New Speaker Cables Now Shipping!

[drewface]

Clearly you are in the skeptic camp, buzzy

FWIW, I am too but nowhere did I say/write that the difference would be audible, just that the cables are better made than others and that can be proven.

He's right. I think the whole point of this little competition is to turn some of the seemingly pure marketing spin into stating the facts: this cable is very well made and produced better results than other brands in areas that matter most in speaker cable performance.

[sensibull]

He's right. I think the whole point of this little competition is to turn some of the seemingly pure marketing spin into stating the facts.

Again, I ask: Where did I not state the facts? The only qualitative sentence in my entire paragraph was: "We also strive for absolute neutrality in delivering the audio signal from its source to your ears." and that was based on the following quote from David.

A higher inductance cable will have more high-frequency loss, thus making a loudspeaker sound warmer, a higher capacitance cable will have more low-frequency loss thus resulting in a more detailed, perhaps brighter sound.

It follows logically that a cable with a better inductance/capacitance ratio will be closer to "neutral."

[curtis]

sensibull, I think drewface was agreeing with your post in reply to buzzy.

[sensibull]

sensibull, I think drewface was agreeing with your post in reply to buzzy.

You know I realized that might be the case a few minutes after I posted, but the "He's right" rather than "You're right" (after quoting me) kinda threw me off.

[buzzy]

He's right. I think the whole point of this little competition is to turn some of the seemingly pure marketing spin into stating the facts: this cable is very well made and produced better results than other brands in areas that matter most in speaker cable performance.

But the whole point of making those statements is to imply something that isn't a fact: that the cables make an meaningful audible difference, one commensurate with the cost. So that's still marketing spin, don't kid yourself.

Bottom line, I'm suggesting that Ascend not get on the wrong side of this. It undermines everything they've built their reputation on. And it calls into question their credibility on other statements. For example, when they say a product has a triple-chambered deoneodymium magnet, or whatever - are people supposed to believe that matters, or will they think it's more of this kind of stuff?

Sell the cables on their actual benefits. That way the right people will buy them. You don't want people buying 170s and these cables, instead of 340s and standard wire, which is what they should do if they want to hear the difference.

[drewface]

sensibull, I think drewface was agreeing with your post in reply to buzzy.

yeh, sorry i wasn't clear. i was agreeing with sensibull

But the whole point of making those statements is to imply something that isn't a fact: that the cables make an meaningful audible difference, one commensurate with the cost. So that's still marketing spin, don't kid yourself.

i agree that any sort of statement about a product can be seen as marketing spin. this little exercise is to see if we can present the facts simply as they are with minimal spin. obviously you'll want to make the product you're selling sound good, everyone does that, even ascend. the quote at the top of this page, "reaching the peak of audio purity," could be considered "marketing spin."

there's no way any company selling a product is going to not use some sort of marketing spin. the only way to do this is to simply list something like:
CMT-340 Loudspeaker
Needless to say, that's not going to sell anything. I agree that the initial listing for these cables had a little more marketing spin than i was used to seeing on ascend's site, but that is what we are trying to change to an acceptable level, while presenting the facts.

this argument could go on forever, probably...

[davef]

Great points Drewface!

Buzzy, nowhere on our site or in this discussion has it been said that these cables will sound any better than any other cable. Features and facts have been listed with perhaps more “marketing” than our customer base is used to seeing.

The fact is that I have measured both lower capacitance and lower inductance compared to some other cables. Those specifications are determined by the way a cable is wound and Ultralink puts their own marketing spin on that. Personally, I don’t see a problem – they need to sell their cables in the way they see fit, in a heavily controversial market completely dominated by a goliath of a company that is a master marketer that created this type of marketing.

Bottom line, I'm suggesting that Ascend not get on the wrong side of this. It undermines everything they've built their reputation on. And it calls into question their credibility on other statements.

Point taken, but seriously - let us not get carried away here, these are not our products and no outrageous claims have been made.

[buzzy]

Great points Drewface!

Buzzy, nowhere on our site or in this discussion has it been said that these cables will sound any better than any other cable. Features and facts have been listed with perhaps more “marketing” than our customer base is used to seeing.

The fact is that I have measured both lower capacitance and lower inductance compared to some other cables. Those specifications are determined by the way a cable is wound and Ultralink puts their own marketing spin on that. Personally, I don’t see a problem – they need to sell their cables in the way they see fit, in a heavily controversial market completely dominated by a goliath of a company that is a master marketer that created this type of marketing.



Point taken, but seriously - let us not get carried away here, these are not our products and no outrageous claims have been made.

Well, to quote a line from a famous baseball story - say it ain't so, Joe.

Saying "extended frequency response, increased dynamic range and greater clarity" is very definitely saying "that these cables will sound any better than any other cable." - link to Ascend website page

And saying "they need to sell their cables in the way they see fit, in a heavily controversial market completely dominated by a goliath of a company that is a master marketer that created this type of marketing." is saying if you can't beat 'em, join 'em - that is, go down to Monster's level. Well, you know what people think of them, and you're saying you're going to join them. Say it ain't so.

drewface is actually very confused about what marketing is. I think that's partly due to using the euphemism "marketing spin" when we should have just used "total BS". Not to mention going from saying "it's not marketing spin" to "marketing spin is OK" in the space of 2 posts. But he inadvertently did a nice job of proving my point by pointing out another phrase on the site. Once you're willing to make stuff up about one thing, who's to say where it stops? And that isn't marketing - which is about understanding your customer needs and delivering on that.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that.

[BradJudy]

buzzy - I'm curious why you've assumed that the measurements don't make an audible difference.

I don't know if they do or don't, but I wouldn't be calling it "total BS" without any experience. This isn't a situation where a difference isn't theoretically possible, there's a measurable difference in electrical performance that may or may not make a difference in audible performance.

Saying "extended frequency response, increased dynamic range and greater clarity" is very definitely saying "that these cables will sound any better than any other cable."

Actually, this statement implies that they are better than something (the use of relative wording instead of absolute). It's typical marketing phrasing in that they don't give the reference point for the statement (greater clarity than what?), but it doesn't even imply that they are better than any other cable, let alone say it definitively.

I'm certainly not big on fancy cables or their marketing, but
I'm disappointed that someone who is really big on facts has been making arguments based on assumptions and hyperbole.

[drewface]

drewface is actually very confused about what marketing is. I think that's partly due to using the euphemism "marketing spin" when we should have just used "total BS". Not to mention going from saying "it's not marketing spin" to "marketing spin is OK" in the space of 2 posts.

marketing is simply buying and/or selling a product in a market. that's what ascend is doing, that's what ultralink is doing, that's what monster and **** are doing. the way i see "marketing spin" is when companies make bold claims about the product (ie "You won't find a better cable for a better price") they are selling without presenting any concrete facts to back up these claims. this is why the current listing of the ultralink cables alarmed me with the line "Advanced internal winding geometry for extended frequency response, increased dynamic range and greater clarity." I'd say 99% of consumers (not users on this board, i'm talking general public) have no idea what that sentence means, but it sounds really good and makes the product sound better.

here's where this exercise comes in. dave presented to us cold, hard numbers to look at for both this product and similar grade cable, as well as gave a quick explanation of what the numbers mean and how the way a cable is wound can have effects on such readings. he then challenged us to rework the bullet points provided by ultralink to make them a little less "spinny." i never said any of the solutions myself or others here have posted weren't spin, but i truly do believe that they come off as having less spin than the current cable listing. ascend likes to show the numbers/facts as plain as possible, as seen by the number of graphs presented for their speakers, and let their consumers decide if those numbers are what they are looking for. sure, that's still marketing, but i wouldn't call it "spin."