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.
2,284 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
QSA fuses | Inner Magazines https://share.google/2QYF64vZUabmt7Q2B
Tomi Engdahl says:
The analogue format is RIAA EQ’d and compressed by design. Stuff is needed in the signal path to inaccurately reverse this. CDs? Nope! Vinyl is, IMHO, for children who want to be different and, by so being, are all the same.
Tomi Engdahl says:
I enjoy the process of playing vinyl records very much. Flipping through my record collection instead of browsing a digital library. Forcing myself to listen through an entire album the way the artist intended it to be played. Turning sides, lowering the needle to the groove. It’s a tactile process. I also love the mechanics of turntables and I restore vintage turntables as a hobby.
Now, do I pretend that analogue sounds better than digital? No! I value the possibility to EQ my sound so much that I run my analogue sources through ADC -> DSP -> DAC. That still doesn’t reduce my enjoyment of playing records.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Jon CopeHi Jon one of the things you pay for in more expensive amplifiers is an accurate RIAA stage
Tomi Engdahl says:
Copper wire is copper wire
Just make sure it’s not copper clad aluminum, or CCA. Aluminum is about 60% less conductive than copper, but there’s a lot of cheap speaker wire in the market made of CCA.
shhh…audiophiles are very sensitive.
Curtis Clemons So you really either don’t know nothing about wires or you’re a argumentative person or even possibly a bot with a response like that
Curtis Clemons doesnt the purity matter? Or quality of the connectors?
Thomas Palacio well if it isn’t 100% copper it isn’t copper wire is it
Tomi Engdahl says:
Oxygen-free copper (OFC), or Oxygen-Free High Conductivity (OFHC) copper, is a high-purity copper with an extremely low oxygen content, typically less than 0.001%. This purity results in superior electrical and thermal conductivity, excellent corrosion resistance, and good weldability, making it ideal for premium applications in the electronics, electrical, and scientific industries. OFHC is a premium grade of copper that exhibits the properties of pure copper, used in wiring, electronic components, and precision scientific instruments where minimal resistance and efficient heat dissipation are critical.
Key Characteristics
High Purity: OFHC is a high-purity copper, with purity levels reaching 99.99%.
Low Oxygen Content: Its defining feature is an exceptionally low oxygen content, typically below 0.001%.
Superior Conductivity: The absence of oxygen minimizes impurities and improves the metallic structure, leading to exceptionally high electrical and thermal conductivity.
Corrosion Resistance: The low oxygen content enhances its resistance to oxidation and corrosion.
Ductility and Machinability: OFHC copper possesses high ductility and excellent machinability.
How it’s Made
OFHC is produced through advanced electrolytic refining processes that remove almost all impurities, including oxygen, from the molten copper.
Applications
Due to its enhanced properties, OFHC is used in a variety of specialized applications, including:
Electronics:
Used in conductors for electronic devices and high-fidelity audio equipment.
Electrical Industry:
Found in high-performance wiring, motor windings, and electrical contacts.
Scientific Instruments:
Utilized in precision scientific equipment, particularly in fields requiring high conductivity and purity.
Industrial Applications:
Its durability and resistance to corrosion make it suitable for certain industrial and marine applications.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Here are 10 signs you’re more of a gear addict than an audiophile: https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/05/signs-gear-addict-audiophile/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Audio legend reveals how a ‘black market’ for obsolete parts is keeping high-end audio alive: https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/audio-legend-reveals-black-market-obsolete-parts/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Here are ‘non-audiophile’ brands that purists mock but real users continue to rely on.
Full story: https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/09/mainstream-audio-brands-worth-owning-audiophiles/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pretty cables cost exponentially more than plain ones. You know, because audiophoolery is really more about cable porn than “sOuNd”.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Bose 901 made one reviewer start his own Hi-Fi magazine just to fight back.
Full story: https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/09/bose-901-loved-hated-speaker-hifi-history/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Lots of pseudo Electrical Engineers graduating from YouTube Institute of Technology lately
Tomi Engdahl says:
Alex Gray no that was not and never was the reason therefore I repeat, the 20 -20 Bandwidth was for AMPLIFIERS ONLY and the 20 KHz upper limit was specified in order that “TRANSIENTS” could be reproduced cleanly in the days of the valve, “tube” No shit Sherlock, just the plain old truth! there are no harmonics of human use or audible to the human ear at 20 KHz, If and adult can get past 12 KHz they will have an awful life! If you examine an accurate RTA you will see that all these imaginary harmonics that Audiophools claim to be able to hear are down in the weeds along with harmonic distortion and noise especially as with digital that, “Noise Floor” has actually gone UP! As it did when early transistorised equipment began to appear. I know this because I was working with Pro-Audio equipment in the 1960s! Initially transistorised equipment could not get near the reliability of Valves/Vacuum tubes!
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14PrQAEbqEA/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Harmonic or transients, frequency response or slew rate, they come to the same thing. As for hearing, in my 20s I could distinctly hear the 15.75kHz whistle of a modern TV line output transformer, and the older 10kHz sets were very audible.
Tomi Engdahl says:
From https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BP5bWwLfX/
Alex Grey
Leigh Reke also of course, at the radio station I did masses of audio editing and I can assure you that the digitally reproduced waveform of a pure sine wave looked just like the image on the left in the original post. Vinyl generally had a lot more tracking distortion, surface noise, clicks, rumble, wow and flutter even from decent quality turntable abd stylus – a ridulous amount of care and expense needed to remotely approach what a typical digital reproduction chain achieved effortlessly and economically.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Leigh Reke it would be difficult to find an ordinary unassuming DAC made in the last 10 years that is NOT transparent. Anything by Topping or SMSL for instance is absolutely, totally transparent, does not impart any character to the sound at all.
DACS made up of discrete devices are garbage compared to chips. Your idiotic presuppositions are exactly backwards.
Leigh Reke Not sure why you would want a DAC made from discrete components – i doubt any available could match a decent microchip option. Microchip ones are are available down to an INL of 0.1 LSB (though typical consumer gear might use an INL of 1 LSB, which is still likely to be well ahead of a typical discrete design. In theory a discrete DAC could achieve the same if every component were hand measured, selected and matched, but it would still be no better than the best microchips. I think far more important is likely to be the quality of the circuitry supporting the DAC.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Fy7bQr2JF/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Each soldered connection is a unique, hand-crafted metal sculpture, made from a proprietary blend of fine silver and rare-Earth materials, resulting in minimal Ohmic losses and the highest fidelity.
So here’s what’s going on with this. I have a long career in electronics and that includes manufacturing and high reliability soldering (aircraft, spacecraft).
Gold plating makes for a great contact surface because it doesn’t oxidize. Beyond that, it’s awful to work with in electronics, especially when solder is concerned. Gold doesn’t play nice with many of the metals used in electronics including copper, tin, and lead where you can use it. It forms nasty intermetallic compounds that clump up and don’t properly wet the solder connection. Also, gold will diffuse straight into copper, it requires a barrier plating layer of nickel between any copper alloy and the surface gold layer.
You can mitigate the problem with gold, but you have to tin the connection area with excess solder then remove it before making your solder connection. That was obviously not done here. The surface texture and that slight iridescent look indicate heavy gold contamination.
And while we are at it, gold isn’t a much better conductor than copper, especially when the nickel barrier resistivity is taken into consideration.
And as someone else mentioned. That’s not the right cable, it’s a twisted pair, it should be a coax.
Also, the connector itself and the plating don’t appear to be the best quality. These types of connectors are usually made from a copper alloy like brass.
Christian Kronborg Højen yeah, that’s not the way. Also, still gold contamination makes solder joints brittle. I forgot to mention that.
Christian Kronborg Højen yeah, that’s not the way. Also, still gold contamination makes solder joints brittle. I forgot to mention that.
Feck me… they must absolutely love non-linear capacitance.
Evelyn Kiera Ivanova Gold has much worse conductivity than copper, not better. It’s closer to aluminum in that matter. It’s silver that copper is only a modicum worse in conductivity and that’s before accounting for the layer of silver oxide, which is pretty much unavoidable in such an application, and in itself is a much worse conductor than any of those behaving like a p-type semiconductor as it does.
Evelyn Kiera Ivanova Buy a decent Iron, we use Gold plated stuff all the time in Pro Audio, that is just Zero skills!
No, it isn’t, but believe what you want. There is real metallurgy behind what I am saying. Oh, and by the way, stuff I soldered flew on spacecraft. I was trained for high reliability stuff and I am an engineer who works on avionics systems.
https://www.electronics.org/system/files/technical_resource/E38%26S07-02%20-%20Mike%20Wolverton.pdf
I can produce plenty of research papers on gold contamination in solder.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Christian Kronborg Højen lol ok that’s a miniature RGBHV loom cable. It’s 5x 75ohm coax in a single jacket, miniature so it would all fit into the back of an HD15 (vga) connector.
One of those lines would be a perfectly acceptable SPDIF connection.
But using more that one will not improve anything, and will likely cause issues that a single line would not.
If you pull the heatshrink back the cable will be printed with text that will ID the bulk cable they have used. You can then see how much markup they are charging for the pigs ear of construction they provide.
A decent RGBHV miniature cable is https://www.vdctrading.com/products/van-damme-red-series-plasma-grade-mini-coax-5-way-per-metre (no longer manufactured because er ¿VGA‽ )
IIRC this was about £10/metre. You can probably find it “new old stock” for less than half that price now if you are lucky.
Lower quality options are also available from the far east.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pro electronics tech with a background in the live AV world. I can confidently say that the worst solder work in the world is found in high end AV cables. If you’re going beyond premium Mogami or Belden you are throwing money away.
.https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CW92v9hJh/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Colin Joneswell you’d judge wrong Col I might not have the greatest ears in the world but I can hear the superiority of analog over CD. I haven’t had a chance to hear any of the new breed of high frequency digital. When I learned in 1980 about nilquists thearum (I’m sure that’s not correct spelling) which said sample at slightly above twice the top frequency you wish to reproduce hence 44.1kz. I thought this can’t work even then I thought it should have a higher sample rate to still reproduce 20k. It would appear that I might have been correct when you see the frequency that are being tried out these days. I’d certainly like to have a listen. Till then I remain of the opinion that only analog done right can reproduce the emotion and intent of the music
Bruce Giddins that’s odd because virtually every record you’ve ever listened to had been through a digital system during the cutting process – usually at lower sample rates than commonly used today
Bruce Giddins well in that case you can’t compare vinyl to CD with your record collection, because CDs of records originally mastered prior to digital delay will themselves have been mastered from 2nd generation (at best) vinyl masters or very old tape.
Bruce Giddins it may just be that’s what you prefer, which is fine. The Ampex ADD-1 was introduced in 1979 and rapidly became the norm for vinyl cutting lathes worldwide. It has a 50kHz sample rate with a 20kHz low pass filter. So virtually every record you have from 1980s onwards includes a digital stage.
Bruce Giddins that is a good question. Fidelity and preference are two different things. I think most of us would have no problem accepting your preference. But don’t say that it is higher fidelity, because that can be very easily proven wrong. It is LOW fidelity. If your preference is for low-fidelity sound, that’s fine. A lot of people prefer the look of film, too.
Bruce Giddins why are you here? You are the type of person this makes fun of. FLAC technically has a range of 1hz-50khz. Technically a record has the potential for 5hz-50khz, however in reality most record masters were cut at 60hz on the low end and 15khz at the upper limit. The “Warm” sound you like is actually the product of the high frequency cut off and a small circuit integrated into record players to boost low frequency playback as part of the limits of the needle and arm. Records were always optimized for low levels, too high and the needle would jump at low frequency. So literally the sound you discribe is the sound of the limitations of the format. And if you think that sounds realistic, seek medical help, have them clean your ears out.
Chris Asendorffor a start Chris I didn’t say warm. What is this needle you talk of I myself use a Garrott Brothers designed stylus very good it is too. Don’t know were you get this 60Hz cut off from. Anyway you obviously haven’t listened to a good all analog LP on a high end system.
Bruce Giddins You my friend are a fool. Dude, Certified Sound Engineer…. I Let me put it this way I work with AKG, SoundCraft, JBL, and so on for Equipment. I wrote several of the Drivers used for sound cards in Linux and in sound production. You are a listener… Do you even understand how get two signals from a record, Do you really? In order to get stereo from a single point that the cartridge has to vibrate against two conductors, and that the signals are actually the along the side walls of the groove. You grasp that that means that the sound stage itself is poor because the timing is actually slightly off phase, and that the signals have to be optimized for the amount of groove space within the record itself. Why was this done rather than two separate tracks? PROFIT. At the time sound engineers wrote op-eds about the poor quality of this format. So on top of the frequency issue, we have very high amount of noise due to the nature of the medium, and the nature of the cartridge. I have attached a diagram of how a cartridge works. The basics of how it works means it sucks. The issue for you isn’t that it sounds good, you are just trying to relive your youth….
Bruce Giddins 60hz was used by most. Didn’t you ever wonder why the standard 7 band EQ starts at 60hz?
Chris Asendorf 50K technically. Maybe. But imo you can’t get 50K off vynil without the sort if cutting lathe that did not exist untill late in the game, and a shibata stylus profile. And then you’ll only get it on the outside grooves where the disk is moving the fastest. I’m old enough to remember the problems tracking the 30K carrier on CD-4 disks, let alone 50K!
Complete nonsense. LPs pressed after the mid 1980s are all taken from digital masters, and therefore are completely pointless being digital audio + compression and noise added
Tomi Engdahl says:
“new design” translation: our aliexpress supplier stopped making them so we got a different aliexpress supplier (so many to pick from! https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-rca-covers.html?spm=a2g0o.home.search.0 )
Tomi Engdahl says:
As the unused inputs don’t get past the input selector switch, any half decently designed amp would not experience any noise from open sockets!
It seems that, by all the add on bits you can buy, these very expensive amplifiers must have really poor design!
If this is supposed to act like a faraday shield, I am willing to test it on one of my spare receivers which has this weird phenomenon where you can hear AM broadcasts via the phono input.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/09/windows-fixing-bluetooth-headphone-problem-audiophiles-gamers/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2024/10/most-iconic-audiophile-headphones/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/09/mainstream-audio-brands-worth-owning-audiophiles/
Tomi Engdahl says:
10 Most Annoying Audio Myths, as Voted by Thousands of Audiophiles
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/most-annoying-audio-myths-voted-thousands-audiophiles/
where audiophiles draw the line between fact and fiction.
The audio world is full of claims that sound convincing but don’t hold up when you look at the data. So, we surveyed thousands of audiophiles to find out which myths they wish would disappear, and the results show a clear pattern.
The claim is that expensive speaker cables or interconnects made from oxygen-free copper, silver, or directional designs unlock deeper bass and smoother highs.
In reality, once a cable is built to a reasonable standard, differences become vanishingly small.
What matters is using the right gauge for your setup. For example, for 8-ohm speakers, 16 AWG works up to about 25 feet, 14 AWG for 25–50 feet, and 12 AWG for longer runs. For 4-ohm speakers, step one size larger.
Beyond that, cables don’t introduce audible losses unless they are extremely thin or unusually long.
The same goes for interconnects: standard shielding is fine for most runs, and balanced cables are better for long distances or noisy environments.
Expensive power cords or exotic geometries don’t change what your amp does with the signal. So, if you want an upgrade that matters, put the money toward speakers, headphones, or room treatment, and not cables.
Tomi Engdahl says:
8 Things Real Audio Engineers Wish Audiophiles Knew Before Wasting Money on Audio Myths
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/real-audio-engineers-wish-audiophiles-knew/
What happens in real studios shows why so many debates in audio circles never add up.
Audiophiles often debate gear choices, but the people who record, mix, and master music have a different perspective. Working engineers across forums and professional groups have shared what really matters in day-to-day audio work. Their comments reveal how music is created, what actually affects sound, and where common beliefs can go off track.
1. Your Room Matters More Than Your Speakers
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.stereotimes.com/post/quantum-science-audio-series-fuses/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.audioquest.com/products/rca-noise-stoppers
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://coherent-systems.co.uk/product/acoustic-revive-rio5-ii/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.inner-magazines.com/audiophilia/qsa-fuses/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/08/most-annoying-audio-myths-voted-thousands-audiophiles/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/02/stages-falling-audiophile-rabbit-hole/