Impedance includes resistance:
The total opposition that a circuit offers to the flow of alternating current or any other varying current at a particular frequency. It is a combination of resistance R and reactance X, measured in ohms.
www.indiantelevision.com/inforesources/tvglossary/i.htm
The total opposition (ie resistance and reactance) a circuit offers to the flow of alternating current. It is measured in ohms, and the lower the ohmic value, the better the quality of the conductor.
www.levitonvoicedata.com/learning/glossary.asp
A measurement of the resistance to the flow of AC (which is what audio signals are); impedance is affected by resistance, capacitance, and inductance in a circuit and is also frequency dependent. Impedance is often mistaken for resistance and is also incorrectly thought of as being a measurement of the voltage from a pickup. In practical terms, you want low impedance sources feeding into high impedance loads; this gives maximum accuracy in signal transfer.
www.seymourduncan.com/website/support/glossary.shtml
They are certainly part of that. They do measurements to see how much distortion people can hear (used to be 1 percent; now it's 0.1 percent). Therefore, distortion is a measurement of a known psycho-acoustic phenomenon.
Let's face it, most IC products are snake oil.
The total opposition that a circuit offers to the flow of alternating current or any other varying current at a particular frequency. It is a combination of resistance R and reactance X, measured in ohms.
www.indiantelevision.com/inforesources/tvglossary/i.htm
The total opposition (ie resistance and reactance) a circuit offers to the flow of alternating current. It is measured in ohms, and the lower the ohmic value, the better the quality of the conductor.
www.levitonvoicedata.com/learning/glossary.asp
A measurement of the resistance to the flow of AC (which is what audio signals are); impedance is affected by resistance, capacitance, and inductance in a circuit and is also frequency dependent. Impedance is often mistaken for resistance and is also incorrectly thought of as being a measurement of the voltage from a pickup. In practical terms, you want low impedance sources feeding into high impedance loads; this gives maximum accuracy in signal transfer.
www.seymourduncan.com/website/support/glossary.shtml
They are certainly part of that. They do measurements to see how much distortion people can hear (used to be 1 percent; now it's 0.1 percent). Therefore, distortion is a measurement of a known psycho-acoustic phenomenon.
Let's face it, most IC products are snake oil.
Just to mention, although it's up on Rod's site, the Innersound paper is NOT written by him, and he clearly states he does not endorse their products (and by implication, tall of the details of their statements). I think it's the gist of the article -that there is more to life and more important things in audio than cables that he is trying to get across by reproducing it.
As for power-cords, I'm with him 100%. A well built, shielded cable costing £10 will sound identical to a cable costing £1000. Especially if it's unshielded and introducing hum ito interconnects (also unshielded.)
I'll stick with the cheap stuff and be happy in the knowledge that I've got something electrically as good, and frequently better than many pieces of wire costing gigantic prices. It's those that really get my goat. Profit's fine. Obscene proft, which all of these cable manufacturers recieve for products which have little material in them and cost very little to build makes me sick. I'd also love to see someone take one of these so-called high-end manufacturers to court over the nonsensical and downright false claims they make. If there's a difference, you can measure it. Can't measure it? It doesn't exist.
As for power-cords, I'm with him 100%. A well built, shielded cable costing £10 will sound identical to a cable costing £1000. Especially if it's unshielded and introducing hum ito interconnects (also unshielded.)
I'll stick with the cheap stuff and be happy in the knowledge that I've got something electrically as good, and frequently better than many pieces of wire costing gigantic prices. It's those that really get my goat. Profit's fine. Obscene proft, which all of these cable manufacturers recieve for products which have little material in them and cost very little to build makes me sick. I'd also love to see someone take one of these so-called high-end manufacturers to court over the nonsensical and downright false claims they make. If there's a difference, you can measure it. Can't measure it? It doesn't exist.
Sir Trefor said:
5) Microphonics?
6) Potential inductive interaction with the Miller Capacitance of the first stage? - I have unshielded DIY cables which drive a high sensitivity, moderate feedback single ended tube amp crazy with RF and noise, and others which are dead quiet. I don't believe we can just assume minimizing R, L and C creates the best interconnect without considering system matching. And yes, 'that way lies madness', but also presents one possible explanation for reported differences.
Samuel Jayaraj said:
Only roughly. Dissatisfaction with today's measurements are as old as Crowhurst articles, fifty years I'ld guess. One of the most astonishing things I've learned from DIYing amps is how much measured intermod is completely inaudible as perceived distortion. It's my belief the mass of available research into lossy compression algorithms will be a goldmine for arriving at measurement parameters which truly correlate with perception.
Samuel Jayaraj said:
There are things which do make a difference, but the job of an engineer is finding out what precisely those are then figuring how to get the best performance for the least dosh. I was quite surprised to find speaker cables and even interconnects making differences in decent systems. I tried to find out why that would be so I could do the same for cheaper (my family makes Scots look like profligates).
I found a way of building a close-to-ultimate speaker cable, at less cost per pair than others charge for a single meter. It tested out well on a number of good systems, but on the other hand the same cable made little difference in another system. The resolution was, ah, not in question: the amplifiers were Rowlands driving Apogee Diva speakers. Whether a difference can be heard depends greatly on the components being interconnected, so with all respect whether a cable isn't heard to make a difference doesn't mean the system or the listener is inadequate.
Long story short, I find the main things for speaker cables to be low series inductance followed by low series resistance, and possibly shielding so RF garbage doesn't get in the feedback loop. Interconnects seem to be happiest if they have a smallish resistor (I use 3.3K) between hot and shield at the downstream end; that might be why many people like equipment with low-impedance inputs.
Cheers,
Francois.
Jay said:Where's the factor for material types (related to electrons movement MAYBE)? There's no difference in impedance or capacitance between silver or copper or gold-plated whatever. Anybody want the RCA socket from zero impedance aluminium?
You are right! There is NO difference in impedance or capacitance between silver, copper, gold plating, etc. For a specific geometry and dielectric material, there will be no difference in the impedance or capacitance of a structure if you change only the conductive parts. You can find the formulas for capacitance and impedance in any physics book. One thing you will notice about the formulas is that there is NO fudge factor for the conductors in the formulas. The materials may contribute to resistance, but any normally used material for a normal length signal cable (i.e. NOT aluminum, and not 200m long) will have such low resistance that it will make NO difference whatsoever.
I know, now we can get into all sorts of arguments about the superiority of dielectric materials...
Interconnect cables are typically connecting a low impedance source (CD player, etc.) to a high impedance preamp input. The high Z in of the preamp/amp renders the fraction of an ohm resistances of the cable itself and the point contact of the connectors completely irrelevant.
Of couse, there are those who will make an argument that since there is SOME difference (0.01 Ohm or so), there MAY be someone, somewhere, who can HEAR a difference. Some who make such arguments will even claim they CAN hear a difference. You can't prove such arguments wrong in an absolute sense.
The question you have to ask yourself in these situations is what motivates these people? In the ca$e of cable $seller$, it'$ pretty obviou$ what motivate$ them. You have a product that requires no engineering, has very low manufacturing cost, and if you can make up a good story, has a VERY high profit margin.
In the case of the buyers who argue in favor of the cable seller's products, I think the motivation is a desire to be superior to their fellow man in some or any way they can. Claiming to hear things other can't is an excellent way to prove one's superiority because no one can prove them wrong. If someone proposes a scientific test, the double-blind testing can-of-whoop-*** is quickly opened.
You can't argue in a reasonable manner with people who refuse to be reasonable. It is like trying to reason with a child or a religious fanatic. Their minds aren't prepared for or receptive to reason.
In the end, arguing about one's imagined extraordinary aural acuity is a lot easier than actually becoming superior to your fellow man by DOING something meaningful with your life. THAT would take time and effort...
I_F
Lots and lots of scientific facts plus claims.
Point still stands after all of the above.
No-one has yet aligned a perceived audio difference (improvement?) with an objective measurement or a reason that can be suported by objective measurements.
If the audio signal is at it's best at the pre-amps output terminal how is it possible for a passive device (inter-connect) to improve the sound, unless it's acting as a frequency band attenuator (tone control). Uh oh ...tone controls are a no no.
Point still stands after all of the above.
No-one has yet aligned a perceived audio difference (improvement?) with an objective measurement or a reason that can be suported by objective measurements.
If the audio signal is at it's best at the pre-amps output terminal how is it possible for a passive device (inter-connect) to improve the sound, unless it's acting as a frequency band attenuator (tone control). Uh oh ...tone controls are a no no.
Did you even read my original post; I said I "wanted to see if I really could"Samuel Jayaraj said:
Well, in less than 24 hours there have been 28 replies(many of them lengthy, at that) and 365 views, so apparently people still have things to say... Hey, I was content with the link Sagarverma gave me; most of the discussion here has been between more seasoned members than I, so can you blame me for starting a new topic when the issue hasn't been resolved? And never will be-
Seriously though, lot's of good info guys, thanks. I really did read all of the posts.
quasi said:
I beg to differ, but your countryman Rod Elliott pointed out where speaker cables, at least, made a difference.
As for interconnects, I don't think anyone claimed they would improve the sound - at least I haven't read that on this thread. On the other hand, the doctrine of "primum non nocere" still holds, and it's interesting to find how a cable can least harm the music.
Are whatever differences I heard in the "earth-shattering" Sam Tellig category? Uh, no. Are they worth investigating? Sure, so long as they don't distract from more important issues. It's a matter of bang for the buck: one can easily spend lots of time chasing a miniscule delta in wire while vast improvements could be gotten for the same effort elsewhere, such as room treatment
One should note some interconnect differences disappear with more rigorously designed gear (I'll put on the fireproof suit now, thanks). The classic case is a SPDIF interface described as "revealing" of different cables, when actually the transmitter is marginal enough that a different load capacitance affects output waveform rise/fall times and hence jitter at the receive end.
Cheers,
Francois.
Scottmoose said:
hi Scottmoose,
nice to see a person who would rather use his brain than falling in the trap of ''audio grade'' cable manufacturers.
Quasi has given great and simple guidlines that r sufficient to get good cables.
jus ask these people to present scientific evidence to back their claims,and they will go .......
pinkmouse said:Oh look, another cable thread...We haven't had one of these for a few months now!
yeah,but there was one related to fancy components.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64538&highlight=
I_Forgot said:
rightly said.crystal structure and all that fancy wordings that remotely affect audio band.airy cable,sounded cable(with built in fm).forget everything,its our cables only that can make the difference.
Rod has b4 hand said that he does not own upto the claims in this article.he cant b blamed 4 mistakes in the article that is not his.
yes,it is.(its net resistance combining the effect of l and c also
)he is right
z is freq. dependent.
he never does.Sir Trefor said:
Cables and Voodoo
Please visit our website where I have a link called TECHTALK and there you shall find some interesting reading re cables and other things. I have not completed all the topics. You can see which links are active
www.zedaudio.com
I ask with a tear in my eye those suckers who believe that 2 metres of IEC power cable sudeenly "drops the noise floor" of their system or some other silly claim. What about the Kilometres (miles) of cable from your wall socket to the sub station.
How can 2 metres of cable do anything.
Stephen Mantz
Zed Audio Corp.
Los Angeles CA
Please visit our website where I have a link called TECHTALK and there you shall find some interesting reading re cables and other things. I have not completed all the topics. You can see which links are active
www.zedaudio.com
I ask with a tear in my eye those suckers who believe that 2 metres of IEC power cable sudeenly "drops the noise floor" of their system or some other silly claim. What about the Kilometres (miles) of cable from your wall socket to the sub station.
How can 2 metres of cable do anything.
Stephen Mantz
Zed Audio Corp.
Los Angeles CA
Samuel Jayaraj said:
Sam,
I can follow your reasoning, but I think there are two things here.
The measurement suites are developed because engineers think (rightfully so in my book) that the object of hifi eqiupment is to transfer the signal with as little errors (of whatever kind) as possible. So, you measure input and output with various means trying to make sure they are identical (except in level). That in itself is a good way, I don't think there is any better way. The only weak point is that the performance with measurement signals might not completely match the performance with musical signals, but there is no real proof that it doesn't either. It is my conviction that measurements are able to extract far more errors than listening. As an example, THD tests can routinely identify errors below 120dB (1 part per million), while even the best listening environments have so much noise that everything 60dB below the signal is drowned out heavily.
The second question is what this has to do with listening enjoyment. I would say nothing. Listening enjoyment comes from various factors like the music, your mood, the company you are in, the drink you had or not, the fact that YOU built that amp, etc. How else would we be able to thorougly enjoy music on a simple table top radio or MP3 player??
Jan Didden
On the subject of speaker cables I forward you to Roger Russell's website , former engineer for McIntosh(loudspeakr division, no less), who makes it quite clear that speaker wire resistance is the main factor that affects it's performance. According to him, when he worked at McIntosh they were using zip cord as speaker wire. He also talks about Gordon Gow(former president of McIntosh Laboratories), who proved there is no difference between high-dollar speaker wire and AC lamp cord.DSP_Geek said:
I use 15 AWG magnet wire; mainly because I can get it for free
Sir Trefor said:
Very good stuff indeed. Note that midway through the article the author could hear a difference with ordinary wire feeding a speaker that dipped down to 2.6 ohms. If this dip occurs at the treble end, then series inductance could also become a parameter of interest, hence my preference for configurations minimising series L.
Wow,
In the long run... you just have to consider the effect on the whole planet. If wealth can be redistributed by one thief taking $10,000 from one idiot in exchange for one pair of cables... then so be it. Keep in mind, the idiot is probably a thief as well... where did he get the $10,000?
In the long run... you just have to consider the effect on the whole planet. If wealth can be redistributed by one thief taking $10,000 from one idiot in exchange for one pair of cables... then so be it. Keep in mind, the idiot is probably a thief as well... where did he get the $10,000?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.