Research? But it is interesting when a company with a conservative brand (i.e. one not aimed exclusively at audiophiles) decides to use it to grab a chunk of the markup on expensive cables. Denon did it a while back with a $500 ethernet cable and I had assumed it would devalue the brand far more than 99.999...% profit on the cable brought in. But then I know little about sales and marketing. The $1000 handbag thing did not seem to harm the companies involved perhaps because they all did it.
I wonder what the BBC thinks?
How would research on speaker cables devalue the Dynaudio brand? It's one of the most serious brands in the entire world. And why should anyone care what BBC thinks?
> How would research on speaker cables devalue the Dynaudio brand?
In the eyes of audiophiles the publication you linked to might strengthen the brand but to professionals and mainstream non-audiophile consumers it will tend to have the opposite effect. It will not be seen as research but the marketing story to support their expensive cables. The reaction is almost certain to be quite similar to that for Denon's expensive cable given here if you read the customer reviews:
Audiophiles rarely appreciate quite what they and their products look like from outside their relatively closed world. This reaction to Denon's cable will have an influence when non-audiophile consumers are choosing between a Denon or a Yamaha receiver.
> It's one of the most serious brands in the entire world.
Prior to finding about this cable I would have agreed which makes what they are currently trying to achieve with their brand interesting.
> And why should anyone care what BBC thinks?
The BBC currently have a significant role in shaping peoples view of Dynaudio as a conservative choice in speakers. How much that is worth to Dynaudio in terms of money I do not know but it is likely to be significant. The BBC are not going to like associations with expensive audiophile cables and, I suspect, nor are a number of people at Dynaudio. This recent push of the ocos cables is rather interesting although I am not sure quite what it means.
'Tsup freako? Interesting but nothing revelational...components work best when impedance matched, as do the cables. How to do it and account for frequency variance has also been discussed before. All of this research simply explains why Bruce Brisson started MIT cables...increasing their efficiency and power transfer capabilities, reducing reflecions, impedance matching, reducing signal loss/noise and addressing frequency response issues for maximum articulation. MIT has the engineering, the patents and the experience behind them whereas Dynaudio looks like they are more than a little late to the party
As someone that has been involved with some of the work of MIT (the real one) for the past few decades I was initially baffled by your post until I looked up the MIT you meant. Doesn't this press any buttons with audiophiles? I recently discovered when looking up a reference that there is an audiophile company calling themselves B&K! And not only that it has a higher rating in google than the real B&K!!
I think the world may be changing too quickly for me to keep up.
Andy, I'm old but you must be ancient if you didn't know about MIT Cables and B&K Audio...have you been working on a time machine or something?
> Andy, I'm old but you must be ancient if you didn't know about MIT Cables and B&K Audio...have you> been working on a time machine or something?
I, like a lot of people, dropped a hobby interest in home audio when the "subjective" thing started to become mainstream in the mid to late 70s. I have only recently taken an interest again and given the closed nature of the audiophile world I am only now finding out about the many companies that formed to produce specialised products for the "subjective" home audio market.
I am familiar with the consumer home audio in department stores (e.g. Denon and Yamaha) and to some extent professional/technical equipment (e.g. Dynaudio) but these companies have not, until recently, been involved in products like exotic cables which generally only appeal to audiophiles. It was interesting to watch how the Denon cable was received by non-audiophile consumers and I would be surprised if Denon consider the product a success. I would have expected the reaction by the average Dynaudio consumer in the professional world to be even more strongly against because they are likely to be more technically knowledgeable and therefore more confident in recognising what Dynaudio is doing. If they are doing this for a particular product in their range then are they also doing it for the other products? It appears to me certain that the Dynaudio brand will be damaged in the pro market sector but then what do I know about marketing? Perhaps the Dynaudio brand is to become primarily an audiophile one where the problem does not exist. Perhaps I am too old and people no longer think it necessary to think well of company to use their products (e.g. microsoft, ebay, paypal,...). Whatever, interesting stuff.
Interesting indeed...as for me, I have always considered Dynaudio to be a driver manufacturer first, an audiophile speaker company second and a professional supplier last (my bad I guess). As for cables, I've just about tried 'em all...only MIT actually delivers substantialy better sound.
Dymaudio came up with this concept over 10 years ago
I don't think Dynaudio will take damage from trying to get access to the cable market (again), but OTOH I don't think they will be successful in this either. I just found it interesting. Until I have learned of anyone who has heard the OCOS cable, I remain open-minded.
Brisson was doing research and designing cables in the 1980's....I've read the MIT research, which addresses the topics raised by Dynaudio. Dynaudio is trying to make it look like they are reinventing the wheel, when they most certainly are not.
Well, you are entitled to your opinion.
Now that sounds like something Speaker Pelosi would say, when confronted with the facts FYI, Brisson started making high end cables in 1981.
Quote:Now that sounds like something Speaker Pelosi would say, when confronted with the facts FYI, Brisson started making high end cables in 1981.
No way, she doesn't tolerate opinions at variance with her own. Facts be damned.
Anyway, I am interested in the Dynaudio thing. Althought many think of them as a 'driver' or 'speaker' manufacturer, think about what goes into that and you have a natural transition to looking at the effect of wiring - binding post to crossover, crossover to driver, etc...
Research into making this a more effective conduit for music signal would seem only natural. (Not endorsing their product, just thinking about their place in the playback chain.)
Apogee speakers used to design and build using Symo products, so this synergy should come as no surprise to audiophiles.
I'll be interested in seeing if Dynaudio comes up with anything 'measurable!'
Quote:Dymaudio came up with this concept over 10 years ago
I bought my first Ocos speaker cable around 1991 when I bought my first Thiels.
It looks and feels like coaxial TV wire and I suspect that's all it is but with a fancy connector.
So this has been around for awhile.
Since someone decided this should be a live thread again (I have no idea what was posted as I have what's his name on permanent "ignore") let me add a few comments.
This OCOS cable would appear to be identical in concept and execution to the OCOS cables sold by Sumiko in the late 1980's early 1990's. A somewhat controversial cable at a time when the cable industry was promoting garden hose sized speaker and interconnect cables, the OCOS was even then expensive for its day. (This is when you could buy excellent speaker cables for under $1.5k.) It did, however, have its proponents and they remained staunchly in favor of this unusual design.
When the OCOS cable was attacked by competitors for the very thin gauge of its center conductor and out of the ordinary construction, the response from OCOS was to suggest doubling up the runs if you really believed you need more conductor than supplied. With the ridiculous impedance loads many speakers of that time period were presenting to amplifiers sold on zero feedback concepts the OCOS cables proved not the be the absolute best match for all systems - but then, what cable is particularly when faced with not so bright options on both ends? Between Jeff Rowland's amplifiers and Dave Wilson's speakers or a B&K Sonata amp and John Bau's Spica Angelus loudspeakers, they proved revelatory.
The original OCOS did present one very unusual concept not seen in other audiophile cables, you could virtually never outgrow your OCOS wiring. The cables were terminated by the retailer for each sale and fitted with silver plated end caps which allowed the client to buy exactly the length required for their system rather than predetermined lengths from the manfucaturer. Should new lengths of cable be needed at a later date the user simply purchased new bulk cable lengths while retaining their old connectors. This was very useful and very economical should their system set up change. Since the bulk cable itself was only moderately priced, this had the potential to save high dollars should a user need new cables.
At the time I was working in a shop that had been dedicated to the MIT line since their inception. There was no doubt in our mind or that of many clients as to which cable gave the most neutral presentation and OCOS cables went out the door with virtually every high end sale we made for quite a while.
Whether it was the ideas sold by OCOS or the very thin construction of the overall package or even the extra set of connection points made with the OCOS cables/terminations that finally pushed the cables out of the market I don't know. They existed in the Sumiko line for long after their heyday and were still sold to a select few very discriminating listeners.
American audiophiles still remain convinced they need extra super sized cables between amp and speaker. I think we all understand how sound quality often can be trumped by ego driven needs.
OTOH, I still have a set of OCOS cables from their original production run and they are, to my ears and those of several friends to whom they have been loaned, the best speaker cable I know of under the stratosphere of pricing. They were used for years in my main system and, if I hadn't switched to DIY speakers hard wired to the amplifiers, they would still be my cable of choice. They are though very stiff and intractable cables. Considering their basic construction their perfomance in this area is not unlike wiring your system with RG59 coax, these cables do not easily bend around corners.
Well worth an audition if they come to a town near you.
Great. Thank you
So much talk about cables, seems The Speakers should gnerate more interest. If you uy into the hype about exotic cables to any measurable degree, you're probably hooked and swear buy them. If you're like me and quite a few other "Philes", you never pay $10K or nowhere close. Truth is, I still respect Monster Cable! Yes, Monster cable! They started the higher grade, and increased attention to better cabling. Therefore, they have the expertise and the history behind them to offer high-quality Cables at affordable prices. Anywayz, I wish these posts had been more about the New Dynaudio Consequence Ultimate Speakers, I have quite a few questions I would like answered, but they have so few dealers for that Series at present. I think they maybe on to something.
IMO, a quality speaker must mate with a quality cable, in order to achieve musical bliss.
Unless a cable alters the frequency and phase response with LCR, it won't sound different. PERIOD.