Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 153 posts

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#141

Post by yial »

bayindirh wrote: post #73
yial wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t SOOW (or THHN/THWN-2 )in 14 or 16 gauge be appropriate for this?

My speaker's manual says the following: > Please always use a good quality loudspeaker connection cable from an audio dealer. To prevent impairment of sound quality, we recommend cables with cross-sections of at least 2.5 mm² for lengths up to 3 m and at least 4 mm² for lengths above 3 m. Interestingly, the table present in the printed manual is not present in the one on the internet. IIRC, recommendation for 100W up…

The type of wire I suggested is easily found in the U.S. (apologies for my bias there) as large as 6g. 10-12g would be in the right range I believe.

The shielding might not be needed, the low cost for single conductor wire is why I mentioned it.

The person I was responding to was mentioning they can’t find appropriate “main power” cable. (So probably not in the USA )

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#142

Post by wat10000 »

lich_king wrote: post #50

It's fashionable to dunk on audiophiles because many of their beliefs are silly and there are businesses that prey on them selling them "oxygen-free" cables and stuff like that. And some of their beliefs are auto-suggestion. But here's another way to look at it: some audio setups will sound better than others in your living room , because of a million variables you can't really control for. Maybe one manufacturer com…

But trial and error is not the only tool. So many of these audiophile scams fall apart with even the most basic knowledge. You don’t need to be an audio engineer to understand that an expensive audiophile SATA cable won’t make your music sound any different. Analog components are less obvious, but it doesn’t take too much to know that speaker cable is a lot less important than the speakers, and special deoxygenated cables are a waste of money, or that there’s dozens or hundreds of miles of wire between your outlet and the power plant so spending a thousand dollars on a power cable for the last two feet is unwise.

One problem is that they will try to convince other people to follow in their obvious nonsense. Convincing someone to spend a bunch of money on an Ethernet cable to make their sound better is victimizing them.

It’s also just symptomatic of a general failure of critical thinking that can become properly dangerous. There’s little fundamental difference between “I swapped in an expensive USB cable and it sounded better so high end USB cable is worth it” and “my kid got his shots and then he got diagnosed with autism so vaccines caused it.”

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#143

Post by wiredpancake »

crims0n wrote: post #26

Probably going to make some people mad... but I went down the Audiophile rabbit hole last year before ultimately coming to the conclusion that it just isn't worth it. I understand the appeal, especially someone who values a nice piece of hardware. There is so much to choose from... DACs, DAPs, amps, fancy looking balanced cables in quality braiding, headphones with solid wood accents, IEMs that look straight outa sci…

[dead]

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#144

Post by just6979 »

calmbonsai wrote: post #110

Well, duh. The chosen propagation media (wire substitute) wouldn't have significant frequency responses differences for those lengths for that level of power in the audio frequency range. You'd need to have transmission-line effects kick-in which would occur at higher frequencies and/or if a cross-section of the signal propagation paths would have a significant difference in impedance. All three of the chosen medium…

They even mentioned this in the article:

"However, the tester surmised that introducing the materials into the circuit is just like adding a resistor in series, and they’re unlikely to distort the audio too much, except by lowering the signal level."

It's really a terrible write-up (AI?), pure click bait.

The final sentence is just garbage:

"They then tried various materials like mud and banana, which, although they’re pretty poor conductors, still seemed to introduce imperceptible changes to the signal, at least for the average person."

What does that even mean? It's trash.

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#145

Post by tom_m »

crims0n wrote: post #26

Probably going to make some people mad... but I went down the Audiophile rabbit hole last year before ultimately coming to the conclusion that it just isn't worth it. I understand the appeal, especially someone who values a nice piece of hardware. There is so much to choose from... DACs, DAPs, amps, fancy looking balanced cables in quality braiding, headphones with solid wood accents, IEMs that look straight outa sci…

The equipment definitely makes a difference but you're right about diminishing returns. In fact, at a certain point it's zero returns and all gimmick unfortunately.

That said, you don't need to break the bank for good stuff and it does make a huge difference. There's also a lot of marketing out there for bad equipment. Apple air pods and beats headphones and more.

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#146

Post by hackingonempty »

alexchantavy wrote: post #35
crims0n wrote: post #26

Probably going to make some people mad... but I went down the Audiophile rabbit hole last year before ultimately coming to the conclusion that it just isn't worth it. I understand the appeal, especially someone who values a nice piece of hardware. There is so much to choose from... DACs, DAPs, amps, fancy looking balanced cables in quality braiding, headphones with solid wood accents, IEMs that look straight outa sci…

Dumb question but what's the difference between headphones and over the ears? I looked it up but I'm still confused

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headphones#Ear_adaption

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#147

Post by ungreased0675 »

ozim wrote: post #39
londons_explore wrote: post #29

The perfect speaker system is indistinguishable from having a live band in the room with you (when blindfolded). Can today's audio systems do that? How much money do I have to spend to get there?

I am quite sure live band will definitely sound worse than most sound systems. My experience is I hanged out with one band in a garage where they were practicing and I attended couple live music shows in pubs. Main upside of those live music shows is that they are not "perfect" like playing a record and each one of the gigs will be off here or there, tempo somewhere will be off or a tune will be off - or you are just…

I’ve noticed that the average guy mixing for house bands usually doesn’t care about making it sound good, just doing the minimum necessary.

If you’re in a band and care about sound quality, bring your own mix guy!

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#148

Post by kergonath »

lproven wrote: post #132

Small side note... Around COVID lockdown #1 I did a lot more walking outside, pushing a pram and listening to music on headphones. For years I'd been using cheap wired headphones from exhibition swag and things. I put a pair through the washing machine. Top tip: this is really not good for them. I looked online and found I could buy a brand new pair of my preferred Sony in-ear ones for $NotALot. I bought the absolute…

> I bought the absolutely top of the line most expensive bass-boost in-ear buds.

Out of curiosity, what did you get?

Re: Audiophiles can't distinguish audio sent through copper, banana or mud

#149

Post by pluralmonad »

atoav wrote: post #98
crims0n wrote: post #26

Probably going to make some people mad... but I went down the Audiophile rabbit hole last year before ultimately coming to the conclusion that it just isn't worth it. I understand the appeal, especially someone who values a nice piece of hardware. There is so much to choose from... DACs, DAPs, amps, fancy looking balanced cables in quality braiding, headphones with solid wood accents, IEMs that look straight outa sci…

As someone who still occasionally mixes for a living, designs and builds audio hardware: Audiophiles are full of shit and this has been scientifically shown probably since the 90s (various AES studies conducted on the perception of CD quality). Of course there is a difference between cheap gear and decent gear. But the difference between decent gear and audiophile gear is non-perceptible in a blind ABX test. And here…

Nothing you've said here is wrong, but maybe for some the wood accent really does affect an aesthetic to the experience. You're talking about objective measures of signals, the warm wood people are talking about subjective experience.
Post reply on HN