AVS Special Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As the debate rages on and the jury probably won't be back for some time, I have a question about those ultra-expensive inter-connect cables. You know, the ones that cost anywhere from $50 per cable to $5000+ per cable.
There are two camps: One that says they make all the difference in the world and if you aren't running them, your missing out and your system doesn't sound as good. The other camp says they are a waste of money and just use any old inter-connect cable.
For the moment I lean towards the second group except for my own experiences.
I'm of the following opinion: Inter-connect cables can make a difference in the obvious, but how far do they or can they go? Example, I used to run whatever cables came with the gear or the rat shack jobs. Then one day I switched over to Monoprice premium RCA inter-connects and it made a noticeable difference, but not totally in sound quality except to say that much RF interference was gone and the build quality of the cables is superior. I don't disconnect and re-connect much, I set up my gear and stay put unless I'm adding or taking away something. So the cables don't see much action. That said though I have had the flimsy cables I used to use give out on me for no reason.
I'm not saying the Monoprice premium inter-connects are the very best as I think the Blue Jean stuff is a step above that, but is it worth it?
That's my question. I'd like to hear from folks without bias or desperate justification for spending more on inter-connects then their entire system. I'm looking for clinical scientific fact data I guess on the merits of buying ultra-expensive inter-connects. I'm not putting down those who have spent the money on those expensive inter-connects at all. Those folks I want to hear from as well, but without bias please. Surely some of you may have the info I seek. I'm not trying to start another war. That's not the purpose of my inquiry. The purpose of my inquiry is to be educated on this and to check my own conclusions thus far.
I'd like to see evidence that those ultra-expensive cables make more than a subtle difference or indeed an imaginary perceptive difference. Of course we all hear things differently, what sounds like crap to one person is heaven to another.
I'm also of the philosophy that inter-connect cables alone do not make a system sound good or better. It's like a computer: garbage in, garbage out. If one has great uber-interconnects, great electronics and speakers, but poorly produced media, it's going to sound bad. If one has great uber interconnects, cheap electronics, decent media and poor speakers, it's going to sound bad. If one has great interconnects, good electronics, good media and poor speakers, it's going to sound bad and so-on and so-forth.
Let's pretend that I have the money for those ultra expensive interconnects. I'd like to use my own set-up as a base for this question: I have an Onkyo TX-R705 (Decent receiver, but not an Integra), Onkyo C-390 CD player (pretty good DAC in that thing) and let's say Paradigm Studio 100s v5 with DIY high-end 14 gauge speaker cables. (I'm really running 1985 Kenwood JPL-690s with standard oxygen-free 18 gauge speaker wire, the Paradigms are on the bench of you will, but let's assume the Paradigms for this).
Now with that set-up (as opposed to decent separates), would there be any noticeable difference or improvement if I were to run the expensive interconnects instead of the Monoprice premiums?
PS. I'm also curious about this because I have been to a couple of meetings if an Audiophile club and was totally put down (and off I might ad) by the folks there slamming my set-up calling it garbage just because I was not running $1400 interconnects and speaker cables. I didn't pay much attention to them because I felt they had no clue as to what an audiophile is, but it did peak my curiosity about their rabid adherence to the ultra-expensive cables and slamming anyone who doesn't run them.