Is the next-gen is kinda freaked out by the cable industry?

silverfi · « **on:** 29 Jul 2006, 09:06 pm »

An e-zine Publisher recently told met that they “only mention cables in the context of other product reviews simply because the next-gen is kinda freaked out by the cable industry”. He added “Sure, they'll end up buying them, but speakers and components are a lot more exciting”. At first glance this may seem OK. But is it so?

First, as a musiclover and then as a cable designer and manufacturer I should say that cables as the vascular system of audio is very very important and they should be exciting as the other audio components. I strongly believe that an audio system could only be as good as its cables.

Currently this topic seems very relevant. Yes, musiclovers let’s discuss audio cables. Give your valuable feedback.

Sezai Saktanber
SilverFi Cable Atelier

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #1 on:** 29 Jul 2006, 09:16 pm »

I am fully confident that the next-gen, as you put it, has already realized that it does take a cable of some sort to connect units together to make a system.

d.b.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #2 on:** 29 Jul 2006, 09:29 pm »

In my opinion cables should be the last thing you worry about. They are so easy to get right that considering them a component is laughable.

kfr01 · « **Reply #3 on:** 29 Jul 2006, 09:31 pm »

I agree with Kevin.

I think the cable industry is definitely turning off the next-gen. Go on any generation x-y-whatever techie website. You mention audio, hi-fi, or sound quality; they will laugh, use "audiophile" as a derogatory term, and present expensive cables as exhibit #1 of our (audio hobyists) stupidity.

Frankly, I don't know that it matters much what anyone here thinks. To my knowledge there aren't too many "next-gen'ers" here. Even more frankly, their idea of "hi-fi" is itunes 128kbps lossy on an ipod with tiny headphones. Do you think they're worried about cables?

No, the high-end audio industry has bigger issues: the next gen will have to be sold on something other than a Panasonic digital receiver that sounds pretty damn good for $300 and the latest 5.1 rig from Paradigm.

nathanm · « **Reply #4 on:** 29 Jul 2006, 11:52 pm »

I would hope that the number of people in the world who care passionately about something as crushingly dull as audio cables will forever occupy the smallest of small niche groups. I always thought of myself as being abnormally concerned about sound quality but I can't even work up very much excitement about cables. And the thought of getting non-nerds to give two seconds of thought to this issue is hilarious. Maybe I am off base, but it looks like bud headphones are the mainstream choice of playback device. But if you can't promote the coarser parameters of active listening, speaker placement and acoustic treatment to the "next gen" crowd, then forget about cables being a concern. Speakers and components are 'more exciting' because they are a much "weaker" link than cables (more variable in tone). Cables get the job done. For the same reason carpenters aren't using botique $5 a piece nails to put houses together I guess.

Personally I say forget about growing the hobby, it won't happen. The people who are going to get into it in the future are going to get into it, but it will never be a widespread phenomenon.

JohnR · « **Reply #5 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 02:15 am »

Your iPod sits right on top of your Apple hifi. What do you need a cable for?

earlmarc · « **Reply #6 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 02:43 am »

If I had to judge the next-gen based on my kids and their friends I would conclude that they could care less about cables. They are more interested in quality headphones for their ipods than the quality of cable that connects them. I am surprised about the differences cables can make in systems. I think they are an important link into tailoring a system to meet personal preferences.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #7 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 05:29 am »

Quote

Even more frankly, their idea of "hi-fi" is itunes 128kbps lossy on an ipod with tiny headphones.

Yep....that statement is right on the money (you can see it everywhere)...thats too bad.

JLM · « **Reply #8 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 11:08 am »

I fear audio is going the way of dodo birds and baseball, all are too dull to survive this generation addicted to the fast pace of modern life and multiple sensory stimulation.

What percentage of the time do any of us just listen? I know 99% of the time I'm banging away on this computer while listening, while "the" chair sits empty (although this seat ain't bad).

My sense is that this generation will have less disposable income as (at least in America) the gap between "haves" and "have nots" widens and more impacts the younger generation. Heck I'm middle aged and with a $3000 super simple system won't spend 10% of it on cabling. I've heard the differences/advantages of cables, but IMO at this price range it's still better to invest in room treatments, component upgrades, or (duh) the room itself.

95% of the audio market has already gone over to HT and why not? Most of the time it's the TV that gets used, and I can use a HT system to listen to music but not the reverse. And as eluded to above the whole audio scene is a big point of dimishing returns game anyway (IMO the quality of a $2000 HT is hard to argue with a non-audio nut).

JohnR · « **Reply #9 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 12:24 pm »

Quote from: JLM on 30 Jul 2006, 11:08 am

I fear audio is going the way of dodo birds and baseball, all are too dull to survive this generation addicted to the fast pace of modern life and multiple sensory stimulation.

Hm... so that makes me wonder. Surely playing back recordings of music has always been (just) entertainment. When stereo came out, mono must have been seen fairly soon after as "dull." Now we can have video as well, downloadable music, the whole shebang connected up to our computers, etc.

When did the "hifi" industry start taking itself so seriously?

john1970 · « **Reply #10 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 12:41 pm »

I also agree with Kevin Haskins!

When building a system you should spend the majority of the money (50 to 75% depending on budget) on the weakest link: THE SPEAKERS. Next is the amplifier. Sources are a distant third IMO.
IMO cables are probably the last place to spend lots of money!

I use cables (interconnects and speaker) from bluejeanscable.com. The interconnects are sheilded Belden professional grade cables and the speaker wire is Belden 99.95% (min) oxygen-free 10-Ga cable. I doubt if you can do better at 10x the price. IMO 99+% of "audiophile cable" advertising is "snake-oil".

With that said, you do want to use sheilded interconnects (to inhibit noise) and a large Ga speaker cable (for a large damping factor and tight bass).

I don't know if the next-gen is "freaked out" or just more wise with their $$!!

Good luck,

John

CornellAlum · « **Reply #11 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 12:45 pm »

I am the next gen I guess, 27 years old, up and coming professional with eventual capitol to spend on these toys. I am not scared off in the slightest by cable companies. I look at it as a bunch of overpriced nonsense, but how can one be scared by cable companies when there is cd cutters, black markers, hockey pucks, green lights, etc. It simply takes a little proritization to figure out what is important, and what is nonsense. For cables, I currently use Bolder Nitro speaker wire that I got for half price from Wayne and couldn't be happier nor have any desire to spend 4 grand on Valhalla...though I might someday

mca · « **Reply #12 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 02:43 pm »

Git yerself a set of Bluejeans cables. Then, git yerself a set of "high end" cables. Most folks have a nice trial period.

Listen to both sets of cables.

If the Bluejeans cables sound better, keep them.

If the "high end" cables sound better, keep them.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #13 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 03:01 pm »

I'm glad some people agree with me.

I'll even step out and make a couple predictions.... Nostradamus step aside.

Rant on....

What we currently think of the high-end will die a slow death. I'd say within the next 20 years the market will shrink to obscurity. By some standards it already has.

The reasons are simple.

Reason #1: There are too many competing forms of entertainment. How many of us spend more time on the computer than listening to our stereo? How many of us spend more time watching the tube? New audio formats will appear that match video/computer standards for audio. The HT systems will get the hardware in place and once there is an installed user base of hardware the music industry will supply software to that market.

Reason #2: The spread of free information and the free flow of goods from international markets. All young people research things on the net. Almost none of them perceive the high-end audio magazines as credible. For good reason... they have lost all credibility in most cases for supporting claims built on sand. The free flow of information and goods will kill the traditional 2-channel audio store.

Reason #3: I also agree the future generations in North America will likely be less affluent. There will always be the rich that can afford whatever they want but there won't be a large middle class with the amount of disposable income we have had in the past. They will be paying most of their income to health care, education, paying interest on government debt and paying for a social security system that is a time bomb. Also... energy and all commodities promise to raise in price as long as there are developing countries and growing populations. Overall we will learn to survive on less disposable income.

Don't get me wrong... there will still be people cryo treating their wires and elevating them. The internet allows small groups of people with the same passion to gather across long distances. The group will be smaller than it is today though as the institutions proping up false gods are going to die a slow death or they will morph into something else.

Rant off....

john1970 · « **Reply #14 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 03:41 pm »

Kevin,

Your predictions on the economic future of the United States are unfortunately very reasonable and very correct. In May 2006 our trade deficit was -$63.8 USD. The real purchasing power (income adjusted for inflation) of the middle class in this country has been on the decline for decades. However, this is the price US citizens pay when we outsource middle-class jobs to lower-cost foreign countries just so we can save a few dollars at WalMart. If you want to make a difference try to avoid buying goods made overseas (say no to WalMart). It can be very difficult, but not impossible.

Had we kept the middle class jobs here in the US, the goods would have costed more, but wages would have increase as well and made up for the difference.

To put things in perspective. When my father went to graduate school back in the late 1950s, a pair of well-made (US) men's shoes (Allen Edmonds) cost ~$40 to $50. These days you can buy dress shoes made over seas for that amount of money. You can still purchase Allen Edmonds, but they currently cost ~$250 (actually this price is reasonable once adjusted for inflation).

The real problem in the United States is our desire to consume. I bet back in the 1950s a man would own 1 pair of nice dress shoes...today we own many more.

FYI Allen Edmonds is the only domestic manufacturer of shoes that still exists. I buy them solely for this reason (they also last twice as long as the cheap imports).

John

silverfi · « **Reply #15 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 03:59 pm »

yes, high-end might shrink in the mid term.

regarding the disposable income issue (not only in the US, this is the new reality in the whole world) , it may mean that more value oriented products will be available from both side of the fence (developed & developing economies). the current SET/digital amp+xoverless speakers trend is a strong and creative answer to that (is it the new and original answer by the next-gen to high-end?).

ipods, cellphones with radios is the sign for changing mediums. but awareness/listening to music enjoys great increase worldwide. few decades ago it was hard to see people listening music on the run. this is an indication of future growth of musiclovers, which is a good indication for market.

the growing middle classes in the developing world (china, india, indonesia and eurosia) might have a positive effect on the range and quality of market in near future. this will also result in new trends-products-price structure.

i am optimistic.

sezai saktanber
silverfi

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #16 on:** 30 Jul 2006, 08:24 pm »

I'm sorry that all came off so negative. I really think having less will be a good thing for us. After all... what good has our wealth done for us? We would have been much better off with having to get by with less.

If you look back at individuals, groups or societies that make a meaningful difference in the world its due to a perspective of personal sacrifice, not due to their ability to entertain themselves.

I also agree that many other societies in the world are going to have MORE wealth relative to what they have had in the past. Is it at the sacrifice of the USA? Kind of and kind of not. There certainly is more competition but I think the key to our demise is our own wealth and the lack of meaning and personal sacrifice that it tends to breed.

It is kind of funny. Human nature is such that wealth is what we spend much of our lives trying to obtain only to find the reward is empty. We adopted a 12 yr. old boy from Ethiopia last year. In his mind he had hit the jackpot. He thought wealth = happiness. We are dealing with the disappointment that his new found position in life doesn't equate to eternal happiness. He never realized he would have to take out garbage, work and people wouldn't be at his beck & call.

Its kind of funny that a kid who had nothing, lived in abject poverty would get disgusted with you for asking him to do a couple chores but that is human nature for you.... we adjust quick and in a negative way to wealth without meaning.

MaxCast · « **Reply #17 on:** 31 Jul 2006, 02:05 am »

Quote from: john1970 on 30 Jul 2006, 03:41 pm

Kevin,

Your predictions on the economic future of the United States are unfortunately very reasonable and very correct. In May 2006 our trade deficit was -$63.8 USD. The real purchasing power (income adjusted for inflation) of the middle class in this country has been on the decline for decades. However, this is the price US citizens pay when we outsource middle-class jobs to lower-cost foreign countries just so we can save a few dollars at WalMart. If you want to make a difference try to avoid buying goods made overseas (say no to WalMart). It can be very difficult, but not impossible.

Had we kept the middle class jobs here in the US, the goods would have costed more, but wages would have increase as well and made up for the difference.

To put things in perspective. When my father went to graduate school back in the late 1950s, a pair of well-made (US) men's shoes (Allen Edmonds) cost ~$40 to $50. These days you can buy dress shoes made over seas for that amount of money. You can still purchase Allen Edmonds, but they currently cost ~$250 (actually this price is reasonable once adjusted for inflation).

The real problem in the United States is our desire to consume. I bet back in the 1950s a man would own 1 pair of nice dress shoes...today we own many more.

FYI Allen Edmonds is the only domestic manufacturer of shoes that still exists. I buy them solely for this reason (they also last twice as long as the cheap imports).

John

Buy that man a beer!!!!!!!!
I always try to buy made in America or any other country with similar labor rates.

But alas, the week rise up and the mighty fall. It has happened all the time. Maybe that is how nature adjusts for inflation lol

ZooDog · « **Reply #18 on:** 31 Jul 2006, 03:35 pm »

A lot of doom and gloom in this thread. It seems like the older generation always lacks faith in the younger one. With this kind of attitude you guys are right, the high-end audio industry is going to all but disappear. I think that attitude has a lot to do with the decline we've seen in the industry over the years. Chances are if a twenty-something walks into a high-end shop they are going to be ignored or discouraged in some way. I know that this is not the case everywhere, but we've all heard the stories and some of us have experienced it ourselves. What should really happen is that when a younger person (or any person) walks into a store they should be sat down in front of the best system in the store, handed the remote, and allowed to play their own music. Get them hooked and maybe they will start buying some stuff. Maybe they'll even tell a couple of friends.

What the industry needs is more companies like Zu. I've never heard any of their products, but they are a bunch of young-ish guys who seem to be doing more than their part to encourage younger people to get into high-quality audio. The rave that they put on at HE 2006 looked like a really cool idea, even though hardly anyone attended. http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/rave/rave.html
Well, at least they are trying.

I find it kind of funny how younger generations get labled as lazy over-consumers when it is the baby-boomer generation that has enabled them to be that way. Don't complain about your kid's lack of motivation when you bought him/her a BMW for graduating college.

I guess it's a waste of time to try and market high-quality audio to younger people because you're telling them that they won't be able to afford it anyways.

nathanm · « **Reply #19 on:** 31 Jul 2006, 05:04 pm »

Wow, that Zu thing looked pretty cool I would've loved to hear that. I mean, when have you ever heard anything besides horned PA cabs at a live gig? (even though I don't care for electronic music in general) I don't know how the "young crowd" of funky hipsters is supposed to afford their speakers, though.

Does the average 'raver' kid have $2800 plus to spend on speakers? The price of hifi is what keeps people away and the cable business is especially responsible for that. That's the first thing people mention in reference to audiophiles, "oh my god, one of those cables costs more than my entire system!" It just makes it seem totally out of reach to people of moderate income. As if a pair of well-designed speakers in a decently treated room is going to suddenly sound like crap if you hook it up with $30 of wire instead of $3000. Poppycock!