Advice please on CD player digital or analogue connection

SaturnV · 13-09-2009, 21:11

This is one for the audio buffs.
I'm fed up with the time it takes for my blu-ray player to load up to play CDs so have decided to add a CD player to my setup.
I've opted for an Arcam Alpha 7 which should give me phenomenal performance for £50 (could only have dreamt of one when they were new).
The question I have is: playing CDs through a Yamaha RX-V520RDS amplifier am I better letting the Arcam do the D-A conversion and using the audio connections or using the digital out and letting the Yamaha do the work.
My instincts say use the Arcam D-A converter (and audio out) but I would like some opinions before I invest in some expensive leads.
Speakers are Mordaunt Short Avant 916i floorstanding.

frasera · 13-09-2009, 21:32

digital out is a gimmick.
expensive leads are just a waste of money.

soulboy77 · 13-09-2009, 21:44

Expensive leads? Decent quality leads are really cheap nowadays.

My initial thought is that the Yamaha amp being more recent will have better DACs than the old Arcam CD player. I would suggest you try both ways and make your own mind up which is best.

Chris Frost · 13-09-2009, 22:31

The ARCAM is, first and foremost, a piece of hi-fi equipment. The boys in the fens will have spent a lot of time and effort to make the analogue output as good as possible since that's the most likely connection in a 2ch hifi system. The digital output won't be too far behind, but in purist terms - analogue first, then digital.

However, the output is only half the story. If the Yam makes a fist of anything connected to its analogue inputs then that will be the overriding factor. Getting 10/10 quality from the ARCAM's analogue out is a waste if the Yam throws away half of the benefit. So it all rests on the Yam really.

So what do you do...

Get yourself some s/h QED Qunex stereo interconnects. This is 75 Ohm cable and plugs. It will work equally well as an analogue interconnect or as a digital. Have a listen to the Yam in "audio direct" mode (if it has it) so there's the minimum of digital signal processing, then compare with the digital connection. Which ever sounds more musical is the answer.

SaturnV · 13-09-2009, 22:48

Thanks for the two good replies there.
I'll take a chance on a decent set of leads then listen and compare.

frasera · 14-09-2009, 03:01

you don't do tests that way. you do a blind test. and you WILL fail.

leads... its all mumbo jumbo, its wire. and its the last place you invest extra money in. its snake oil.

Chris Frost · 14-09-2009, 09:22

Contrary to frasera's assertion I consider cables to be just as valid a part of the electronic circuit as a capacitor, resistor, inductor or other electronic component; and since cables exhibit properties of capacitance, resistance and inductance then shouldn't they be considered part of the audio circuit?

For the record I do think there's a lot of hokum involved in the business of selling cables, but that's very different from the business of making good sounding hifi.

Nigel Goodwin · 14-09-2009, 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

Contrary to frasera's assertion I consider cables to be just as valid a part of the electronic circuit as a capacitor, resistor, inductor or other electronic component; and since cables exhibit properties of capacitance, resistance and inductance then shouldn't they be considered part of the audio circuit?

A line level phono lead is a VERY non-critical component, and you're not going to hear or measure any differences.

Notice that audio professionals in studios don't use any of these stupidly priced 'high quality' leads, and yet their application is FAR more critical.

Pugwash69 · 14-09-2009, 10:16

I only use the onboard decoder for 5.1 stuff (got a SACD/DVD-A), and it limits my choice of amps when I upgrade as not all have 6 channel input. It's simpler to run a single optical/coax between CD and amp for stereo. I'd struggle to hear the difference.

soulboy77 · 14-09-2009, 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pugwash69

I only use the onboard decoder for 5.1 stuff (got a SACD/DVD-A), and it limits my choice of amps when I upgrade as not all have 6 channel input. It's simpler to run a single optical/coax between CD and amp for stereo. I'd struggle to hear the difference.

I suspect most of us wouldn't hear any real difference. With my old set-up I used a co-ax lead to connect to a digital input on a Denon receiver but in all honesty it was no better or worse than when using the analogue stereo inputs. I very rarely listen to CDs nowadays.

Chris Frost · 14-09-2009, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

A line level phono lead is a VERY non-critical component, and you're not going to hear or measure any differences.

Notice that audio professionals in studios don't use any of these stupidly priced 'high quality' leads, and yet their application is FAR more critical.

1) I invite you to a blind listening session.

2) Professional studios do use high quality cables.

http://www.oceanwayrecording.com/ uses Cardas cables...

so does Grundmann Mastering

The Limehouse in London uses Planet Waves

and you'll find countless studios, OB trucks and recording facilities wired with Belden.

Pro-studio are going to deal with brands from their market, and there's only few cable companies that stand in both the pro and consumer markets.

Pugwash69 · 14-09-2009, 13:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by soulboy77

I very rarely listen to CDs nowadays.

Same for me. I ripped them all to a NAS and playback through XBMCs. I still can't tell the difference!

frasera · 14-09-2009, 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

1) I invite you to a blind listening session.
2) Professional studios do use high quality cables.
http://www.oceanwayrecording.com/ uses Cardas cables...
so does Grundmann Mastering
The Limehouse in London uses Planet Waves
and you'll find countless studios, OB trucks and recording facilities wired with Belden.
Pro-studio are going to deal with brands from their market, and there's only few cable companies that stand in both the pro and consumer markets.

i invite you to show me credible science proving fancy cables are necessary for such consumer applications. those studios have their own motivations for using over priced equipment, perhaps they got a "special" deal so they could be used for advertising. in any case its not proof or convincing evidence of anything. a studio could use monster cable and 300 dollar fancy ac power cable as well, it would sound no different and their work would get done even though they wasted a ton of money. its not the kind of snake oil that leads to failed applications, its the kind that empties your wallet for no benefit at all.

http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coa...monster-cables
audiophile cable equipment claims tend to fail real scruitiny.
here's the audiophile grade ac cable lol
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/my...er-3-a-293165/

Chris Frost · 14-09-2009, 14:45

frasera, you're welcome to hop on a plane to Manchester UK and come and sit in on the test. I'll put you up for a week.

SaturnV · 14-09-2009, 15:05

Sorry to cause a debate on the value of decent interconnects, given the importance of impedance matching, capacitance and shielding I didn't expect it to be a contentious issue. Good speaker wire especially is vital.
I was more interested in the relative merits of a dated but previously state of the art Arcam with a more modern digital processor. Suppose I'll let my ears decide.

Chris Frost · 14-09-2009, 15:31

I don't think you have anything to apologise for, SaturnV. The cable debate will rage on, and it's understandable why.

Here's a point for the absolutists to mull over..."I haven't seen it, it can't be measured, so I don't believe it".

Oxygen - ever seen it?

History is littered with turning points where accepted knowledge was shown to be incomplete. Men and women of vision suffered ridicule for proposing new ideas. Charles Darwin was openly mocked for his theory of the evolution of species. Louis Pasteur suffered similarly for pioneering his work in to vaccines.

For years the idea pervaded that the atom was the smallest building block of the universe. In fact it was the ancient Greeks first came up with an idea that everything was made up of tiny particles. It took mankind over two millennia to develop the technology just to observe the consequences of atomic collisions, and nearly 100 years more before we were able to see an atom. Not being able to see atoms didn't stop Oppenheimer's work on splitting them, as the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will attest.

Science isn't an absolute. It's simply an attempt to explain the world by observation and experiment based on the tools and knowledge of the time. Those tools and that knowledge are improving every day, and with it our understanding of the world around us evolves too.

Nigel Goodwin · 14-09-2009, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaturnV

given the importance of impedance matching,.

Actually there's no issue about that at all, impedance matching isn't (and shouldn't be) used. You connect a low impedance output to a higher impedance input (at least five times as high, and usually more).

frasera · 14-09-2009, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

I don't think you have anything to apologise for, SaturnV. The cable debate will rage on, and it's understandable why.
Here's a point for the absolutists to mull over..."I haven't seen it, it can't be measured, so I don't believe it".
Oxygen - ever seen it?
History is littered with turning points where accepted knowledge was shown to be incomplete. Men and women of vision suffered ridicule for proposing new ideas. Charles Darwin was openly mocked for his theory of the evolution of species. Louis Pasteur suffered similarly for pioneering his work in to vaccines.
For years the idea pervaded that the atom was the smallest building block of the universe. In fact it was the ancient Greeks first came up with an idea that everything was made up of tiny particles. It took mankind over two millennia to develop the technology just to observe the consequences of atomic collisions, and nearly 100 years more before we were able to see an atom. Not being able to see atoms didn't stop Oppenheimer's work on splitting them, as the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will attest.
Science isn't an absolute. It's simply an attempt to explain the world by observation and experiment based on the tools and knowledge of the time. Those tools and that knowledge are improving every day, and with it our understanding of the world around us evolves too.

oh yea...copper wires are so magical that scientists are having trouble proving the claims of the magical eared audiophiles. its one of the secret mysteries of the universe lol! give me a freakin break. if this bs was real there would be tons of people bending over backwards to prove it with studies and science. you only have to rely on bs when you are selling pseudo science snake oil claims after you realize such sh*t is unmeasurable because it doesn't exist.

Chris Frost · 14-09-2009, 22:51

LMFAO at frasera

I had no idea the concept of something unknown would unsettle you so much. Chill out. It's not life or death, it's just hi-fi.

All joking aside, how you've responded is typical of an absolutist viewpoint. You're so certain that there's no room for any other possibilities than what you "know" right now. That's the fatal flaw in all the arguments against the possibilities of cables making a difference. That was the point of my previous post.

There was a time we knew with absolute certainty that the earth was flat...until we found out it wasn't. There was a time we knew 100% for sure that the earth was at the center of the universe...until we found out it wasn't. You believe right now with 100% conviction that cables can't make a difference... do you see where this is going?

If you can't trust your ears, and can only accept measurements then have a look at this

frasera · 14-09-2009, 23:34

no, you aren't just trying to claim that you have esp for kicks. you are trying to get people to throw down money into a pit, and that is not so harmless.

all sorts of pseudo science from ESP to psychics make the same claims you do. all claim that science just isn't good enough to see their magic. i'm sorry, you are going to have to do better than that.

as for trusting your ears...audiophiles failing double blind tests is pretty much a given, so there is no reason to trust your ears. you can only trust that because of the nature of evolution people aren't entirely rational, and psychological weaknesses are easily exploited by marketers to alter perception and empty wallets. perhaps you should take a look into behavioral economics to see how easy people are to fool.

lol at your pdf
http://www.audioholics.com/education...able-resonance
cable resonance claims debunked.
http://www.audioholics.com/news/indu...ake-oil-cables
top 10 audiophile snake oil claims
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-you-snake-oil

there are many places in audio where spending more DOES get you more. cables is not one of them. unless you have cable runs that are ridiculously long there is no justification for anything special at all. so perhaps you've been brainwashed, or perhaps you fill your pockets fooling the ignorant, i don't know. i just know this stuff is snake oil.

Chris Frost · 15-09-2009, 00:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by frasera

no, you aren't just trying to claim that you have esp for kicks. you are trying to get people to throw down money into a pit, and that is not so harmless.

Would you like to point out where I suggested folk spend excessively on cables? Read back through this thread. You'll find me suggesting the OP invest in some s/h cables that would work equally well as analogue and digital interconnects. The cables I recommended retail about around £50/$75 new, and s/h would be about 1/3rd that figure - so hardly opening the gates of hell to an endless money pit, wouldn't you agree?

Quote:

Originally Posted by frasera

as for trusting your ears...audiophiles failing double blind tests is pretty much a given, so there is no reason to trust your ears. you can only trust that because of the nature of evolution people aren't entirely rational, and psychological weaknesses are easily exploited by marketers to alter perception and empty wallets. perhaps you should take a look into behavioral economics to see how easy people are to fool.

I'm not particularly interested in what some journalist can or can't do. Most of them are so far up their own backsides they don't know what day it is. Equally there's a lot of really bad hi-fi dealers who are only interested in selling the next highest priced box or mega-expensive accessory; so it's no surprise to me that cables create such hotly divided opinions.

What does interest me is getting the best performance out of a system for the smallest outlay. It doesn't matter if a system costs £1000 or £10,000, the point is that I'd rather explore every avenue to get the best out of the existing gear before making a major box upgrade. 10% spent on accessories might be a better investment than 30%-50% spent on a new bit of hardware. So much money is wasted on unnecessary hardware upgrades when better results can be had from making the existing system work better. Please remember too, I'm not a hi-fi dealer, I don't sell cables. I'm a music enthusiast.

Quote:

Originally Posted by frasera

lol at your pdf
http://www.audioholics.com/education...able-resonance
cable resonance claims debunked.
http://www.audioholics.com/news/indu...ake-oil-cables
top 10 audiophile snake oil claims
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-you-snake-oil

Well, you wanted something measured, so I just obliged you. We could play this tit-for-tat game all night; offering up one bit of information then the other knocking it down only for that to be knocked down too. It doesn't prove anything beyond opinions are like Rsoles - everyone's got one. I've offered a blind test for anyone willing to make the trip to Manchester, that's all that should really be required.

frasera · 15-09-2009, 06:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

Would you like to point out where I suggested folk spend excessively on cables? Read back through this thread. You'll find me suggesting the OP invest in some s/h cables that would work equally well as analogue and digital interconnects. The cables I recommended retail about around £50/$75 new, and s/h would be about 1/3rd that figure - so hardly opening the gates of hell to an endless money pit, wouldn't you agree?

i wouldnt. pushing paranormal beliefs about simple components distorts judgment on where money is best spent by default. the "i'm only ripping you off a bit" is not an argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

I'm not particularly interested in what some journalist can or can't do. Most of them are so far up their own backsides they don't know what day it is. Equally there's a lot of really bad hi-fi dealers who are only interested in selling the next highest priced box or mega-expensive accessory; so it's no surprise to me that cables create such hotly divided opinions.

its hotly divided not because of "opinions" but because one side is selling snake oil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Frost

What does interest me is getting the best performance out of a system for the smallest outlay. It doesn't matter if a system costs £1000 or £10,000, the point is that I'd rather explore every avenue to get the best out of the existing gear before making a major box upgrade. 10% spent on accessories might be a better investment than 30%-50% spent on a new bit of hardware. So much money is wasted on unnecessary hardware upgrades when better results can be had from making the existing system work better. Please remember too, I'm not a hi-fi dealer, I don't sell cables. I'm a music enthusiast.
Well, you wanted something measured, so I just obliged you. We could play this tit-for-tat game all night; offering up one bit of information then the other knocking it down only for that to be knocked down too. It doesn't prove anything beyond opinions are like Rsoles - everyone's got one. I've offered a blind test for anyone willing to make the trip to Manchester, that's all that should really be required.

ANY money spent on snake oil is wasted money. 10% spent more on snake oil is 10% more spent on snake oil. if i sell you a voodoo incantation for relatively cheap compared to upgrading your other components i've not saved you any cash at all.

lol blind tests, any blind test set up in a truly objective manner has been failed by audiophiles making such claims. if you've think you've passed such a test either you've set it up in a rigged manner or don't know the meaning of a blind test.

Chris Frost · 15-09-2009, 10:39

frasera, you do make me chuckle when I read your replies here. I can just imaging e you screaming at the screen as you type frantically.

You're adamant in trying to tell me that I'm mistaken in my experiences, and that I can't possibly have heard what I heard. I've offered to share the circumstances that have lead to my belief that cables make a difference - no gimmicks, no sales ploy, no agenda - just the opportunity to listen to some music objectively.

I quite appreciate how people in the 'No' lobby may have come to their own conclusions. Perhaps if I listened to their systems and did blind testing there too then I might be of the same opinion. God knows I've heard enough bad hi-fis that kill the passion of music to know what I like and don't like in a system.

It's interesting to watch the reaction of friends to music reproduced well. It's like the audiological equivalent of regaining one's taste after a cold. Maybe this experience is far rarer than even I imagined.

The offer stands open to anyone who can make the trip to Manchester. Come have a listen and decide for yourself.

gemma-the-husky · 15-09-2009, 17:33

all i can say is

a long while ago i had a lovely technics cd player, and a nad amp, and recorded on sony mini disc. I had mission 700 speakers, then monitor 25s I think, and I have a load of Kefs knocking around as well

ordinary phono plugs, nothing special

all sounded great

i changed the cd player, and amp to sony kit, with remote controls and optical out.

still sounded great

However, i never heard the slightest difference between anything - analogue minidisc recordings sounded identical to source material on the cd player (either cd player) to my ears

i think once you get a certain standard you need good hearing and big budgets to generate fairly minor improvements

now i also have a rega planar 3 turntable, and I AM convinced there is more detail (and better bass) from the vinyl, but more crackles, and more getting up and down also.

Chris Frost · 15-09-2009, 20:51

That's interesting. I wouldn't have classed Technics or Sony as a hi-fi brands as I would NAD.

I remember Technics Class AA amps getting reasonable reviews back in the early to mid 80's, and them being on sale at the local general hi-fi stores in Manchester - Cleartone and Practical - but not at The Music Room nor The Audio Counsel in Oldham which were more specialist.

13-09-2009, 21:11	#1
SaturnV Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 5,625	Advice please on CD player digital or analogue connection This is one for the audio buffs. I'm fed up with the time it takes for my blu-ray player to load up to play CDs so have decided to add a CD player to my setup. I've opted for an Arcam Alpha 7 which should give me phenomenal performance for £50 (could only have dreamt of one when they were new). The question I have is: playing CDs through a Yamaha RX-V520RDS amplifier am I better letting the Arcam do the D-A conversion and using the audio connections or using the digital out and letting the Yamaha do the work. My instincts say use the Arcam D-A converter (and audio out) but I would like some opinions before I invest in some expensive leads. Speakers are Mordaunt Short Avant 916i floorstanding.

13-09-2009, 21:32	#2
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	digital out is a gimmick. expensive leads are just a waste of money.

13-09-2009, 21:44	#3
soulboy77 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Herts Posts: 17,005	Expensive leads? Decent quality leads are really cheap nowadays. My initial thought is that the Yamaha amp being more recent will have better DACs than the old Arcam CD player. I would suggest you try both ways and make your own mind up which is best.

13-09-2009, 22:31	#4
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	The ARCAM is, first and foremost, a piece of hi-fi equipment. The boys in the fens will have spent a lot of time and effort to make the analogue output as good as possible since that's the most likely connection in a 2ch hifi system. The digital output won't be too far behind, but in purist terms - analogue first, then digital. However, the output is only half the story. If the Yam makes a fist of anything connected to its analogue inputs then that will be the overriding factor. Getting 10/10 quality from the ARCAM's analogue out is a waste if the Yam throws away half of the benefit. So it all rests on the Yam really. So what do you do... Get yourself some s/h QED Qunex stereo interconnects. This is 75 Ohm cable and plugs. It will work equally well as an analogue interconnect or as a digital. Have a listen to the Yam in "audio direct" mode (if it has it) so there's the minimum of digital signal processing, then compare with the digital connection. Which ever sounds more musical is the answer.

13-09-2009, 22:48	#5
SaturnV Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 5,625	Thanks for the two good replies there. I'll take a chance on a decent set of leads then listen and compare.

14-09-2009, 03:01	#6
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	you don't do tests that way. you do a blind test. and you WILL fail. leads... its all mumbo jumbo, its wire. and its the last place you invest extra money in. its snake oil.

14-09-2009, 09:22	#7
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Contrary to frasera's assertion I consider cables to be just as valid a part of the electronic circuit as a capacitor, resistor, inductor or other electronic component; and since cables exhibit properties of capacitance, resistance and inductance then shouldn't they be considered part of the audio circuit? For the record I do think there's a lot of hokum involved in the business of selling cables, but that's very different from the business of making good sounding hifi.

14-09-2009, 10:03	#8
Nigel Goodwin Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: North Derbyshire Posts: 41,789	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost Contrary to frasera's assertion I consider cables to be just as valid a part of the electronic circuit as a capacitor, resistor, inductor or other electronic component; and since cables exhibit properties of capacitance, resistance and inductance then shouldn't they be considered part of the audio circuit? A line level phono lead is a VERY non-critical component, and you're not going to hear or measure any differences. Notice that audio professionals in studios don't use any of these stupidly priced 'high quality' leads, and yet their application is FAR more critical.

14-09-2009, 10:16	#9
Pugwash69 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: The Sticks Posts: 3,720	I only use the onboard decoder for 5.1 stuff (got a SACD/DVD-A), and it limits my choice of amps when I upgrade as not all have 6 channel input. It's simpler to run a single optical/coax between CD and amp for stereo. I'd struggle to hear the difference.

14-09-2009, 10:34	#10
soulboy77 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Herts Posts: 17,005	Quote: Originally Posted by Pugwash69 I only use the onboard decoder for 5.1 stuff (got a SACD/DVD-A), and it limits my choice of amps when I upgrade as not all have 6 channel input. It's simpler to run a single optical/coax between CD and amp for stereo. I'd struggle to hear the difference. I suspect most of us wouldn't hear any real difference. With my old set-up I used a co-ax lead to connect to a digital input on a Denon receiver but in all honesty it was no better or worse than when using the analogue stereo inputs. I very rarely listen to CDs nowadays.

14-09-2009, 12:03	#11
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Quote: Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin A line level phono lead is a VERY non-critical component, and you're not going to hear or measure any differences. Notice that audio professionals in studios don't use any of these stupidly priced 'high quality' leads, and yet their application is FAR more critical. 1) I invite you to a blind listening session. 2) Professional studios do use high quality cables. http://www.oceanwayrecording.com/ uses Cardas cables... so does Grundmann Mastering The Limehouse in London uses Planet Waves and you'll find countless studios, OB trucks and recording facilities wired with Belden. Pro-studio are going to deal with brands from their market, and there's only few cable companies that stand in both the pro and consumer markets.

14-09-2009, 13:04	#12
Pugwash69 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: The Sticks Posts: 3,720	Quote: Originally Posted by soulboy77 I very rarely listen to CDs nowadays. Same for me. I ripped them all to a NAS and playback through XBMCs. I still can't tell the difference!

14-09-2009, 14:19	#13
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost 1) I invite you to a blind listening session. 2) Professional studios do use high quality cables. http://www.oceanwayrecording.com/ uses Cardas cables... so does Grundmann Mastering The Limehouse in London uses Planet Waves and you'll find countless studios, OB trucks and recording facilities wired with Belden. Pro-studio are going to deal with brands from their market, and there's only few cable companies that stand in both the pro and consumer markets. i invite you to show me credible science proving fancy cables are necessary for such consumer applications. those studios have their own motivations for using over priced equipment, perhaps they got a "special" deal so they could be used for advertising. in any case its not proof or convincing evidence of anything. a studio could use monster cable and 300 dollar fancy ac power cable as well, it would sound no different and their work would get done even though they wasted a ton of money. its not the kind of snake oil that leads to failed applications, its the kind that empties your wallet for no benefit at all. http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coa...monster-cables audiophile cable equipment claims tend to fail real scruitiny. here's the audiophile grade ac cable lol http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f21/my...er-3-a-293165/

14-09-2009, 14:45	#14
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	frasera, you're welcome to hop on a plane to Manchester UK and come and sit in on the test. I'll put you up for a week.

14-09-2009, 15:05	#15
SaturnV Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 5,625	Sorry to cause a debate on the value of decent interconnects, given the importance of impedance matching, capacitance and shielding I didn't expect it to be a contentious issue. Good speaker wire especially is vital. I was more interested in the relative merits of a dated but previously state of the art Arcam with a more modern digital processor. Suppose I'll let my ears decide.

14-09-2009, 15:31	#16
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	I don't think you have anything to apologise for, SaturnV. The cable debate will rage on, and it's understandable why. Here's a point for the absolutists to mull over..."I haven't seen it, it can't be measured, so I don't believe it". Oxygen - ever seen it? History is littered with turning points where accepted knowledge was shown to be incomplete. Men and women of vision suffered ridicule for proposing new ideas. Charles Darwin was openly mocked for his theory of the evolution of species. Louis Pasteur suffered similarly for pioneering his work in to vaccines. For years the idea pervaded that the atom was the smallest building block of the universe. In fact it was the ancient Greeks first came up with an idea that everything was made up of tiny particles. It took mankind over two millennia to develop the technology just to observe the consequences of atomic collisions, and nearly 100 years more before we were able to see an atom. Not being able to see atoms didn't stop Oppenheimer's work on splitting them, as the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will attest. Science isn't an absolute. It's simply an attempt to explain the world by observation and experiment based on the tools and knowledge of the time. Those tools and that knowledge are improving every day, and with it our understanding of the world around us evolves too.

14-09-2009, 16:05	#17
Nigel Goodwin Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: North Derbyshire Posts: 41,789	Quote: Originally Posted by SaturnV given the importance of impedance matching,. Actually there's no issue about that at all, impedance matching isn't (and shouldn't be) used. You connect a low impedance output to a higher impedance input (at least five times as high, and usually more).

14-09-2009, 21:50	#18
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost I don't think you have anything to apologise for, SaturnV. The cable debate will rage on, and it's understandable why. Here's a point for the absolutists to mull over..."I haven't seen it, it can't be measured, so I don't believe it". Oxygen - ever seen it? History is littered with turning points where accepted knowledge was shown to be incomplete. Men and women of vision suffered ridicule for proposing new ideas. Charles Darwin was openly mocked for his theory of the evolution of species. Louis Pasteur suffered similarly for pioneering his work in to vaccines. For years the idea pervaded that the atom was the smallest building block of the universe. In fact it was the ancient Greeks first came up with an idea that everything was made up of tiny particles. It took mankind over two millennia to develop the technology just to observe the consequences of atomic collisions, and nearly 100 years more before we were able to see an atom. Not being able to see atoms didn't stop Oppenheimer's work on splitting them, as the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima will attest. Science isn't an absolute. It's simply an attempt to explain the world by observation and experiment based on the tools and knowledge of the time. Those tools and that knowledge are improving every day, and with it our understanding of the world around us evolves too. oh yea...copper wires are so magical that scientists are having trouble proving the claims of the magical eared audiophiles. its one of the secret mysteries of the universe lol! give me a freakin break. if this bs was real there would be tons of people bending over backwards to prove it with studies and science. you only have to rely on bs when you are selling pseudo science snake oil claims after you realize such sh*t is unmeasurable because it doesn't exist.

14-09-2009, 22:51	#19
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	LMFAO at frasera I had no idea the concept of something unknown would unsettle you so much. Chill out. It's not life or death, it's just hi-fi. All joking aside, how you've responded is typical of an absolutist viewpoint. You're so certain that there's no room for any other possibilities than what you "know" right now. That's the fatal flaw in all the arguments against the possibilities of cables making a difference. That was the point of my previous post. There was a time we knew with absolute certainty that the earth was flat...until we found out it wasn't. There was a time we knew 100% for sure that the earth was at the center of the universe...until we found out it wasn't. You believe right now with 100% conviction that cables can't make a difference... do you see where this is going? If you can't trust your ears, and can only accept measurements then have a look at this

14-09-2009, 23:34	#20
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	no, you aren't just trying to claim that you have esp for kicks. you are trying to get people to throw down money into a pit, and that is not so harmless. all sorts of pseudo science from ESP to psychics make the same claims you do. all claim that science just isn't good enough to see their magic. i'm sorry, you are going to have to do better than that. as for trusting your ears...audiophiles failing double blind tests is pretty much a given, so there is no reason to trust your ears. you can only trust that because of the nature of evolution people aren't entirely rational, and psychological weaknesses are easily exploited by marketers to alter perception and empty wallets. perhaps you should take a look into behavioral economics to see how easy people are to fool. lol at your pdf http://www.audioholics.com/education...able-resonance cable resonance claims debunked. http://www.audioholics.com/news/indu...ake-oil-cables top 10 audiophile snake oil claims http://www.audioholics.com/education...-you-snake-oil there are many places in audio where spending more DOES get you more. cables is not one of them. unless you have cable runs that are ridiculously long there is no justification for anything special at all. so perhaps you've been brainwashed, or perhaps you fill your pockets fooling the ignorant, i don't know. i just know this stuff is snake oil.

15-09-2009, 00:58	#21
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Quote: Originally Posted by frasera no, you aren't just trying to claim that you have esp for kicks. you are trying to get people to throw down money into a pit, and that is not so harmless. Would you like to point out where I suggested folk spend excessively on cables? Read back through this thread. You'll find me suggesting the OP invest in some s/h cables that would work equally well as analogue and digital interconnects. The cables I recommended retail about around £50/$75 new, and s/h would be about 1/3rd that figure - so hardly opening the gates of hell to an endless money pit, wouldn't you agree? Quote: Originally Posted by frasera as for trusting your ears...audiophiles failing double blind tests is pretty much a given, so there is no reason to trust your ears. you can only trust that because of the nature of evolution people aren't entirely rational, and psychological weaknesses are easily exploited by marketers to alter perception and empty wallets. perhaps you should take a look into behavioral economics to see how easy people are to fool. I'm not particularly interested in what some journalist can or can't do. Most of them are so far up their own backsides they don't know what day it is. Equally there's a lot of really bad hi-fi dealers who are only interested in selling the next highest priced box or mega-expensive accessory; so it's no surprise to me that cables create such hotly divided opinions. What does interest me is getting the best performance out of a system for the smallest outlay. It doesn't matter if a system costs £1000 or £10,000, the point is that I'd rather explore every avenue to get the best out of the existing gear before making a major box upgrade. 10% spent on accessories might be a better investment than 30%-50% spent on a new bit of hardware. So much money is wasted on unnecessary hardware upgrades when better results can be had from making the existing system work better. Please remember too, I'm not a hi-fi dealer, I don't sell cables. I'm a music enthusiast. Quote: Originally Posted by frasera lol at your pdf http://www.audioholics.com/education...able-resonance cable resonance claims debunked. http://www.audioholics.com/news/indu...ake-oil-cables top 10 audiophile snake oil claims http://www.audioholics.com/education...-you-snake-oil Well, you wanted something measured, so I just obliged you. We could play this tit-for-tat game all night; offering up one bit of information then the other knocking it down only for that to be knocked down too. It doesn't prove anything beyond opinions are like Rsoles - everyone's got one. I've offered a blind test for anyone willing to make the trip to Manchester, that's all that should really be required.

DS Forums

Advice please on CD player digital or analogue connection

15-09-2009, 06:53	#22
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost Would you like to point out where I suggested folk spend excessively on cables? Read back through this thread. You'll find me suggesting the OP invest in some s/h cables that would work equally well as analogue and digital interconnects. The cables I recommended retail about around £50/$75 new, and s/h would be about 1/3rd that figure - so hardly opening the gates of hell to an endless money pit, wouldn't you agree? i wouldnt. pushing paranormal beliefs about simple components distorts judgment on where money is best spent by default. the "i'm only ripping you off a bit" is not an argument. Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost I'm not particularly interested in what some journalist can or can't do. Most of them are so far up their own backsides they don't know what day it is. Equally there's a lot of really bad hi-fi dealers who are only interested in selling the next highest priced box or mega-expensive accessory; so it's no surprise to me that cables create such hotly divided opinions. its hotly divided not because of "opinions" but because one side is selling snake oil. Quote: Originally Posted by Chris Frost What does interest me is getting the best performance out of a system for the smallest outlay. It doesn't matter if a system costs £1000 or £10,000, the point is that I'd rather explore every avenue to get the best out of the existing gear before making a major box upgrade. 10% spent on accessories might be a better investment than 30%-50% spent on a new bit of hardware. So much money is wasted on unnecessary hardware upgrades when better results can be had from making the existing system work better. Please remember too, I'm not a hi-fi dealer, I don't sell cables. I'm a music enthusiast. Well, you wanted something measured, so I just obliged you. We could play this tit-for-tat game all night; offering up one bit of information then the other knocking it down only for that to be knocked down too. It doesn't prove anything beyond opinions are like Rsoles - everyone's got one. I've offered a blind test for anyone willing to make the trip to Manchester, that's all that should really be required. ANY money spent on snake oil is wasted money. 10% spent more on snake oil is 10% more spent on snake oil. if i sell you a voodoo incantation for relatively cheap compared to upgrading your other components i've not saved you any cash at all. lol blind tests, any blind test set up in a truly objective manner has been failed by audiophiles making such claims. if you've think you've passed such a test either you've set it up in a rigged manner or don't know the meaning of a blind test.

15-09-2009, 10:39	#23
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	frasera, you do make me chuckle when I read your replies here. I can just imaging e you screaming at the screen as you type frantically. You're adamant in trying to tell me that I'm mistaken in my experiences, and that I can't possibly have heard what I heard. I've offered to share the circumstances that have lead to my belief that cables make a difference - no gimmicks, no sales ploy, no agenda - just the opportunity to listen to some music objectively. I quite appreciate how people in the 'No' lobby may have come to their own conclusions. Perhaps if I listened to their systems and did blind testing there too then I might be of the same opinion. God knows I've heard enough bad hi-fis that kill the passion of music to know what I like and don't like in a system. It's interesting to watch the reaction of friends to music reproduced well. It's like the audiological equivalent of regaining one's taste after a cold. Maybe this experience is far rarer than even I imagined. The offer stands open to anyone who can make the trip to Manchester. *Come have a listen and decide for yourself.*

15-09-2009, 17:33	#24
gemma-the-husky Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: UK Posts: 17,858	all i can say is a long while ago i had a lovely technics cd player, and a nad amp, and recorded on sony mini disc. I had mission 700 speakers, then monitor 25s I think, and I have a load of Kefs knocking around as well ordinary phono plugs, nothing special all sounded great i changed the cd player, and amp to sony kit, with remote controls and optical out. still sounded great However, i never heard the slightest difference between anything - analogue minidisc recordings sounded identical to source material on the cd player (either cd player) to my ears i think once you get a certain standard you need good hearing and big budgets to generate fairly minor improvements now i also have a rega planar 3 turntable, and I AM convinced there is more detail (and better bass) from the vinyl, but more crackles, and more getting up and down also.

15-09-2009, 20:51	#25
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	That's interesting. I wouldn't have classed Technics or Sony as a hi-fi brands as I would NAD. I remember Technics Class AA amps getting reasonable reviews back in the early to mid 80's, and them being on sale at the local general hi-fi stores in Manchester - Cleartone and Practical - but not at The Music Room nor The Audio Counsel in Oldham which were more specialist.