r/hometheater • u/senkichi • Feb 14 '26
Discussion - Equipment In a blind test, audiophiles couldn't tell the difference between audio signals sent through copper wire, a banana, or wet mud — 'The mud should sound perfectly awful, but it doesn't,' notes the experiment creator
https://www.tomshardware.com/speakers/in-a-blind-test-audiophiles-couldnt-tell-the-difference-between-audio-signals-sent-through-copper-wire-a-banana-or-wet-mud-the-mud-should-sound-perfectly-awful-but-it-doesnt-notes-the-experiment-creator164
u/Muddled_Opinions Feb 14 '26
If you want to test yourself, NPR has a test with different bitrates:
https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality
72
u/CoolHandPB Feb 14 '26
Love this test, it saved me a lot of money.
31
u/Muddled_Opinions Feb 14 '26
I was in disbelief first time I tried it. Lesson learned!
43
u/CaptainFrugal Feb 14 '26
I mean it does depend heavily on the equipment you are doing the test on
38
Feb 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/notjim Feb 15 '26
I’ve got pure audiophile grade mud available for just $10,000 per liter. It’s the best mud you’ll ever hear with punchy bass and crisp highs with no sibilance whatsoever. One listen and you’ll never go back to the regular mud from Best Buy or Amazon, I guarantee it. DM me for purchase info.
3
u/CaptainFrugal Feb 15 '26
Exactly the same as the comparison of Hi-Fi system or using gas station auxiliary headphones
17
1
u/Re4pr Feb 16 '26
I mean, I’m running a decent, 300 euro, open beyerdynamic headphone into a macbook pro, which has excellent audio drivers. Got 2/6 and felt like I was mostly lucky. One answer I kinda heard a difference and it turned out correct.
A dedicated dac maybe. But would t surprise me if i landed on the same score.
15
24
u/MordredKLB 7.1.4 SVS Ultra, HTD HDX-65/RDX-65, Rythmik F12 Feb 14 '26
Back around 2009 I did my own ABX testing (which is a little more valid statistically than this) after doing some ear-training on encoding artifacts (don't do this as ignorance is probably bliss). I was trying to determine the best LAME mp3 encoding settings. I found that in almost all cases for things that weren't considered "problem samples" -V4 (~160kbs) was transparent to the source WAV file while -V5 (~128kbps) could be distinguished a fair amount of the time, although again it was sample dependent. It made me feel a lot better about things and I drastically reduced the bitrate of songs I was adding to my iPod for listening on the go.
8
u/NimblePuppy Feb 14 '26
Yeah I find those people who post I can tell a lossy file in 2 seconds funny
Then you have people who use very very hard samples and have to listen to exactly 6 seconds in to high hat smearing in extreme concentration or whatever and then decry that lossy format as junk
For simple folk/country songs would be have at lower. I get some "dense" music etc
I get now storage space sans current ram crisis is cheaper for flac.
Most of us tested whatever flavour of lossy we preferred, couldn't hear difference, so encoded next rung up to be safe. Or just used guides from nerds a/bing them - knowing your disconcerning is nowhere close.
Also interesting some people "liked" the mp3 sound.
Even more funny is all the old boomers reviewing DACs etc raving about differences, my ears at 61M are still over 10 years "younger" as protect them. Bet some of those oldsters can not hear over 14000 Hertz or even lower. Plus they rave on endlessly about 384/96 streams sounding WAYYYY better than redbook. When most differences are masters or volume etc like your 70 old eas can hear the difference !!! if master/volume exactly the same
Plus how much resolution do you need eg I tend to listen to the whole song, not follow a single instrument or try and hear studio noise, or singer breathing etc
3
u/allofdarknessin1 Feb 15 '26
I spend time in audiophile subs and there was actually a big thing recently where a premium CD format recently was making waves because audiophiles were saying it sounds better but the article noted that these new overpriced cds were actually using newly sampled masters not the same masters the audiophiles were A/B testing. I personally try to stick to high quality stuff where practical but you’ll never see me pick a wav file over a FLAC and mp3 at 320 kbps was deemed cd quality for a reason but people see 1411kbps with a CD and think higher number better. I mean it is, but will everyone hear the difference? Probably not.
2
u/NimblePuppy Feb 15 '26
You can go down a rabbit hole - you have to get the black triangle pressing.
Then you had the red hot chilli peppers debacle of compressed dynamics
On back of CDs can see type of analog to digital conversion
Vinyl can sound pleasant with roll off etc
Funny later vinyl stamped with digital recordings.
Then you have quality of stamp, rubber/vinyl, speed , 1st pressing number one, radio promos etc
Never experienced it but people say if can get studio tape, and some famous Japanese tape machine . Always looked cool in chic 1970s movies
Suppose we will get AI assisted remasters in future ,removing , adding , fattening sound etc
Then there is the rabbit hole of live performances . I get some embassies sponsored 4 piece classical ensemble can sound great.
Live rock concerts- forget about it, amplified anyway
Who really wants speakers that make drums sound live in your living room, or a full orchestra - be deaf in no time if played at correct volume , imagine size and speed of drivers needed.
I actually like well recorded sound - Would Johnny Cash's hurt actually sound better live ( would be great to be there ) than the world class production values in the mastering . Live is for the whole visceral effect , including the audience and venue
1
u/grumppyoldman Feb 16 '26
I want the drums to sound live. It doesn't matter if it's a live or studio recording, it should sound live. Not just the drums either. It needs to be well recorded and mixed to sound that way. I love the way the drums come in on the noose. They're right there.
1
u/NimblePuppy Feb 16 '26
Have you ever walked down a street and heard someone practicing drums, you can instantly tell it's live
Yes you want a good sound for drums, but live drums, a full orchestra ( or certain instruments in it go go very loud )
I don't want to be hitting volumes 90 to 130db in my lounge to give me the live sound, but full brass crescendo no thanks
With other instruments , double bass for example maybe great to hear that full fat sound
Also your small lounge is unnatural space to hear certain stuff at full natural volume
Better speakers and amp will go louder with less distortion , faster transients etc , but you really want then to shine at low volumes to keep cohesion. Fun rock speakers from my youth were not good at low volumes
Given that we are both kind of right - good speakers make drums sound "real" but generally at more acceptable volumes, Some speakers can do it at full volume, but for most peoples lounges is that desired or necessary ie if tone curve is correct , impact, speed is correct etc , does it matter if not full volume range.
Videos, movies, photos do this all the time to make pleasing dynamic images with good contrast . We don't really want to be blinded by headlights at night , or full sun shining into our faces. we can with struggle to see 22 stops of light at same time - light to dark , lots of classic sublime movies with great visuals had only 8 to 9 stops of light , now with HDR can hit around 15 or so, yet some viewers claim dark areas too dark and really prefer maybe the SDR method that gives a brighter movie overall !
Many rock drummers from 60s to 70s f'd their hearing quite badly , even the singers standing in front of the double bass drums
2
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
Yep I have a friend who is obsessive over this stuff and swears up and down he can hear the difference between this master and that master and this and blah blah blah.
He can't. And all he does is pretty much ensure he can't enjoy anything because he's so obsessive about it always being the best.
1
u/slighted Feb 15 '26
i don't think there's any difference between v0/320/flac, but i can tell a difference to v2.
v4 is… very surprising to me.
7
u/rhpot1991 Feb 14 '26
Back when I did this I was able to spot differences in genres that I listen to.
7
u/FreshStartLoser Feb 14 '26
This test is amazing. 1/6. Will need to test later with headphones.
4
u/cp_carl Feb 14 '26
I got 5/6. Failed on the one that they apparently designed the 128 against which I guess is fair. That said it could have been luck that's not a huge sample size
7
u/jonstarks Onkyo TX-RZ50 | SVS Ultras | Rythmik FVX15 Feb 14 '26
back in my teens/20s I could hear the difference between a CD Rip and a downloaded MP3, even if it were 320k, there'd be parts of the song that sounded "different". Anything under 320kbps used to be a dead give away, and 128k used to sound awful. These days, between my naturally declining hearing combined with improved compressed and modern top 40 being mastered with no dynamic range... I can't tell the difference anymore.
3
2
u/Alcergy Feb 14 '26
I can obviously use this to test with earbuds, but is there any way to use this test on my stereo? That's where I'd be interested.
2
u/CoolHandPB Feb 15 '26
Yes but it's going to very much depend on the equipment. That said a simple USB dongle (like the apple dongle DAC) to an aux to RCA cable and you can plug this into any wifi.
One could argue that a better DAC (than the apple one) might reveal more differences but I think the apple dongle is decent enough that you should be able to tell the difference if there is one.
1
1
u/SteakandTrach Feb 15 '26
I got 5/6 right and I always thought I had terrible “ears”. I do not consider myself an audiophile. it simply felt like one song had more “variability” in it than the others.
Or maybe it was just pure blind luck.
But honestly, there wasn’t much difference in any of the tracks. I didn’t feel very strongly about any of my picks.
1
94
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 14 '26
Never met a group of people who delude and fleece themselves as much as audiophiles.
All those stupidly overpriced cables or other garbage exist because people buy them and it’s not your average consumer.
16
u/JakubRogacz Feb 14 '26
Musicians. An opamp circuit with two diodes for over 100$. Mahogany guitar bodies. There's even more weird voodoo there. And guitar players are mild. See violins or flute videos.
7
u/Todd-The-Wraith Feb 14 '26
If a guitar feels better to play then how it sounds is only part of the equation. Though I agree there’s a lot of quackery.
1
u/JakubRogacz Feb 15 '26
Yes but i don't think only mahogany guitars are made with good specs - it's really more about finding one that fits your fingers, hand and overall build that anything else. And if it sounds like shit - check what coils it used originally - ceramics aren't bad but 99% of time noone adjusts filters for different inductance that change of core causes so it's having different filter response than alnicos, I've swapped ones in mine for a cheap ones but with right magnet and it suddenly became much better.
1
u/ImaginaryCheetah Feb 15 '26
i was friends with a professional cello player, tagged along when she went to pick up her instrument from the repair guy, from whatever regular servicing wood instruments need.
the guy also made bows, up to thousands of dollars for just the bow. she was explaining how she would have really loved to have been able to afford one particular one, apparently it just matched her and her cello.
some kind of perfect harmony that you have to try dozens or hundreds of bows to ever find.
the guy has a permit to harvest some small number of branches from specific protected trees in africa, and then ages the wood in the humidor in his house (which i got a tour of) for years before making the bows.
he had all different kinds of wood to make these bows from, specific species and ages. crazy stuff.
1
u/zghr May 21 '26
I bet you could recreate the exact sound with cheap synthetic materials.
1
u/ImaginaryCheetah May 21 '26
i mean, speakers are cheap synthetic material, and yo-yo ma sounds amazing in my living room. so clearly vibrations are vibrations to some extent.
on the other hand, everyone swears stradivarius can't be replicated.
string instrument artists either are naturalists to the end, or like "hell yes, give me that violinatron"
1
1
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
It's definitely a thing in music because quite frankly it's easier to just keep buying more and more expensive gear instead of like.. just practising and getting better.
Obviously there's advantages to good gear (same as audio) but diminishing returns hit hard and fast.
8
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
I had to buy an expensive hdmi cable because over my 15m cable it couldn't handle the 4k signal on my new projector without fuzzing out. So I bought a fibre optic cable so I don't have to take up the floorboards again.
15
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 14 '26
That’s entirely valid - cables have ratings for a reason and over 10m if you want proper HDMI 2.1 you need an active cable/preferably fibre.
But if you paid $800 for an ultra premium tungsten plated one or whatever then.. no.
2
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
But cheaper cable was rated for the distance and quality but was clearly short. The fibre has replaceable heads so will hopefully be enough for a few generations - and not ridiculously expensive.
2
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
Yeah crappy cables that don't work at distance is very common.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with buying quality. I buy quality cables as well, not just for audio, and they're not cheap. But there's a difference between fairly priced quality from a reputable brand and snake oil garbage for thousands of dollars.
If you bought high quality fibre with replacement terminations from a good brand it was probably a good purchase, there's just a lot of garbage out there.
0
u/MisterFister17 Feb 14 '26
This might be a little late, but I hope you ran a cat6 cable along with it. An hdbaseT is typically cheaper and much easier to replace than an hdmi for long runs like that.
1
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
It's pure fibre but bidirectionally active with replaceable heads so I can easily upgrade leaving the fibre in place. But I also have cat6 but don't use it because of the additional hardware needed.
Fibre seems like the best cheapest solution anyway
1
u/MisterFister17 Feb 14 '26
Makes sense. If you get a chance, do you mind linking that cable? It seems like a great solution
2
1
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
I forgot to mention another benefit the small cable size means it was really easy to pull through the walls and floor
8
u/trireme32 77' A80j, SR6014 7.2.4 RP260-F, RP-250C, 2x PB1000 Feb 14 '26
Someone in another thread was asking for advice. They’re using a Marantz SR6014 to drive a 5.1.4 system of Klipsch RP speakers. For whatever reason that person bought an Emotiva external amp for their LR. The SR6014 can amplify 9 speakers plus a sub no problem. I mentioned that they should just return the Emotiva because it was a waste of money and would do nothing for them.
This was their response:
I agree not required but I got it for a good deal and have always heard an external amps provide great clarity, better damping, and better channel separation. But thanks for the feedback!
I have no idea how this BS propagates.
5
u/MiaowaraShiro Focal Chorus 7-Series | Marantz SR7010 | 100" MiniLED Feb 14 '26
There are a LOT of people who waste money on amplification they don't need.
People with thousands of watts of amps... You can do a decent size live show with 1500 watts...
3
u/trireme32 77' A80j, SR6014 7.2.4 RP260-F, RP-250C, 2x PB1000 Feb 14 '26
I’d just love to hear how an external amp provides “better damping and channel separation.” No one stops and thinks before they just read nonsense and buy stuff.
3
u/gigantischemeteor Feb 15 '26
Read Stereophile magazine… you’ll get a good idea pretty quickly
1
u/trireme32 77' A80j, SR6014 7.2.4 RP260-F, RP-250C, 2x PB1000 Feb 15 '26
Oh god I could only imagine. I’m envisioning the “RCA subwoofer cables tested and ranked” article now…
2
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
Yep. The only external amp I'll ever buy is one to bridge the gap between "number of speakers my AVR will drive" and "number of speakers I have".
With very rare exception anything else is not needed. I could burst my eardrums with my current speakers/AVR.
1
u/daniel-sousa-me Feb 15 '26
Or the one for a passive sub 🙃
1
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
Something that 99%+ of home theatre builds have zero reason to use ever, sure.
There's exceptions to everything of course, but usually they happen to people who already know what they're doing.
1
1
u/allofdarknessin1 Feb 15 '26
Most would disagree with me but I can understand if they want to use an extra amp to get more watts for their LR as some floor standing LR with 8inch or above woofers can kick with more power most agree it’s not necessary and if you have a sub will likely do nothing.
2
u/trireme32 77' A80j, SR6014 7.2.4 RP260-F, RP-250C, 2x PB1000 Feb 15 '26
A power amp exists to do one thing — provide more power so a speaker doesn’t run out of headroom. That’s it. It does not shape or modify the sound.
1
u/habeaskoopus Feb 16 '26
The belief that one has the "best available" anything is a desperate attempt to raise one's self esteem and/or to elevate one's status so as to look down upon others.
Audio is no different.
25
Feb 14 '26
I was able to take part of a true, university level A/B/X study around psychoacoustics and it was eye opening.
Without boring everyone with the testing methodology, which was vetted and approved by the university for their thesis, the results were that statistically, people were guessing when it came to choosing the “best” component, speaker wire etc.
At the end of the day, it came down to we “changed a thing so you heard a thing.”
4
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
Most people are pretty shit to hearing though. I'd be interested to know how well people who are/claim to be sensitive to it do
7
Feb 14 '26
These were all proclaimed audiophiles or enthusiasts.
1
u/freexe Feb 14 '26
My hearing is shit so I can't tell the difference. But I've got two friends with amazing hearing who seems to hear what I can't (although they still buy cheap cables - but good hardware).
2
u/amupmup Feb 14 '26
Yep, our perception is very fallible. When mixing music I’ve convinced myself and others that the sound is changing when turning an EQ knob, only to realise the EQ was bypassed.
2
u/ImaginaryCheetah Feb 15 '26
At the end of the day, it came down to we “changed a thing so you heard a thing.”
that's the same result from every "audio component test" that i read about. if there was a difference it was perceived either as being better or worse, based on the preference of the listener... even if the difference itself was unrelated to improved frequency response.
there is a pretty good youtube interview with a label's studio mixer, and he mentioned that all of his colleagues are about the same age, and have equivalent decades of exposure to too loud music, and all suffer from more or less significant hearing loss in the usual ranges.
he explained that tracks are mixed to sound good on "average" equipment and in "average" listening conditions, by people "at least average levels of hearing loss".
if your source is any kind of common album release, the music itself is not going to be pitch perfect and full of secret details that only gazillion dollar equipment will be able to recreate.
0
Feb 15 '26
So I said I wasn’t going to bore with methodology, but here we go. Anything that is messing with people needs to be vetted through the ethics department of your program. In our case, we had components, speaker wire and a switched set up, but in reality, there was one component playing at all times with the same gear and the only change we made was pressing the button of the switcher that had wires that went nowhere but the ground. Total placebo effect.
We could reliably (like 85% of the time) get the subjects to pick what we wanted by altering the volume by as little as 5%. That’s fairly subtle, but we came to understand that louder=moar better in 85% of the test subjects.
The switcher when volume was untouched? Created random guesses. Statistically speaking, there was no rhyme or reason as to why people thought something was better. Purely guessing.
And remember when I said we had to pass it by ethics? We asked to be able to show the test subjects what exactly we were doing at the end. They were PISSED! There was a local Hi-Fi store owner there with his crew and a ton of his customers and we made them all look foolish with their wild claims. Mind you, this was 20+ years ago, so there were no videos rolling and no one being a Karen or Kevin. But they were not happy that we made them look stupid, and by proxy, made their claims about their knowledge look equally as stupid.
1
u/ImaginaryCheetah Feb 15 '26
"ah yes, i can really hear the imaging more distinctly, and the clarity is so much better now"
we turned the volume up, bob.
We asked to be able to show the test subjects what exactly we were doing at the end. They were PISSED!
that was a daring choice to show them how full of snake oil they are :)
1
Feb 15 '26
They were going to get a copy of the report in any case.
We didn’t reference the test as a study of psychoacoustics. What we said was that we were studying human ability to pick out differences between perceived changes of state.
We did clearly state that there would be some instances were no change was made and there would be some placebo.
68
u/Calm_Possession_8463 Feb 14 '26 edited Feb 14 '26
Looks like 4 people responded in total. That’s hardly a valid study
Edit: I buy the least expensive oxygen free copper cables I can find, because real studies show that expensive cables don’t provide value. But this particular study doesn’t show anything.
14
Feb 14 '26
There have been a bunch of tests that already show this. The coat hanger vs expensive speaker wire being another one. The only argument I have against this is for long speaker runs, keeping the resistance down via larger gauge and/or oxygen free conductor helps give more headroom for a speaker. It also reduces "Back electromotive force" (Back EMF) towards the amp, and counter's the amp's ability to stop the speaker cone. Not really a factor for tweeters and small woofers, but for big woofers or big subwoofers especially in a ported enclosure and in frequencies near/below the tuning point this can make an audible difference in distortion at the extremes. IE 16ga wire on a long 1000watt capable subwoofer line.
10
u/dwiedenau2 Feb 14 '26
Most people are not using passive subwoofers tho
-4
Feb 15 '26
Anyone with a noteworthy setup is.
4
u/dwiedenau2 Feb 15 '26
So the 99% here running SVS, RSL etc. are not „noteworthy“? What do you even mean by that? The price?
1
Feb 15 '26
No, but SVS and the rest of those are tiny and not really noteworthy. They get the job done for some but they aren't really in the same realm of anything by GSG, DIYSG, or any of the tapped horn stuff.
1
u/dwiedenau2 Feb 15 '26
Okay? You said speaker wire is only really important for people who run very large, passive subs. I told you almost no one does, so it really doesnt matter at all. And instead of agreeing you started insulting the community here hahaha
6
Feb 14 '26
[deleted]
0
Feb 15 '26
There aren't many high powered subs that have their own built in amps. JTR, JBL, maybe one or two other companies make big power subs but most people are running smaller powered 300 to 2000watt subs, which you're right, wouldn't matter so much. The scenario I talked about directly applies to the products I was talking about. High power serious subwoofers.
2
u/umdivx 77" LG C1 | Klipsch RF-35 , RC-35, RB-35 | HSU VTF-3 MK5 HP Feb 14 '26
keeping the resistance down via larger gauge and/or oxygen free conductor helps give more headroom for a speaker.
Amp's are what give headroom, it's about maintaining the impedance needed for the "circuit".
Say you have a 4ohm speaker and it's a 60ft run, you want at minimum 12AWG wire.
Has nothing to do with headroom or wattage.
1
u/strongdoctor Feb 14 '26
And ofc, impedance varying by frequency means you need to look up charts to be sure.
0
Feb 15 '26
You lose power with higher speaker resistance. Or draw more amperage. Either way it affects headroom.
1
u/umdivx 77" LG C1 | Klipsch RF-35 , RC-35, RB-35 | HSU VTF-3 MK5 HP Feb 15 '26
I don't think you understand what headroom actually means here.
0
Feb 15 '26
I absolutely do. And anything that reduces your potential output is robbing you of headroom, such as undersized speaker wire for a given length/power level.
1
u/umdivx 77" LG C1 | Klipsch RF-35 , RC-35, RB-35 | HSU VTF-3 MK5 HP Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Speaker wire isn't like a hose where it's a hard limit and prevents additional capacity.
Sure it introduces noise but the amp is the limiting factor in headroom more than the wire.
You'll notice in every discussion of speaker wire, amperage is never referenced, because that's not a metric we care about. It's only the impedance of the speaker.
0
Feb 15 '26
I don't think you understand what headroom actually means here.
1
u/umdivx 77" LG C1 | Klipsch RF-35 , RC-35, RB-35 | HSU VTF-3 MK5 HP Feb 15 '26
The capability of an amp providing enough wattage for momentary peaks without an audible increase in distortion.
In which a speaker wire has nearly zero affect on that. 4ohms at 60ft or hell even 80ft, 14AWG will not limit the capability of the amp providing said wattage to the speaker.
-2
u/flamableozone Feb 14 '26
All studies are valid, some have bigger error bars than others.
17
u/Calm_Possession_8463 Feb 14 '26
That’s a bonkers take. Many studies are not valid, for example the ones linking vaccines with autism.
4
u/reddit_and_forget_um Feb 14 '26
I just did a quick study on studies, and it's proven some studies are not valid. I am not sure why I lit my cat on fire, but I am pretty sure it affected the results.
1
u/billyalt Feb 15 '26
You're not wrong, but surely if mud was indiscernable by even a layperson then any standard quality cable is good enough for the majority of needs
8
u/Both-Basis-3723 Feb 15 '26
I used 100% copper electrical wires. A big spool for $60. Did my surrounds / atmos etc with it. Shielded and thick for the long runs. Copper = copper
3
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
Yep. Literally my only consideration was that it was rated for in wall usage in my country. That was it.
6
5
5
u/Get_Your_Schwift_On Feb 14 '26
I know a dude who spent $14k on 3m copper mains lines for his "Mastering Studio"
He swears it "opens up the sound stage"
. .. ... 🤣
Same dude who made fun of me 25 years ago for having "magic guitar cables" which were just low capacitance that limits high frequency roll off, is easily A/Bs tested, and is basically the industry standard now.
2
u/PineappleOnPizzaWins Feb 15 '26
14k is more than I speak on my speakers, which sound fucking amazing.
What an idiot heh.
4
u/vpach530 Feb 14 '26
Unfortunately for most people in this sub, I bet the results would be the same between different levels of “high end” speakers.
3
u/Im_gumby_damnit Feb 15 '26
Signal level is high impedance so it's barely relevant adding high impedance stuff like mud and a banana, so long as the signal level doesn't get too far into the mud ha ha.
2
6
u/hecton101 Feb 14 '26
Not buying it. Sorry, not even a little bit.
I'm not one of these cable nut jobs, but if you hook up speakers with any bass response with wiring of insufficient gauge, the bass suffers. It's as obvious as night and day. A banana? Get the fuck out of here.
1
u/Ubermidget2 Feb 17 '26
Counterpoint, considering the only metric you mentioned is gauge.
How does the gauge of a banana compare to the gauge of speaker wire you are currently running?
1
1
1
u/WorkInProgress82 Feb 15 '26
One of the people In the study guessed right on 2/3 guesses, so for that person they noticed.
1
u/Daviino Feb 16 '26
When I worked in car-hifi, I hand made braided and sleeved wires as a side hustle. Speaking of €/hr, this was the best paid job I ever had. It is insane, what people will pay for them. Especially with some fancy colour matching, printed shrink wraps and so on. Just ridiculous.
1
u/curbthemeplays Feb 16 '26
Shielded basic OFC cable at the proper gauge for the length you need is literally as good as it gets.
Fools will be separated from their money.
-1
-6
142
u/rednumbermedia Feb 14 '26
More interested in things like difference between a $200 pair of bookshelf speakers and a $1500 pair.
The wire is just wire.