I set up my system I tried about 8 different analog interconnect cables and they all had a different sound. I could hear not only a difference in tone but also in quality. Settled on Chord Company Cobra.
I found Nordost best Audioquest and XLO Electric beat Nordost.
Do it blindly before buying, your wallet will thank you after...
@@Melkitzedeq Wow, you still try to defend yourself. Not all people need to lie to themselves with the results of forever inaccurate blind tests.
Some actually have the money to buy and be happy with the performance gain or the balance found in the system with a good and matching cable.
@@AudioThingslol "forever inaccurate" xD you do know how medical studies are conducted, don't you? DOUBLE-blind. always, or they have no scientific relevance
@@bubtheloop That's a whole different thing. You cannot compare audio with medical business. Be real.
very well done!
I am happy that you are shedding light on the sound quality of interlinks. Hope that the endless discussion will stop now that we know cables have different properties and will change the sound accordingly. Now we just have to start relying on our ears, they are the reference.
@RudieVissenberg
I highly doubt that this test will stop the endless discussion and debate, regardless of how extensive The Alpha Audio's tests were.
However (IMO), I feel that "cable-swapping" is the absolute least useful and effective way to "change" or "adjust" the sound of any audio system.
There are Many, Many far more important variables that have Exponentially more effects on the outcome of any given systems' audio quality.
Try suggesting this in a professional recording/mixing/mastering studio environment and you'll be sure to get at least few raised eyebrows and SMDH responses, LOL.
So I want monoblocks close to each speaker with 6 inch connectors because speaker cable length matters more than interconnect length.
Yup... Definately.
Thank you for this. I have a Luxman amp and Audio Physic Avanti (the new ones) speakers. The differences between interconnects are evident. Their role for the overall sound is not small.
@RainerErnst44
I'm interested to know all of the different brand/model interconnects you tested and which ones you kept? Are any of them included in The Alpha Audio test?
Supra EFF, Oehlbach, Viablue, Inakustik Reference… the last one was very good. The Supra a bit too thick in lower mids for my system. The Oehlbach is more linear sounding but soundstage is more flat. The supra was included in an earlier test.
Still looking for „the right one“. I love my qed speaker cable, so maybe on of theirs
@@RainerErnst44 Thanks for the replies. Other than my Grimm TPR & TPM and Sommer Cable, the only others I've used in the past are Kimber Kable, MIT, and Inakustik (I have quite a few of their reference recordings as well).
Good luck on your search.
When non-technically trained people speak using technical terms. This is hilarious. Rich in inference. At audio frequencies, historisis, attenuation, VSWR are of no consequence. Use high purity copper cable 16-12 awg and spend your time on listening room acoustics.
Exactly. John Dunlavy debunked this BS years ago, but people still buy into this nonsense and continue to waste lots of money.
What a super project! Cables does indeed matter! Next time maby testing powercables?
Not sure how to do that.
@theomindschrddr7983
While I'm not disagreeing that Signal and Speaker Wire/Cables may affect sound quality, please keep in mind that all of the highly sensitive and extremely PRECISE Test Equipment being used to perform all of these minute nano-second, microvolt, and LCR measurements must have infinitely better specs than the equipment they are testing, otherwise the test equipment itself is a limiting factor. Can we agree on that?
If so, then take note that all of these Uber-Precise Test Equipment devices are supplied with Standard "plain Jane" UL/CE/ISO listed and certified power cables directly from their respective manufacturers, similar to what you'd receive with a name brand flat-screen HDTV, desktop computer or UPS, and/or 99% of electronic medical equipment.
The manufacturers of the Test Equipment being used DO NOT insist on or supply these incredibly sensitive and precise electronic measurement devices with any type of power cables with exotic special geometries, cryogenically-treated magic alloy, uniquely formulated insulation jackets, or "audiophile grade" plugs, etc. The manufacturer supplies you with good old basic UL/CE/ISO listed power cables, nothing "fancy", and guarantees their product to perform to the high tolerances and specifications as claimed with said power cable.
That, in and of itself, should be telling and speak volumes. ;-)
@@bbfoto7248well they are selling their equipment short for the reasons of economics, check out shunyata research supplying power cords for hospitals heart measuring equipment, because of increased resolution and the following increases in accuracy
Thanks for your hard work, much appreciated 👏. A balanced perspective 👍
Welcome!
You mention the timing behaviour of the cables in the site and it is clear from the measurements that there are differences between the cables' phase responses within the audio band. Did you not find any correlation between the phase response differences and the subjective assessments from listening to the cables?
You don’t seem to have any vibration damping under components. I suggest you try that because it can make more of a difference than cables.
I’ve never even touched an interlink that was more than $60 but I find this interesting. Do manufacturers market their cables as warm,cool,fast or slow? It seems with the proper measuring tools they could have multiple cables with proven attributes for the customer to choose from.
I have never seen them marketing them as such... but it could be possible.
If they didn't, it's because either they got no tool, or they always got the same results. When you are left only with words (see religions), you can bet it's a scam. But beware, your betting is based on perceptions, to measure it you must die, so no one tries, and that's fine, all left with their consolatory "My god sounds better than yours to me". Yeah, it does...
Lots of work and appreciative of that. But we're talking generally MHz, nanoseconds, and miniscule
Please read the written article. I explain why we use these test signals.
It would be interesting to evaluate these properties with two unconventional cable topologies, such as Verastarr Grand Illusion audio foils (flat silver foil conductor) and the Teo Liquid Metal fluid-based conductor cables.
I’d be happy to loan a couple Teo Audio Liquid Metal fluid conductor interconnect cables to you to assess, if you want.
I'm sure a roll off at 195Mhz makes a huge impact on audio frequencies... 🤔 I think you may have left out a very important point and failed to mention that quality of the material such as purity of copper. I sense a little conjecture here.
Please check the written article for details.
In the site, in the test set up section, you write that 2ns pulse corresponds to 500MHz - it should be kHz.
No. A 2ns pulse is 500 MHz.
Correct@@TheAlphaAudio !
I guess this was a momentary lapse of reason? I must have subconsciously suppressed the existence of microseconds!
Big magic ✨️🤔
You’re measuring artifacts on a 10 nanosecond scale and they aren’t even a whole division long meaning, they are above 100 MHz. There is no way the human ear can hear that.
Please, just stop with using this as evidence for audible differences.
If you take the time to comment, please also take the time watch the whole video. That way you would know why we use these signals. I also explain it extensively in the written article.
Hi thanks for your effort and dedication
One question maybe you have to specify the output impedance of the source and the input impedance of the integrated or preamplifier
Because sources as cd players have different output impedances and this influences in the micro and macrodynamics
"Most mid range CD players priced below $2000 (even some over) will have a very simple output stage with nothing more than a pair of Op-amps. That will result in higher output impedance (typically 150 ohms to 500 ohms that limits Macro and Micro dynamics.
Thanks for your response
Please check the written article. I have it all specified there.
@@TheAlphaAudio great thanks
So, youre trying to base objective measurements off of subjective listening results at frequencies several orders of magnatude above the human ability to hear?
Please read the article. I explain why i use these signals.
So, you're trying to give an opinion on a study without actually reading the study? It would be like judging a hifi component without listening to it. It would be absurd. Oh, wait a minute ....
@@TheAlphaAudioit is not fair to answer with another click bait. We lose time for nothing. I understand it is marketing technique but it isn't a good one IMHO.
@@DaveJ6515but did you read it. Where is the scientific proof?
@@findingneeo7060 I asked the question. In any case, of course I read it, so what?
Regarding testing speaker cables, I'd be interested to see what difference makes f.e. the copper quality of a cable, if there is an effect in loudness, dynamics or whatever. there are now so many different types of cables out there, different concepts of cable-designs including material-mixes.
I don't really understand what a cable test is good for, if the test not points out differences in the making of a cable and delivers clues about the effects. Just to proof that there are differences in cables, you can compare an alu-wire with a copper-wire, everybody will hear the difference.
@davidzoller9617
While not a "scientific" review or listening test of speaker cables, the following listening test was conducted in a blind manner:
Search for "$8000/pair Speaker Cable vs. $14 DIY Speaker Cable A/B Test: Vintage Audio Review Episode #87"
Note that they listened to just One speaker in Mono while instantly switching between the 2 different speaker cables. You and others may feel that this is the wrong way to conduct such a listening test.
However, IME it is MUCH easier for us to distinguish any minute differences when our brain only needs to concentrate and process sound that is emanating from a Single Source, JUST like we do in the Real World (i.e. a chirping bird or birdsong, a rooster crowing, a cow's "moo", a horse "whinny", an airplane flying overhead, ANY acoustic instrument or vocal at a live acoustic performance, our spouse yelling at us, etc.).
IME, it is also MUCH easier to distinguish any audible differences when you are able to INSTANTLY SWITCH between the two different DUT, rather than the significant time of silence and "downtime" that it took the Alpha Audio testers to switch between each of their speaker cables.
In addition, from over 20 years of DIY speaker building and measurements using multi-driver loudspeakers for both high end home audio, studio, and high end car audio systems with 3-way front speakers + subwoofers where all of the Crossovers, Time Alignment, Phase, and EQ are optimized and accomplished via a multi-channel professional DSP unit, what Matters MOST in regards to achieving Excellent IMAGING (width/depth/height/focus/separation) and 3D SOUNDSTAGE performance is perfectly Matching the Frequency Response between the Left & Right Speakers AT your listening position...
All to say that IME, listening to just One speaker in Mono does not make the listening test any less valid.
What I find ironic and truly revealing, is that the gentleman who initiated this test unknowingly chose inexpensive speaker cable that was made with Copper-Clad Aluminum wire (CCA) when he thought he was buying Pure OFC speaker wire...
So, this blind listening test is between what all of us probably consider the absolute worst speaker cable ever made (Aluminum based) vs. the $8K "high end" speaker cables. 😛
I'm sure everyone will find at least some type of "flaw" in their testing method, but IMO it is still at least as valid as The Alpha Audio test simply due to Alpha Audio not being able to instantly switch between the cables.
It has also long been proven that discerning any audible differences is much easier to detect when we can repeat and instantly switch between just a very short (
@@bbfoto7248 Well, I would not pay more then 10$ per Meter for a speaker cable, and if it's not just another rip off, one should hear the difference to a standard 1$ cable from the mall, specially if you have dynamic speakers powered by a solid class A amp. We are talkin high end, not slim column-speakers powered by a cheap digital amp fed by mp3.
People spending x-1000 bucks on an amp and x-1000 bucks on the speakers and then not buy a high purity copper cable from the audio shop but go to the mall to get a cheap copper cable with a pvc jacket? Would you do that?
There are differences in cable quality and you can hear them. I know it, so I don't need somebody telling me different.
Thanks for the effort. We still don't know for a fact though, that well made less expensive cables (under $100.00) actually sound different than more expensive cables.
Read the article. Good cables are all over the place in terms of price. So no: price is not always relevant.
This can be settled right now. Answer this question. In one hand you have a pair of cables that cost $100, and in the other hand you have a pair of cables that cost $500. What are the differences between those 2 cables? And when I say difference, I'm not talking about listening. I'm referring to the differences in the design and the materials used to make them.
Read the article. Cables that "propogate" faster, are good (Gee, thanks Grimm), they're "open, fresher and more energetic", cables that fall off faster are bad. OK, I have to get some of those open, fresher, energetic cables. I won't bother you anymore with cynicism, but the comment section is open.@@TheAlphaAudio
@@AT-wl9yq Obviously, no two different cables will measure the same. Isn't listening, or what you hear, the only thing that matters? Unless you have a cable that is so poorly made that it just fails.
@@TheAlphaAudioyes, I got XLO electric cables off eBay. Price suggests may be Chinese copies, but I don’t care as they sound really good.
@TheAlphaAudio
So much work! Time for a holiday, mate! LOL. I'd want to hibernate for a week after all of that, haha!
Forgive me as I haven't had time to read the full written article/test. It's on my agenda.
What I'm most curious about is IF All of the Same Attributes of Each Interconnect Cable Remain IDENTICAL when used in an equally resolving but completely different HiFi system with a different source and signal chain as well as speakers???
IOW, will ALL of us have the Same Experience when each of these cables are used in WHATEVER system we may have?
Before anyone else chimes in, I want to stave off any arguments that "you will Only hear the differences IF you have a high-end system that can resolve the differences". RUBBISH. The Alpha Audio's own Livestream Multi-tests have proven that a wide majority of their listeners can hear identical or at least similar differences as they hear live in the studio, even when we are all listening over TH-cam's lossy compressed audio, and through all of our widely different computers, smartphones/tablets, speakers/headphones/earbuds/IEMs and audio systems. So there's that.
- - - - - - - - - - -
BLOODY LONG RAMBLING:
Just for reference, 90% of my studio equipment, microphones, and studio monitors are all connected using Grimm Audio TPM & TPR in addition to Sommer Cable SC Peacock MK II XLR or 6.3mm TRS wiring. I purchased all of these in bulk many years ago, so the cost difference wasn't dramatic compared to let's say, Mogami, etc.
The Grimm & Sommer Cable were both suggested to me by the engineer & manufacturer of some of the high-end ribbon microphones that I purchased, which you probably realize must carry and transfer Extremely Low MilliVolt audio signals over distance without being prone to inducted EMI/RFI noise and without influencing/affecting their inherent properties (the electrical audio signal).
In the studio, if we desire, we can easily adjust the spectral balance and "character" of the microphone by adjusting the Input Impedance on the microphone preamplifier, or with any number of outboard analog or digital rackmount or DAW plugin EQs.
TBF, I also have some standard, good-quality Mogami XLR & TRS cables on-hand as extras or backups, and I've never really found that they sound particularly different to any "Ohhh...WAIT a Minute" degree of revelation. But if they did, I would probably be more inclined to simply correct any anomalies using EQ or other tools.
Imaging width, depth, focus, "space", etcetera, are all attributes that mixing and mastering engineers control and adjust by using L/R panning, independent levels, Frequency Response, and Phase/Timing tricks (and not in such minute nano-increments).
And to start, IF the Frequency Response between your Left & Right SPEAKERS do not closely match at your listening position, image focus & separation, width, depth, and "3D space" will suffer...
Note that this DOES NOT mean that your Speakers must Both Measure "FLAT", only that they must MATCH in Frequency Response as closely as possible at your listening position.
The better you match the Left vs. Right Frequency Response at your Listening Position, the better the Imaging and Soundstage performance will be.
This is one reason that it's ridiculously easy to at least achieve a decent Center Image even with cheap headphones or earbuds, even when they have terrible tonality/spectral balance. And, you can obviously have a pair of Loudspeakers that offer great imaging and soundstage performance even when they do not measure well in regards to FR.
IF the Directivity of the Loudspeakers is Smooth & Even, you'll find that it is easy to adjust the FR or overall spectral balance using EQ to address specific room issues and for your personal preference. These adjustments can either improve or deteriorate the imaging/soundstage performance.
And IME, the attributes of different speakers, their FR, their placement, and your room's acoustics have FAR MORE influence on the resulting sound quality of "your system" compared to any cable swapping differences.
At least in the recording studio, the absolute LAST thing that a professional tracking, mixing, or mastering engineer will do in order to improve any metric of the system's sound quality is reach for a different cable.
With that, I am not saying that "all cables sound the same". But I AM saying that in the real world, there are Much Easier ways to "affect" or "adjust" the real world performance of your system rather than "cable swapping".
Keep this in mind as well:
Suppose you find "the perfect cable" for your system that provides for perfect "synergy". If it is not a "neutral" or "agnostic" cable, it may no longer have good synergy with your system if you decide to "upgrade" or change any single component in that system at a later date.
So, then you might be back to "square one" again, and you might need to go through the entire and potentially expensive and time consuming cable-swapping exercise all over again....until the next change. No Thanks.
If you enjoy that aspect of "Experimenting" and "Playing" with cable-swapping, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.
But recording engineers just need a consistent and reliable product so they can get their work done with the least amount of fuss or issues. And personally, I would rather spend my time listening and Enjoying my Music rather than "listening to my equipment".
I guess I'm lucky in that I suppose my "decent" choice of cables from the start allows for that. IDK?
I guess the character would remain the same, yes. The thing is: some cables will accentuate bass, mids or treble. And some sound larger than others. That will always be the same in my opinion. Whether that will fit your system, is the question.
You should of posted this first, a lot of truth in those statements
Given that all recordings and sound processing are done in studios, using professional equipment, I would be very interested in the differences (if any) that exist between professional cables and those intended for home reproduction. I would be interested in just tests of professional cables alone, since these already contain a lot of variations. The questions is of course what exactly constitutes a professional cable apart from it being obviously marketed as such. I mean, is this the only criterion for making this distinction?
Another thing is that I noticed that all cables came fitted with what seemed to be factory fitted connectors. That would make comparing professional cables against consumer cables harder as the former are usually available in bulk mostly.
The final thing is what effect do connectors have if any? To assess that, it could illustrative to test just one cable against a variety of connectors (i.e. having many lengths of the same cable type fitted with different connectors) and even testing for variation in the making of the electrical connections within the connector (e.g. poor soldering vs. good soldering, mechanical only vs. soldered joins, etc.).
Cable material used in studio’s was represented as well. Read the article for the results.
All makes a case for DSP
We sense and detect to hear
Interesting explanation, congrats for your passion and dedication!
Love your channel!
One of the Best!!
Thank you!
Good work! My brother and I did these tests and more, many years ago. We had hell getting people to accept the results back in 1997 😂.
Anyone that tells me that cables do not affect sound quality gets the same response; "Oh I see.... so you have a mid-fi system that isn't optimally set up"?
Ends the debate usually 😆🤣
Cool. You still have the results somewhere? Pretty curious about what you found!
I’ve compared some of my cables through headphones , and yes I can hear differences, the cables I thought were my reference cables sounded closed a bit narrow neutral, compared to let’s say my blue jeans lc1 , it sound wider , livelier, don’t know if that is from it’s low capacitance , 12pf foot compared to my reference cables at 100 pf foot . Yes , cables have sound variations
As Nelson Pass said (as well as Khomenko) - if cables change sound of your system, the components are not properly designed or cables are not shielded. Or have old type of schematics (say, Audio Note) with high output impedance so they are obviously sensitive to the cable capacitance and induction. Modern solid state designs - as long as the cable is properly shielded and soldered, there should not be any difference.
Great. A Nelson Pass product is used :D
How ironic we are using Pass Labs products.
@@TheAlphaAudio Who said they are properly designed? There are Chinese products at 1/5 prices sounding better. They might have been properly designed when he said that - decades ago. Now they mostly sell brand names. In business of making money, that is.
@@michael71601 Sour grapes my friend, sour grapes.
@@jmtennapel Social net discussion derail 101 - switch to "you simply can't afford this, this is why" or something else, like personal appearance, age, etc. Congratulations.
I always ask myself why some people are in this hobby when proclaiming simply EVERYTHING sounds the same!
Ignorants & idiots in my book… Thanks for your great work. Even so I only trust my ears - not measurements. Nevertheless interesting
Welcome.
That's usually because they can't afford the good stuff.
@@DaveJ6515 Either that, or they simply don’t have gear that can show differences/ they never experienced it. But they nevertheless have a STRONG opinion and know everything better. Idiots
This is very interesting, IMO mostly because we have all been in the dark on the subject of WHY and HOW cables can sound different.
I mean, the measurements we have used for cables up till today, gave us no clues what so ever.
I have a feeling I am on the right track, in that sense that I prefer neutral equipment all over, cables included. I use Chord Shawline cables everywhere, except power cables (Pangea) and my phono interconnects (Furutech).
I am looking very much forward to your measurements on speaker cables!
I'm ONLY commenting in regards to POWER CABLES here, but FYI, the Test Equipment that Jaap is using to actually objectively measure these nanosecond and other uber-minute properties of the different interconnect cables in the test are supplied by the manufacturer with common UL/CE/ISO listed power cables. That alone SHOULD BE telling.
IF the actual manufactures of all of this test equipment that must be ultra-low noise, ultra-precise, and 100% perfectly neutral in order to properly measure the electrical properties of the devices they are connected to do not require some type of exotic power cable with a specific wire alloy, cable geometry, cryo-treatment, insulation, plugs, etcetera, then I THINK you'll be fine as well. 😉
Of course I do realize that most women, as well as some men, do appreciate "jewelry" and "bling" in order to enhance their "beauty", cosmetic look, and aesthetics. I mean, yeah, basic black power cables are boring. 😛 But at least in my systems, the power cables are not visible so it doesn't matter to me.
@keldherbst
Looks like you Edited your post so as not to include the Separate comment regarding "Power Cables"? FYI, for anyone reading, that is what I was specifically basing my comment on with my previous reply.
@@bbfoto7248then your equipment isn't as accurate as it can be due to economics, that is the ONLY reason they are not included
LCR is impacting in bandwidth at high frequancy!
Thanks. I looked it up. Seems indeed the case.
Great great great job!
Do members of the ASR forum still have their heads buried in the sand?
Probably... but I am not looking forward to all of their hatred in this comment section.
@@TheAlphaAudioit's like trying to explain reality to a flat earther, there's no point.
Zero point to try and explain to them.
@@Music_time82 Yup
They always did and probably will. Flat earth audiophiles lol
Maybe a strange question but does this also aply on hdmi cables
@TheAlphaAudio
Hello. Those papers have been lost long ago. I own a lot of siesmology and labratory testing equipment. I've spent 42 years working on the "why" of audio sound quality differences.
There are cable construction techniques that eliminate a lot of the issues you've measured. I worked on this for 7 years.
I'm a retired engineer. I have owned systems with over $80,000 in cables (Tara Labs vacuum cables, Valhalla, etc).
All were sold and I've used my own cables for the past 14 years.
Sounds interesting. Can you send me a pair and tell me how you measured them? I am pretty curious. Also: let's continue via e-mail. YT is not really the place for this. You can drop me an e-mail via the wbsite: www.alpha-audio.net
sommer epilogue and gotham gac 4 ultra pro.... best of the best👌
Sommer makes great cables.
I just got a chord c-line based on what I heard in the videos with comparisons. Unfortunately this cable cripples my system taking away the air and detail in favor of a relaxing experience. When listening to a crappy source it must be a Godsend, but in my tube system, which is already smooth It takes away from the realism of the instruments. In the end a 15e cordial cable sounds better for me even if the soundstage is narrower. Instruments are more full bodied and voices sound more nuanced. The c-line puts a filter over everything and tames the sound too much. I would recommend it in a harsh transistor only environment. I assume this is why people transitioning from c-line to clearway are so excited, but maybe try a pro-audio cable before shelving out another 60e for a chord cable.
Interesting video, thanks for all your work. On your noise tests, I am wondering why you did not use the Bryston as the source? It has a much lower output impedance, which I would think would significantly lower the induced noise.
Cables make a good difference to people who ACTUALLY know how to build a resolved system. Ive had plenty of high end gear mashed together, and my room was the let down unfortunately. But once you have a magical system, the right cables can be a big cherry on the top. And you cannot go back! Its easy to be a flat earther and run your mouth about cables not making a difference.
All you're really doing is screaming out your ignorance AND exposing not only your crappy ears, but your very average system too.. at the same time
Two birds one stone
Indeed.
Careful they'll bust out the golden ears snipe lol 😂
@Music_time82
Your comment seems quite curious to me, in that I would think it would be the "NON-Flat Earther" types (science based folks) who would be the ones "running their mouth about cables NOT making a difference", and not the Flat-Earther crowd as you suggest. (head scratch/chin rub)
To directly quote a sentence in your post: "Its easy to be a flat earther and run your mouth about cables not making a difference."
Isn't a "Flat Earther" one who denies scientific measurements and observations that are presented to them, such as those that The Alpha Audio have performed in this test?
Your comment comes off as a bit elitist as well.
The Alpha Audio's own Live Multi-Test TH-cam Livestream listening tests have indicated that Regardless of the vast differences in all of their viewers' and listeners' own playback systems, nearly ALL have been able to quite easily hear the differences in the DUT despite using different sources, individual electronic components, and speakers/headphones/IEMs/earbuds during the Livestream.
TBF, during at least one of their Livestream MultiTests, I was out of town on business and just used my smartphone to watch the video while connected to my Wireless Bluetooth Headphones in order to participate and comment in the Live Chat during the livestream.
Even via my smartphone and wireless ~$300 Bluetooth headphones I could easily hear the differences, and I would say that at least 80% of my impressions and comments correlated quite well to what the Alpha Audio gentlemen were also hearing Live in their listening room and confirming with their listeners.
Keep in mind that there are no less than 2 Levels of inconsistencies/generations in quality between what they were hearing Live in their studio and what all of their listeners were hearing:
1. We are hearing their speakers through Microphones that are capturing the sound of the speakers and their room, not listening directly to the speakers as they were.
2. We are all listening over the Internet via WiFi AND completely different Sources, as well as it being over TH-cam with its compressed lossy audio codec.
3. In my case, I was also listening with yet another layer of lossy audio compression via the wireless BT connection between my smartphone and my "average quality" ~$300 BT headphones. (I'm not going to travel with and/or risk the loss or damage of my much better Hifiman Susvara headphones. They stay at home in the studio).
This smartphone/wireless BT headphone "system" was obviously NOT anything approaching a "resolved system" using high-end gear. I wasn't even using a USB DAC/headphone amp connected to my smartphone.
AND YET, I was still FULLY CAPABLE of hearing the minute differences in sound quality and I also described them accurately ~80% of the time in my Live Chat comments to the Alpha Audio boys during the Livestream.
NOTE that this "system" ironically required NO cables whatsoever, and was "plagued" by at least 2 levels of lossy audio compression (TH-cam and Bluetooth).
Would a direct wired cable connection to my headphones using a well-regarded USB DAC/headphone amp and cable have improved the overall sound quality? Most Likely.
However, my inexpensive, average, every-day, wireless Bluetooth headphones streaming from my smartphone still allowed me to easily perceive and discern the differences in sonic character in the Alpha Audio Live MultiTests events.
Does this mean I am "exposing my crappy ears"? 😛
Contrary to popular belief, you DO NOT need a "high-end ultra resolving system with special cables" to hear clear differences in Sound Quality.
This has also been further demonstrated by the irrefutable fact that a vast majority of recording & mixing engineers for many years (and still some to this day) used the admittedly "Low-Fi" Yamaha NS-10 "studio monitors" (actually designed as HiFi speakers) that had $10 tweeters & $15 7" midwoofers with a cheap passive crossover network to produce a sh!t ton of AMAZING music that both you and I still listen to this very day.
I'm fairly certain that Jaap, Yung, and Martijn (sp?) know me by my user name and can confirm that I have participated and commented in the Live Chat of quite a few of their Live MultiTest events.
They can also probably either confirm or deny that my observations and sound judgements and comments during these Livestream events were relatively accurate, or not. 😛
How did you measure the ‘sound’ of the cable? Did you test the cables in an audio system vs a signal measurement ; so how did you relate these two elements?
Where is the audio system you used?
th-cam.com/users/liveq9sZTILbUus?si=pTM20IIR6bdwkhHX
Please check our article. It explains all of this.
Most of the better cable difference is at the dac to preamp section. Amp to speaker not so much. My all silver jewerly 9999 solid core diy with fiberglass sleeves 80$ xlr cable made the most difference. And with my magnapan lrs+, schitt is so coherent that i can hear immediate cable differences. You are nuts to be forking out hundreds if not thousands for cable, just learn to diy your own and none of those fing manufacturers even give you the real stuff solid silver until you hit the 1k mark.
How about using 2 cheap cables in parallel instead of using expensive cable.
That will not help.
The naysayers who say everything sounds the same is because they are/have one of these things:
- cheapskates
- mediocre stereo components (amplifier, preamplifier, DAC, streamer/transport)
- medicore cables/interconnects
- limited hearing ability
- compressed music source like Spotify instead of using a lossless source like Apple Music
- bad room acoustics
- bad setup (speaker placement, angle, other objects in the room)
True
@@TheAlphaAudio I've recently upgraded from my Parasound 2125v2 amp to the NAD C298 (like you).
I too own and love the GoldenEar BRX.... I also have 2 sealed subwoofers helping them.
My video th-cam.com/video/ncwCopnHJqA/w-d-xo.html
Bingo! These naysayers most likely have vintage Pioneer or sansui receivers with Cerwin Vega speakers. They’re not critically listen for sure. They wouldn’t even know what to listen for when swapping cables out.
But maybe, just maybe they are/have fourty years of recording experience, a degree in electronics/physics and access to equipment/studios on a daily basis, where the glass between recording booth and control room alone cost more than most setups of so called "audiophiles". They will tell you a completely other story about the "sound of cables" than those who believe in cable voodoo. And they will tell you a story about the importance of double blind tests, that no cable sound zealot wants to listen to.
@TheAlphaAudio
Jaap, can you be more specific with what you mean in regards to using the term, "DRY" and any of the other subjective adjectives you use in the video?
I find that especially between different cultures and languages many adjectives and descriptive words are interpreted to mean very different things to different people.
In addition, in a recording/mixing/mastering studio environment, when we say "Dry" it usually refers to an individual track of a vocal or instrument with no processing or EFX added to it...i.e. a "dry" vocal straight from the microphone/mic pre output as opposed to one with Reverb added to it, which might be referred to as "Wet", LOL.
Cheers
Please check our article. It explains a lot more.
He won't give up and I bet he still hasn't read the article
👍👍👍👍👍
Another video about cables with a couple of screenshots showing nothing significant. Did you just say a bump showed why a cable sounded dry? From the screenshot it looks like its a signal at 195mhz ? And yet no real showing of the actual test equipment, or at what level this artefact is. Its almost like pictures we seen in the 90's adverts claiming a difference, despite being an inaudible test tone at -120db.
Can we have a more informative detailed test with the equipment and all parameters present?
So far most people with equipment that can measure are showing us these sort of differences are so miniscule and at such a low noise floor we medically cannot be hearing them, yet we still get sellers peddling fat cables with more bass, thin silver cables with more treble, shorter cables sounding faster and other such nonsense. Weird how so much of a cables look influences sound.
I have pretty much given up on HiFi cables due to just how underhanded the industry is.
Read the article on our website before you start bashing a video that is actually a summary of months and months of measurements.
Now you have to make a video subjectively testing and comparing some of the better ones to advise your subscribers 😀 (i home for some good value/ affordable ones as well)
Well... ;-)....
But please check the written article. You can pretty much see what cables are good.
@@TheAlphaAudio ok, thanks
If only there was a way to prove this.
A good cable, interconnect, is the less resistance, the less inductance and the less capacitance., basically is 0ohms, 0uH and 0pf.
All is about phase shift between frequencies at the end you will have musical information loss, this result in less soundstage, less details.
You cannot mesure cables with an oscilloscope, sound is not an image.... Also it depend of the source impedance and the receiver impedance.
Try cables on a turntable with a good moving magnet and you will have big differences in high frequencies because MM need low capacitance cable.
A moving coil have a lower impedance so less difference between capacitance cables.
Also, you need a very open system that let the musical informations flow to speakers, again some audio equipment can have good musical tones, good bass with control but having no soundstage, it is.like 2D and 3D explained.
Why an oscilloscope probe have a capacitor trimmer ?
To get the probe matched to the oscilloscope impedance and a square wave perfect on the scope display, without round edge or overshoot edge, so now think all cables have different capacitance, different inductance and different resistance !
I am in the highend audio field since 30 years and I am a electronic technician.
Many things in Hifi still elude full scientific explanation.
Measured a "difference" of Audio cables at 195MHz !!! and you had an "Aha" moment? Right...🙄
Why nobody analyse the sound signature instead of the characteristics of the cable by itself? If we push the analyse of the sound as his technical level… we will see the real difference from the speakers… isn’t?🤷🏼