What annoys me today in marketing and media that too often today then talking on hi-fi, science is replaced by bizarre belief structures and marketing fluff, leading to a decades-long stagnation of the audiophile domain. Science makes progress, pseudo-science doesn’t. Hi-fi world is filled by pseudoscience, dogma and fruitloopery to the extent that it resembles a fundamentalist religion. Loudspeaker performance hasn’t tangibly improved in forty years and vast sums are spent addressing the wrong problems.
Business for Engineers: Marketers Lie article points tout that marketing tells lies — falsehoods — things that serve to convey a false impression. Marketing’s purpose is to determining how the product will be branded, positioned, and sold. It seems that there too many snake oil rubbish products marketed in the name of hifi. It is irritating to watch the stupid people in the world be fooled.
In EEVblog #29 – Audiophile Audiophoolery video David L. Jones (from EEVBlog) cuts loose on the Golden Ear Audiophiles and all their Audiophoolery snake oil rubbish. The information presented in Dave’s unique non-scripted overly enthusiastic style! He’s an enthusiastic chap, but couldn’t agree more with many of the opinions he expressed: Directional cables, thousand dollar IEC power cables, and all that rubbish. Monster Cable gets mostered. Note what he says right at the end: “If you pay ridiculous money for these cable you will hear a difference, but don’t expect your friends to”. If you want to believe, you will.
My points on hifi-nonsense:
One of the tenets of audiophile systems is that they are assembled from components, allegedly so that the user can “choose” the best combination. This is pretty largely a myth. The main advantage of component systems is that the dealer can sell ridiculously expensive cables, hand-knitted by Peruvian virgins and soaked in snake oil, to connect it all up. Say goodbye to the noughties: Yesterday’s hi-fi biz is BUSTED, bro article asks are the days of floorstanders and separates numbered? If traditional two-channel audio does have a future, then it could be as the preserve of high resolution audio. Sony has taken the industry lead in High-Res Audio.
HIFI Cable Humbug and Snake oil etc. blog posting rightly points out that there is too much emphasis placed on spending huge sums of money on HIFI cables. Most of what is written about this subject is complete tripe. HIFI magazines promote myths about the benefits of all sorts of equipment. I am as amazed as the writer that that so called audiophiles and HIFI journalists can be fooled into thinking that very expensive speaker cables etc. improve performance. I generally agree – most of this expensive interconnect cable stuff is just plain overpriced.
I can agree that in analogue interconnect cables there are few cases where better cables can really result in cleaner sound, but usually getting any noticeable difference needs that the one you compare with was very bad yo start with (clearly too thin speaker wires with resistance, interconnect that picks interference etc..) or the equipment in the systems are so that they are overly-sensitive to cable characteristics (generally bad equipment designs can make for example cable capacitance affect 100 times or more than it should). Definitely too much snake oil. Good solid engineering is all that is required (like keep LCR low, Teflon or other good insulation, shielding if required, proper gauge for application and the distance traveled). Geometry is a factor but not in the same sense these yahoos preach and deceive.
In digital interconnect cables story is different than on those analogue interconnect cables. Generally in digital interconnect cables the communication either works, does not work or sometimes work unreliably. The digital cable either gets the bits to the other end or not, it does not magically alter the sound that goes through the cable. You need to have active electronics like digital signal processor to change the tone of the audio signal traveling on the digital cable, cable will just not do that.
But this digital interconnect cables characteristics has not stopped hifi marketers to make very expensive cable products that are marketed with unbelievable claims. Ethernet has come to audio world, so there are hifi Ethernet cables. How about 500 dollar Ethernet cable? That’s ridiculous. And it’s only 1.5 meters. Then how about $10,000 audiophile ethernet cable? Bias your dielectrics with the Dielectric-Bias ethernet cable from AudioQuest: “When insulation is unbiased, it slows down parts of the signal differently, a big problem for very time-sensitive multi-octave audio.” I see this as complete marketing crap speak. It seems that they’re made for gullible idiots. No professional would EVER waste money on those cables. Audioquest even produces iPhone sync cables in similar price ranges.
HIFI Cable insulators/supports (expensive blocks that keep cables few centimeters off the floor) are a product category I don’t get. They typically claim to offer incredible performance as well as appealing appearance. Conventional cable isolation theory holds that optimal cable performance can be achieved by elevating cables from the floor in an attempt to control vibrations and manage static fields. Typical cable elevators are made from electrically insulating materials such as wood, glass, plastic or ceramics. Most of these products claim superior performance based upon the materials or methods of elevation. I don’t get those claims.
Along with green magic markers on CDs and audio bricks is another item called the wire conditioner. The claim is that unused wires do not sound the same as wires that have been used for a period of time. I don’t get this product category. And I don’t believe claims in the line like “Natural Quartz crystals along with proprietary materials cause a molecular restructuring of the media, which reduces stress, and significantly improves its mechanical, acoustic, electric, and optical characteristics.” All sounds like just pure marketing with no real benefits.
CD no evil, hear no evil. But the key thing about the CD was that it represented an obvious leap from earlier recording media that simply weren’t good enough for delivery of post-produced material to the consumer to one that was. Once you have made that leap, there is no requirement to go further. The 16 bits of CD were effectively extended to 18 bits by the development of noise shaping, which allows over 100dB signal to noise ratio. That falls a bit short of the 140dB maximum range of human hearing, but that has never been a real goal. If you improve the digital media, the sound quality limiting problem became the transducers; the headphones and the speakers.
We need to talk about SPEAKERS: Soz, ‘audiophiles’, only IT will break the sound barrier article says that today’s loudspeakers are nowhere near as good as they could be, due in no small measure to the presence of “traditional” audiophile products. that today’s loudspeakers are nowhere near as good as they could be, due in no small measure to the presence of “traditional” audiophile products. I can agree with this. Loudspeaker performance hasn’t tangibly improved in forty years and vast sums are spent addressing the wrong problems.
We need to talk about SPEAKERS: Soz, ‘audiophiles’, only IT will break the sound barrier article makes good points on design, DSPs and the debunking of traditional hi-fi. Science makes progress, pseudo-science doesn’t. Legacy loudspeakers are omni-directional at low frequencies, but as frequency rises, the radiation becomes more directional until at the highest frequencies the sound only emerges directly forwards. Thus to enjoy the full frequency range, the listener has to sit in the so-called sweet spot. As a result legacy loudspeakers with sweet spots need extensive room treatment to soak up the deficient off-axis sound. New tools that can change speaker system designs in the future are omni-directional speakers and DSP-based room correction. It’s a scenario ripe for “disruption”.
Computers have become an integrated part of many audio setups. Back in the day integrated audio solutions in PCs had trouble earning respect. Ode To Sound Blaster: Are Discrete Audio Cards Still Worth the Investment? posting tells that it’s been 25 years since the first Sound Blaster card was introduced (a pretty remarkable feat considering the diminished reliance on discrete audio in PCs) and many enthusiasts still consider a sound card an essential piece to the PC building puzzle. It seems that in general onboard sound is finally “Good Enough”, and has been “Good Enough” for a long time now. For most users it is hard to justify the high price of special sound card on PC anymore. There are still some PCs with bad sound hardware on motherboard and buttload of cheap USB adapters with very poor performance. However, what if you want the best sound possible, the lowest noise possible, and don’t really game or use the various audio enhancements? You just want a plain-vanilla sound card, but with the highest quality audio (products typically made for music makers). You can find some really good USB solutions that will blow on-board audio out of the water for about $100 or so.
Although solid-state technology overwhelmingly dominates today’s world of electronics, vacuum tubes are holding out in two small but vibrant areas. Some people like the sound of tubes. The Cool Sound of Tubes article says that a commercially viable number of people find that they prefer the sound produced by tubed equipment in three areas: musical-instrument (MI) amplifiers (mainly guitar amps), some processing devices used in recording studios, and a small but growing percentage of high-fidelity equipment at the high end of the audiophile market. Keep those filaments lit, Design your own Vacuum Tube Audio Equipment article claims that vacuum tubes do sound better than transistors (before you hate in the comments check out this scholarly article on the topic). The difficulty is cost; tube gear is very expensive because it uses lots of copper, iron, often point-to-point wired by hand, and requires a heavy metal chassis to support all of these parts. With this high cost and relative simplicity of circuitry (compared to modern electronics) comes good justification for building your own gear. Maybe this is one of the last frontiers of do-it-yourself that is actually worth doing.
2,550 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
Audio cable insulation affects sound by influencing signal speed, capacitance, and high-frequency response; materials like polyethylene and Teflon offer lower capacitance for clearer, brighter high-frequency reproduction than lower-quality PVC, which can cause signal loss and a duller sound. Good insulation also prevents oxidation and damage, ensuring signal integrity and durability, while the primary role of the insulation is to prevent short circuits.
Impact on Signal Integrity
Signal Speed:
The dielectric constant of the insulation material affects how fast the electrical audio signal travels through the cable. Materials with a low dielectric quality, such as common PVC, can slow the signal, causing high-frequency information to be lost or delayed, resulting in an unbalanced sound with a loss of clarity.
Capacitance:
The two conductors and the insulation form a capacitor. Materials with lower dielectric constants, like polyethylene, result in lower capacitance, helping to preserve high frequencies and maintain a clear, detailed sound.
Signal Loss:
Poor-quality insulation can contribute to signal loss, especially over longer cable runs, where the resistance increases and the signal’s integrity degrades, impacting the accuracy and quality of the audio.
Material-Specific Effects
PVC (Polyvinyl Chloride):
Often found in cheaper cables, PVC is an inferior insulation material that can cause high signal loss and slow down the signal, leading to a reduced speed and a dull, less vibrant sound.
Polyethylene & Teflon:
These materials are often used in high-quality cables and offer better performance. Their lower capacitance helps maintain higher frequencies, resulting in a clearer, more detailed, and brighter sound.
Primary Functions of Insulation
Preventing Short Circuits:
The main purpose of insulation is to prevent the conductive wires from touching each other or other components, which would cause a short circuit and disrupt the signal.
Protecting the Conductor:
Insulation provides a protective layer against external factors like moisture, temperature changes, and physical damage, which can oxidize the conductor and weaken the connection.
When Insulation Matters Most
Long Cable Runs:
The effects of insulation quality and cable resistance become more pronounced over longer cable lengths, where signal degradation is more likely.
High-Fidelity Systems:
For audiophiles seeking the most accurate and immersive listening experience, investing in cables with high-quality insulation materials is essential for preserving sound quality
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.audioresurgence.com/frequently-asked-questions-audio-cables-and-how-they-sound
Air dielectrics, as the name suggests, use air as the insulating material between the conductors.
Foam dielectrics are made of a foam material
Solid dielectrics, such as polyethylene and Teflon, are the most commonly used dielectric materials in audio cables. They offer low capacitance and inductance
Q – Is silver a good conductor for audio cables and how does it differ to copper
A – Silver and copper are two of the most commonly used materials for audio cable conductors, and each has its own unique properties that can affect the Purist Audio Dominus Reviewperformance of the audio signal and the resultant sound from your system. When it comes to choosing between silver and copper conductors, there are several factors to consider, including conductivity, cost, and sound quality.
In terms of conductivity, silver is a better conductor than copper, with a higher electrical conductivity rating. This means that silver can transmit an audio signal with less resistance, resulting in improved signal transmission and less signal loss. Silver also has a lower impedance than copper, which can help to reduce distortion and improve the overall sound quality of the audio signal.
Despite its advantages, silver is a more expensive material than copper
Copper, on the other hand, is a more affordable and widely available material, hence it’s a popular choice for consumer audio applications. While copper is a good conductor, and high-quality copper cables can deliver a transparent and accurate audio signal, copper has a higher impedance than silver, which can result in increased distortion and decreased signal purity and sound quality.
The choice between silver and copper conductors will depend on the specific requirements of the audio system, budget, and personal preferences.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://plungeaudio.com/blogs/news/the-impact-of-cable-quality-on-audio-performance?srsltid=AfmBOopqHiQQ9F4e7xeOZU3j7bHiHRZ0wRMU9vamGLExUvS5HvxIHBK0
1. Conductor:
A cable’s conductor transmits the power and signals in the cable. Adequately sized and constructed conductors maintain the integrity of the electrical signal since it needs to travel effectively to the cable from its source. If the conductor is made from compromised materials, the audio signal may experience increased resistance and change overall sound quality.
Some of the common conductors include:
Copper:
Due to its cost-effectiveness and high electrical conductivity, manufacturers often use copper. Investing in premium copper cables can improve sound quality and less signal distortion.
Silver:
Silver is a renowned conductor material like copper due to its higher electrical conductivity. As a result, these cables provide a clearer and more detailed sound.
Silver-Plated:
Copper cables with silver plating combine the benefits of copper and silver. The silver coating enhances the signal’s precision and clarity, while the copper core offers outstanding sound conductivity, improving the overall sound experience.
2. Insulation:
IEM cables are incomplete without insulation, which shields the conductor from external disruptions and physical harm. The insulation material affects both the length of a cable and its sound quality.
PVC is one of the common insulation materials used in IEM cables. It provides outstanding flexibility and durability in the long run. In addition to having good electrical insulating characteristics, it is reasonably priced, making the IEM cable affordable.
3. Shielding:
Reducing or eliminating background noise that the conductor takes up from various sources is an essential aspect of high-quality audio. Shielding plays a pivotal role by protecting the audio signal from radio frequency interference and electromagnetic interference. With proper shielding, you can ensure that you enjoy audio without any noise or external distortion.
4. Connector:
Connectors are an essential part of an IEM cable. They connect your IEMs to your audio source physically and electrically. High-quality connectors avoid signal loss and achieve the best possible sound quality, elevating the overall listening experience.
Tomi Engdahl says:
They already exist: https://www.goldnote.it/cables/speakers-cables/
“The conductors are arranged in our proprietary geometry and individually sealer in Elastollan tubes with a special thick mineral oil as a dielectric medium to control temperature and dampen any vibration.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Facebook
Conversation I have every day as a luthier and music store owner.
The only thing that makes PIO caps special is how shit they are when they inevitably get high ESR and leakage and instead of it being a 47n cap, it’s now more like a 27n cap, or a 67n cap. They’re out of spec, useless and hygrophilic.
There’s a reason the dielectric isn’t a factor in calculating the 3dB point in a passive, high impedance audio frequency filter. Not like we’re talking 5ghz at 600v or some shit.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14JukpiwMGL/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Dave Hitt Audiophools will go beyond HDMI cables and buy things like gold-plated TOSLINK cables that make zero sense. The problem with HDMI is that differences between cables do exist (HDMI cables are speed-rated), so there is a kernel of truth to “getting a good HDMI cable”, and salesmen will take advantage of this to sell you a $100 Monster cable, when you only need an HDMI cable good for the Gbps rating you need.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Kris Hewitt analogue recordings are processed to give a particular equalisation to compensate for the relative energy levels in high or low frequency signals – otherwise the high energy of the low frequency audio would overpower the low energy of high frequency signals and cause major issues in the recording process.
The statement that “The analogue format preserves continuous sound waves, rather than compressing them.” implies that the writer doesn’t know the difference between compression and digitisation – two totally different things.
Here is the RIAA Equalisation curve…
Tomi Engdahl says:
If they are more technically complicated (to a degree), or more expensive (without upper bound), someone thinks they sound better. Law of nature – nature of the audiophool.
Tomi Engdahl says:
They already exist: https://www.goldnote.it/cables/speakers-cables/
“The conductors are arranged in our proprietary geometry and individually sealer in Elastollan tubes with a special thick mineral oil as a dielectric medium to control temperature and dampen any vibration.”
Perhaps it could go one better with pressurised oil filled insulated cables. I’ve never seen one, but we were told about them whilst doing Telephony and Telegraphy training in the early 70s.Post Office Telephones (part of the GPO) Yes, the Post Office Telephones (part of the GPO) did use oil-filled cables, particularly for their extensive underground telecommunications network before the widespread adoption of sealed, solid-insulated cables. These oil-filled cables, sometimes referred to as “gas-pressure cables” or “paper-insulated cables”, used oil to insulate and protect the conductors and maintain cable pressure, preventing moisture ingress and ensuring insulation.
It’s old, old tech. The original Edison distribution cables from 1888 were basically that, copper wrapped in rope spacers and put in a steel tube then filled with bitumen. Not too dissimilar from some audiophool cables, so I guess the only reason why the snake oil peddlers haven’t revived it to feed that appeal to antiquity that defines the hobby is the bizarre personality cult of Tesla and misinformed villainization of Edison.
I thought the oil they used to use in transformers and cables decayed to form dioxins.
“Why there are no real snake oil filled hifi cables?”
To quote Homer Simpson: “I … don’t
know….”
There is plenty to say that PIO capacitors are truly awful, as they leak current like a sieve.
Guitarists talking about PIO caps in their guitars are particularly hilarious, because in that passive circuit the signal you hear does not pass through the capacitor. The tone pot when wound down feeds signal to the high-pass filter which allows the high frequencies to be bled off to ground, and everything else (the signal you hear) is blocked from doing so.
I love the quasi-conspiratorial look some audio-connaisseurs get in their eyes when they start talking about Russian Pio’s.
Then i quickly leave the room.
Source https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FGKS29KAw/
Tomi Engdahl says:
I’m getting the quantum vibes that I’m in the wrong business
Tomi Engdahl says:
‘Bottleneck distortion’? It suggests resistance, but smells like snake oil.
Tomi Engdahl says:
In a way they are too cheap. Think about it. Anyone involved in the branding, marketing or selling these devices have ruined their professional reputation forever. You make multiple millions over a lifetime as a professional. That could all be lost. No decent company wants to hire a con artist.
Tomi Engdahl says:
It only works if you observe it!
Actually, under Many Worlds, it both works and doesn’t work.
Tomi Engdahl says:
When the wave function collapses so does your bank account.
Tomi Engdahl says:
It’s true, ‘warmth’ is distortion. It’s also true that it’s not compressed. There’s a reason FLAC sounds better than MP3 and it’s that.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Transformers are actually much better than capacitive coupling so using them to impedance match is totally legit they’re just impractically heavy and expensive for most devices these days. Having that many probably inflated the part cost to around $1,000 per unit which is why they have to charge so much.
They also have limited bandwidth and cause waveform distortion, which capacitors do not do.
John van Son “Limited bandwidth” oh really, is that rolloff in the audio frequency range? And, as opposed to the RC filter you form with capacitive coupling? Lol transformer coupling is objectively superior for low end response (as long as the transformer has sufficient inductance but the ones in this amp are huge and surely do), I build amps and have tested it on an oscilloscope. The small benefit is outweighed by the cost and weight in most devices as a very clearly said, but if space and cost aren’t a concern it’s objectively superior for audio.
Make fun of these people for buying a $40,000 cable that sounds the same as some coat hangers soldered together, sure, but the fact that you called it ‘waveform distortion’ and don’t understand why it’s superior to capacitive coupling in some ways in niche applications like a guitar or desktop hifi amp – idk what else to say besides stay in your lane.
It is impractical, that’s why 99% of amps don’t do it anymore. But practicality is not always the point in a hobby.
Kris Hewitt You surely forgot to measure the phase response of your transformers, notably in the low end
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1RxyqNvXPT/
Hmm, output transformers, tubes… what more could you want in a…DAC? Wait, what?!
https://ankaudiokits.com/product/dac-5-1-signature/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Researching the depths of their customers’ wallets and gullibility.
Or replace research with “mining”.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Why does ‘high end’ gear have so much noise? I can hit the pause button on my CD player, put my ear against the speaker and can’t hear any residual noise. The ‘high end’ equipment needs noise filtering for their power leads, signal and speaker cables. I don’t get it.
That’s a lot of words for “I have no idea, just give me an ungodly amount of money for this electronic snake oil, fool”.
Tomi Engdahl says:
This specialist got… screwed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9UQY1oVAZE
(actually it’s a very interesting and informative and data-driven video but it shows the type of methodology and introspection that audiophools lack)
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke music as the final result with analog system depends on analog electronic and precise electromechanical components – and all of them are, well, more or less limited in performance (usually much more limited than digital parts)
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/02/audiophiles-experiment-cd-sound-superiority-myth/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Traditional analog studio microphone processing chain analog and a continous function of the source. In modern smart phones the microphone capsule often outputs digital signal. Many people use USB microphones that are often traditional microphone combined with ADC housed in the mic case.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Do Audio Cables Really Affect Sound? More Than 50% of Audiophiles Say ‘Yes’ on New Survey
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/audio-cables-affect-sound-audiophiles-survey/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke you know who is math obsessed? The engineers that design the equipment you seem to say you know more about than they themselves do.
You don’t even understand what a sound wave is, and the fact that every wave – from waves in the ocean to the oscillation of binary star systems – is easily described mathematically. There’s nothing special or even remotely interesting about sound waves, and they are nothing more than what the numbers say.
If it weren’t for people understanding maths, you wouldn’t have audio at all. You’d barely have music, in fact, and for the most part you’d be left chanting and banging sticks together, staring at some fallen tree trunks, lumps of mineral ore, and a puddle of crude until you died at the age of thirty of an infected cut.
bullshit has zero epistemic value compared to actual knowledge – zero predictive power, zero utility.
Tomi Engdahl says:
440 Hz is the modern, standard concert pitch for musical instruments, known for a bright, stimulating, and invigorating sound, whereas 432 Hz is a less common, alternative tuning believed by proponents to create a sense of universal harmony, deeper relaxation, and increased focus,
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke vinyl is objectively shit, and digitising anything that’s analog is the best way to preserve it perfectly
Leigh Reke music as the final result with analog system depends on analog electronic and precise electromechanical components – and all of them are, well, more or less limited in performance (usually much more limited than digital parts)
Leigh Reke Show me some numbers where the 80s tech can come close to the SNR, DR of a simple 24 bit 48 kHz Wav? I can wait… The world is flat too right?
Tom Neudorfl digitising to preserve would work if neutral & high resolution DACs and ADCs would exist
but they don’t. There are none. They are all trash.
Leigh Reke no, they’re indistinguishable from hypothetical perfection. What you’ve written is technically illiterate bullshit.
Leigh Reke buy a studio sound card for at least 1000$
Tom Neudorfl so perfection means that every chip sounding absolutely different (especially comparing ESS Sabre vs Wolfson) that’s like comparing cassette to LP if that’s the perfection, your music must be recorded in ghetto
Leigh Reke all these chips sound identical.
When you start from false assumptions and have a tenuous grasp of reality, you can imagine all kinds of things that simply aren’t true, but this is phantasmagorical technically illiterate gobbledygook for which there exists absolutely no objective, verifiable evidence.
Please point to a single peer reviewed study published in the AES journal that either (a) shows audible differences between ADC/DAC chips under level-matched blind ABX testing, or (b) that explains the existence of audible differences in signals with measured artefacts below the threshold of human detection. Guess what: nothing like this exists because the idea itself is nonsensical.
If you think you know otherwise, publish such a paper yourself. You will become an overnight millionaire superstar of not just the entire audio industry but also of audiology. All the purveyors of audiophool snake oil will fly you around the world in private jets as a consultant to put meat on the bones of their scams. Do it – unimaginable fame and fortune is right there for the taking!
But you won’t because reality gets a say too, and down here in reality what you’re saying is abject bullshit.
Tom Neudorfl hey Tom, im not so clued up on all this but if all DACs are the same, as you mention does that mean that streaming devices differing wildly in price (due to claims of superior/inferior DACs) perform similarly spund quality wise? Thanks for your time!!
Pedro Campiao absolutely yes! Sound quality is not measured in dollars.
Audio Science Review is a great resource for objective measurements and assessments of audio equipment. And whilst it can be relied upon for objective data, what’s often left out is a calibration back to the limitations of human hearing. Anything with a reasonably flat frequency response (say +-0.5 dB) and distortion (SINAD) less than about 0.05% will be audibly indistinguishable from any other device that meets these criteria. That’s of course a threshold much, much “worse” than the performance of even very basic low cost DACs and streamers.
So take something like the Wiim Pro vs the Wiim Pro Plus: yes, the Plus has performance that is state of the art whereas the analog out of the Pro appears just mediocre by comparison, but the reality is no one would be able to differentiate them in a blind level matched ABX test.
Here is a great blog post about the marketing deceptions common in audio.
http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-we-hear.html?m=1
Leigh Reke In digital media wow and flutter don’t exist, the best way to preserve music is digital audio in PCM or Wav at 96khz
Josue Duran describe, yes, but there’s still no way to reproduce it as it was descibed as all chips on a market sound very, very differently
Comments from https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1A1Xa7Y9cu/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Anthony Hegedus 440 Hz is the modern, standard concert pitch for musical instruments, known for a bright, stimulating, and invigorating sound, whereas 432 Hz is a less common, alternative tuning believed by proponents to create a sense of universal harmony, deeper relaxation, and increased focus,
Tomi Engdahl Actually A=442 is becoming much more common, at least here in Europe. String players prefer a brighter pitch.
Most tuned percussion made after the 1970s is A=442.
I have never met a a musician who takes A=432 seriously, although A =415 is still the Baroque standard.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Vincenzo Bruno speaker turns analog electricity into mechanical vibrations. It’s a transducer, not a Digital to Analog Converter.
Michael Larson speaker element turns traditionally analog voltage to mechanical vibration traditionally with data-dac-amplifier-speakerelemt. Here DAC is clear. No matter if amplifier is AB or class D with filter.
Michael Larson where you define DAC in data-dsp-classd-speakerelement. Here digital data gets to DSP that directly drives class D output drivers that directly connects to speaker element without any LC filters. It is digital path from sound source up to driving output transistors that connect directly to speaker. Where you say DAC is?
Tomi Engdahl says:
Is AI better than Headphone Reviewers?
Resolve explores the usefulness of AI (or lack thereof) when it comes to headphone purchase advice or technical explanations, and what may limit AI’s usefulness in this regard.
https://headphones.com/blogs/features/is-ai-better-than-headphone-reviewers
Artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT and Perplexity are increasingly being used to answer questions about audio gear. At first glance, they seem like a convenient alternative to wading through countless reviews and forum posts. But when it comes to audiophile topics—especially headphones—AI’s reliance on online discourse often means it’s amplifying confusion rather than cutting through it.
Aggregating the Noise
AI doesn’t have opinions or firsthand listening experience. It aggregates information from the internet: reviews, forum threads, blog posts, and articles. In the headphone world, where subjective impressions, hype cycles, and personal biases dominate, this can skew results toward whatever’s being talked about most—whether or not it’s accurate or relevant.
When asked a basic question like “What are the best open-back headphones under $500?”, AI will produce a mix of solid recommendations and odd relics. Discontinued models like the Audeze LCD-1 or outdated options such as the AKG K7XX often show up simply because they still have a lot of chatter online. Even more specific prompts, like “smooth treble and even spectral balance”, can yield contradictory results—pairing genuinely smooth-sounding models with headphones known for harsh treble or unusual tuning.
Technical Questions Fare Better
On straightforward technical topics—like defining “acoustic impedance” or “diffuse field”—AI can give accurate, well-sourced answers. This is because these concepts have clear, factual definitions available from reputable sources. But as soon as a question drifts into subjective territory (for example, whether certain cables make audio “warmer”), AI begins to regurgitate audiophile folklore, complete with recommendations for dubious tweaks like “audiophile crystals.”
The Placebo Problem
The headphone hobby is especially prone to suggestion, placebo effects, and confirmation bias. AI can’t distinguish between widely shared misconceptions and well-supported facts—it treats them both as valid inputs. Even when it hedges by saying “some people perceive…”, it’s still presenting questionable claims alongside accurate ones, which can mislead those who don’t know the difference.
A recent example: someone asked an AI if a frequency response graph can fully represent the sound of a track. The AI’s “no” answer—which was doubtlessly sourced from dubious sources—listed factors like time-domain behavior, phase response, distortion, and dynamics. While this can technically be true in very uncommon contexts, when it comes to headphones many of these factors are already reflected in very commonly-done measurements or aren’t audible under normal conditions.
The result? An answer that sounds authoritative, but risks reinforcing and propagating misunderstandings instead of actually answering the questions people are asking.
Bottom Line
AI is a useful tool for retrieving definitions, summarizing specs, and providing overviews—if you know enough to filter the noise.
But in a field as subjective and hype-driven as audiophile gear, its recommendations and answers are only as good as the conversations it’s trained on… which aren’t all that great. Treat AI answers as conversation starters, not proofs for communicating what you’re trying to explain, and be wary of using them to justify purchases or technical claims.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/discontinued-speaker-models-audiophiles-desperately-missing/
20 Discontinued Speakers Thousands of Audiophiles Say They Miss the Most
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://forum.headphones.com/t/how-will-the-world-of-headphones-change-with-ai/26281
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/why-do-some-designed-specify-braided-cables.250934/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/12pw2ud/purpose_of_braided_cables/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.cablematters.com/Blog/Networking/Shielding-the-way-braided-cables
Tomi Engdahl says:
90% of Audiophiles Hear Less Than Half Their System’s Potential Due to ‘Useless’ Room Treatments, According to Experts
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/audiophiles-system-useless-room-treatments-experts/
Experts reveal why most acoustic panels and diffusers are actually a waste of money.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/extreme-snake-oil.24765/page-181
Tomi Engdahl says:
Adds analogue-like sound to digital Ethernet audio
“The standard Orange Lan Jitters aim to refine your music listening with a natural, analogue-like sound and a range of sonic improvements, thanks to QSA’s proprietary techniques. Designed to provide a deeper, more immersive audio experience over time, they cater to those seeking relaxation or an enhanced music journey, offering clearer, more detailed, and natural sound across all listening levels..”
https://www.futureshop.co.uk/quantum-science-audio-lan-jitter-orange-pair/
Tomi Engdahl says:
My opinion (yes opinion) is that some records are mastered better than their original CDs and such. I’ve bought records that sound like digital MP3s and some that actually try to fix the “loudness war”.
But you could put that same master on digital and it’d probably sound better!
Source: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19bU7yc2KV/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke Good DACs do not sound different. If two DACs sound different, then at least one of the is not competently designed.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke This is inaccurate, DACs are basically perfect. Chips don’t sound different – circuit design and implementation is what alters tonality. Meanwhile, vinyl requires massive EQ / RIAA to correct it’s flawed sound. Cartridges and preamps have FAR more tonal difference between each other than different DACs do. Analog has a level of variance that’s simply unacceptable – digital is perfect.
Also, most old analog recordings are trash too. With the exception of some bands, most professional studio recordings simply don’t hold a candle to a modern recording session held in someone’s basement on a $200 interface.
Tomi Engdahl says:
I’m absolutely convinced the people who buy these have never looked at the internal cabling inside most amplifiers and many speaker internals as well
John Gray Nor have they ever been into a recording studio – amateur or professional. In over 40 years of studio equipment design, build and installation, I have never seen so much snake oil as the Hi-Fi audiophool fundamentalists thrive on. It is a source of much amusement.
John Gray well, only two things matter. They hear the difference, and they have the money. The rest is your jealousy that it wasn’t you selling them the stuff.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke This is inaccurate, DACs are basically perfect. Chips don’t sound different – circuit design and implementation is what alters tonality. Meanwhile, vinyl requires massive EQ / RIAA to correct it’s flawed sound. Cartridges and preamps have FAR more tonal difference between each other than different DACs do. Analog has a level of variance that’s simply unacceptable – digital is perfect.
Also, most old analog recordings are trash too. With the exception of some bands, most professional studio recordings simply don’t hold a candle to a modern recording session held in someone’s basement on a $200 interface.
Nick Fury Chips don’t sound different…wow, so you wanna say, Burr Brown and ESS sound the same?
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19bU7yc2KV/
There is nothing wrong with digital music which can be measured, however it has a very brittle sound which I put down to it’s ridiculous bandwidth which no human ear/brain can ever hope to understand which is the main reason, “Aural Fatigue” which is VERY REAL phenomenon really sets in! Examine the 4 musical clefs, if you have any understanding of music at all! You will find that the highest clef, (Treble) begins at 4.5 KHz, NOT BLUE LIGHT! Alto, (High mid) approx 3.5 kHz (Swept)tenor, (Lo mid) 400 Hz, (Swept) and Bass, (Baritone! Centre frequency 80 Hz! The best mixing desk I ever used was the entirely Musical 16 Chn H-H desk, everything worked, there is fuck all to a human/brain belong 12 KHz but harmonic distortion! Proven by the Cinema Industry in about 1950!
Leslie Acres the highest cliff may be at 4.5kHz, but that’s the for the fundamental notes – harmonics generated by high pitch instruments, eg whistle/violin etc can go way way higher, as can the transients from drums, string plucking, cymbals etc.
Alex Gray anything beyond 2 nd harmonic is down in the weeds anyway or so distorted you are better off without it, especially theoretical harmonics! Transient reproduction is essential for aural identification which is why SLEW RATE is more important than bandwidth! The original spec of 20 Hz to 20 KHz was for VALVE/TUBE Amplifiers of the day to reproduce transients properly! The theory was that the amplifiers could then reproduce transients properly! It did not apply to Loudspeakers/microphones/transducers etc, I know because I am an old fart and I WAS THERE!
Tomi Engdahl says:
The reason a LOT of modern music is initially impressive sounding is that the producer / artist spend more time ‘titivating’ the recording in ProTools on Mac PC’s, effectively removing any spontaneity by fiddling with timing.. ooh! that beat is 2mS behind that bass.. Quick, fiddle with the timing of the various ‘tracks’ relative to each other. Etc etc.. I find this makes music less interesting & enjoyable than if they just left these ‘mistakes’ in.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Adrian Dnes Err.. no it doesn’t! The signal leaving the coil in a dynamic microphone with magnetic circuit or diaphragm & FET or valve / tube interface in a condenser is most definitely analogue… otherwise you just invented an invisible ADC with no active components. Even if the microphone outputs a digital stream, the start of the chain is analogue until it is sampled in the internal ADC…
Tomi Engdahl says:
Michael Eickemeier Hmm.. does he not realise that the pre-emptive groove spacing used when cutting the original disc from the tape ( most likely a digital recording, not actual tape ) that the signal to the cutting head amp had to be DIGITALLY delayed so that the groove spacing computer / controller has sufficient time to make the adjustments. Unless he’s producing DMM or some other direct to disc cutting…
Tomi Engdahl says:
The only thing those sort of pictures with jagged “digital” waveforms show is a compete misunderstanding of how sampling actually works.
Richard Mitton Depending on curriculum Fourier’ transforms and sampling rate is Bsc or Msc level. One with college of liberal arts education will post pictures as OP.
Richard Mitton Yes, but as practical autodidact one usually have no motivation to actually memorize base theory and all formulas. Usually it is not necessary either. If one UNDERSTANDS how Fourier’ transforms actually work, implementation is easily achievable with python and little help from Copilot or similar. This, of course prerequisites two things 1. one actually understands sampling 2. one does not blatantly lie and provide falsified “data” to sell more criminally overpriced snake-oil.
Andres Septer A recommended and widely used book for Fourier Transforms in Digital Signal Processing (DSP) is The Scientist and Engineer’s Guide to Digital Signal Processing by Steven W. Smith, which is available online for free. The Scientist and Engineer’s Guide to Digital Signal Processing https://share.google/1dzJ8542Btf3S3ZNe
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke LP dynamic range will always be awful. Nyquist/Shannon proves mathematically that any speaker, let alone the human ear, cannot resolve the differences between digital samples and an analoge wave. Cognitive dissonance is thriving. Loudness wars is irrelevant. I agree on master tapes being the priority, but digitizing them should be even higher. Recording in analogue is better because it forces the producer to get everything right before the mic, not because “pure wave form is superior to stair steppy signal”
Tomi Engdahl says:
You’re talking rubbish.. go to University & take courses in electronics and music technology.. you have much to learn. Then come back in a few years and apologise for posting such inaccurate information. I see you sell ‘audiophile records’ Are you sure there’s nothing digital in the path? What about the DIGITAL delay used to delay the cutting signal while the groove spacing computer makes adjustments? Or are all your master discs live direct to metal masters?
Tomi Engdahl says:
Here are 10 Chi-Fi brands that can stand against western giants: https://www.headphonesty.com/2024/04/top-chifi-brands/