Showing 1 of 27 conversations about:
View Full Discussion
Ah the good ol' cable debate.
I don't know why people care so much. If you aren't interested, don't spend your money on it.
At the end of the day, all these cable manufacturers are in business because it sells. A lot of people have spent a small (or large) fortune on their systems and don't want to go with $2 cables, REGARDLESS of whether or not the 'boutique' cables make audible differences or not. Can you deny that Nordost cables look awesome? If you ask me, that alone is enough of a reason / justification for someone to buy a $1000 Nordost speaker cables if they can afford it. On a similar note, how about those options for Ferraris? Something like $5,000 for a carbon fiber cup holder. Well, if they can afford it and want it, what more is there to say about that? I think the same thing applies here.
Still, it would be questionable to spend $100 on cables if your entire setup was worth $500. But, if you have a $5000 setup? Why not?
I don't think this is where the core of the debate lies. If you have the money, you aren't hurting anything by purchasing something like this. The problem lies with the advertising -- this product (and many others like it) is advertised as if it will completely redefine the way you listen to music.
It's an issue of morality, I think. Do the ends justify the means? Is it okay to deceive uninformed people, even if their quality of life is improved in some way? If the description of the cables read: "looks good, lasts forever, doesn't make your music sound worse," there would be absolutely no qualms whatsoever.
You are right. It isn't the 'main' issue here but many points are written with the assumption that the cables do not make any difference. But with all of that aside, even fully assuming for the sake of the argument that cables do not yield any audible differences (or any differences for that matter), I would have to agree that ethically speaking, it isn't fully "right" to advertise cables in this manner. However, there are plenty of other goods that are advertised in this way. For instance, those bracelets that are apparently supposed to keep you healthy (or whatever it is that they do). In essence, all products that people view as "snake oil" fall under this category. I would say that even a product like Dre 'Beats' fall under this category. Just look at how they advertise their headphones.
"The Beats Acoustic Engine makes your listening experience intimate, personal, and real. Our signature DSP software is designed to generate the emotional experience that Dr. Dre, Jimmy Iovine, and some of the music industry's greatest rock, hip-hop, pop, electronic, and R&B producers want you to feel. This is how music would sound if the artist could play it back for you in person."
If you have a problem with the way these cables are advertised, you have got to have something to say about these headphones as well when they say "This is how music would sound if the artist could play it back for you person" referring to 'Beats' headphones.
While again, ethically speaking this probably does not sit right with most people, you have to understand that these things will always be around. There isn't much anyone can do about it which is the point I was trying to make in my original post.
Besides, who do you think would buy these cables anyways? It's those that do not do their research properly. 5 minutes on Google should be sufficient to deter an individual from spending $100 on cables or buying 'Beats' over Sennheisers (for example); Which is the main reason for why I have no sympathy over those who spend $300 on 'Beats' when they could have spent $150 on Senns for better sound. Then there's the other group of people who like I said truly have 'end game' setups and do not care much for whether or not cables make sonic differences. These are the people who want 'Beats' even after discovering the Senns because it's "hip" or "cool" to have a pair of Beats. Who's to stop them?
I agree with you that this is unethical to a certain extent but what I'm trying to say is that there are plenty of other unethical advertisements out there, albeit in varying degrees.
Oh, absolutely. I guarantee you would see 10x the ruckus if a Beats product were being sold here. The disdain doesn't stop with these cables haha
I don't think anyone necessarily wants these cables removed from the site, but I'm sure nobody wants a newbie with a $300 budget to get suckered into buying something like this for their first system.
I really hope these cables are as magical and amazing as Morrow Audio claims, though. Who wouldn't want that to be true? We all benefit if these things really get the job done.
But, given the shady break-in service details, the overall presentation of the product, plus the consensus on cables in general, there's just no reason to trust a product like this unless substantial, objective proof can be given that it works as advertised.
I really wouldn't mind if Morrow Audio proved us all wrong. I'm not going to hold my breath, though.
"On a similar note, how about those options for Ferraris? Something like $5,000 for a carbon fiber cup holder"
People "care so much" because of the important distinction that the high-end cable market is mostly based in unabashed spreading of misinformation. Yes, it's ultimately up to the consumer as to whether a high-end cable is worth the money or not, but that doesn't mean it isn't commendable for people to make the unaware consumer informed of the marketing mumbo-jumbo.
If Ferrari marketed a $5,000 carbon fiber cup holder not as a luxury addition but rather as a feature that increased horsepower, and then that lie was propagated by Lamborghini, Audi and Bugatti and believed by consumers, then you'd see people angrily calling "BS" on that as well.
High end interconnects aren't getting flak simply for being luxury items, pretty to look at, or of superior build quality. They are getting flak for being misrepresented.