Which Interconnects? -Cheap v Expensive
Gary Sutherland
How much should I pay for new interconnects? I know there's a huge price
range but is there really a big difference between a £25 cable and a £125
cable?
Any help or advice appreciated.
TIA
Gary
DrLargePants
hear it, if you prefer it, and if you think the difference is worth it !.
Audition a few and see what you think...
"Gary Sutherland" <ga...@eqdesign.co.uk> wrote in message
news:B78B270C.74B4%ga...@eqdesign.co.uk...
Šave
Another example of the law of diminishing returns is evident here.
The difference between a £5 scart from Argos and a £30 Ixos is significant.
However, start going up higher in price and the return for your money isn't
so noticeable. And of course, it also depends on what the cable is joining
together, as some around here would argue that there is no point in having
gold, oxygen free interconnects if the connections on the components isn't
of a similar standard.
IMHO
Ðave
Double Doom
"DrLargePants" <DrLarg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9k3qr7$g2l$1...@taliesin2.netcom.net.uk...
> In my experience no, but I'm sure there is, it just depends on if you can
> hear it, if you prefer it, and if you think the difference is worth it !.
In my experience, yes.
I was suffering a hum from my subwoofer which a better quality shielded
cable took away. The picture quality improved when I when from el-cheapy
scart to a quality shielded scart.
However, I wouldn't spend £125 on a cable. That would be daft on mainstream
equipment. £25 for a scart lead would be about the going rate between a
£300 dvd player and a £1200 tv for example.
David
ViNNY
news:9k3t0g$2f4ta$1...@ID-99924.news.dfncis.de...
I'd say the difference becomes indistinct from about £15 up - at least with
"consumer" level equipment with its own "features", tolerances and
individual little distortions.
-Vin
Duncan Armstrong
> range but is there really a big difference between a £25 cable and a £125
> cable?
>
I, personally, can hear a difference between cables in my hifi (or think I
can), and I absolutely love my £150 Ecosse Reference interconnects. Whether
it's good value for money is anyone's guess (still not sure of that m'self,
but then again, I've always been a bit reckless with money...) and really
only you can say.
Funny thing is, there are a lot of people who are convinced that different
cables can't possibly make a difference. Once they're screened and with
decent connectors (i.e. costing maybe £5/m or so for interconnects, and a
lot less for speaker cable) there's no improvement you can make. Cables are
cables, case closed. Try posting the same question on uk.rec.audio and
you'll see what I mean. =)
Cheers,
Dunc
ViNNY
news:9k51b1$2k1ra$1...@ID-97016.news.dfncis.de...
Digital interconnects are digital interconnects. With analogue, there can be
a noticeable difference, but spending an extra £10 will make more difference
at the bottom end of the scale than the top.
-Vin
DrLargePants
" Digital interconnects are digital interconnects."
Apparantly thats not true either. I cant see why TBH but if you search on
dejanews for +digital +coax there's a big thread about that on there...
ViNNY
>
> " Digital interconnects are digital interconnects."
>
> Apparantly thats not true either. I cant see why TBH but if you search on
> dejanews for +digital +coax there's a big thread about that on there...
Pure hokum. Either the bitstream gets through or it doesn't.
"You get better bass with this digital cable than with that one!"
-Vin
Duncan Armstrong
news:0pw97.4298$bU3.55375@news1-hme0...
> DrLargePants <DrLarg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9k5nve$o1p$1...@taliesin2.netcom.net.uk...
> >
> > " Digital interconnects are digital interconnects."
> >
> > Apparantly thats not true either. I cant see why TBH but if you search
on
> > dejanews for +digital +coax there's a big thread about that on there...
>
> Pure hokum. Either the bitstream gets through or it doesn't.
>
With Dolby Digital and DTS, which use packet systems to transfer the digital
data, this is true. With CD it's more complicated. CD's use pulse code
modulation which depends entirely on the timing of signal as it reaches the
DAC's internal clock. If the clock is crummy the signal suffers distortion:
called 'jitter'. Also, if the transport is crummy, jitter can be induced as
well (I believe). Therefore, IMHO, it follows that it may be possible for
jitter to be induced by a crummy digital cable.
I think there are arguments against this, and I've probably oversimplified
the matter, but what I'm saying is there are grounds for arguing that a
digital cable *may* make a difference where PCM is concerned. DD/DTS are
immune to jitter, though, as the signal is re-clocked by the DAC anyway.
Cheers,
Dunc
Duncan Armstrong
> >
> > Funny thing is, there are a lot of people who are convinced that
different
> > cables can't possibly make a difference. Once they're screened and with
> > decent connectors (i.e. costing maybe £5/m or so for interconnects, and
a
> > lot less for speaker cable) there's no improvement you can make. Cables
> are
> > cables, case closed. Try posting the same question on uk.rec.audio and
> > you'll see what I mean. =)
>
> Digital interconnects are digital interconnects. With analogue, there can
be
> a noticeable difference, but spending an extra £10 will make more
difference
> at the bottom end of the scale than the top.
>
Thing is, I wasn't referring to digital interconnects - I meant analogue
ones! Most people I know can hear a difference, but plenty of people,
generally of the engineer persuasion (a.k.a. hard-line sceptics =), believe
that there is no reason cables could possibly have an effect on the sound,
even analogue ones, as long as they're sensibly built for the task (i.e. the
freebie cables that come with the kit may not suffice, but a decent phono
lead from Maplin should do fine.) They surmise that the only reason people
hear differences between cables is because they expect to hear a difference
and their brain fools them into hearing it.
I personally don't buy into that entirely. I'm not convinced that when I
hear a difference it's just my brain telling me that I paid a shitload of
dosh so I should hear a difference. Sounds a bit far-fetched. For one
thing, the differences I hear aren't always improvements as you go up the
price range. More expensive cables don't always sound better to me -
sometimes I prefer the cheaper ones. I think it's flawed reasoning to make
an assumption that I'm just trying to rationalise the money I just spent.
For one thing, when I bought my Ecosse interconnects, they weren't the most
expensive cables I auditioned, though they weren't the cheapest either. I
do, however, take cable manufacturers' pseudo-scientific technobabble with a
grain of salt - in most cases it's just marketing!
However, I must admit that the sceptics have fairly good scientific support
on their side - namely, that no double-blind test has ever revealed any
significant difference between any two cables, ever. Ever. There's
actually a pool going - £1000 for anyone who can reliably (i.e. to a
statistically significant extent) tell the difference between two cables in
a series of double-blind tests.
Again, try posting that question on uk.rec.audio - or better yet,
rec.audio.opinion - and you'll find out just what I'm talking about!
(Though you risk being branded a troll. =)
FWIW, I do feel that differences between cables, particularly once you get
into the high end (i.e. £100+), tend to be very subtle and not likely to be
worth the price difference. Therefore I agree that £20-30 cables sound a
lot better than freebies, but that above that you've just gotta decide what
you're willing to pay for.
Anyway, just my opinion. Cheers,
Dunc
Šave
> FWIW, I do feel that differences between cables, particularly once you get
> into the high end (i.e. £100+), tend to be very subtle and not likely to
be
> worth the price difference. Therefore I agree that £20-30 cables sound a
> lot better than freebies, but that above that you've just gotta decide
what
> you're willing to pay for.
>
> Anyway, just my opinion. Cheers,
>
> Dunc
>
Hey, it's not just about sound quality.
I looked at a cheap (£10) scart cable in Richer Sounds the other day, and it
just felt so cheap and nasty that my gut response was to drop the thing as
soon as possible. Now, compare that to the feel of a decent interconnect
such as an Ixos...ahhhh, much better.
Time to get out more methinks...
Ðave
Dave K
so if you spend 500 on the amp and 300 on the cd then anything from 30-80
would be ok, as said earlier no point connecting a 200 pound van den hul
cable up to a technics 70 pound cd player.
One experiment I did do with connections was to replace my fathers speaker
bell wire he had on his sony micro system with some qed silver, it honestly
sounds like a different system completely now and is now worth the 400
pounds were as before it was shite.
and weight is important I managed to get some 10 pound scart cables that
weigh about 1/2 kilo each, I have been more than happy with them. (the 10
pound was at cost they should have been 40-50)
"Ðave" <da...@anon.net> wrote in message
news:9k6gob$2r0ft$1...@ID-99924.news.dfncis.de...
Leon Smith
I'd definately spend the money on good quality video interconnects but don't
go mad! In other words - don't use a £3 Tesco lead, but go to Maplin or
Richer Sounds (happen to be the two I use) and spend £25 ish on oxy
free/gold connectors etc. I've had interference lines disappear by using
better quality scart leads.
I don't personally subscribe to the belief that one digital interconnect is
any better than another so I use a £10 job from Maplin (although it is oxy
free, gold connects etc) - does the job nicely I reckon.
Speaker cable is the last one and personally I can't tell the difference and
use £1.50pm stuff on the fronts and £0.69pm on the surrounds (which also
benefits from a high WAF - Wife Approval Factor).
At the end of the day, peoples eyes and ears (and not to mention equipment!)
are different and only you can tell. Richer Sounds claim to offer a free
cable test where you can borrow some good quality interconnects from them
(after a deposit)
"Gary Sutherland" <ga...@eqdesign.co.uk> wrote in message
news:B78B270C.74B4%ga...@eqdesign.co.uk...
Steve Bond
Leon Smith <le...@rbbh-tr.nhs.uk> wrote in message
news:9k98em$3cstq$1...@ID-62059.news.dfncis.de...
> [can of worms opens and everyone rushes to close it up quick!]
>
> I'd definately spend the money on good quality video interconnects but
don't
> go mad! In other words - don't use a £3 Tesco lead, but go to Maplin or
> Richer Sounds (happen to be the two I use) and spend £25 ish on oxy
> free/gold connectors etc. I've had interference lines disappear by using
> better quality scart leads.
>
> I don't personally subscribe to the belief that one digital interconnect
is
> any better than another so I use a £10 job from Maplin (although it is oxy
> free, gold connects etc) - does the job nicely I reckon.
>
> Speaker cable is the last one and personally I can't tell the difference
and
> use £1.50pm stuff on the fronts and £0.69pm on the surrounds (which also
> benefits from a high WAF - Wife Approval Factor).
>
> At the end of the day, peoples eyes and ears (and not to mention
equipment!) are different and only you can tell. Richer Sounds claim to
offer a free cable test where you can borrow some good quality interconnects
from them (after a deposit)
>
I think they do similar with speaker cables too.
<short pause while Steve looks for the latest catalogue>
Yes. Here it is. At the bottom of the speakers page. Same criteria as the
interconnects.