It’s the time of year for saving money!
Why do audiophiles ever, at any point in time, make a change to their system? Why bother to perpetually fiddle around with speaker placement, buy new components, replace cables with better ones, hang room treatments all over the place, be absolutely positive there are as few reflective surfaces as possible (I even used the smallest diameter LED light bulbs with the highest wattage I could find just to minimize glass in my audio room) and all the other micro and macro things we do to improve sound? Why? Well, the simple and obvious reason is to do that thing we all seek – improve our system’s sonics. Sort of stands to reason, right?
So, when we’ve done all that, and we sit down to listen, if things sound better are we disposed of that belief because we are sure it does, or because we want it so? Does it sound better because we are convinced beyond measure that making all those precipitous changes actually improves sonics? Could it also be that because we did make those changes, doing so MUST enable moving the sonic needle forward? Does one happen singularly because of the other, or because we want it to happen because of the other? Is the perceived improvement actual or imaginary? Let’s face it, after spending lots of money on that new set of speaker cables, we absolutely, positively, for sure must be the happy recipient of better sound, right?
I once bought a power cord a manufacturer told me would be at least equal to, or in his belief, better than the main power cord I was using. Never mind this “replacement” was a fraction of the cost of my then power cord. I was convinced beyond measure of impending failure. Know what? It failed. Miserably. I removed it after five minutes and went back to my reference power cord. My suspicions confirmed. I gave it to a friend of mine to use on his system, not telling him anything about my experience. I simply suggested he try this cord on his integrated amp. Surprise, surprise, he absolutely loved it. Told me it improved his sonics immeasurably. He was, to steal a phrase used by Jonathan Valin, “gobsmacked” by what he heard.
This brings up an interesting question. I was convinced the power cord would fail. It did. My friend had no such preconceived notions, he tried the cord out of simple curiosity. He loved it. He is still using it, in fact. Wait though, there are other conditions at foot here. My system is far superior in sonic capability and far more expensive than my friend’s system. Doesn’t that have something to do with the sonic capability of a power cord? Certainly, a lesser grade thing won’t make substantive improvements to a better grade thing, right? A set of el-cheapo tires might work well on a four banger sub compact, but on a world class sports car, what then? Think those el-cheapo tires could corner and have the same handling ability as a set of “super car” tires?
Judgments of what we hear on our systems are formed by our own personal opinions. We make changes to our systems in the inestimable hope of conclusive improvements. Personally, I think that is part and parcel of perhaps one facet of the audiophile gem. Sometimes we are guided by what we want to occur. We replace a speaker system, component, cable or cord not with the hope of improvement, but because we trust improvements will likewise follow. Spending whatever sum of money we spend must yield superior results, our sonic lives greatened. If no changes to a system’s sonic capabilities are practiced, will the status quo provide enduring satisfaction? When, and at what point in time will that status quo no longer be musically fulfilling? So making a change to move the needle forward must – it has to provide the desired result. Failing that, our money is wasted and we simply cannot tolerate that. Is that why the new whatever sounds better? Many would say yes.
If this were a true condition, how then could we ever reliably believe an equipment review? If a reviewer loved a set of speakers in which we might be interested, and we try them out for ourselves, do we do so convinced we will hear the same improvements the reviewer heard? Or are we patently skeptical of measurable improvements? Wait though, we rely on reviewers to draw fair and unbiased conclusions about those products under review. Does it not seem reasonable that because someone IS a product reviewer that unbiased opinions follow? Does a reviewer begin a review convinced as was I the review sample would fail, or do they check preconceived notions at the door? I would certainly expect the latter.
In the end, improvements are really nothing more than a matter of opinion. I despise Brussel Sprouts, others love them. Is then, liking or disliking an audio component really any more difficult to discern? Like it or not, Audiophilia is predominately a largely singular hobby. I love to have people to my home to hear my system. Doing so hopefully provides validation of the choices I made, the money I spent, and how I chose to build my system. And as wonderful as that may be, I am most fulfilled when it is just me in my listening chair, listening to my music, that which I like best. It is those times I cherish. If I make system changes and I am heartened by what I hear, does it really matter if my observations are factual or perceived? As long as I am convinced that what I hear is pleasing, as long as the music that reaches my ears moves me and strikes my fancy, it really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks. As long as it is good for me, that’s all I need.
Actually, it’s Brussels Sprouts (add an “s” to Brussel). I hate them also. If you freeze them and take them to the golf driving range, they make nice tracers as he leaves fly off.
As for the rest of the article, well, …to thine own self be true.
Harry, I would have sworn that my original version I submitted had the “s” but in checking it didn’t. I do know better, however.
There’s a difference between things that make an audible difference, and things that we *think* make an audible difference. It’s up to each of us to decide whether we are willing to risk our money for an improvement we only *think* we can hear (i.e. the placebo effect), or whether we also get satisfaction from knowing we have spent our time and money on things that actually make a difference.
For your power cable situation, it would have been interesting to do an experiment. Get some sort of cloth to cover any visible part of the power cables, and have a friend or housemate plug one of them in to the system. Then listen to it for hours, days or weeks until you are willing to judge the quality of the sound, and guess which one it might be. Have your friend or housemate record your guess. Then have them remove the cable and flip a coin (that only they can see). Heads, they switch the cable. Tails, they reinstall the previous one. Then listen until you can make guess and judgement. After 10 guesses and judgements, take a look at your results. Were you consistently judging one cable the same against the other? Assuming you have extensive experience listening to your system with the original power cable, were you able to consistently identify when the cable had been switched?
Does anyone who believes power cables can make an audible difference to the sound of a system want to try it?
Jon in this instance the difference was not only profound in my system, but immediately noticeable. While your test might be interesting for some, it would not have been necessary for me and my system. Other systems, maybe so.
“In the end, improvements are really nothing more than a matter of opinion.” That seems overly subjective and relativist to me. If the difference inserting the cheap power cord in your system was immediately noticeable then it doesn’t really matter what your preconception was. Preconceptions can only affect, much less totally determine, perception when the differences are quite subtle. And yes, it really does make a difference whether your perception of difference is something that at least some other educated listeners would agree on (though they might not evaluate that difference exactly the same way you do – that could depend on their sonic priorities, musical tastes and other variables) or whether only you hear the difference. If the perception and evaluation of sonic qualities were based on nothing more than individual opinion, audiophile reviewing would be next to meaningless. So much of it is hype as it is – but that’s a different problem.
Well… I know I’m going to catch flak for this, but: Your power comes from a source that, more than anything else is exposed to the air (above-ground power cables carry most of what you use.) Then, when the power enters your house, it’s usually in non-shielded Romex – unless you’ve spent the money to place shielded Romex to the outlets for your system. Then you spend how much money to treat the last six feet to your equipment? How much noise do you suppose you’re really eliminating?
I pulled a stunt on two of my long time audiophile bud’s I put up a small screen in front of the equipment in the room and had a number of different speaker cables, interconnects and power cables in plain site waiting to “test”.. We went thru a selection of source material including 24 bit/192KHz digital from HTtracks. I “swapped” power and speaker cables on several occasions and played the source references over and over giving them both time to decide on what they heard. I repeated this with the analogue interconnects and it was the only time I actually swapped anything. Both of these guys heard a difference with 2 sets of speaker cables being changed and one swore that one power cable improved the sound (“tighter bass”) while the other was not sure. The cables are Tara Labs RCS-Prime Bi-Wire. They were told that the reference wires were MCX-1 Monster. I never actually changed anything.. The only time they were correct was the change from a $2.00 analogue RCA cable to a Monster M-Series M1000 MKII interconnects between the Accuphase power amps and Marantz AV7701 processor. Speakers are Martin Logan ESL’s for the L/C/R front’s and 4i for the side/rear surrounds.
thanks for a great article !
sorry i cant comment on your spelling or correct your grammer ! lol
i am just hear for the music !
i enjoyed your article because i consider myself an Audiophile even though none of my equipment would be considered Audiophile quality.
i have a Yamaha RN803, Deff Tech Studio Monitor 350’s and a Martin Logan Dynamo 300.
ive read alot and have made the subtle adjustments and tweeks…and still do !
i stream Deezer and just sit for hours smiling at just how amazing i think it sounds.
i read HTR so i am well aware of how much better things might sound…
but never hearing anything of higher quality than what i have now i dont know the difference.
your last sentence in your article for me says it all !!
thanks again !
Thanks, Tim! Glad you enjoyed the piece.
Happy Listening!!!
Hey, c-can I have your brussel sprouts?