Normally I find cable tests arranged by comparing files on the internet rather pointless. Even if differences are possible to detect, there are often too many factors that are unknown or just overlooked by the person who creates it. And all too often, the files sound really dull too, which defeats the purpose of the comparison: To evaluate how we interpret the files musically.
This time I found it slightly amusing for a change. The reason was that when I played these four files, I immediately felt that the file which received most votes was terrible - and the one which nobody voted for was probably the best. Musically, that is. Maybe noone on that forum pays attention to that aspect.
http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22779
I didn't do anything but download the 'very short files' and play them on my lousy computer speakers. Which cable is which is reveiled on page 4.
One thing that struck me is that it should be possible to create some example files that demonstrate more versus less tuneful versions of the same track. And these files could be added as examples on a page that explains how to use the Tune Method, how to position loudspeakers etcetera.
Comments?
Silly cable test
Moderator: Staff
This is where I end up feeling I can't tune dem my way out of a paper bag. First impressions seemed to offer a bigger difference between them, yet the more I compared the more similar they became. Maybe I got too used to the tune.
They didn't seem hugely different to my ears - not in the grand scheme of things anyway. At first I thought 4 was going to be the most popular as mentioned by Fredrik cos it sounded the most impressive first time around. I did find 1 easiest to follow which I presume from the low count is the one Fredrik preferred. It's not so clear sounding though which I guess is what appealed to most people that voted.
I do think it adds a new angle to demonstrating/learning tune dem and is easier to do than hauling speakers around and swapping out components. Why not compose you own page Fredrik? No doubt the differences can be made even more pronounced for folk like me :P
They didn't seem hugely different to my ears - not in the grand scheme of things anyway. At first I thought 4 was going to be the most popular as mentioned by Fredrik cos it sounded the most impressive first time around. I did find 1 easiest to follow which I presume from the low count is the one Fredrik preferred. It's not so clear sounding though which I guess is what appealed to most people that voted.
I do think it adds a new angle to demonstrating/learning tune dem and is easier to do than hauling speakers around and swapping out components. Why not compose you own page Fredrik? No doubt the differences can be made even more pronounced for folk like me :P
No one else going to give this a go? Only takes a few moments to download the short 2min files.
What surprises me is that 2 was so popular as it doesn't even sound that good to me. I'd rank musicality as follows, but some of them are quite close so would be interested to know what others prefer: -
1st 1
2nd 3
3rd 2
4th 4
So will you give this a go Fredrik? I like the idea and it's dead easy to use.
What surprises me is that 2 was so popular as it doesn't even sound that good to me. I'd rank musicality as follows, but some of them are quite close so would be interested to know what others prefer: -
1st 1
2nd 3
3rd 2
4th 4
So will you give this a go Fredrik? I like the idea and it's dead easy to use.
OK Charlie, you goaded me into it.
I gave it a shot downloading the short files and comparing them on the internal speakers of an iMac G5 through iTunes (not the highest resolution system I've ever used). I found the differences were quite audible and equally amusing.
I am in agreement that the cable with the lowest votes - actually no votes - was the most musical. I also felt the one with the most votes was really bad. Although it should be noted that the most votes by far went to "I cannot detect a difference" which indicates to me that a lot of people should find a more useful kind of forum to spend time on. :)
For those who don't want to bother viewing the thread the voting (which is now closed) came down as follows:
Cable 1 - 0 votes
Cable 2 - 3 votes
Cable 3 - 2 votes
Cable 4 - 2 votes
Can't tell - 15 votes
In my listening I felt that two were really bad and two were listenable with a bigger gap between those groups than between the cables within a group. My ranking is as follows:
Cable 1 - Best
Cable 2 - Worst
Cable 3 - 2nd
Cable 4 - 3rd
Slightly different than Charlie's ranking in the position of 3rd vs. 4th but I did find those two to be the closest and both were pretty bad. I just found cable 2 a bit more actively annoying - especially the cymbals. I suppose that a system with less high-frequency extension and definition than the iMac
might change the results.
Since the differences were readily audible, both the sonic and the true musical qualities, it does seem to me that Fredrik's idea of putting a link to some music files that demonstrate the tune would be a good idea. Files could be made that show big tune differences that would make the concept more obvious and some with more minor differences could be posted as well. Possibly even a couple files showing the difference between a change that makes for better "sound" with worse tune.
Anyway, an interesting way to pass the time, although it took only a few minutes to listen to the samples but over a half hour to compose the post!
I gave it a shot downloading the short files and comparing them on the internal speakers of an iMac G5 through iTunes (not the highest resolution system I've ever used). I found the differences were quite audible and equally amusing.
I am in agreement that the cable with the lowest votes - actually no votes - was the most musical. I also felt the one with the most votes was really bad. Although it should be noted that the most votes by far went to "I cannot detect a difference" which indicates to me that a lot of people should find a more useful kind of forum to spend time on. :)
For those who don't want to bother viewing the thread the voting (which is now closed) came down as follows:
Cable 1 - 0 votes
Cable 2 - 3 votes
Cable 3 - 2 votes
Cable 4 - 2 votes
Can't tell - 15 votes
In my listening I felt that two were really bad and two were listenable with a bigger gap between those groups than between the cables within a group. My ranking is as follows:
Cable 1 - Best
Cable 2 - Worst
Cable 3 - 2nd
Cable 4 - 3rd
Slightly different than Charlie's ranking in the position of 3rd vs. 4th but I did find those two to be the closest and both were pretty bad. I just found cable 2 a bit more actively annoying - especially the cymbals. I suppose that a system with less high-frequency extension and definition than the iMac
might change the results.Since the differences were readily audible, both the sonic and the true musical qualities, it does seem to me that Fredrik's idea of putting a link to some music files that demonstrate the tune would be a good idea. Files could be made that show big tune differences that would make the concept more obvious and some with more minor differences could be posted as well. Possibly even a couple files showing the difference between a change that makes for better "sound" with worse tune.
Anyway, an interesting way to pass the time, although it took only a few minutes to listen to the samples but over a half hour to compose the post!
-
Robert Lake
- Active member
- Posts: 103
- Joined: 2007-08-19 17:50
Interesting
On my Dell6400, the differences are audible, unless you are stressed up of course. Asking the question which of these four bands can play well, and is not experimenting too much, my choice is number 1. I am, on the hand, surprised that 3 and 4 sound so bad in musical terms. On the other hand, I am not, I think I have a good reason for keeping out of non-linn Hi-Fi stores for the last 15 years.
The differences would of course be larger if one compared a cheap CD player against a Unidisk. It would be an interesting learning example for MP3 listners and people thinking about buying a HI-FI.
The differences would of course be larger if one compared a cheap CD player against a Unidisk. It would be an interesting learning example for MP3 listners and people thinking about buying a HI-FI.
Re: Interesting
Not sure if Robert meant 'sound' or 'musicality', but it brings up something I'd like to ask... Do members think that tune dem only tells you which is better and not how much better? That was my understanding anyway, although I felt the Radikal was significantly more musical in a way I'd not heard before, but this could have been my mind playing tricks due to my expectations.Robert Lake wrote:The differences would of course be larger if one compared a cheap CD player against a Unidisk.
-
Linncredible
- Active Member
- Posts: 70
- Joined: 2008-01-12 14:01
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
It seems everyone preferred cable 1 - the unbranded cheapest-possible cable. My very quickly evaluated list actually turned out exactly like Thomas'. But I wouldn't bet much on it being more correct that Charlie's, which had the position of the two worst cables reversed. I felt that both of them were much worse than the two best.
I also have to agree with Charlie that these kind of differences don't become easier the more you hear them. I find it easiest to focus and then pick my preferred order straight away. Hearing those same few seconds in rather low quality again and again makes me go "deaf" rather quickly.
It surprised me too (including the "well, perhaps not" ) that cable 4 was so terrible. Chord has made cables for Naim and their sales director is Alan Gibb, a very nice guy who used to work for Linn in the past...
I've said it before and I'll happily repeat it: The audio cable business is the dirty backyard of HiFi. The serious manufacturers are extremely few, and I instictively dismiss (perhaps unfairly) a company with ten different analogue interconnect models in their program.
Nice that you all approve of a file-based Tune Method explanation and a loudspeaker positioning guide! I guess the only problem is that I don't really have the time to put the files together. I think it will require some trial and error to get them right.
I was also thinking, regarding the loudspeaker positioning guide, that the music could be recorded straight from the room. I've assisted loudspeaker positioning by phone (that is, I've been on the phone and just said "better" and "worse" when those in the room have moved the speakers around) and to my amazement, it really works. It's not the easiest method, as I sometimes have to repeat a certain move several times (and perhaps change music) to be certain, but it does work.
I also have to agree with Charlie that these kind of differences don't become easier the more you hear them. I find it easiest to focus and then pick my preferred order straight away. Hearing those same few seconds in rather low quality again and again makes me go "deaf" rather quickly.
It surprised me too (including the "well, perhaps not"
) that cable 4 was so terrible. Chord has made cables for Naim and their sales director is Alan Gibb, a very nice guy who used to work for Linn in the past...I've said it before and I'll happily repeat it: The audio cable business is the dirty backyard of HiFi. The serious manufacturers are extremely few, and I instictively dismiss (perhaps unfairly) a company with ten different analogue interconnect models in their program.
Nice that you all approve of a file-based Tune Method explanation and a loudspeaker positioning guide! I guess the only problem is that I don't really have the time to put the files together. I think it will require some trial and error to get them right.
I was also thinking, regarding the loudspeaker positioning guide, that the music could be recorded straight from the room. I've assisted loudspeaker positioning by phone (that is, I've been on the phone and just said "better" and "worse" when those in the room have moved the speakers around) and to my amazement, it really works. It's not the easiest method, as I sometimes have to repeat a certain move several times (and perhaps change music) to be certain, but it does work.
Last edited by lejonklou on 2009-09-21 20:43, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Interesting
I think it's difficult to quantify the difference in quality. So when you compare A with B, it's hard to tell for sure whether that difference was bigger than last week's C versus D.Charlie1 wrote:Do members think that tune dem only tells you which is better and not how much better?
On the other hand, sometimes I do feel certain whether a difference is big or small. The big ones, like Radikal, will also stand the test of time and amaze you again and again. The small ones can sometimes feel big when you first hear them, but an hour later you can become unsure of which one you left playing.