For $100k You could build a room that was actually big enough and at the proper dimensions to house a system like that and use the $27 cables...Guarantee it would make a much bigger difference than spending the $100k on speaker cables.
@@InPursuitOfLibertyI wouldn’t say no need for better cables & gears as a dedicated room built for audio reproduction would really show the benefits of them. But you’ve gone in the right direction as you would be getting a lot more for your money with a good room & proper acoustic treatments.
No matter the size of the room he'll still need really good cables, but those he can get for a few hundreds of dollars. No need for insanity levels like $100k.
@@geminijinxies7258 A few hundred dollars don’t get you very good cables IMO. But all that matters for us all is if we are happy with our system. However, being happy is different to having the goal of achieving the best out of your system possible which then cables, among everything else can’t & shouldn’t be ignored.
Jay, 100k for any cable is insane... One of the reasons I enjoyed watching the Lab is learning how not to waste time and money on taking chances with gear. You are doing this for us and I Thank you. Here is an idea, use your cable line taking the larger part of that 100k and purchase one of the latest R to R's along with a studio master recording. For the better part of the 100k you can buy a lot of recordings. The sound will blow you away! The latest tape machines use very highend heads which are XLR.
If you knew how much time it takes to mfg,. them, go through the R&D phase, you'd realize that the network is mfg. like a high end piece of gear. The cable itself uses their standard design that they've had on the market for decades. It's the network box that has HUNDREDS of LRC circuits and they have to hand match every single component so that they can make a pair of identical cables. They also measure the resistance/capacitance/inductance of the cable every couple of feet to ensure the cables are mfg. to the highest tolerances. It takes them probably a month to mfg. one pair of those cables and EVERYTHING goes through hand matching components, etc. at every stage of the mfg. process. the billet aluminum boxes are probably thousands of dollars to mill out, the labor is one month, or more of labor for a skilled worker, plus the price of the materials, which are custom mfg. to their specs.
@@Oneness100 Most Audiophile's systems would improve much more on gear than any cable would provide. The only reason to spend 100k on cables is when the pockets are deep and there is nothing else to buy.
@@user-eh3qz4zv1o Well, they aren't for those, like you, that don't have $100K+ to spend on a pair of cables. It's not like the company is forcing you to buy them either. They just are what they are when they take their design philosophy to the maximum level. Are they great cables? Sure. Are they worth $100K+? I'm sure to those that buy them, they feel they got their money's worth, otherwise they wouldn't buy them. Some people buy things like that because of the exclusivity factor, the engineering behind the design and the level and attention to detail with how they are mfg.'d. Since you don't have the money or a system to put them in, you'll never know what they do to a system, but you don't have to have an expensive system to hear their differences. They'll make just as much of an improvement as any other device in the system, like an amp or pre amp that costs that much money, it's just they bring out a lot of details that other cables lose. That's the point of making them.
@@Oneness100 You have a $100'000 speaker cable using copper with fancy covers on it and a massive box of electronics to try and even out LCR values, so it can replay what is on a recording. Look at what you are claiming, hundreds of LCR circuits in the signal path, hand matched components, measured LCR every couple of feet, in an industry where guys with $40'000 lab equipment can show you a $2500 Audioquest interconnect measures the same as a freebie RCA cable you get with a budget CD player. You then have IDIOTS claiming it resolves more detail than the cables that made the recording. If the cable is $100'000 then all your hearing is what a $30 cable put into that master tape. You cant hear anything else. So either the resolution you hear is what a $30 cable can reproduce onto the recording, or the $100'000 cable is not truthful and actually altering the sound in a manner that makes you believe its more resolving. Its like having a black and white movie, and playing it on a colour TV, you only get what is on the recording. Black and white. Its like watching VHS and claiming a cable gives you 4k 60hz resolution from that 525 lines at 29fps. But that is the reality of audiophiles, recordings made with the likes of Van Damme over many many meters of cables in rooms full of equipment, and all of a sudden there is a quality issue with cables outside proffesional mastering. How the hell does Canare cable resolve so much detail onto a recording that you can only hear it with $100'000 cable and the Canare as an example cannot resolve what it recorded. Basically its that sort of argument we hear. I personally would love to see these MIT cables tested over at ASR forums.
@@SastusBulbas1 Well, YOU are the ignorant one here. All of those LRC circuits are NOT in the signal path like you suggest. If the LCR circuits were wired in series, then yes, they would act like a VERY high precision, and huge equalizer that has up to 268 bands of EQ. Imagine designing and mfg's a high precision EQ with 268 bands and every component is hand matched and put in a milled billet aluminum enclosure? How much would GML charge for a 268 band stereo eq like that? GML charges $7600 for a stereo EQ that has only 5 bands of eq and it's just in a low cost enclosure. So you're paying how much per band of EQ? $760 per band. 10 bands for 5 band stereo, right? MIT is charging a LOT less than that if you price it per network. MIT is charging only $186 per network in the ACA 268. 268 networks for a PAIR of cables. The difference is that the MIT Cables are in a more expensive milled billet aluminum enclosure, and each component is probably hand matched to tighter tolerances than GML. They are wired in parallel, NOT in series. Case closed, next time do your homework and NOT assume anything. Each of those values of LCR components and cable have to be measured and matched down to a gnat's ass if you will, as every cable has to MEASURE and sound the same. I forget the level of precision, but it's VERY precise. I think the resistors are down to a .001 of an ohm if I'm not mistaken. The cable itself uses the highest quality copper cable from Cardas cable, and they use three different guage strands. They use a prescribed number of strands per bundle of the three gauges and each bundle is wrapped a different number of times as they have to be in phase and time aligned, and they are doing something like 12 or so twists per foot on a high precision cable winders. MIT has a patent on their cable design and it's quite unique. If you want, you can look at the patent on MIT"s website. FWIW, some of the top mastering studios and recording studios actually use MIT Cables or another company which is a similar (but definitely not the same) design called Transparent Cables. Skywalker Ranch actually wired their entire studio with MIT Cables and Gateway Studios wired their mastering lab with Transparent Cables? I do understand what you're trying to use as your argument and I understand. But hear me out. I believed, exactly like you, BEFORE I heard a pair of MIT Cables and I was reinforced that new belief after I used a pair of Transparent cables. I notice a LOT more smoothness in the overall presentation, I also notice no audible distortion in the region that I'm VERY sensitive to. There's the 2K to 4K region where there's distortion it can cause a pain in your ears/hearing. It's just VERY noticeable for me, it's been that way for a long time. that's why I would attend certain concerts and have to leave early if their PA system sucked. I also found out that distortions in that range can cause a ringing in your ears after you attend a live concert or exposed to high SPL for a length of time. Now, do people have to buy $100K cable to hear these subtle differences? NO. I heard a difference with both MIT and Transparent Cables cheapest cable. It's just that as you go up the line, they add more networks to the cables and they add enough for each model to make a noticeable difference and you just buy whatever you can afford that matches up with your system. Also, for interconnect cables between the pre amp and power amps, being matched for the resistance of input and output is critical. Some cable mfg. make cables that sound like crap, regardless of the cost because they aren't matched to the preamp/power amp output/input. on certain cables, MIT actually puts a switch so you can change between 3 different settings. Other cables, MIT will actually match at the factory, so if you know what range of resistance your amp/preamp is, then you can order them to be matched at the factory so they will work well with the electronics.
Cables can be a way of tone controls, pretty much it. All depends on inductance and capacitance which can cause resistance especially over longer distances. What I was tough for my EE profession.
Yep I'm an electronics tech. Why throw away that lovely low output impedance with lamp cord cables? Plus the zip cord pair probably introduces capacitance, so the least one could do is zip them apart into single wires.
Jay. Please think of the box in the cable as a type of equaliser or tone control. It’s never entirely off. It’s natural for the ear to perceive that small change to bass and treble may enhance the listening experience. The oldest trick in the book for a salesman demoing a system. A small change in volume or tone is often described as clearer , sharper , more dinamic etc. but it’s literally just changing the sound. Like an equalizer in the system.
Jay, man I started my day today with a cup of coffee, and this video. I love that you left the blooper in there with the “oxygen-copper” cables. I laughed out loud! Your content is inspiring me. I think I should get myself an ultra high-end system, or at least something approaching ultra. I’m looking for my ideal sound right now. I heard the Magico S3 speakers with a sub briefly the other day and I didn’t like how the tweeters drew attention to themselves when I wanted them to do a disappearing act like the cheap bookshelves I have at home. Albeit, I was really impressed by everything else they did. The Wilson Audios I’ve heard sounded very enjoyable, clean and clear, maybe not as immersive as I wanted them to be, but I’ve yet to hear what the Alexx or the Chronosonics can do, or even just a good subwoofer pairing. I really like watching your Børresen tour content. I would certainly like to hear some of those in action. My impression is that they could strike a balance between engagement and refinement; without the feeling of compromising one for the other. Thanks for the great content Jay! I look forward to seeing the result of the “clash of the cables”!
Thank you again for putting your great experience in exceptional hi-fi equipment at our service and giving us the right advice in this controversial field of cables and here speaker cables. Like you, I was able to see that the volume button is a very good assessment test (hearing fatigue) in changing cables.
Hey Jay You are doing a great job on this test. I think what most people don't get is will cheap cables work for sure they will Are they the best hell no Thank you for doing this
Sounds like the $100'000 cable is actually a $27 cable with $99973 worth of passive filtering masking a rough edge the more transparent cheaper cable is highlighting?
Those boxes definitely have components inside that the signal is passing through, so comparing straight-up cable to those is not an apples to apples comparison.
The idea is to test whether or not there’s a difference between cheap versus expensive cabling. Network hub or not, if there’s a difference, the comparison is valid. It’s not supposed to be “apples to apples”. One is 3,700,000% more expensive. It’s not supposed to be “apples to apples”.
It's obvious that there will be a difference . The expensive cable is not just a cable it has an equalizer inline with it. So this test is completely invalid. You're comparing a cable with a cable and equalizer combo.
Why would it make any difference? Cables with network boxes are just a different approach to making an audio cable. The LCR networks aren't wired in series like an EQ, so they don't alter the sound like an EQ does. What they are actually doing is designing "cables" for specific frequency range that operate as close to identical as the next. If you took all of the music related frequencies and their relative harmonics and measured how the energy at each frequency is stored and released, there is a measurable difference and that difference can be plotted out into a curve. That's essentially the fundamentals of MIT's cables. so their entry cables have 3 networks, and their most expensive have 268 networks per channel. their entry level had only three because it just to show their theory and to see if there's a difference with only 3 networks, covering the 3 bands of audio frequencies, THEN they got more precision and designed to specific frequencies, whether they were even or odd harmonic frequencies. That's where the level of precision and the number of networks had to be designed and mfg into the cable box. It gets immediately more expensive to mfg. as every component has to be hand matched and custom value resistors, capacitors and inductors have to be mfg. MIT mfg. their own inductors. And capacitors and resistors are made custom to MIT in terms of values and level of precision in tolerances, which drives the prices up multiples of just standard resistors and capacitors you can buy at Radio Shack.
System matching, synergistic integration of compatible components is necessary as you constantly advise. I totally believe this. Cheap cables for cheap components bring no discernible difference. BUT your system demands a similarly refined cable matching approach. I subscribe to buy the best you can afford being cognizant of overall system matching. You are a champion for audio wisdom & practicality. Racing fuel in a go cart makes no sense. Vice versa is also true. Low octane in a high performance engine is ridiculous. System matching is necessary!
I agree that cables make difference, often a big difference. I have no doubt that the two cables in this test will sound different. What I don't buy is cabling "settling in". What is going to change about the cable after "breaking in"? I'd really like to know that. I agree that electronic components and transducers can change after break in. But cables "settling in to your system"? I'd have to see proof of such a thing being possible.
You hit the nail on the head. The only thing going through the cable is a signal. It's not like a woofer is flexing or capacitors resistors are warming up. There is no settling. He's just making it up
@@jaysaudiolab instead of this "trust me bro" stuff you could actually very easily prove your claim by recording the audio coming from your speakers. Once with cheap cables and then expensive ones. Or in the opposite order, doesn't matter. Cheapest measurement mics costs around $40 and you can find a DAW for free.
i think what concerns people is that the expensive cable has some sort of eq built into the box so that can alter the sound so its not a direct cable comparison
cable do make a difference for those who have high end hifi components , i have the same experience as jay has experience. i have cardas cables, interconnects and power cords.
I am not a large believer in cables being a huge difference but I still buy copper OCC well constructed cables. I generally feel that the price to performance is not as good as buying a higher end product in the same product stack. However giving ANY component a full week of evaluation then swapping back will tell you what you need to know. You will immediately notice when you take the upgrade away or swap back to your original component after your full week. If there was no difference or worse take it back. This method ALWAYS works for me.
Keep in mind blind tests require several back and forth comparisons. One time on one cable and one time on the other is not accurate. Typically 10 swaps and then how many times out of 10 did the results reveal. Keep in mind that the 10 swaps should also include sessions where no switch happened.
Jay, How about connecting those cheap cables to the control box versus your high end cables without. Then you can determine if the cables matter or the box is the answer to your listening clarity.
what will the $27 cable look like if you braid it with four layers of cable. interesting how it will sound then. so you get a thicker cable. and a bit of shielding effect at the same time. will depend on work but can it be worth it.
I said it once, I’ll say it again. If there is anyone that thinks that speaker cables, power cords, component cables don’t make a difference, than one of two things are happening. One, you don’t have a good enough system to hear the difference. Two, you simply have terrible ears. Everything Jay is saying, is 100% true.
@@Larwiz Yet another uninformed response repeating uniformed opinion. Level of resolution is reality that applies to audio systems. Dream on if you think there is no difference between cheap and expensive anything.
@jfritzy4358 Lotta bold talk from the cable believers, but unfortunately, that's all you have, cuz you have no data or proof whatsoever. Just your "I can hear the difference, you can't cuz your system isn't resolving enough" nonsense. I bet YOU wouldn't bet your system that you could discern your cables from my 14 gauge COPPER CLAD cables, even 7 times out of 10. Tell me you can, and we can set up the bet, put it in writing, and figure out when to conduct the test. I lose, you get my system, do what you want with it. How confident are you?!?
You set the stage,you picked your audience and when you didn’t get the answer you wanted you spun the outcome with some serious mental gymnastics! At a $19,973 difference there should be no comparison,the fact that they both picked the cheap cable speaks volumes about the scam that is cables and that more expensive is better.Blindfold someone and give them a ride in a Kia then give them a ride in a McLaren and ask which one was faster.Thats how this test should have worked if the difference was obvious.
I remember when Monster Cables were introduced (1979). The only reason I bought them was for the looks. Per foot, they weren't that expensive, and 12 gauge was a nice thick cable at the time. I was an electronic engineering student and knew better than to waste money on more expensive cables.
@@sportsfanivosevic9885 being an 'engineer' means one designs power-supplies, amplifiers, and speaker/enclosures for best low noise performance and has test equipment to validate designs. The audio industry I fear is more about tossing an infinite variety of random components together while the human ear is not likely to distinguish a difference in most instances, or to know why a difference exists, or tell if the difference is faithful to the original. 16ga wire handles about 13A, and 12ga about 20A. Not as much power handling with 16ga wire is a difference. Could have spent $38 on 12ga cable rather than randomly guessing. It seems > $10,000 cables are a lower gauge mix of conductors using copper and/or silver so much higher current handling.
@@jefflabute2946 Understand where your comming from, however, do you recall the period when the Japanese focus was on specs and their equipment did'nt connect with listeners. There must be more to it than just measurements because ultimately, the ear and brain is the arbiter. Personally, I believe getting components into synergy with each other and locking into the natural time domain is the path to satisfying results but not the end of the journey.
Jay, in general even the most Refined Copper Cables have always fallen shorter in the High Frequency Registers compared to Refined Silver Cables! But not All Brands using Copper are like that! Love your Comparisons!💪
@@j.m.harris4202 what you mean fall short of high frequensies? All the Copper cables can go past 20khz flat? So they will play all the highs you can ever hear.
100k could give you a high quality 98inch Tv, killer surround speaker system, four 15 inch powrerd subwoofers,a good preamp/processor, a multichannel amplifier and seating for 8 people and a good streamer.
Jay is absolutely correct with cables settling in. First plug in & fully settled cables can sound vastly different. Not many people are spreading the word regarding this. If I do quick cable swap outs, I run music for 2 hours through the cable before sitting and evaluating. With eventually giving cables a day or 2 for final thoughts. ✌️
It actually depends on the cables. It's more about the dielectric in that cables act like a resistor, inductor and capacitor and depending on the type of dielectrics used will determine if they need to be "broken in". Since MIT Cables have those networks inside the box, they have discrete resistors, capacitors and inductors and the capacitors do need some "break in" time.
@@joonas4427 I won’t admit to understanding it at all, it shouldn’t make a difference, But it’s easy to hear. You can hear cable differences doing quick unplugging, but you won’t know how that cable will sound in one’s system until it "settles"
Jay, the MIT cable is not really a "cable". It's a tone control, basically an EQ box. So if you run a blind test, all you'd be checking is whether your listeners are able to hear the difference that EQ made. I suspect all the MIT is doing is filtering out some of the high frequencies from your speakers which you perceived to be harshness. It's not really "snake oil" because it actually does do something to the signal. The issue is that you don't need to spend $100,000 to achieve that kind of sound in the hands of an audiophile who can measure the effect and replicate through some software. Why not do an apples-to-apples blind test? I agree with others, Authentic Audio Image Assoluto Speaker Cable ($4000?) vs. 12AWG OFC cable ($27).
This isn’t a bad train of logic, but you are entirely misinformed. We can’t measure for everything, but we CAN measure for frequency response. MIT and other companies like Transparent (though, not all others) have been measured to the fullest extent that technology currently allows. If it were as simple as an EQ, or more importantly, if it actually affected the frequency response in the way you’re describing, we would already know about it. Besides, it’s silly to suggest that the copious engineers out there designing network boxes are all EQing their cables.
Imagine if we could just relax and be happy with whatever gear we might have.. Wouldn't that be a beautiful thing? No stress, no chasin' our own tail all the time, spending endless amounts of money, and never being satisfied.. Instead just relaxing, and enjoying the music.. Yes, the MUSIC.. Recharge our batteries.. Not worrying about how everything sounds.. This beautiful hobby, can also become a sickness, and destroy lives.. Believe me, it almost happened to me.
Jay, I agree that you shouldn't use the MIT cables if they have tone controls that will change the sound. You should use the shunyata cables you originally showed. And I am not a cable denier
I've felt that other reviewers have said several weeks tell the story as some listening fatigue may set differently on different components (cables included) that quick a/b testing won't reveal. In my opinion, the speakers, rooms, and tubes make the biggest differences.
i have to agree with something you said in the last video, and thats when you have a system of THAT caliber you will notice these things. however, not many people can have the luxury of a 1500W amplifier, at most many will be lucky to own a system capable of 500wpc, the higher the power consumption the higher the gauge needed to carry the power optimally and control the drivers to the fullest extent the amplifier can
The basic and only task of a good speaker cable is not to change anything in the sound or limit anything, in other words, the cable should be transparent. Certainly, a magic cable with box for 100k $ changes something, so this cable does not meet the criteria of a good cable, even though you may like what it brings to the sound, but DSP and equalizers are for such tricks.
This is going to come down to the fact that your system is so So transparent and revealing on a wholly different level that ANY change will be easily apparent..that being said good or bad results will not be hidden. As for results ..I think those who follow this experiment will have a predetermined conclusion…was there (in your system) a $99970 difference between cables ….its crass to think of the money ..but everyone including you are looking for a unicorn 🦄..or a surprise. Have a great rest of the week 👍
My speaker cables are over 40 years old. High-end In their day, very heavily insulated. Down through the years, I have switched and added many different components and speakers. There is no reason whatsoever I should, or will ever ever let go of these cables.
We know now that electricity does not travel in the wire but outside. Any cable close together will affect each other and much more carrying sound. To be fair you need to separate the cable. Thank you for your effort.
Described input bias and that boxes job. Try silver mil-spec wire. It ain't the wire. It's what is in-between your ears. By the way humidity in the room will have more effect. Must be same same. Higher humidity - faster sound travel.
I bought a $27 ish cable on aliexpress. I couldn't have diy the cable for that price. It's even directional😮 . Sounds ok. Not as good as my Kimber but there is a huge price difference. The most important question for any audiophile is, are you having fun? I got way more than $27 of fun so, cool!
I think it is less the claim that there is nothing in the box, as that there is. That if there are controls, there is something inside they are adjusting. Being passive, there is nothing it can enhance. Only roll off or blend. Perhaps explaining less harshness because of high end roll off?
I did post that I thought there could be an issue with that MIT cable network thing but I definitely didn't say anything about that box being empty. I read a short description on their website and while I didnt give it much thought it sounded like they were doing something extra within the signal path. I took that at face value. So, just seemed like an obvious issue if you're trying to do a true A/B listening test. Everything would have to be the same but the cable. Now, I don't think any of this that big of a deal but people do get worked up about this stuff. Even if you did a legit A/B test and had trouble making a decision then it's just inconclusive. It doesnt end the debate or anything. I just think its a fun experiment, and the few times Ive seen this done before it's always a mess. No one can tell anything. It's fun to do though, and fun to watch.
Speaker cables are very important. The quality of the cable will determine the quality of sound. My subwoofer cables must be at least 10 gauge ofc or bigger to handle the power from my amplifier. You can run a smaller cable but you risk damaging the amp or subwoofer. I don’t know much about high end cables. This is my first time hearing about cables that cost more than my house. I am sure those cables have the best quality metals for audio. The best shielding and can carry a signal with no issues. I don’t know about the box they run through. I do know that all cables are not equal
So, if you're worried about apples to apples, a comparison of speaker cables where neither one has a giant box filled with circuitry and knobs would probably be more appropriate. Any circuitry in the path could easily have an effect on the signal I would think. Admittedly, I have no idea what's actually in the box or what it supposed to do, but it sure looks like it would have an effect.
I didn't say that. I just would like you to compare them. They could just be categorized as a everyman or woman entry level cables. People will do whatever they want with their money....they always have. It's all subjective value and spending. If you want to spend as much on speaker cables as you payed for your new truck, that is your choice. I personally , being a handy with wood , build statement loudspeakers. For listening now ; some vintage Tannoy Berkeley + ribbon super tweeters' and have some Ancient Apogees in storage. Some 15" FOCAL woofer waiting to.
I would try some 2 or 4 gauge cables and keep the pair of wires separated from each other to minimize any capacitance. The capacitance from zip cable pairs could probably affect the highs for sure.
The heavy gauge would keep the resistance low. So if your audiophile power amp has terrifically low output impedance that enhances current, the heavy gauge would help preserve that.
Plus if you have a couple of mono blocks, you could place them behind the speakers to keep the cable runs short. Using balanced XLR connections going from the preamp to the power amp helps minimize losses as well.
Hi Jay.....I am using a new set of speaker cables the Clarus Crimson........I have read that these cables take a very very very long time to break in. Out of the box they feel like someone threw a thin blanket over the speakers.
I also have the Audience Au24 sx and that is a fantastic cable.But the wire is much thinner and didn't sound so shut in.I guess with the much thinker Clarus Crimson it will need time to not sound so shut in.If it stays this way then it will be an expensive mistake....but I hope things open up.
Here are my thoughts but first a question: Once the current from the amp reaches the speaker it has to cross the connection barrier and then flow through much smaller wire to the crossovers and then from the crossovers to the drivers. Doesn’t the connection itself, and the much smaller wire in the speaker, affect the sound negatively? It seems to me that the large differences in resistance and other electrical parameters in the speaker itself would have a greater effect on the sound than the different parameters you would get between two different cables, thereby negating those differences. Thoughts?
@@Error2username You are right, but you may have missed my point. If you have a downstream issue that affects everything going through it to a degree greater than the difference between two upstream “currents”, wouldn’t it negate the upstream differences? In other words, if I have two cables “upstream” that vary in, for example, their resistance, and then a connection and wiring that cause a greater change in resistance, wouldn’t the larger change in resistance downstream negate the differences between the two cables? And wouldn’t other electrical parameters be affected as well? So…the electrical specs of the connection and wiring of the speaker would have a greater effect on speaker sound than the cables.
The inherent quality of a recording is what it is. Fortunately most recordings are pretty good. But anything you subtract from that inherent quality is bad. If your playing them through a speaker with mediocre internal wiring that subtracts a certain amount of sound quality. But why would you want to subtract even more sound quality with mediocre interconnects and speaker cables? Or think that it doesn't matter. In audio, the old saying "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link" isn't correct. It's more like "how many strong links versus weak links do you have?" Strengthening some weak links always helps, sound quality wise.
Do the premium speakers use wires on the crossovers that are the same size and quality of the super expensive speaker cables. Like the choke coils? That would make them about the size of a telecom 5,000 ft reel of wire I am thinking. The speaker box would need to be size of a 10' x 10' shed.
I just got a quote of $80k for a swimming pool with spa. I'm very happy because I still have $20k left for a complete two channel audio system with shotgun runs (per speaker) of Home Depot oxygen free 12 gauge cables. I may even do quad twisted pairs for my homemade power cords! I will even wrap my cables with PET braided expandable sleeves from Ali Express (in bright blue).
And if you prefer to spend your money that way, more power to you! Back to the subject at hand, you should understand that some people can spend a couple million dollars for their stereo setup in a 50 million $ mansion.
@@DaveJ6515 - you seem rather defensive. My beef is with the absurdity of a speaker cable priced at $100k. I will bet that Jay's own cables sound almost as good in every aspect (whatever good means to different audiophiles) for 1/15th the price.
@@jaimeballester840 And I am saying that there are people for whom those cables are a feasible choice, provided they sound good to their ears. That's all. I, for one, am not going to pay 100k for speaker cables. There are things to do before I think about it: further improvements to my room acoustics, get a d'Agostino Momentum or a Gryphon are the first that come to my mind.
@@DaveJ6515 - Dave, we agree. BTW, great choice of amps. And while I haven't heard them, CH and Soulution are great choices. Actually, there are many brands that are top, top notch. Cheers!
Hey, if anyone is dumb enough to spend 100k for a wire, they have every right to enjoy the 5% improvement. Might prevent a regret suicide.😊 What about the music? Do we need to spend 100k or do we just need a soul to enjoy it? I think it's the latter, but your mileage may vary.
This started with ppl saying there is No difference on lampcord Vs high end cabels. So thats why he made this vid. You dont need to be rude, calling ppl dumb for using money they have.
Those are not "tone controls". They are networks so that each frequency can store and release where they articulate at the optimal level. It's not snake oil, unless you're someone that simply doesn't understand the design of the network and why it's used. It's used to fix the problems of a non-networked cable. The MIT top end model is just taking the design to the maximum level and the reason why they sell it is because there are people that want that kind of cable and they have the money to spend. Do people need those $100K+ cable? NOPE. Even the engineer that designed them thinks they are overkill. The reason why he designed them is to simply take his initial design concept to the maximum level as a cost no object concept to see if there is a difference and if so, is it something worth putting on the market.
I also have that cheaper cable and for my system it is fine but for a high end system you will buy better stuff. And a good sacd file will sound amazing no matter how hard i put it.
I like these type if comparisons. However, we know that the 27 dollar cables will work without question. But, for high end systems It is nice to see higher quality cable options that are not 100K. I think this type of comparison should include at least 2 step up options prior to the MIT. The one thing about MIT or Opus is the ability to calibrate specifically to allow amplifiers and speakers to be more sonically matched. I have Opus Magnums calibrated to XLF and Mac MC2KW 1 Amp.s and I can clearly tell the difference from other versions. With that said I am 100% certain that several other options for a fraction of the cost would have worked very well for my set up. Maybe not as refined as the Opus, but nonetheless I would have been pleased. For High End Audio Systems, we are always looking to get the most our of our components, but at some point, you don’t have to spend an insane amount of money to achieve a great result. I would to see the 27$ cables with at least 2 intermediate options to the higher end that is reasonably priced would be a better measure for an Audiophile to consider. While I know 27$ cables would certainly work in my room, I have no desire to use them.
We are all saying that the box with all that passive network will change the sound and that can be proven with measurements. If it sounds any better it doesnt mean it is better. We are also saying that getting used to sound is more real than break in. That is where you should do an ABX with a switcher, because nothing is worse than audio memory. No excuses about a switcher being in the way of the signal, it will apply to A&B so stop speaking like its going to only affect B. Audio science is saying that if there is no difference in measurements, there wont be any audible difference. Those are the claims, nothing more, nothing less.
And this video is example why scientifically controlled trials have to include examples for placebo effect. Trying exotic cables just goes to show someone is unhappy with their speakers, or that they weren't all they were hyped up to be, or are in the wrong space. There will be other signs too, when you see every available band-aid and treatment installed trying to make up for speakers that are too revealing with the variable quality of available mainstream recordings. Amazing how this so-called better sound is otherwise magically asleep in the recordings since the studios don't use fantasy cables. That means that this superior sound was grown out of thin air once the fantasy wire is installed. Simply amazing.
I always burn-in any component added to my system, before deciding; if it made an improvement to it, that I like. That basic audiophile 101! Some of the same people commenting about the price of these cable are some of the same people who will spend their life saving on season tickets to a football game so they can sit in the cold. Instead of watching the game for free in the comfort of their own home! I believe the word I am looking for is hypocrisy.
I got 30 out of 30 correct in Blind Testing with a blindfold on, between a $400 speaker cable versus a near $5,000 speaker cable. Ironically the near $5,000 speaker cable was a former top of the line MIT cable, and it had those boxes, just like the MIT cables in your experiment. It was the MIT MH 770 Ultralinear II speaker cable.The boxes are NOT empty or snake oil. They weighed about the same as an unopened 2 titer bottle of cola; for you snake oil barkers out there. We used an integrated amp with 2 speaker outputs; speakers A & B. That way my assistants only had to switch cables at the one end; the loudspeaker end. And that made it even more scientific, as we wouldn't have to turn off the power amp for several minutes when switching cables. As soon as an amp is turned off; it's capacitors, resistors, transformer starts cooling down a bit, and even in a few mintes the sound is slightly different. Which would have been a variable. Also I warmed up the equipment by playing music, a full 2 hours beforehand. Keeping it turned on for 2 hours and not playing music, is not the same as actually playing music through it for 2 hours; believe me on that. When you turn on your equipment from cold, the sound on the first recording you play won't be nearly as open or as sweet as if you went back and played that same recording with a few cds or whatever, played in between. From the first recording on, your sound very gradually gets cleaner and smoother sounding, and the spaces between the instruments become much more pronounced. During that time your equipments electronic signature goes noticeably down and the bass fullness and definition go noticeably up. Since this is very gradual, many people do not notice this. Even after 2 hours of play, your system is NOT FULLY warmed up, but the changes at that point are much much less, than how much the sound of your system changes in the first two hours of play. This was ironically demonstrated to me one time when I was listening to Christmas music, one cold December night. My cd player was on repeat. The first track of the various artists compilation cd was White Christmas by Bing Crosby. The sound quality was as dated as it's age; around 75 years old at the time. It sounded raw and anything but smooth, and you couldn't clearly hear all the instrumentation and singers in the background. Not a recording you'd listen to for sound quality. I must have been tired that night, with the speakers at a bit above average volume on either side of the glowing Christmas tree; I still fell asleep. A few hour later, when I woke up, the same cd on repeat, was playing the same track White Christmas again. My Gosh! The sound quality did not sound primitive at all anymore; if less than audiophile quality. His voice was smooth, you could hear every intonation of the background singers in the background, and more singers than it sounded like before, every delicate fingering of the harp in places you never heard it before. And you could hear. something else! ..Not little tiny reindeer, but tiny ticks and pops.... galore. What do you know.The cd track was from a recorded 78; not a master tape. All these things were revealed because as I slept, the system was warming up and improving little by little as I snoozed, and it added up big time. My systems warm up had come full circle and Bing Crosby was now crooning smoothly and cleanly right ABOVE the lighted star at the top of my 7 foot glistening Christmas tree.
Thank you!...Really. Ridiculous to you because you likely have a crappy system, and definitely have a closed mind, & can't hear. Does it make you feel smart to think all these smart doctors, investors, lawyers and professionals from other fields are "imagining"? Imagine if you could be what they are.
Time for another blind test about the *HIGH* you've talked about, let yourself be part of the blind test panel, let a friend who is knowledgeable about your system to control the test.
Maybe cut two lengths of the same cheep cable, burn one pair in then use the other one cold n hear the difference. I’d also like to see your room with just 2 speakers and amps.
100% it was the right thing to do to bin the lamp cord. That’s too extreme when you can buy audio specific cables for a tiny bit more. I’d like to see $200 cables versus price no object. But interested to see the $30 cables to start. I have old cheap MIT cables with a box and I’ve seen inside it’s a bunch of glue and some coiled device that I think smooths out the harmonics. I am guessing the 100k box is more of the same. Do a video of what’s inside the box!
@@USEC3 I see you know everything about this subject. Build them yourself and become rich by selling audio cables with an outrageous profit! I am afraid you are going to find it hard to make them sound good, but who knows ...
Jay, I like the extreme disparity in cost of the cables. It fully illustrates the counter argument of deniers. Whenever someone uses the term, “Cables don’t matter” or this or that doesn’t matter, I hear 2 things: “I wouldn’t spend that much on cables,” or “Based on my components, I won’t hear a difference either way.”
And when I see cable believers comment, it is often some nonsensical version of "your system isn't resolving enough ", which is basically what you said. Smh
I'm using a single Viablu SC-6 cable , for each tri-amped speaker , which has 2 pure copper wires for the woofers , 2 tin-plated copper wires for the midrange and 2 silver-plated copper for the tweeters. I'm using 2 meters per speaker , cost is 99 euro/meter (approx. $110/meter). That's even going overboard , I would only spend thousands on components , not cables.
I would prefer to see the cheap cables compared with something which might be purchased by someone currently owning cheap cables. Maybe $250 cables? Maybe 500.00 if you want to push it?
All RUclips ‘reviewers’ should be subject to an independently controlled, blind a/b or a/b/c test. Then let’s see how accurate they all are at determining their chosen product. Apart from loudspeakers it has continually proven to be extremely difficult even with markedly disparate priced hardware.
Good on Jay for this video!! Most people in the industry praise high end cables because its in their interest to do so! BUT its not fair to compare a £30 cable to a $100,000 cable! That's just not playing the game!! Get some $1000.00 cables(or even $500.00) and compare then to the $100,000 dollars cables. That's still a hundred times cheaper and I think you'll find zero difference!! IMO!!
@TheChrisleekay No, I think he did right. If Jay approaches this with integrity, I think he will find that his two listeners will find little to no difference in either cable, so long as they do NOT know which cable is which. But none of this can verify this, so we have to take Jay at his word. I am NOT a cable believer, and would challenge Jay to have ME or any bonafide cable non-believer (Gene from Audioholics for example) to be involved with such a blind test to ENSURE that the participants were not prompted in any way. No offense to Jay, but how can we truly know that he won't prompt them in some way? We don't.
Why isn't it fair to compare $30 cable vs. $100k, as if price has anything to do with how something sounds? Once you know how something sounds then you can determine if it's worth the price, not the other way around.
@@YuengsNwings But that doesn't make sense! If I can buy some $500 cables that sound as good as the $100,000 cables then most people are going to go with the $500 dollars cables. Maybe send that $99,500 saving on a nice new Mercedes!!?
Back in the 1980's in the UK, at the suggestion of a hifi magazine I remember experimenting with 35p/metre solid core mains cable. I was using QED '79 back then. In short a lot of your comments today resonated with my recollections of the effect on the system sound as a result. One effect perhaps which wasn't immediately apparent was a slight hardness to the treble - almost a coarser edge to the treble - this (and also I guess, with the concurrent effect on the other frequencies being heard) initially gave a different edge to music played on the system, perhaps marginally more transparent superfically. Something different, all for less than the cost of the QED cable! Not necessarily better, just an alternative presentation to the music. Unfortunately, any benefits of the solid-core were negated (for me) as extended listening over time induced fatigue - not massively - but definitely so!. The eventual burning-in of the soild-core occurred when the cable settled. The sound did lose some of the edge to the sound, but not enough for my preferences. Look forward to your next vid!
Why will one convince a nay sayer, what do you win… I tested (blind) different cables and did not hear a difference, but I don’t have golden ears. Cable break in, no prof on any university can prove that with formules that work for ages….
@@patrickmeylemans9627 Cables need break in. Speakers and other components need break in. It's a fact. You are free not to believe it. It remains a fact. It took me 500 hours to break in my Ansuz C3 speaker cables and Borresen 03 speakers. It's a fact. And it's also a fact that after I power everything on, it takes 40-50 minutes to sound really good, and if the DA converter external clock was not in standby mode, it will take a couple hours to open up and produce a huge sound stage. It's a fact.
I know first hand that brand new cables sound harsh and needs to be “warmed” up for the lack of a better word, to settle and sound as they should. And I heard that cables can get worn out over time. Now that I’m not sure about and it’s probably very hard to notice because it’s such a slow deterioration.
Surely it can be shown scientifically the difference between cables, if you can hear a difference that must relate to a different electrical signal. An oscilloscope will surely show it, and, you can buy an oscilloscope really cheap, peanuts compared to 100k cables. BTW the $27 cables not only weren't terminated but they weren't even fully connected, how about using welding cables, size matters, at the very least the cable has to be 2x thicker than the speakers power requirements and what about coax cables and twisted pair, all these things are for specific jobs so it must matter and be noticeable.
Do you know how to use an oscilloscope? A pair of eyes interpret what is displayed on an O-scope. Rudimentary at best, would only clearly reveal large differences easily audible. Those that claim measurements would prove/disprove difference do not know what to measure or how to measure it. Requires far beyond an O-scope or anything internet wanna be experts possess.
@thomprd I don't think you truly believe that. There's no real rationale to your thought. Why would someone's system likely sound bad because they don't believe in pricey cables?!? Why can't one simply believe in good sources, components, and speakers being the key to a good system, like myself? I've had cable believers over to hear my system, and they have all said that it sounded good. Just my experience. 🤷🏾
it matters because the cable box probably inhibits the sound there for on a system with high distortion, may tame it. cables can only inhibit sound or let sound through.. they cant improve the source. U still wont use a revealing low cost low sinad amp to prove your high end high distortion amps are a waste of money and just look good!
Personally, I would have thought one should be able to tell a difference even without any music being played. Yeah, sure, for at least 10 minutes, a current would have to flow through the cable, but if one was to, then press pause (or mute) Someone who's familiar with the sound of their set-up should notice how the noise floor has slightly risen.
"Cables settle into the system".........Lmao! What a line of garbage.
For $100k You could build a room that was actually big enough and at the proper dimensions to house a system like that and use the $27 cables...Guarantee it would make a much bigger difference than spending the $100k on speaker cables.
Lmfao 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Valid line of thinking.
@@InPursuitOfLibertyI wouldn’t say no need for better cables & gears as a dedicated room built for audio reproduction would really show the benefits of them.
But you’ve gone in the right direction as you would be getting a lot more for your money with a good room & proper acoustic treatments.
No matter the size of the room he'll still need really good cables, but those he can get for a few hundreds of dollars. No need for insanity levels like $100k.
@@geminijinxies7258 A few hundred dollars don’t get you very good cables IMO.
But all that matters for us all is if we are happy with our system.
However, being happy is different to having the goal of achieving the best out of your system possible which then cables, among everything else can’t & shouldn’t be ignored.
I love getting High and watching these cables channels.🤪🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Jay, 100k for any cable is insane... One of the reasons I enjoyed watching the Lab is learning how not to waste time and money on taking chances with gear. You are doing this for us and I Thank you. Here is an idea, use your cable line taking the larger part of that 100k and purchase one of the latest R to R's along with a studio master recording. For the better part of the 100k you can buy a lot of recordings. The sound will blow you away! The latest tape machines use very highend heads which are XLR.
If you knew how much time it takes to mfg,. them, go through the R&D phase, you'd realize that the network is mfg. like a high end piece of gear. The cable itself uses their standard design that they've had on the market for decades. It's the network box that has HUNDREDS of LRC circuits and they have to hand match every single component so that they can make a pair of identical cables. They also measure the resistance/capacitance/inductance of the cable every couple of feet to ensure the cables are mfg. to the highest tolerances. It takes them probably a month to mfg. one pair of those cables and EVERYTHING goes through hand matching components, etc. at every stage of the mfg. process. the billet aluminum boxes are probably thousands of dollars to mill out, the labor is one month, or more of labor for a skilled worker, plus the price of the materials, which are custom mfg. to their specs.
@@Oneness100 Most Audiophile's systems would improve much more on gear than any cable would provide.
The only reason to spend 100k on cables is when the pockets are deep and there is nothing else to buy.
@@user-eh3qz4zv1o Well, they aren't for those, like you, that don't have $100K+ to spend on a pair of cables. It's not like the company is forcing you to buy them either. They just are what they are when they take their design philosophy to the maximum level. Are they great cables? Sure. Are they worth $100K+? I'm sure to those that buy them, they feel they got their money's worth, otherwise they wouldn't buy them. Some people buy things like that because of the exclusivity factor, the engineering behind the design and the level and attention to detail with how they are mfg.'d.
Since you don't have the money or a system to put them in, you'll never know what they do to a system, but you don't have to have an expensive system to hear their differences. They'll make just as much of an improvement as any other device in the system, like an amp or pre amp that costs that much money, it's just they bring out a lot of details that other cables lose. That's the point of making them.
@@Oneness100 You have a $100'000 speaker cable using copper with fancy covers on it and a massive box of electronics to try and even out LCR values, so it can replay what is on a recording. Look at what you are claiming, hundreds of LCR circuits in the signal path, hand matched components, measured LCR every couple of feet, in an industry where guys with $40'000 lab equipment can show you a $2500 Audioquest interconnect measures the same as a freebie RCA cable you get with a budget CD player.
You then have IDIOTS claiming it resolves more detail than the cables that made the recording.
If the cable is $100'000 then all your hearing is what a $30 cable put into that master tape. You cant hear anything else. So either the resolution you hear is what a $30 cable can reproduce onto the recording, or the $100'000 cable is not truthful and actually altering the sound in a manner that makes you believe its more resolving.
Its like having a black and white movie, and playing it on a colour TV, you only get what is on the recording. Black and white.
Its like watching VHS and claiming a cable gives you 4k 60hz resolution from that 525 lines at 29fps.
But that is the reality of audiophiles, recordings made with the likes of Van Damme over many many meters of cables in rooms full of equipment, and all of a sudden there is a quality issue with cables outside proffesional mastering.
How the hell does Canare cable resolve so much detail onto a recording that you can only hear it with $100'000 cable and the Canare as an example cannot resolve what it recorded. Basically its that sort of argument we hear.
I personally would love to see these MIT cables tested over at ASR forums.
@@SastusBulbas1 Well, YOU are the ignorant one here. All of those LRC circuits are NOT in the signal path like you suggest. If the LCR circuits were wired in series, then yes, they would act like a VERY high precision, and huge equalizer that has up to 268 bands of EQ. Imagine designing and mfg's a high precision EQ with 268 bands and every component is hand matched and put in a milled billet aluminum enclosure? How much would GML charge for a 268 band stereo eq like that? GML charges $7600 for a stereo EQ that has only 5 bands of eq and it's just in a low cost enclosure. So you're paying how much per band of EQ? $760 per band. 10 bands for 5 band stereo, right? MIT is charging a LOT less than that if you price it per network. MIT is charging only $186 per network in the ACA 268. 268 networks for a PAIR of cables. The difference is that the MIT Cables are in a more expensive milled billet aluminum enclosure, and each component is probably hand matched to tighter tolerances than GML.
They are wired in parallel, NOT in series.
Case closed, next time do your homework and NOT assume anything.
Each of those values of LCR components and cable have to be measured and matched down to a gnat's ass if you will, as every cable has to MEASURE and sound the same. I forget the level of precision, but it's VERY precise. I think the resistors are down to a .001 of an ohm if I'm not mistaken.
The cable itself uses the highest quality copper cable from Cardas cable, and they use three different guage strands. They use a prescribed number of strands per bundle of the three gauges and each bundle is wrapped a different number of times as they have to be in phase and time aligned, and they are doing something like 12 or so twists per foot on a high precision cable winders. MIT has a patent on their cable design and it's quite unique. If you want, you can look at the patent on MIT"s website.
FWIW, some of the top mastering studios and recording studios actually use MIT Cables or another company which is a similar (but definitely not the same) design called Transparent Cables.
Skywalker Ranch actually wired their entire studio with MIT Cables and Gateway Studios wired their mastering lab with Transparent Cables?
I do understand what you're trying to use as your argument and I understand.
But hear me out.
I believed, exactly like you, BEFORE I heard a pair of MIT Cables and I was reinforced that new belief after I used a pair of Transparent cables.
I notice a LOT more smoothness in the overall presentation, I also notice no audible distortion in the region that I'm VERY sensitive to. There's the 2K to 4K region where there's distortion it can cause a pain in your ears/hearing. It's just VERY noticeable for me, it's been that way for a long time. that's why I would attend certain concerts and have to leave early if their PA system sucked. I also found out that distortions in that range can cause a ringing in your ears after you attend a live concert or exposed to high SPL for a length of time.
Now, do people have to buy $100K cable to hear these subtle differences? NO. I heard a difference with both MIT and Transparent Cables cheapest cable. It's just that as you go up the line, they add more networks to the cables and they add enough for each model to make a noticeable difference and you just buy whatever you can afford that matches up with your system.
Also, for interconnect cables between the pre amp and power amps, being matched for the resistance of input and output is critical. Some cable mfg. make cables that sound like crap, regardless of the cost because they aren't matched to the preamp/power amp output/input. on certain cables, MIT actually puts a switch so you can change between 3 different settings. Other cables, MIT will actually match at the factory, so if you know what range of resistance your amp/preamp is, then you can order them to be matched at the factory so they will work well with the electronics.
Cables can be a way of tone controls, pretty much it. All depends on inductance and capacitance which can cause resistance especially over longer distances. What I was tough for my EE profession.
Yep I'm an electronics tech. Why throw away that lovely low output impedance with lamp cord cables? Plus the zip cord pair probably introduces capacitance, so the least one could do is zip them apart into single wires.
Jay. Please think of the box in the cable as a type of equaliser or tone control. It’s never entirely off. It’s natural for the ear to perceive that small change to bass and treble may enhance the listening experience. The oldest trick in the book for a salesman demoing a system. A small change in volume or tone is often described as clearer , sharper , more dinamic etc. but it’s literally just changing the sound. Like an equalizer in the system.
Jay, man I started my day today with a cup of coffee, and this video. I love that you left the blooper in there with the “oxygen-copper” cables. I laughed out loud! Your content is inspiring me. I think I should get myself an ultra high-end system, or at least something approaching ultra. I’m looking for my ideal sound right now. I heard the Magico S3 speakers with a sub briefly the other day and I didn’t like how the tweeters drew attention to themselves when I wanted them to do a disappearing act like the cheap bookshelves I have at home. Albeit, I was really impressed by everything else they did. The Wilson Audios I’ve heard sounded very enjoyable, clean and clear, maybe not as immersive as I wanted them to be, but I’ve yet to hear what the Alexx or the Chronosonics can do, or even just a good subwoofer pairing. I really like watching your Børresen tour content. I would certainly like to hear some of those in action. My impression is that they could strike a balance between engagement and refinement; without the feeling of compromising one for the other. Thanks for the great content Jay! I look forward to seeing the result of the “clash of the cables”!
Thank you again for putting your great experience in exceptional hi-fi equipment at our service and giving us the right advice in this controversial field of cables and here speaker cables. Like you, I was able to see that the volume button is a very good assessment test (hearing fatigue) in changing cables.
I bought a new cable, plugged it in, and it sounded great straight off. No effect pedal, just natural Strat tone.
Hey Jay
You are doing a great job on this test.
I think what most people don't get is will cheap cables work for sure they will
Are they the best hell no
Thank you for doing this
Thank you!
Sounds like the $100'000 cable is actually a $27 cable with $99973 worth of passive filtering masking a rough edge the more transparent cheaper cable is highlighting?
Those boxes definitely have components inside that the signal is passing through, so comparing straight-up cable to those is not an apples to apples comparison.
Ok
The idea is to test whether or not there’s a difference between cheap versus expensive cabling. Network hub or not, if there’s a difference, the comparison is valid. It’s not supposed to be “apples to apples”. One is 3,700,000% more expensive. It’s not supposed to be “apples to apples”.
It's obvious that there will be a difference . The expensive cable is not just a cable it has an equalizer inline with it. So this test is completely invalid. You're comparing a cable with a cable and equalizer combo.
Why would it make any difference? Cables with network boxes are just a different approach to making an audio cable. The LCR networks aren't wired in series like an EQ, so they don't alter the sound like an EQ does.
What they are actually doing is designing "cables" for specific frequency range that operate as close to identical as the next.
If you took all of the music related frequencies and their relative harmonics and measured how the energy at each frequency is stored and released, there is a measurable difference and that difference can be plotted out into a curve. That's essentially the fundamentals of MIT's cables. so their entry cables have 3 networks, and their most expensive have 268 networks per channel. their entry level had only three because it just to show their theory and to see if there's a difference with only 3 networks, covering the 3 bands of audio frequencies, THEN they got more precision and designed to specific frequencies, whether they were even or odd harmonic frequencies. That's where the level of precision and the number of networks had to be designed and mfg into the cable box. It gets immediately more expensive to mfg. as every component has to be hand matched and custom value resistors, capacitors and inductors have to be mfg. MIT mfg. their own inductors. And capacitors and resistors are made custom to MIT in terms of values and level of precision in tolerances, which drives the prices up multiples of just standard resistors and capacitors you can buy at Radio Shack.
System matching, synergistic integration of compatible components is necessary as you constantly advise. I totally believe this. Cheap cables for cheap components bring no discernible difference. BUT your system demands a similarly refined cable matching approach. I subscribe to buy the best you can afford being cognizant of overall system matching. You are a champion for audio wisdom & practicality. Racing fuel in a go cart makes no sense. Vice versa is also true. Low octane in a high performance engine is ridiculous. System matching is necessary!
He sounds like a dad lecturing about not taking the trash out.
Yep
Thanks for listening son 😅
@@jaysaudiolab Was the other cable $99,973 better Papi? You could have sponsored a months long meal plan for 500 Gautemalan kids.
I agree that cables make difference, often a big difference. I have no doubt that the two cables in this test will sound different. What I don't buy is cabling "settling in". What is going to change about the cable after "breaking in"? I'd really like to know that. I agree that electronic components and transducers can change after break in. But cables "settling in to your system"? I'd have to see proof of such a thing being possible.
Lots changed for me during a 24 hour window with these cables. I explained it on the video
You hit the nail on the head. The only thing going through the cable is a signal. It's not like a woofer is flexing or capacitors resistors are warming up. There is no settling. He's just making it up
@@jaysaudiolab instead of this "trust me bro" stuff you could actually very easily prove your claim by recording the audio coming from your speakers. Once with cheap cables and then expensive ones. Or in the opposite order, doesn't matter. Cheapest measurement mics costs around $40 and you can find a DAW for free.
Useless test until you do a blind A/B comparison and can pick the same cable 9 out of 10 times, does not really mean anything, placebo plays HUGE role
Right? Have someone else do the rewiring while Jay wears the blindfold the whole time.
i think what concerns people is that the expensive cable has some sort of eq built into the box so that can alter the sound so its not a direct cable comparison
cable do make a difference for those who have high end hifi components , i have the same experience as jay has experience. i have cardas cables, interconnects and power cords.
The people saying the box makes no difference are not necessarily the same people as those people that say the cables themselves make no difference.
I am not a large believer in cables being a huge difference but I still buy copper OCC well constructed cables. I generally feel that the price to performance is not as good as buying a higher end product in the same product stack. However giving ANY component a full week of evaluation then swapping back will tell you what you need to know. You will immediately notice when you take the upgrade away or swap back to your original component after your full week. If there was no difference or worse take it back. This method ALWAYS works for me.
Keep in mind blind tests require several back and forth comparisons. One time on one cable and one time on the other is not accurate. Typically 10 swaps and then how many times out of 10 did the results reveal. Keep in mind that the 10 swaps should also include sessions where no switch happened.
Won’t be doing 10 swaps. I only have 24 hours in a day
Jay,
How about connecting those cheap cables to the control box versus your high end cables without. Then you can determine if the cables matter or the box is the answer to your listening clarity.
They don’t work with the box. The connection isn’t compatible
what will the $27 cable look like if you braid it with four layers of cable. interesting how it will sound then. so you get a thicker cable. and a bit of shielding effect at the same time. will depend on work but can it be worth it.
I said it once, I’ll say it again. If there is anyone that thinks that speaker cables, power cords, component cables don’t make a difference, than one of two things are happening.
One, you don’t have a good enough system to hear the difference.
Two, you simply have terrible ears.
Everything Jay is saying, is 100% true.
thanks man
@@joshuagordon5270 same "system isn't resolving enough" FALSE rhetoric. Smh
@@Larwiz Yet another uninformed response repeating uniformed opinion. Level of resolution is reality that applies to audio systems. Dream on if you think there is no difference between cheap and expensive anything.
@jfritzy4358 Lotta bold talk from the cable believers, but unfortunately, that's all you have, cuz you have no data or proof whatsoever. Just your "I can hear the difference, you can't cuz your system isn't resolving enough" nonsense. I bet YOU wouldn't bet your system that you could discern your cables from my 14 gauge COPPER CLAD cables, even 7 times out of 10. Tell me you can, and we can set up the bet, put it in writing, and figure out when to conduct the test. I lose, you get my system, do what you want with it. How confident are you?!?
Bad cable tends to bring a lot of noises
You set the stage,you picked your audience and when you didn’t get the answer you wanted you spun the outcome with some serious mental gymnastics! At a $19,973 difference there should be no comparison,the fact that they both picked the cheap cable speaks volumes about the scam that is cables and that more expensive is better.Blindfold someone and give them a ride in a Kia then give them a ride in a McLaren and ask which one was faster.Thats how this test should have worked if the difference was obvious.
I remember when Monster Cables were introduced (1979). The only reason I bought them was for the looks. Per foot, they weren't that expensive, and 12 gauge was a nice thick cable at the time. I was an electronic engineering student and knew better than to waste money on more expensive cables.
Being an engineering student does not relate to how well you can hear.
@@sportsfanivosevic9885 being an 'engineer' means one designs power-supplies, amplifiers, and speaker/enclosures for best low noise performance and has test equipment to validate designs. The audio industry I fear is more about tossing an infinite variety of random components together while the human ear is not likely to distinguish a difference in most instances, or to know why a difference exists, or tell if the difference is faithful to the original.
16ga wire handles about 13A, and 12ga about 20A. Not as much power handling with 16ga wire is a difference. Could have spent $38 on 12ga cable rather than randomly guessing. It seems > $10,000 cables are a lower gauge mix of conductors using copper and/or silver so much higher current handling.
@@jefflabute2946 Understand where your comming from, however, do you recall the period when the Japanese focus was on specs and their equipment did'nt connect with listeners. There must be more to it than just measurements because ultimately, the ear and brain is the arbiter. Personally, I believe getting components into synergy with each other and locking into the natural time domain is the path to satisfying results but not the end of the journey.
Jay, in general even the most Refined Copper Cables have always fallen shorter in the High Frequency Registers compared to Refined Silver Cables! But not All Brands using Copper are like that! Love your Comparisons!💪
@@j.m.harris4202 what you mean fall short of high frequensies? All the Copper cables can go past 20khz flat? So they will play all the highs you can ever hear.
@@joonas4427 Simply put, to well trained ears copper gets grainy and not as clear!
@@j.m.harris4202 What you mean by well trained ears? Where did you train your ears?
@@joonas4427 Many years on Sound Boards and HiEnd Home HiFi since the Mid 70's and 80's! Also just Subjective Personal Preferences!
Silver is seven percent more conductive than copper. That would help preserve the output impedance of the amp.
Take for example the Mogami 3104 with decent connectors vs your 100 k.....
Is it better to keep my speaker cables as short as possible and of equal length?
Short
100k could give you a high quality 98inch Tv, killer surround speaker system, four 15 inch powrerd subwoofers,a good preamp/processor, a multichannel amplifier and seating for 8 people and a good streamer.
I agree that you should be comparing the hardware store cables to non-network cables. The network will obviously change the sound.
Cable stabilization. Not heard of that as a physicist. Maybe the electrons woke up.
Jay is absolutely correct with cables settling in. First plug in & fully settled cables can sound vastly different.
Not many people are spreading the word regarding this.
If I do quick cable swap outs, I run music for 2 hours through the cable before sitting and evaluating. With eventually giving cables a day or 2 for final thoughts. ✌️
Good job
It actually depends on the cables. It's more about the dielectric in that cables act like a resistor, inductor and capacitor and depending on the type of dielectrics used will determine if they need to be "broken in". Since MIT Cables have those networks inside the box, they have discrete resistors, capacitors and inductors and the capacitors do need some "break in" time.
@@damonsbest This makes absolutely no sense.
@@joonas4427 I won’t admit to understanding it at all, it shouldn’t make a difference, But it’s easy to hear.
You can hear cable differences doing quick unplugging, but you won’t know how that cable will sound in one’s system until it "settles"
10K+ views. Yeah, we like this content ;)
Jay, the MIT cable is not really a "cable". It's a tone control, basically an EQ box. So if you run a blind test, all you'd be checking is whether your listeners are able to hear the difference that EQ made. I suspect all the MIT is doing is filtering out some of the high frequencies from your speakers which you perceived to be harshness. It's not really "snake oil" because it actually does do something to the signal. The issue is that you don't need to spend $100,000 to achieve that kind of sound in the hands of an audiophile who can measure the effect and replicate through some software.
Why not do an apples-to-apples blind test? I agree with others, Authentic Audio Image Assoluto Speaker Cable ($4000?) vs. 12AWG OFC cable ($27).
Maybe I will
@@jaysaudiolab That would be great!
This isn’t a bad train of logic, but you are entirely misinformed. We can’t measure for everything, but we CAN measure for frequency response. MIT and other companies like Transparent (though, not all others) have been measured to the fullest extent that technology currently allows. If it were as simple as an EQ, or more importantly, if it actually affected the frequency response in the way you’re describing, we would already know about it. Besides, it’s silly to suggest that the copious engineers out there designing network boxes are all EQing their cables.
Imagine if we could just relax and be happy with whatever gear we might have.. Wouldn't that be a beautiful thing? No stress, no chasin' our own tail all the time, spending endless amounts of money, and never being satisfied.. Instead just relaxing, and enjoying the music.. Yes, the MUSIC.. Recharge our batteries.. Not worrying about how everything sounds.. This beautiful hobby, can also become a sickness, and destroy lives.. Believe me, it almost happened to me.
What a lot don't realise is it's the recording. not the system.
@@justinparkman3585This guy gets it!!
Is music enjoyable / livable at all with the cheaper cables for you? Ie stepping down to a lower value cable.
Of course you could go a little upscale by getting some bulk microphone cable, which is shielded.
Very, very interesting. I have never heard this before. Thanks, thanks....👏
Thanks for listening
It all comes back to good old ohms law. Cables "settling in" is ridiculous, they are exactly the same.
I love 100k speaker cables. Especially when Jay's buying them and im not. 😊
Couldn't agree more!
😂
How about trying 10ga ofc wire at $60? Maybe the differences would be still less.
Jay, I agree that you shouldn't use the MIT cables if they have tone controls that will change the sound. You should use the shunyata cables you originally showed. And I am not a cable denier
Those are gone
I've felt that other reviewers have said several weeks tell the story as some listening fatigue may set differently on different components (cables included) that quick a/b testing won't reveal. In my opinion, the speakers, rooms, and tubes make the biggest differences.
i have to agree with something you said in the last video, and thats when you have a system of THAT caliber you will notice these things. however, not many people can have the luxury of a 1500W amplifier, at most many will be lucky to own a system capable of 500wpc, the higher the power consumption the higher the gauge needed to carry the power optimally and control the drivers to the fullest extent the amplifier can
The naysayers dont have systems of high caliber so they feel their experience is the same for others
The basic and only task of a good speaker cable is not to change anything in the sound or limit anything, in other words, the cable should be transparent. Certainly, a magic cable with box for 100k $ changes something, so this cable does not meet the criteria of a good cable, even though you may like what it brings to the sound, but DSP and equalizers are for such tricks.
This is going to come down to the fact that your system is so So transparent and revealing on a wholly different level that ANY change will be easily apparent..that being said good or bad results will not be hidden.
As for results ..I think those who follow this experiment will have a predetermined conclusion…was there (in your system) a $99970 difference between cables ….its crass to think of the money ..but everyone including you are looking for a unicorn 🦄..or a surprise.
Have a great rest of the week 👍
This is definitely the ideal system for this kind of testing.
I wish that you tried the 10 gauge OFC cable.
My speaker cables are over 40 years old. High-end In their day, very heavily insulated.
Down through the years, I have switched and added many different components and speakers. There is no reason whatsoever I should, or will ever ever let go of these cables.
Ok 👍
Nagra's a great brand and the other pieces shown are first rate also. Do they come with manufacturer's warranty?
No they don’t.
We know now that electricity does not travel in the wire but outside. Any cable close together will affect each other and much more carrying sound. To be fair you need to separate the cable. Thank you for your effort.
Described input bias and that boxes job. Try silver mil-spec wire. It ain't the wire. It's what is in-between your ears. By the way humidity in the room will have more effect. Must be same same. Higher humidity - faster sound travel.
The MIT isn’t a cable. It’s an equalizer unit with copper wire on both ends.
I always use the IsoTek - Full System Enhancer (Burn-in) CD to burn in cables for 24 hours with the volume low to kick things off, then music.
I’m not sure, is this a comedy channel? If so it’s a good one 😂
Have you measured the capacitance and impedance yet?
@@darylfortney8081Im not a measurements guy. There are other channels out there for that
@@jaysaudiolab so it is a comedy channel is what you’re saying
@@darylfortney8081the only comedy here it was you look at every morning when you sit down and pee.
I bought a $27 ish cable on aliexpress. I couldn't have diy the cable for that price. It's even directional😮 . Sounds ok. Not as good as my Kimber but there is a huge price difference. The most important question for any audiophile is, are you having fun? I got way more than $27 of fun so, cool!
Is that really the question, though? For most of us, it is (or at least it’s supposed to be) about sound.
I think it is less the claim that there is nothing in the box, as that there is. That if there are controls, there is something inside they are adjusting. Being passive, there is nothing it can enhance. Only roll off or blend. Perhaps explaining less harshness because of high end roll off?
At work ..this is playing in the background..very very INTERESTING 🤔
I did post that I thought there could be an issue with that MIT cable network thing but I definitely didn't say anything about that box being empty. I read a short description on their website and while I didnt give it much thought it sounded like they were doing something extra within the signal path. I took that at face value. So, just seemed like an obvious issue if you're trying to do a true A/B listening test. Everything would have to be the same but the cable. Now, I don't think any of this that big of a deal but people do get worked up about this stuff. Even if you did a legit A/B test and had trouble making a decision then it's just inconclusive. It doesnt end the debate or anything. I just think its a fun experiment, and the few times Ive seen this done before it's always a mess. No one can tell anything. It's fun to do though, and fun to watch.
Speaker cables are very important. The quality of the cable will determine the quality of sound. My subwoofer cables must be at least 10 gauge ofc or bigger to handle the power from my amplifier. You can run a smaller cable but you risk damaging the amp or subwoofer. I don’t know much about high end cables. This is my first time hearing about cables that cost more than my house. I am sure those cables have the best quality metals for audio. The best shielding and can carry a signal with no issues. I don’t know about the box they run through. I do know that all cables are not equal
So, if you're worried about apples to apples, a comparison of speaker cables where neither one has a giant box filled with circuitry and knobs would probably be more appropriate. Any circuitry in the path could easily have an effect on the signal I would think. Admittedly, I have no idea what's actually in the box or what it supposed to do, but it sure looks like it would have an effect.
great point, but my best cables happen to be MIT
The Neotech nes-3004 mkII cost about 80$ per meter, 11 awg. Would be a great contender I think and still very affordable.
I would like you compare it wth maybe to a $200 or $300 Audio Quest cable to super expensive ones ?
Cables don’t matter right ? So the price shouldn’t either
I didn't say that. I just would like you to compare them. They could just be categorized as a everyman or woman entry level cables. People will do whatever they want with their money....they always have. It's all subjective value and spending. If you want to spend as much on speaker cables as you payed for your new truck, that is your choice. I personally , being a handy with wood , build statement loudspeakers. For listening now ; some vintage Tannoy Berkeley + ribbon super tweeters' and have some Ancient Apogees in storage. Some 15" FOCAL woofer waiting to.
I would try some 2 or 4 gauge cables and keep the pair of wires separated from each other to minimize any capacitance. The capacitance from zip cable pairs could probably affect the highs for sure.
The heavy gauge would keep the resistance low. So if your audiophile power amp has terrifically low output impedance that enhances current, the heavy gauge would help preserve that.
Plus if you have a couple of mono blocks, you could place them behind the speakers to keep the cable runs short. Using balanced XLR connections going from the preamp to the power amp helps minimize losses as well.
Hi Jay.....I am using a new set of speaker cables the Clarus Crimson........I have read that these cables take a very very very long time to break in. Out of the box they feel like someone threw a thin blanket over the speakers.
I also have the Audience Au24 sx and that is a fantastic cable.But the wire is much thinner and didn't sound so shut in.I guess with the much thinker Clarus Crimson it will need time to not sound so shut in.If it stays this way then it will be an expensive mistake....but I hope things open up.
Im loving this series of videos. Looking forward to the next instalment. Maybe you could do the same type of shootout with interconnects? 🔊🙏🏻
That's a great idea!
Been using 9 gauge ofc cable forever. I want to go to an A B comparison myself but never have.
Here are my thoughts but first a question: Once the current from the amp reaches the speaker it has to cross the connection barrier and then flow through much smaller wire to the crossovers and then from the crossovers to the drivers. Doesn’t the connection itself, and the much smaller wire in the speaker, affect the sound negatively? It seems to me that the large differences in resistance and other electrical parameters in the speaker itself would have a greater effect on the sound than the different parameters you would get between two different cables, thereby negating those differences. Thoughts?
Speakers is made with a price point, some have straight on bad wires and some have better, speakers in this class tho do not have this problem.
Hard to say
@@Error2username You are right, but you may have missed my point. If you have a downstream issue that affects everything going through it to a degree greater than the difference between two upstream “currents”, wouldn’t it negate the upstream differences? In other words, if I have two cables “upstream” that vary in, for example, their resistance, and then a connection and wiring that cause a greater change in resistance, wouldn’t the larger change in resistance downstream negate the differences between the two cables? And wouldn’t other electrical parameters be affected as well? So…the electrical specs of the connection and wiring of the speaker would have a greater effect on speaker sound than the cables.
The inherent quality of a recording is what it is. Fortunately most recordings are pretty good. But anything you subtract from that inherent quality is bad. If your playing them through a speaker with mediocre internal wiring that subtracts a certain amount of sound quality. But why would you want to subtract even more sound quality with mediocre interconnects and speaker cables? Or think that it doesn't matter. In audio, the old saying "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link" isn't correct. It's more like "how many strong links versus weak links do you have?" Strengthening some weak links always helps, sound quality wise.
Do the premium speakers use wires on the crossovers that are the same size and quality of the super expensive speaker cables. Like the choke coils? That would make them about the size of a telecom 5,000 ft reel of wire I am thinking. The speaker box would need to be size of a 10' x 10' shed.
Yes
I just got a quote of $80k for a swimming pool with spa. I'm very happy because I still have $20k left for a complete two channel audio system with shotgun runs (per speaker) of Home Depot oxygen free 12 gauge cables. I may even do quad twisted pairs for my homemade power cords! I will even wrap my cables with PET braided expandable sleeves from Ali Express (in bright blue).
And if you prefer to spend your money that way, more power to you! Back to the subject at hand, you should understand that some people can spend a couple million dollars for their stereo setup in a 50 million $ mansion.
@@DaveJ6515 - you seem rather defensive. My beef is with the absurdity of a speaker cable priced at $100k. I will bet that Jay's own cables sound almost as good in every aspect (whatever good means to different audiophiles) for 1/15th the price.
@@jaimeballester840 And I am saying that there are people for whom those cables are a feasible choice, provided they sound good to their ears. That's all. I, for one, am not going to pay 100k for speaker cables. There are things to do before I think about it: further improvements to my room acoustics, get a d'Agostino Momentum or a Gryphon are the first that come to my mind.
@@DaveJ6515 - Dave, we agree. BTW, great choice of amps. And while I haven't heard them, CH and Soulution are great choices. Actually, there are many brands that are top, top notch. Cheers!
Hey, if anyone is dumb enough to spend 100k for a wire, they have every right to enjoy the 5% improvement. Might prevent a regret suicide.😊 What about the music? Do we need to spend 100k or do we just need a soul to enjoy it? I think it's the latter, but your mileage may vary.
Just a soul
This started with ppl saying there is No difference on lampcord Vs high end cabels. So thats why he made this vid. You dont need to be rude, calling ppl dumb for using money they have.
SUCH RUDENESS IS NOT COOL!
That’s funny! $100k is a lot of money for many of us, it ain’t a lot for some folks though. That’s why it’s the ultra high end.
Those are not "tone controls". They are networks so that each frequency can store and release where they articulate at the optimal level. It's not snake oil, unless you're someone that simply doesn't understand the design of the network and why it's used. It's used to fix the problems of a non-networked cable. The MIT top end model is just taking the design to the maximum level and the reason why they sell it is because there are people that want that kind of cable and they have the money to spend. Do people need those $100K+ cable? NOPE. Even the engineer that designed them thinks they are overkill. The reason why he designed them is to simply take his initial design concept to the maximum level as a cost no object concept to see if there is a difference and if so, is it something worth putting on the market.
I also have that cheaper cable and for my system it is fine but for a high end system you will buy better stuff. And a good sacd file will sound amazing no matter how hard i put it.
I have old audioquest type 8 cables for my front sound stage. Won't ever go past that price point but I also have 10 year old speakers
I like these type if comparisons. However, we know that the 27 dollar cables will work without question. But, for high end systems It is nice to see higher quality cable options that are not 100K. I think this type of comparison should include at least 2 step up options prior to the MIT. The one thing about MIT or Opus is the ability to calibrate specifically to allow amplifiers and speakers to be more sonically matched. I have Opus Magnums calibrated to XLF and Mac MC2KW 1 Amp.s and I can clearly tell the difference from other versions. With that said I am 100% certain that several other options for a fraction of the cost would have worked very well for my set up. Maybe not as refined as the Opus, but nonetheless I would have been pleased. For High End Audio Systems, we are always looking to get the most our of our components, but at some point, you don’t have to spend an insane amount of money to achieve a great result. I would to see the 27$ cables with at least 2 intermediate options to the higher end that is reasonably priced would be a better measure for an Audiophile to consider. While I know 27$ cables would certainly work in my room, I have no desire to use them.
We are all saying that the box with all that passive network will change the sound and that can be proven with measurements. If it sounds any better it doesnt mean it is better. We are also saying that getting used to sound is more real than break in. That is where you should do an ABX with a switcher, because nothing is worse than audio memory. No excuses about a switcher being in the way of the signal, it will apply to A&B so stop speaking like its going to only affect B. Audio science is saying that if there is no difference in measurements, there wont be any audible difference. Those are the claims, nothing more, nothing less.
Audio Science Review is correct.
Meh
And this video is example why scientifically controlled trials have to include examples for placebo effect. Trying exotic cables just goes to show someone is unhappy with their speakers, or that they weren't all they were hyped up to be, or are in the wrong space. There will be other signs too, when you see every available band-aid and treatment installed trying to make up for speakers that are too revealing with the variable quality of available mainstream recordings.
Amazing how this so-called better sound is otherwise magically asleep in the recordings since the studios don't use fantasy cables. That means that this superior sound was grown out of thin air once the fantasy wire is installed. Simply amazing.
I always burn-in any component added to my system, before deciding; if it made an improvement to it, that I like. That basic audiophile 101! Some of the same people commenting about the price of these cable are some of the same people who will spend their life saving on season tickets to a football game so they can sit in the cold. Instead of watching the game for free in the comfort of their own home! I believe the word I am looking for is hypocrisy.
I got 30 out of 30 correct in Blind Testing with a blindfold on, between a $400 speaker cable versus a near $5,000 speaker cable. Ironically the near $5,000 speaker cable was a former top of the line MIT cable, and it had those boxes, just like the MIT cables in your experiment. It was the MIT MH 770 Ultralinear II speaker cable.The boxes are NOT empty or snake oil. They weighed about the same as an unopened 2 titer bottle of cola; for you snake oil barkers out there. We used an integrated amp with 2 speaker outputs; speakers A & B. That way my assistants only had to switch cables at the one end; the loudspeaker end. And that made it even more scientific, as we wouldn't have to turn off the power amp for several minutes when switching cables. As soon as an amp is turned off; it's capacitors, resistors, transformer starts cooling down a bit, and even in a few mintes the sound is slightly different. Which would have been a variable. Also I warmed up the equipment by playing music, a full 2 hours beforehand. Keeping it turned on for 2 hours and not playing music, is not the same as actually playing music through it for 2 hours; believe me on that.
When you turn on your equipment from cold, the sound on the first recording you play won't be nearly as open or as sweet as if you went back and played that same recording with a few cds or whatever, played in between. From the first recording on, your sound very gradually gets cleaner and smoother sounding, and the spaces between the instruments become much more pronounced. During that time your equipments electronic signature goes noticeably down and the bass fullness and definition go noticeably up. Since this is very gradual, many people do not notice this. Even after 2 hours of play, your system is NOT FULLY warmed up, but the changes at that point are much much less, than how much the sound of your system changes in the first two hours of play. This was ironically demonstrated to me one time when I was listening to Christmas music, one cold December night. My cd player was on repeat. The first track of the various artists compilation cd was White Christmas by Bing Crosby. The sound quality was as dated as it's age; around 75 years old at the time. It sounded raw and anything but smooth, and you couldn't clearly hear all the instrumentation and singers in the background. Not a recording you'd listen to for sound quality. I must have been tired that night, with the speakers at a bit above average volume on either side of the glowing Christmas tree; I still fell asleep. A few hour later, when I woke up, the same cd on repeat, was playing the same track White Christmas again. My Gosh! The sound quality did not sound primitive at all anymore; if less than audiophile quality. His voice was smooth, you could hear every intonation of the background singers in the background, and more singers than it sounded like before, every delicate fingering of the harp in places you never heard it before. And you could hear. something else! ..Not little tiny reindeer, but tiny ticks and pops.... galore. What do you know.The cd track was from a recorded 78; not a master tape. All these things were revealed because as I slept, the system was warming up and improving little by little as I snoozed, and it added up big time. My systems warm up had come full circle and Bing Crosby was now crooning smoothly and cleanly right ABOVE the lighted star at the top of my 7 foot glistening Christmas tree.
Are you kindly able to summarise your point in one sentence?
In other words, my system sounds better after a few hours 😂😂😂😂
IIt wasn't a point, it was a true story. Sorry you and your friend can't distinguish even that.
@@sidesup8286 It was a ridiculous story. Glad you heard what you wanted to.
Thank you!...Really. Ridiculous to you because you likely have a crappy system, and definitely have a closed mind, & can't hear. Does it make you feel smart to think all these smart doctors, investors, lawyers and professionals from other fields are "imagining"? Imagine if you could be what they are.
Time for another blind test about the *HIGH* you've talked about, let yourself be part of the blind test panel, let a friend who is knowledgeable about your system to control the test.
Maybe cut two lengths of the same cheep cable, burn one pair in then use the other one cold n hear the difference. I’d also like to see your room with just 2 speakers and amps.
100% it was the right thing to do to bin the lamp cord. That’s too extreme when you can buy audio specific cables for a tiny bit more.
I’d like to see $200 cables versus price no object. But interested to see the $30 cables to start.
I have old cheap MIT cables with a box and I’ve seen inside it’s a bunch of glue and some coiled device that I think smooths out the harmonics. I am guessing the 100k box is more of the same. Do a video of what’s inside the box!
No man. I don’t want to break
Anything. It’s too expensive
@@jaysaudiolab It's 30 dollar in material with a 100k pricetag
@@jaysaudiolab hey I get that. Someone has to do it though! It’s like that movie Seven… what’s in the box!!!
@@USEC3 I see you know everything about this subject. Build them yourself and become rich by selling audio cables with an outrageous profit! I am afraid you are going to find it hard to make them sound good, but who knows ...
@@USEC3 List the parts. I'd like to see for myself.
Cables settling into the system- kind of like day old chili 😅😅😅😅
Jay, I like the extreme disparity in cost of the cables. It fully illustrates the counter argument of deniers. Whenever someone uses the term, “Cables don’t matter” or this or that doesn’t matter, I hear 2 things: “I wouldn’t spend that much on cables,” or “Based on my components, I won’t hear a difference either way.”
And when I see cable believers comment, it is often some nonsensical version of "your system isn't resolving enough ", which is basically what you said. Smh
I'm using a single Viablu SC-6 cable , for each tri-amped speaker , which has 2 pure copper wires for the woofers , 2 tin-plated copper wires for the midrange and 2 silver-plated copper for the tweeters. I'm using 2 meters per speaker , cost is 99 euro/meter (approx. $110/meter). That's even going overboard , I would only spend thousands on components , not cables.
I would prefer to see the cheap cables compared with something which might be purchased by someone currently owning cheap cables. Maybe $250 cables? Maybe 500.00 if you want to push it?
the issue is my channel is dedicated to the ultra high end..
@@jaysaudiolab Fair enough. I can see that my suggestion would be off topic for your channel.
I’ve seen reviewers like A-Hole-Licks say that, it’s just placebo.
i wish you were here...
This is fun.... 🙂
All RUclips ‘reviewers’ should be subject to an independently controlled, blind a/b or a/b/c test.
Then let’s see how accurate they all are at determining their chosen product.
Apart from loudspeakers it has continually proven to be extremely difficult even with markedly disparate priced hardware.
how many more episodes before the comparison?
Well it depends on the test subjects. They have families and jobs. It all needs to be done when everyone is available
Good on Jay for this video!! Most people in the industry praise high end cables because its in their interest to do so! BUT its not fair to compare a £30 cable to a $100,000 cable! That's just not playing the game!! Get some $1000.00 cables(or even $500.00) and compare then to the $100,000 dollars cables. That's still a hundred times cheaper and I think you'll find zero difference!! IMO!!
I think cables DO make a difference BTW!!
@TheChrisleekay No, I think he did right. If Jay approaches this with integrity, I think he will find that his two listeners will find little to no difference in either cable, so long as they do NOT know which cable is which. But none of this can verify this, so we have to take Jay at his word. I am NOT a cable believer, and would challenge Jay to have ME or any bonafide cable non-believer (Gene from Audioholics for example) to be involved with such a blind test to ENSURE that the participants were not prompted in any way. No offense to Jay, but how can we truly know that he won't prompt them in some way? We don't.
Why isn't it fair to compare $30 cable vs. $100k, as if price has anything to do with how something sounds? Once you know how something sounds then you can determine if it's worth the price, not the other way around.
@@YuengsNwings But that doesn't make sense! If I can buy some $500 cables that sound as good as the $100,000 cables then most people are going to go with the $500 dollars cables. Maybe send that $99,500 saving on a nice new Mercedes!!?
OK there's something in the box, you can now remove it or use it with the 27 dollar wire for "apples to apples". Go.
Sure
The box came with the highend cabels, the lampcord comes without.
@@Error2username bingo
Back in the 1980's in the UK, at the suggestion of a hifi magazine I remember experimenting with 35p/metre solid core mains cable. I was using QED '79 back then. In short a lot of your comments today resonated with my recollections of the effect on the system sound as a result. One effect perhaps which wasn't immediately apparent was a slight hardness to the treble - almost a coarser edge to the treble - this (and also I guess, with the concurrent effect on the other frequencies being heard) initially gave a different edge to music played on the system, perhaps marginally more transparent superfically. Something different, all for less than the cost of the QED cable! Not necessarily better, just an alternative presentation to the music. Unfortunately, any benefits of the solid-core were negated (for me) as extended listening over time induced fatigue - not massively - but definitely so!. The eventual burning-in of the soild-core occurred when the cable settled. The sound did lose some of the edge to the sound, but not enough for my preferences. Look forward to your next vid!
Thanks
The overcompensation is strong with this one.
It would be interesting experiment to attach the $27 cable to the box which MIT provides and then compare it to the original MIT cable with box.
That box comes with the high end cabels, lampcord/cheap speakercable comes without.
Why will one convince a nay sayer, what do you win… I tested (blind) different cables and did not hear a difference, but I don’t have golden ears. Cable break in, no prof on any university can prove that with formules that work for ages….
@@patrickmeylemans9627 Cables need break in. Speakers and other components need break in. It's a fact. You are free not to believe it. It remains a fact. It took me 500 hours to break in my Ansuz C3 speaker cables and Borresen 03 speakers. It's a fact. And it's also a fact that after I power everything on, it takes 40-50 minutes to sound really good, and if the DA converter external clock was not in standby mode, it will take a couple hours to open up and produce a huge sound stage. It's a fact.
I know first hand that brand new cables sound harsh and needs to be “warmed” up for the lack of a better word, to settle and sound as they should.
And I heard that cables can get worn out over time. Now that I’m not sure about and it’s probably very hard to notice because it’s such a slow deterioration.
Surely it can be shown scientifically the difference between cables, if you can hear a difference that must relate to a different electrical signal. An oscilloscope will surely show it, and, you can buy an oscilloscope really cheap, peanuts compared to 100k cables. BTW the $27 cables not only weren't terminated but they weren't even fully connected, how about using welding cables, size matters, at the very least the cable has to be 2x thicker than the speakers power requirements and what about coax cables and twisted pair, all these things are for specific jobs so it must matter and be noticeable.
Do you know how to use an oscilloscope? A pair of eyes interpret what is displayed on an O-scope. Rudimentary at best, would only clearly reveal large differences easily audible. Those that claim measurements would prove/disprove difference do not know what to measure or how to measure it. Requires far beyond an O-scope or anything internet wanna be experts possess.
Just look at any cable denier's system and it's easy to see why cables don't make any difference for them.
And what exactly would one see when they look at a cable denier's system?
@@LarwizI’m sure most sound pretty bad.
@thomprd I don't think you truly believe that. There's no real rationale to your thought. Why would someone's system likely sound bad because they don't believe in pricey cables?!? Why can't one simply believe in good sources, components, and speakers being the key to a good system, like myself? I've had cable believers over to hear my system, and they have all said that it sounded good. Just my experience. 🤷🏾
@Larwiz probably a bit plastic looking mukka ..
@@Larwiz Cheap equipment usually and not set up correctly.
it matters because the cable box probably inhibits the sound there for on a system with high distortion, may tame it. cables can only inhibit sound or let sound through.. they cant improve the source. U still wont use a revealing low cost low sinad amp to prove your high end high distortion amps are a waste of money and just look good!
Thanks 🙏
Personally, I would have thought one should be able to tell a difference even without any music being played.
Yeah, sure, for at least 10 minutes, a current would have to flow through the cable, but if one was to, then press pause (or mute) Someone who's familiar with the sound of their set-up should notice how the noise floor has slightly risen.
If as is claimed that wire sounds different where are the measurements?
Measurements 😂 here we go