Interconnects and Cables (Taken from 50% Off All QED Signature Interconnect Cables!)

[Butuz]

Cable spend should be a percentage of overall system cost IMHO.

No point in spending £100 on an interconnect and £100 on speaker cable that connects a £100 CD player to a £100 amp and to £100 speakers. The cd/amp/speakers simply are not capable of reproducing the level of detail required in order to tell the difference between those and a £50 or £20 cable.

Some systems on the other hand would clearly demonstrate a difference between those cables.

Audio cables are one thing, some of it is snake oil for sure but it is not in the same league of snake oil as £1000 kettle leads and £500 wooden knobs!

Butuz

[Rave]

i work in broadcast integration and i spend my life ensuring the signals can successfully transmit through cables without interference and with the best quality possible. Now while i agree a £40 or £80 phono cable is way over the top... claiming cable quality has no effect is downright insulting to my career.

Who's claimed that then? Not me- this thread is about unbalanced interconnects intended for home hi-fi usage. I have already explicitly stated that cable quality does make a difference for analogue video. I have also stated that for digital signals in a hi-fi/home cinema setup, cables either work or they don't. If they don't, you need better cables.

So who's your beef with?

Admitadly i tend think more in BNC and coax but to put it into perspective an HDBNC costs a few quid and an SD BNC costs a few pennies, are you going to tell the multi million pound broadcast company are wasting our money because its a digital signal anyway?

So what's a few quid exactly? £2-5 maybe? We're talking £40 for a phono plugged sub lead here. Would I spend £20-30 on a cable to hook up the mixing desk to the main amplification bank over 30m at a major music festival? Sure. But to hook up my AV receiver to my sub? Not so much.

I wouldnt ever recomend people spend more on cables unnecissarily as yeah most of the time there isnt really any difference. The thing i have a problem with is i just think is the level of ignorance in this thread as to the actual properties of signals doesnt match up to the level of vigilence people seem to have towards their opinions.

Would you care to go through this thread and provide specific examples of this ignorance that so offends you? Please?

Cable spend should be a percentage of overall system cost IMHO.

About 1% is right. But nice to see you back Butuz, long time no see.

[Lowe]

Would I spend £20-30 on a cable to hook up the mixing desk to the main amplification bank over 30m at a major music festival? Sure. But to hook up my AV receiver to my sub? Not so much.

The ultimate irony is, at most gigs the cables used for such purposes are the cheapest, most scrappy leads you can imagine.

Bigger gigs get a little more tasty. The multicore I run at work is 50m long, 32 channels and cost a snip over £1600.