It’s the time of year for saving money!
In a recent article I wrote regarding comments left on forums and web sites, one reader replied that he was going to continue commenting until the “mistakes were fixed.” Now in all honesty, there was not a lot in the way of specifics on what the mistakes actually were or how they should be corrected. In considering the matter, I suspect these perceived mistakes could be wide ranging. And of course, it got me thinking.
One hallmark of high performance audio is variety. There are many ways to assemble and enjoy an audio system. There are price points from the very affordable to the extremely, and many would say ludicrously expensive. There are so many options available, the obvious result is a diverse methodology utilizing any number of system building choices. I seriously doubt any one person could ever exhaust all the available combinations of components and cables in a system. Common sense, time, and very likely purchase cost would get in the way. Yet how many audiophiles harbor the opinion they alone are somehow possessed of a higher degree of what is correct, and consequently incorrect when putting together an audio system?
Consider analog and digital. Fact – analog lacks the dynamic range of digital. Fact – analog may contain pops and clicks and surface noise that denigrates the sound. Fact – analog requires more work and effort to utilize than digital. Fact – many people, in spite of everything, simply enjoy listening to an album. How do we reconcile these discrepancies? How do we address the fact that despite its shortcomings, there are those who still enjoy, even prefer analog? On the other hand, if you prefer digital, are you somehow mistaken? Which part of this is fact or merely the opinion of someone else? And if you are in some way of a contradictory position from another audiophile regarding analog or digital, are you therefore correct, incorrect, informed, uninformed, or instead, merely of a different opinion? Can your determined position actually be “fixed?” Should it?
Consider cables – another highly contentious subject. There does not appear to be any unilateral agreement or conciliatory opinion regarding cables. Suppose you have, use and believe in hyper expensive cables. There will be those who will support your beliefs and those who do not. Disagreements, not surprisingly, are wide ranging. One popular theory is an expensive cable cannot possibly make any difference. Another, possibly lesser held theory is they do. Most surprisingly, there does not seem to be a lot in the way of scientific evidence that better cables make a difference. Those in advocation for superior cable products lend their support, primarily, because of claimed improvements heard when switching one cable for another. They hold with the position that better cables make the most difference with better systems, and those with lesser systems cannot hear any improvements anyway. Is it not surprising, therefore, that disagreements ensue? Regardless of the actual truth, most of the discussion surrounding cables is opinion, right? Or can factual evidence be claimed when two or more listeners hear the same result – regardless of what that result may actually be?
Let’s circle back to the original question. Let’s fix the mistakes. And what, exactly, are those mistakes? At what point in time do we cross an unseen line in the sand regarding what is fact or fiction, right or wrong? Just because any one audiophile supports a belief in an audio component or methodology, is that same audiophile mistaken if those beliefs and preferences contradict someone else? If I like apples and you like oranges, am I right and you wrong because I say so? How exactly should we set upon the task of fixing these presumed mistakes?
Of course, none of this addresses the question of the veracity of a person ascribing to the goal of “fixing” the audiophile hobby. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I will leave my choices and beliefs to myself. Should I choose to support the notion that better cables matter, or if I prefer one amplifier technology to another, those are my decisions alone. What I do not really need or want is someone telling me my preferences are wrong or misguided simply because their opinions differ from mine.
When you get right down to it, the audiophile hobby is not only a collection of component choices, but also a variety of individual belief structures. We have and hold sanctuary those beliefs as they are most commonly our guiding principles of system building. Our opinions are ours alone and they are made based on any number of ways. It does not matter if we believe cables work or don’t work, only our conviction in any side of a disagreement is relevant. If we like digital over analog, we are not, somehow, a second class audiophile because we have upset some highbrowed position by analog proponents. Conversely, anyone who does like analog is not necessarily sacrificing sonic excellence and yielding to a forgotten technology because they support a presumed inferior medium.
Ours is a hobby of wide ranging choices. It is chiefly a hobby whose main benefit is about having fun. When we sit down in the listening position, do we enjoy what we hear is the preeminent question. If any individual audiophile is enraptured by what is heard when they play their audio system, that is all that principally matters. Whether or not the system is budget priced or costs more than a home, cables are expensive or inexpensive, whether they are streaming, spinning PVC or polycarbonate is inconsequential. All that really matters is we like what we hear. Our fundamental enjoyment is that “oh wow” feeling bestowed to us by a collection of audio components.
Most importantly, no one should tell someone in such a position that anything, anything at all needs to be “fixed.”
cables can sound different. Is that better?
It’s better if you like a different sound more! People listen for different things in audio reproduction. No system or component can reproduce everything equally well in regards to the live / studio / “absolute” sound. People therefore gravitate towards / must emphasize different aspects- timbre, dynamics, soundstaging, ‘body,’ etc. in their audio choices, especially since even the balance of different recordings or genres of recordings differ. Even different live settings produce different acoustic balances due to different absorption and reflection factors (or {discernible} lack thereof, in certain fully-outdoor settings)- therefore, even live, there’s no one, ‘absolute’ sound. Some research a few years ago even suggested that millennials tended to prefer compressed recordings to uncompressed ones! Therefore ultimately there’s no ‘better’ to everyone. And different cables emphasize different sonic qualities, and certain ones better than others, depending upon the listener.
To all those (not necessarily you) who believe that perceived cable differences are simply placebo effects, or that differences cannot be judged as ‘better,’ I’d say that in my experience, using certain cables in my system made it sound worse to me, according to which sonic qualities were important/pleasing to my ears, which means, therefore, that the alternatives I ended up using in these cases sounded better to me. No one primed me to believe that my system (already a pretty decent one IMO) sounded inadequate under certain circumstances, so my visceral discomfort with the sound of certain cabling suggests real differences to me (with other, more palatable ones). That being said, I’ve found that the differences between cables I’ve owned have tended to be modest, except when emphasizing a pre-existing unpleasant sonic imbalance in my system.
I have always known that there were differences in audio cable since I was a teenager and heard the difference between zip wire and monster cable. Moving up the food chain to cable manufacturers that continued to define with increasing refinement the “sound” their cables “produced” exposed me to the rule of diminishing returns.
At some point, your gear will fail to resolve the smaller and smaller differences. But I would ALWAYS encourage people to match the quality of their cables with the quality of their electronics and to taste.
The great part of owning higher resolution gear is the fun in actually being able to discern the differences of ALL gear put in the music reproduction chain. Hearing those flavors change from piece to piece is the fun part of the hobby and ultimately settling on the gear that entertains your musical sweet tooth the most is very satisfying indeed.
Paul, thank you for another thought-provoking article! BTW, oranges are better – so you’re wrong! 😉
The “you’re doing it wrong” comments get old quickly. What I like to hear/read are tips that others have found useful. While they may or may not be helpful or applicable to your situation, you at least have some insight in which to make a decision.
For instance:
1) Use a tube pre-amp to get the warmth but a solid state amp to get the punch.
2) Buying separates will allow you to swap out a single piece of gear as needed/desired.
3) The same digital file stored locally on your streamer/computer will sound better than streaming from a service.
Thanks Michael, glad you enjoyed the piece!
Paul
..or they could start making tone controls again…
Or use a portable player with 10-band EQ…
Actually, since most systems (alas) are becoming digital, would EQ in the digital domaine be so terrible?
I hope audio beliefs NEVER become fact. Reproducing live recordings to an exact nature is an admirable pursuit but forever fraught with the limitations of room acoustics and equipment. Even with the help of various DSP and room correction…no room correction (mechanical or electrical) will reproduce to exact perfection the space in which a particular performance of a specific type of music was performed.
Larger orchestral room correction won’t help resolve the intimacies of a jazz club and vice versa. It’s always a compromise that depends on the preferences of the listener….thank god. Imagine how boring the audiophile world would be if there were only ONE way to resolve music and we HAD to agree on the one way and the one audio manufacturer and their way to accomplish this feat….BORING.
Affordable access to all of the worlds great music should be priority one and that is why I believe we all live in the greatest era yet for music aficionados. Once people hear great music…their love will drive them to improve their experience…to better and better gear (fingers crossed) and hopefully…to live venues to share the music together in the way the artist wants the most….in front of an appreciative audience.
The biggest problem with our “hobby” is we spend too much time arguing what is best, real, factual, better, chasing our tails on upgrades, trying to make good better and too little time listening to music.
Everybody should buy the system that makes them happy. But denying facts (like the ones you cited about analog) is stupid and unnecessary. If a claim that someone makes about audio can’t be confirmed through blind listening tests, measurement, or some other means in which bias is minimized, it’s just opinion and not worth arguing about.
The motorcycle guys have it right. I’ve never heard a Harley or Ducati owner claim their bike outperforms the latest Yamaha or Honda. They buy those brands because they have character, instead of that generic, stamped-out feel of the Japanese bikes. For them, that choice makes them happier overall, and they understand that the hardcore performance guys who choose Yamaha or Honda are making the choice that makes them happiest. Of course, it wasn’t always this way …