What a Difference a Wire Makes Letters

Letters responding to this article were published in February, June & August 1996 (Vol.19 Nos.2, 6 & 8):

Cable standards
Editor: Thank you for publishing a scientific study of cable performance using in-circuit measurements ("What a Difference a Wire Makes," December '95, p.95). Author Ben Duncan suggests that low inductance correlates with good measured results. The obvious deficiency is that he did not provide inductance (L), capacitance (C), and resistance (R) measurements for the eight cables he studied in the article. Would it be possible to ask him to supply such measurements? I also wish Stereophile would start measuring speaker wire and interconnects. Martin Colloms published measured results for a number of cables in the July 1990 issue of Hi-Fi News & Record Review.

Note that another important effect of cables is their frequency response. High L values tend to roll-off the high frequencies, while the long "settling times" Ben Duncan measured may audibly show as loss of transparency and low-level detail. Given at least the two measurable effects (frequency response and settling times), I'm not surprised that some people report hearing differences among cables. Of course it remains, for another article, to correlate the long settling times with sonic attributes, in a well-controlled blind listening experiment.

From the very little data I was able to obtain on only four speaker cables from two manufacturers, I found inductance variation by a factor of 25 and capacitance variation by a factor of 86! How much variation would I have found had I looked at 50 cables?

The FDA requires extensive testing and evaluation of drugs before approval. Makers of bottled and canned foods and drinks are required to report calorie and nutrient contents in a specific way. Tobacco companies are required to publish in their adverts nicotine and tar contents in their cigarettes. Amplifier makers are required by the FTC to report power rating in a very specifc way. Car makers have to report tens, possibly hundreds, of measurements on their cars. Is it too much to require cable and interconnect manufacturers to publish inductance, capacitance, and resistance specifications in their adverts? Maybe it's time for Stereophile to lead in this direction.

Finally, Mr. Duncan's "Further Reading" list (p.105) was very short. Max Kelson has recently posted a list of 36 references on the topic on the rec.audio.high.end (R.A.H.E.) internet newsgroup.—Bahjat F. Qaqish, Chapel Hill, NC

Ben Duncan's list of measured R,L, and C was published in May 1996. I agree that for cable manufacturers to specify these parameters is a good idea. Certainly we should start publishing this information in our cable reviews. Mr. Duncan's further reading list was only intended to be a starting point. If the interest exists, we'll publish a complete list of references. Incidentally, an important earlier article which revealed measured speaker cable differences was written by Ken Cowans, the co-founder of Kinergetics. It appeared in Stereophile in January 1990 (Vol.13 No.1, p.103).—John Atkinson

Cable sonics
Editor: While I generally concur with Stereophile's position regarding cable sonics, recent experiments of mine suggest that you may be doing your readers a disservice. Specifically, I've been playing around with Teflon-insulated, silver-plated, reasonably priced cables from D.H. Labs (stranded) and Apature (solid-core). If my ears and my MartinLogan speakers are not deceiving me, I have found these cables to compare quite favorably with excessively priced esoterica. I may expand my quest to include products from Alpha, et al.

Your disservice is in not pursuing similar research. Why have your reviewers never attempted a comparison of exotic cables with similarly constructed off-the-shelf products? Heck, many of the exotic cable manufacturers are really marketeers who merely put their logos on products manufactured under more pedestrian auspices. Surely this would have been suitable grist for the old "Cheapskate" or "Getting Real" mills.

Could it be that companies like Alpha and National Wire don't advertise in your periodical? Or is that spending less than $10/ft. induces Audiophilia nervosa in otherwise responsible journalists?—Steve Podvoll, Gardena, CA

As far as I'm aware, the brands of cables we recommend feature proprietary constructions and materials. This is not to say that there are not also good inexpensive cables to be had. We have been remiss in not auditioning a wider selection of such cables. We'll try harder in the future.John Atkinson

Cable standards
Editor: The obfuscation of information appears to be alive and well in the audio cable industry. Many a so-called "white paper" has been published in attempt to explain away various cable design techniques and their audibility. These same publications have yet to address the real cause of cable differences: the lack of impedance standards for sources and loads!

In support of the above idea, it should be said that many years ago (ca 1976), the powers-that-be realized that there were problems in the hi-fi industry with the measurement and specification system regarding FM broadcast tuners. Everyone was using testing methods that attempted to make their products look better than the competition. They (the Institute of High Fidelity or IHF) set about finding and publishing a group of methods for measuring and specifying FM broadcast tuners. This action turned out to be a great success; soon thereafter, most (but not all) manufacturers of FM tuners started using the IHF methods to specify their products. Not being an insider, I can only assume that the manufacturers realized that consumers would catch on to what was happening and the "numbers" farce would become obvious to everyone.

Zoom forward to 1996...witness the proliferation of companies that specialize in the arcane field of audio cable design. The real problem is this: the fault is not the physics of cables, but poor product design.

The lack of standards for audio component engineers has lead to a seriously audible problem which is being "corrected" by the cable industry. Very few companies (Conrad-Johnson comes to mind) have attempted to make their products follow any kind of "standard" regarding source capabilities and load impedances. The "integration" method of designing, wherein a component is designed for use with only a specific product (usually from the same company), is often frowned upon by the audio community for its lack of adaptability. The engineer has designed a product which will perform as advertised when presented with a load of known electrical characteristics.

Designing a product that will predictably work well into all known loads is an impossible task. The best an engineer can do is hope that the consumer will use reasonable loads for signals. The result of this is easy to predict: any cable that calms the errant signals present with improperly terminated loads will be deemed a blessing, and will subsequently be referred to as a superior cable. The fact that no cable works well in all installations outlines this idea very well.

I wonder why equipment designers have not created a de facto standard in attempt to eliminate this whole thing...must be a money thing.—Gary Mattie, Kolbermoor, Germany

Cable physics
Editor: I am writing regarding Ben Duncan's "What a Difference a Wire Makes" (December '95, p.95). The time-domain results shown are hardly surprising, especially given that his test signal "representing a music transient" bears little similarity to a musical signal at all.

Musical signals have an unmistakable amplitude envelope, a fact well-known to synthesizer designers. Percussive sounds may start with a rapid onset, but they all end with a controlled decay. The end of the [1kHz] toneburst used in his tests bears more similarity to a squarewave than to a musical source. The maximum slew rate of a sinewave occurs at the zero crossing, and this is where the tone burst suddenly ends. For example, look at his fig.7 (Vol.18 No.12, p.100). Cover up the waveform to the left of the "4.00m" mark. Note that the end of the toneburst not only looks like the rising edge of a squarewave, [this is a visual illusion due to the large vertical amplification used in BD's graphs—Ed.], but also the circuit behaves as if it were (and for good reason), with harmonics similar to those shown in my fig.1.

Cables with greater inductance and amplifiers with lower damping factor will have a higher impedance at higher frequencies, which permits greater ringing with transient signals. The end of a 15kHz toneburst could certainly be considered "transient" since its slew rate is 15 times greater than at 1kHz. Whether or not the >100kHz ringing observed is "common" is unproven without a larger sample of amplifiers. Whether it makes an audible difference is yet another question that perhaps bats could answer.

The amplifier I tested does not exhibit this "imperfection" even at frequencies greater than 15kHz, in spite of the amplifier's relatively large negative feedback. On the other hand, this amplifier's damping factor remains constant and high across the audio spectrum. So which will make the greater difference—the amplifier, cable, or speaker? If Mr. Duncan had used a different amplifier, the cable effects at 15kHz would have been masked less by the amplifier's artifacts.

Even if we were to accept a toneburst with no amplitude envelope control as a possible musical source from an electronic instrument, no evidence is shown that the measured effects are actually audible. If they were in any way audible, then I'm certain that data would have been prominently displayed. Then the phrase "meaningful differences" would be undeniable. If no one can hear it, how important is it?

I can find nothing in Mr. Duncan's results that suggests "logic" concerning special cables for mains. I have never seen current waveforms into power supplies that even remotely resemble an isolated double-sine toneburst. The fundamental frequencies involved are so low (50Hz/60Hz) that even the harmonics will not be profoundly affected by mains-cable inductance (even without considering the tens of thousands of microfarads of filter capacitance that follow in a typical power supply). What degree of real improvement could be expected by changing the last meter or two of cable at the end of several kilometers of mains wiring?

Mr. Duncan's data concur with mine: The effects of a speaker cable, though measurable, are small compared to amplifier artifacts. Once again, we are left with clearly measurable differences between speaker cables, but no proof that these differences are audible.—Fred E. Davis, Connecticut

Cables redux
Editor: I read Fred Davis's letter in the June Stereophile (p.28) with interest. He appears to admit the validity of my cable measurements! But to maintain his belief system, he falls back on simplistic and flawed logic: Small numbers aren't (at all, ever) audible behind (different) big numbers. I find that to counter real-world experience.

Sure, the burst I used isn't like a lot of music waveforms, but it's far, far more like them than the test signals used in 99% of audio electronic path measurements. Such waveforms also will occur for real, when zero voltage switching (zvs) is used to obviate clicks. Such waveforms are therefore embedded in a great deal of recorded music produced on modern mixers that employ zvs analog switching, as well as electronically produced house music. Like many electronic engineers, Mr. Davis might best refrain from defining music unless he is in the thick of it.

Mr. Davis's comment about the quality of the AC mains supply is unimaginative. I have some 11kV (British) power-line frameworks acting as Babylonian sculptures in my garden, so I know a little about the wide spacing, hence high inductance of AC-power transmission lines. Using high-capacitance/low-inductance cable in the final few yards forms a useful circuit known as a low-pass filter. Unlike a single capacitor, the transmission-line capacitance of a speaker cable made from a cable of high mutual inductance will attenuate stuff far above audio, without the high-Q resonances of ordinary capacitors, over a very wide range of radio frequencies, quite possibly up to GHz frequencies. I am sure I don't need to further spell out the benefit of using low-inductance cables for AC power connection in high-resolution audio systems.—Ben Duncan, Tattershall, Lincoln, England

I believe that this letter should bring the Great Cable Debate to a (temporary) close. Malcolm Omar Hawksford's article last October ("The Essex Echo," Vol.18 No.10) showed that, working from first principles, cables have effects on signals propagated through them not predicted by simplistic considerations of the electrical characteristics (L, C, and R). Ben Duncan's article last December ("What a Difference a Wire Makes," Vol.18 No.12, with addenda in May and June '96) revealed measurable differences similar to those predicted by Professor Hawksford's theoretical work. The Audio Establishment, in the form of wire expert Fred Davis, mutters that while such effects can be measured, they don't matter. The rest of us, having found that cable choice can sometimes have a surprisingly large effect on the sounds of our systems, gets on with listening to our music.John Atkinson

COMMENTS
Anton's picture

I look forward to the day when my hobby catches up to 1995 and rediscovers the ability to measure such parameters in cabling to enable consumer comparison.

Imagine the conversations we could have! It would be like talking about cartridge compliance and tonearm mass, or speaker/amp impedence matching.

The places we could go!

Thank you one million for posting this, back to the future!

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Hi-Fi News measures cables :-) ......

Glotz's picture

I think Mr. Austin is trying to get some fights going... lol.

Anton's picture

For ‘our delectation’ means he wants to foment discord.

;-D

Jason Victor Serinus's picture

doesn't have to work very hard to get some fights going. Just breathing is enough.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

JVS could review the Crystal Cable Ultimate Dream pure silver interconnects ($20k) and speaker cables ($47k) :-) .........

Anton's picture

“The top of the line Nordost ‘loom’ now has a target on its back: the Crystal Cable ‘loom‘ May be the most revealing set of cables I have yet heard in my system. They capture ever finer levels of nuance and detail while still preserving startlingly quick shifts in dynamic tone and both the macro dynamic and micro dynamic ebb and flow of the program material. These cables are what ‘high end’ audio is all about and in the context of what they can achieve they are a worthy addition to a well heeled audiophile’s system. In the discussion of price, they may not be a bargain, but they certainly do offer value.”

There!

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Were you able to reach out and touch, Diana Krall, Norah Jones, Patricia Barber, Melody Gardot etc. etc.? :-) .........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Did Louis Armstrong, Michael Jackson, Prince, James Brown, Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra etc. etc. come alive in your listening room? :-) .........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Did the walls and ceiling of your listening room disappear and you were transported to the symphony hall and the entire orchestra was playing right in front of you? :-) .......

mcduman's picture

none of those expressions aged well, did they?

i was reading a bike review the other day and the young reviewer said the 3000$ rims had an audiophile effect to them without even realizing that he was insulting us. questionable value for stupidly high prices is now the de-facto definition of audiophilism.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

One can buy a nice Giorgio Armani designer suit for $3,000 :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

Cable is undeniable. We've known it for Decades. Enid Lumley brought it to Audiophile attentions but the astute already began understanding the complex relationships of all circuits and connections materials and methodology.

Toyota Auto Company brilliantly triple seal their Automotive wire connections helping their cars have a 30 year useful lifespans ( very much to the embarrassment to Domestic Auto companies. )

Sensitive Instrumentation Manufacturers like Tektronix engineer Wire systems that assure accurate measurement of electronic circuit relationships.

Our Air Manufacturers like Boeing have engineers that specialise in Wire Designs to achieve consistant performance, cabling integrity is super-high Priority for them as evidenced in the 737 crisis that crippled the Company. ( a sensor issue )

Audiophile cabling's ownership problem is the Crazy Prices for useful Wire Designs.

Most every Audiophile would like to own a high performance Cable System, if only it could be within financial reach.

I'm hoping that a Brave Stereophile Reviewer ( like Mr.rschryer ) would step forward to assume the roll as our Wire authority and then provide readership with useful insights into this important element of audiophile bliss.

I'd calculate that most of the Cable Manufactures would be delighted to supply samples, useful knowledge and encouragement.

I certainly would be an anxious fan and reader.

Tony in Venice

ps. The Photo of instrumentation seems to include a 6 oz can of WD-40, I typically use Cramolin but will resort to WD-40 to help achieve a short term 'good electrical connection'.

Ortofan's picture

... HR has already volunteered his services for the role of "Wire Authority".
https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-33-interconnects-loudspeaker-cables

Perhaps, RS would be willing to serve as 'Wire Authority in training'?

Bogolu Haranath's picture

I didn't know RS was training on 'high-wire' :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

Yeeeeeeeeessssss.... HR did sort-of promise some sort-of wire reporting. ( and Tube rolling, I think )

I'm holding out some Hope that Mr.RS could achieve real Status as: our Wire King of the Frozen North, an Authority, perhaps even a leading authority. I wonder if he feels like I'm dragging him into our crazy world of readership chaos and rough commentary resulting in endless pain and suffering? Lets hope not.

Wire is an exciting world of discovery, a tiny bit controversial and confrontational, it's like discovering the World is round in 1500s .

We need journalism explaining wire's many hidden secrets.

Tony in Venice

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Audiophiles are used to 'endless pain and suffering' :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

Red Book is the easy remedy to Audiophile agonies.

RedBook > Schiit > Active Genelec Pro-Audio Loudspeakers is a smooth pathway to Nirvana.

Let the healing begin. Vinyl is the 600 lb. Gorilla sitting in the middle of the Living room that defines Audiophiledom.

Tony in Venice

rschryer's picture

...that in my new position as Technical Editor of Stereophile I won't have the time to review cables. JA1 was canned from his duties yesterday for placing bets on the outcome of his workbench measurements, à la Pete Rose.

Now if I can just figure out what all those stupid lines on the screen mean...

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Those lines represent seismic activity for monitoring earthquakes :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Fig.12 through Fig.19 represent EEG of somebody listening to Rap/Hip-Hop music :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

It won't be necessarily necessary, will it?

All those little numbers are holdovers from the Japanese Reciever Distortion Wars.

As long as Audiophiles have listening rooms with ambient noise levels in the 55 dba range it will be difficult to correlate measured performance/perceived performance and/or reviewed recommended performance.

Besides:

Measured performance triggers neurotic/psychotic episodes in existing owners and hesitant buying decisioning for prospective buyers.

Needs:

No.1) Value for Money measurement calculation should be one of the top indexes of Audio Gear. i.e. Schiit Ascgard2 for $250 should have a Value for Money rating of AAA+ since it's a Class A amplification and can drive most any headphone and is also a very nice Preamplifier.

No.2) Amplifiers and Loudspeakers should be properly rated for the Room Sizes they can fill. Audio Sound is simply pressure, amps and loudspeakers are pressure transducers. Can a room be properly pressurised?, or is the system a listening seat only ( bite bar as in those early Quad57s ). The clumsy reviewer attempt is to suggest Imaging abilities, which suggests the system has some sort of single listener narrowness as an important trait rather than a deficiency. A great music system is room filling like a Grand Piano.

No.3) If a 21st Century attempt at measurements is to be properly made, we need include the dopamine release data because the most important reason for enjoying music is the dopamine release. Little babies get the dancing thrill from casual hearing of music. Lets include the critically important Dopamine Index, please.

Bon Vivant

Tony in Venice

AJ's picture

Whoa Tony. Only if measured with maybe a Rat Shack meter or they live atop a sawmill ;-).
A broadband measurement would yield something quite different, especially in the ears most critical range.

Btw, did you know that the Hawksford nonsense cited above was completely debunked by jneutron (John E at Brookhaven National Labs)?

https://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages//4367.html

Myths tend to be persistent...for those who believe.

cheers
AJ
Soundfield

tonykaz's picture

Are we discussing cylindrical waveguides ? I'm not.

I've owned sensitive Sound Pressure measuring instruments for my Automotive Industrial work. I've used those tools to measure listening rooms, acoustically treated rooms, semi-anechoic chambers and anechoic chambers, all of it real world stuff.

I'm trying to point out that everyday folks are living in high-noise environments.

Tony in Venice

AJ's picture

Nope. Strange you would ask.

55 dba 60 Hz ok, no prob, quite reasonable. 55 dba 2 kHz?? Whoa.
Kapish?

tonykaz's picture

I referred to your "Propeller Head Plaza" Article.

55 dba @ 60Hz. well, ok.

The rest of the ambient frequency range also contains levels including harmonics.

We would typically use Bruel & Kjaer sound and vibration measurement gear, full range Sweeps. I'm referring to gear who's cost is far beyond what any Audio Manufacturer or Sales outfit would ever own.

I happen to have had access to these research instruments because I was the Purchasing Agent that ordered them and I have an engineering background in Noise Vibration Harshness ( NVH ) workings. NVH is an important group of data in Automotive design and manufacturing.

From here on, I will not go into measurement practices or methodologies. I recognise that listening rooms all have sonic signatures that effect & affect audio gear performance envelopes.

Tony in Venice

AJ's picture

Ah, yes, that debunked the central theme of this article. Ok, two totally separate things, not room noise related.
The fact of the matter is, if I came to your room in Venice and measured, it would be rather extraordinary to see 55 dbA at 2 kHz.
And no we don't need auto industry gear. The same type of mic setup JA uses for speakers, or even a smart phone with calibrated mic would be sufficient.

cheers,

AJ
Soundfield

tonykaz's picture

I'm attempting to suggest the comparative significant relationship of detailed Measurements of Amplifiers to real world environments.

People's brains erase ambient sounds to the point of no longer noticing them, even when the ambient sounds are significant. Brains seem like powerful tools !

I appreciate the detailed measurements of our John Atkinson and Tyll Herston, they help to understand the usefulness of a device.

Yet, we audiophiles, ourselves, are sensitive measurement instrumentation with brains calibrated to normalize ( for lack of a better word ) our daily environments. We all hear and judge against our widely varying environments.

My realized difficulty is that the typical Citizen lives and enjoys MP3 & Bose Loudspeaker Quality levels, while I endlessly chase better sounding Audio Gear. I feel like an addict chasing a better high.

Tony in Venice

John Atkinson's picture
tonykaz wrote:
As long as Audiophiles have listening rooms with ambient noise levels in the 55 dba range it will be difficult to correlate measured performance/perceived performance and/or reviewed recommended performance.

You can find the spectrum of the background noise in my listening room at www.stereophile.com/content/john-atkinsons-listen-room-noise-level. Yes, my room is quiet.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

tonykaz's picture

Thank you for the reveal.

My own rooms are similarly quiet and non-reflective.

I've always admired your curious analytical approach to understanding and explaining.

Tony in Venice

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Building 87, Washington state, USA ...... Microsoft building, is the quietest place on Earth ....... According to Guinness book of world records :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

These low levels can be useful for instrument measurement but I ( personally ) can't cope as the ambient level drops below 30ish dbA range. My brain reacts to sound, not the absence of sound.

For my purposes, I'm playing music with a realistic dynamic max range of 60db, hoping for a 100dbA peak playback level.

Naturally quiet listening rooms provide a pleasant atmospheric experience.

Tony in Venice

Bogolu Haranath's picture

In that building 87, probably SPL of 'Brownian motion' can be recorded :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

One of my Companys was named Esoteric Audio.

Brownian motion sound is way more esoteric that I can cope with.

Are air molecule collisions all that important to y'all???

Tony in Venice

ps. I need my ambient air molecules colliding properly, despite the sounds they make, they keep me from my long awaited dirt nap.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

May be 'Da'at' .... nap :-) .......

AJ's picture

...and non-reflective.

Ouch. Dedicated MCH I hope..

tonykaz's picture

what is MCH?

Tony in Venice

AJ's picture

Multi CHannel. The thing Kal Rubinson occasionally reviews.
And rarer JA
https://www.stereophile.com/content/wheres-real-magazine-we-see-it-february-2001

Wow, you are a stereophile ;-)

rschryer's picture

A stereophile is anyone who loves stereo.

Being a stereophile does not mean one can't also love other things, such as MCH or Mono.

I'm guessing you're a stereophile too, AJ. ;-)

AJ's picture

Well, my experience mirrors the reaction to the linked JA article.
Stereophiles abhor MCH, heretical. Movies, maybe, music no way. A quick peruse of any audiophile aka stereophile forum will confirm this.

Quote:

I'm guessing you're a stereophile too, AJ. ;-)

No sir. My pursuit is to make chicken salad of it.

cheers,
AJ
Soundfield

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Stereophiles have 2 ears ..... MCH people have 5.1 ears ....... People who listen to Dolby Atmos for example have 7.2.4 ears ...... That is the difference :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

I'm a 2 Channel owner, mostly because 2-Channel is the prevalent format.

I could easily be a MonoCH except there isn't any Mono any longer.

I love a room full of Sound.

Stereo seems like a fuller room full of sound than Mono.

Of all the things I'm doing, I'm not sitting down listening to a wide and clearly defined soundstage. Soundstage guys are far more obsessed than I could ever be.

I do enjoy a nice mood-altering piece of exciting music.

Tony in Venice

ps. MCH seems like it could be either/both Multi-channel and Mono-channel. Hmm.

ps.2). I wish my BBQ would have only one full burner instead of multiple burners.

AJ's picture
Quote:

I love a room full of Sound.

Stereo seems like a fuller room full of sound than Mono.

Of all the things I'm doing, I'm not sitting down listening to a wide and clearly defined soundstage. Soundstage guys are far more obsessed than I could ever be.

Then I find it even more difficult to reconcile your "non-reflective" room statement.
Ah well. Yes, your point about 2ch material being the most prevalent coincides with JA's article I linked previously.
That makes zero difference regarding channel count required for realism.

cheers,

AJ
Soundfield Audio

tonykaz's picture

you might be right.

I and my family discovered the improved quality of life from non reflective walls and surfaces. Everyday conversations are easier, book reading improves, etc... We've been working on this since 1980ish. Even the rare 'screaming' episodes are manageable without having to call the trigger happy 5 O people.

On realism, I'm not at all chasing it. I like wonderful sounds floating thru my residential Aether, it creates a pleasant anaesthetic environment. I keep adding ***** five Star music to my random playlist, I have thousands of these Songs that float along creating a 'mild' dopamine infused Incubator for fading-out Industrialists. Control for the dopamine level is the Volume knob. I'm like an Anaesthesiologist.

I should say that I began life with a singing mother that kept singing canaries, our little home was a wonderful sounds Odyssey.

Overall, I'm pretty much along the lines of Mr.Kalman Rubinson & Round 5.1 or 7.1 except that I'm happy with Mono or 2ch., I like the immersed feeling. I am particularly addicted to sitting in close to a live String Quartet as they electrify my nervous system like the most powerful & survivable forces in Nature. ( it's like being in the engine room of a working Tug-boat ; throbbing power )

Reading Stereophile is itself an Odyssey, all these interesting people going deep into the various facets of reproduced music gear and philosophies . ( Mr.Austin calls it a Big Tent ) It's like Gourmand Audio Journalism, an endless stream of beautiful offerings to sample.

Tony in Venice

ps. conspicuously missing are the "Reports from the Wilds" from Mr.Tyll. Mr.Herstens is one of the Greats in Audio Journalism, the World needs his insights .

Bogolu Haranath's picture

JA1's listening room has better SNR than some tube amps :-) .......

tonykaz's picture

which tube amps ?

Tony in Venice

Bogolu Haranath's picture

One example ...... Take a look at BorderPatrol tube amp ...... Fig.13, measurements ....... Also, Fig.12 :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

If a pin drops in the symphony hall where the recording is made, JA1 can hear it in his listening room :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

'Curious, analytical approach to understanding and explaining' ........ JA1 is like Sherlock Holmes ..... 'Elementary Dr. Watson' :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

I lived in England in the 1980s and can recall HFN&RR as the finest of all the Audio Journals in Print. So much so that I exported bundles of each issue to Sell on a Subscription basis ( I think for $27.50 ). I was then B &. K Imports and was selling subscriptions ( with the help of Laura Lovechio of Audio Mag. classifieds ) without any knowledge of HFN&RR, it's publisher and without any sort of proper/formal agreement. I just did it. I was a Grey Importer. I didn't realise or care that our JA was part of the publication. I only casually met Mr.JA at a 21st Century Audio Show, he didn't know me and was at that time quite busy with Show Related things. ( he did have the dam cleverest little A&K player that inspired me ).

Mr.JA's integrity gave our Hobby a legitimacy that seemed missing from most other Ad Content Publications. Even so, I miss the beautiful Adverts the Brits create, that HFN&RR had in Fold-Outs. ( i.e. Finding a Great High-Fi is like finding a Needle in a Haystack ).

Funny thing is that JA could've landed at Rolling Stone or any one of many technical Journals. Stereophile must've been a nice place to call home.

Tony in Venice

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Good thing, JA1 did not go into politics ..... Who knows JA1 could be the PM of UK :-) ......

John Atkinson's picture
tonykaz wrote:
Mr.JA's integrity gave our Hobby a legitimacy that seemed missing from most other Ad Content Publications. . .

Thank you, Tony. I learned my craft working with the late John Crabbe. See www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/communities/index.html. Money quote from that rememberance: "If you tell the truth about components you review, there will always be a small percentage of companies at any one time who are not advertising in your pages. But if you publish the truth, you will have a good magazine. And if you have a good magazine, you will have readers. And as long as you have readers, disgruntled advertisers will eventually return. But if you don't tell the truth, you won't have a good magazine. And if you don't have a good magazine, you won't have readers, at least not for long. And if you don't have readers, you won't have advertisers."

tonykaz wrote:
Funny thing is that JA could've landed at Rolling Stone or any one of many technical Journals. Stereophile must've been a nice place to call home.

Yes it was. Here's a link to the very first As We See It I wrote after arriving in New Mexico: www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/352/index.html.

John Atkinson
Editor, Hi-Fi News, 1982-1986
Editor, Stereophile, 1986-2019
Technical Editor, Stereophile, 2019 onward

tonykaz's picture

I wish that we all could have had useful mentoring, it would've changed everything in our world.

I'd like to work on any Elon Musk project, where would be the limits?, not even the sky!

Tony in Venice

ps. we are in for one hell-of-an-"onward".

AJ's picture

Wow. Indeed.
Then again, it's probably not a humid 90+ outside...

John Atkinson's picture
rschryer wrote:
JA1 was canned from his duties yesterday for placing bets on the outcome of his workbench measurements, à la Pete Rose.

Well at least you didn't compare me with Bill Buckner!

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

At least RS did not compare JA1 to John Gochnaur :-) ........

rschryer's picture

Wiki: "Along with holding the distinction of being the last major leaguer to commit ninety errors in a season, Gochnaur holds the record for most at bats without a home run by a player with a career batting average below .200."

Boy, he stunk.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

I think JA1 is more like Babe Ruth :-) .......

Jim Austin's picture

... that I've started taking audiophile-editor steroids. Watch out, JA1. Your record isn't safe! :-)

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Hope JA1 did not put any 'Curse of the Bambino' on that editor's chair :-) .......

Jim Austin's picture

Go, Red Sox!

(Not actually a huge fan--just lived in New England for 20 years and so rooted for the Red Sox vs the Yankees. Still, that Buckner play gives me nightmares, even though it was long before I moved to New England. I'm more a Yankee-hater, actually, plus Atlanta Braves fan. I'm a southern boy.)

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Braves are the oldest baseball team, started in 1871 ....... Braves great Hank Aaron broke Babe Ruth's home run record ...... Elton John is part owner of Atlanta Braves :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

RS did not compare JA1 to William Lee Bergstrom, either :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

Buckner was a Super-Star that played in 4 Decades of Major League Baseball.

Tony in Venice

John Atkinson's picture
tonykaz wrote:
Buckner was a Super-Star that played in 4 Decades of Major League Baseball.

Yes indeed, though with increasing health issues. I just can't forget the Mets' Mookie Wilson hitting the game-winning ball through Red Sox first baseman Buckner's legs in Game 6 of the 1986 World Series. www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpyJjecJnuI

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

tonykaz's picture

Phew.

Mookie seemed to be a "Hot" bat, electrically-alert team-catalyst.

Poor Buckner looked "outa-gas", just like I sometimes feel.

Baseball has its unforgettable and relivabe moments for those of us willing to let go of our problems, to be fascinated with spectacle.

The YouTube video is well worth watching, thanks.

Tony in Venice lock down ( again )

maelob's picture

100$ a meter! lol how about now 10k or 20k or even 50k a meter - I wonder how much better they sound

AJ's picture

...unless you have some sciency looking measurements ;-)

navr's picture

Only random controlled blind testing involving 100s or 1000s of participants can bring all this to a conclusion. When lives are at stake, RCT pharma trials through Phase 1, 2, and 3 are mandatory by law. With high end audio what is at stake are 1000s, 10s of 1000s, even 100s of 1000s of dollars. $22,000 speaker cable? 96% speed of light? Ok, let's conduct a RCT trial, fully in line with the science of statistics. If Big Pharma is forced to do it so should Big Audio. Big Audio is the best kept secret in the history of commerce and economy. Not under anyone's radar. Huge, huge profits, second to none. If you want to earn big bucks unaffected by macro-economic situation, go into audio cable business and make sure the name you give to your cable is magnificent. Palpable Nirvana comes to mind.
Pharmacology is about effects of medications on human body. There is no formula, no equation, that can compute this effect, for a simple reason: human physiology and medication interaction is a complex system. Only RCT can increase our knowledge and here is why. While it is true that an individual can be suspicious or in favor of anything out there apriori and even consider everything to be an illusion, there is a discipline called epistemology. In epistemology, one always starts with a belief, knowledge, and the concept of justification. Is justification that what makes belief a knowledge? Well, no. Because one can have justified true beliefs that are not knowledge. Bertrand Russel mentioned a case of a man who just entered a room with full expectation that the wall clock in that room was accurate. It just happened that this event took place at noon and that that wall clock, which was stopped, was showing 12pm i.e. noon.
Therefore, this man had a justified true belief on the basis of this wall clock, but at the same time, he did not have the knowledge since the clock was stopped. What, then, is the definition of justification?
In a broader sense, justification for believing in something is about having a foundation in support of the thesis, which can be obtained through memory, perception, and reasoning. Justified beliefs are not knowledge. We need to include perception in order to obtain knowledge on this complex subject. We need RCT blind testing of audio cables.

Jchefs7@msn.com's picture

I thought we all would have gotten passed believing cables make an audible difference above 115 dab

X