Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 192 conversations about:
Alanbition
16
Aug 8, 2018
bookmark_border
First, Cardas is a reputable company.
Second, it is 2018 now, everyone claimed himself or herself an audiophile should know cable can make difference, especially in hi-end system.
Third, $135 is definitely can be considered as "Cheap" among the current Hi-end cable market.
I personally owned an Aux 8 wire from OC studio($500) and will purchase an 1960s 4wires cable from PW audio($1200) for my 64 U12t.
RareAirs
156
Aug 8, 2018
bookmark_border
Alanbition$135 for only 3.3 ft. The up charges is where they get you.
Other companies do make a lot of snake oil like $5000 speakers and cables like the $1000 HDMI cable from monster around 2010. It’s marketing and no proof needed attitude to make a buck is how a lot of companies roll to make a buck. (Not talking about this company in particular) It is sad and unfortunate part of the hobby but cables making a differencebut is like splitting hairs... very expensive hairs
Alanbition
16
Aug 8, 2018
bookmark_border
RareAirsAt least switching cable (Not talking about this cable in particular) is like switching earphones to my ears.
Alanbition
16
Aug 8, 2018
bookmark_border
RareAirsDon't get me wrong. It is definitely not worth to spent that much on cable, but considering about the low market demand and the cost for researching different materials and combinations, it is not wrong for the company to "overprice" it.
Buckbrick
521
Aug 9, 2018
bookmark_border
RareAirsThe hifi world is perhaps the best example where proponents are equating expensive with better. That’s the reason why it’s littered with overpriced products. I just got a pair of interconnects made with Canare star quad and connectors of outstanding quality, untainted by snake oil, all for less than $50.
ayang02
32
Aug 9, 2018
bookmark_border
AlanbitionDifferent types of cables will provide different sound tuning but people need to get their priorities straight: upgrade your heaphone/dac/amp/daps first before trying to fine-tune the sound using cables.
Cables are definitely not "snake oil" if your headphone is good enough. That's like saying lossless music is no different than MP3 because you can't hear the difference with your crappy headphones.
Cables are definitely not "snake oil" if your headphone is good enough. That's like saying lossless music is no different than MP3 because you can't hear the difference with your crappy headphones.
xx0x0
93
Aug 9, 2018
bookmark_border
AlanbitionOh, you mean switching earphones made no difference to your ears.
xx0x0
93
Aug 9, 2018
bookmark_border
AlanbitionIt is 2018 now, everyone claimed himself or herself an audiophile should know you can buy a utterly bad made cable in an obscene price to mess up the signal, especially in hi-end system.
PirateIce
232
Aug 9, 2018
bookmark_border
ayang02aha ayang, i smile so much reading your comment about mp3 vs flac, here i am in another thread in this dicussion area and someone pops up with " Its like saying MP3 at 320kbps and FLAC at 320kbps is different.... " lol didn't even bothering saying audibly different... theyre just the same, screw those different bits! lol some people...
ayang02
32
Aug 10, 2018
bookmark_border
PirateIceBut I must say, these newer lossy codecs do a pretty good job compared to the old days. I'm finding it harder and harder to to distinguish between lossy & lossless music; I'd really have to be paying attention to the details to note these differences. For what it's worth, I did manage to get something like 9/10 on the Tidal test a few years ago.
Anyhow, another hot take here, cables make a bigger difference than lossy vs lossless music these days.
Cheers =)
Anyhow, another hot take here, cables make a bigger difference than lossy vs lossless music these days.
Cheers =)
ayang02
32
Aug 10, 2018
bookmark_border
PirateIceOn another note, how does FLAC at 320 kbps work? Won't you be hearing EVEN MORE difference compared to the MP3 because that's far below the normal 1411 kbps used by the CD bit rate. If the MP3 and FLAC files are the same length in the case that you are referring to, MP3 will beat down the 320 kbps FLAC file so people will say MP3 > FLAC lol
PirateIce
232
Aug 10, 2018
bookmark_border
ayang02Um, i think if its too low it just wouldn't work, i havent used flac recently but i think this is just a funny aspect of what was said... Im saying this cause flac is lossless not "kinda lossless-y" so I don't think you can choose to undercut the bitrate, especially below what it absolutely needs, it is however compression, so it would be below the 1411kbps of the cd right? I dont know off hand where you got that number so if its what you get after ripping with flac then ignore me. Its just funny to me because this was brought up as some gold standard of why things DONT have differences, i mean come on, dont point to two distinctly different files and tell me they are absolutely the same, it's not quantum science to run a diff.
Jutsu
60
Aug 10, 2018
bookmark_border
AlanbitionNo offense, but cut the BS; things like this is going to be death of the "audiophile" community.
Related Products
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop