It's refreshing to find that a few other people are also a bit skeptical of high-priced "paved-with-gold" promises. Don't get me wrong - I have heard a difference in sound by running some scotchbrite over the dull and faded mains-plug terminals. However, in order to accept something I need to understand it. There's far too much in the realms of HiFi that is never explained or simply does not add up.
Note: above comment refers to another post:
" ... Originally Posted by Larry365
The inside of a separate does not use special cables to supply the RCA sockets, so why would the signal suddenly become better when it meets a super-dooper IC? ..."
Very modest connections are fine in short lengths. For example one common recommended chart for car wiring suggests a 20 GA wire can be 13' maximum for a 1/2 V drop @ 8A, and shows a 1/2V drop @ 10A at less than 10', but you could use a 20 GA wire as a fusible link of a few inches at even higher currents; automotive OEMs do it all the time.
If your interconnects are short, you can get away with fairly modest construction. A copper trace on a PCB may be fine even though an interconnect requires more attention between two PCBs. It might be worth mentioning however that copper traces on PCBs have been known to be problems if inadequate.
It is similar with loudspeaker internal wiring; if it's only a foot or two within the cabinet it's possible to be insignificant (or relatively insignificant), but the same cable may be audible at 10 feet between amp and speaker.
I find the problem becomes more acute at line level interconnects of 2M or more; if you can use a 1/2 meter cable to make your connections then a properly constructed cable geometry and materials will probably perform well in most systems.
So, although it's a valid point that not every signal carrying connection is "exotic" it does not necessarily follow that using the same connection between the component(s) will never affect sound quality to an audible degree.
Also somewhat lost or completely absent from almost every cable discussion is the environment the system finds itself in. I would venture to suggest that no two users on this forum have the same RF or EMI issues to deal with, especially in light of my own experience where moving a system to a different part of the same building affects interference issues. Since a shield, even if floating, affects cable performance, it's extremely difficult to generalize let alone suggest a specific cable to another user. This is just one aspect that can affect interconnect performance on a given specific system.
Use what works for you and your budget, and consider but don't etch in stone what others are using or have used. Whatever sits between two of your own components is really your own problem to find solutions for, because your system is practically guaranteed to be unique if not in component choice then in the electrical and radio field world it inhabits. If you're happy then you're happy.
The mulit-buck cables are not marketed to people such as myself, nor am I likely to be in a position to even consider a four or five figure cable as even a reasonable choice given the system I am likely to own for the rest of my foreseeable future. It does not strike me as impossible that a six figure system might be more sensitive to cable choice than what I own, the actual answer as to what value, if any, such a cable might offer is irrelevant to me.
How revealing your system is plays a role as well. Using FM radio as an example, the shite that comes over the airwaves today (and I'm only talking about sound quality, not content) is hardly indicative of the ultimate quality FM is capable of and once upon a time actually did consist of, yet if that is all you have for stations it's moot whether a better receiver would help fidelity. I actually have a very good FM tuner but in many cases a station sounds worse over it than on my car's radio, because the processing is all the more evident.
But if your system does undergo an improvement in resolution, it might be worthwhile to revisit your conclusions about suitable cable, if only to validate your current conclusions.
Last edited:
Actually Jitter, there are some exotic materials that you can use for high frequency designs (GHz) and all the other things you mention...I have seen some equipement sites already used PCB design as a marketing point, boasting multilayer design for digital layout is one I have seen...
The good thing about PCB's if they are designed right is you can control the impedance, of the signal path. Not so critical for analgue, though nice, but megga important for digital and RF.
Larry365, there have been some excellent discussion on this forum regarding signal transmission down cables, all genres of signals, trouble is they are spread all over. Basicly the problem with cables is you are coming out of a shielded (one would hope) and controlled envoironment of the box, down a relitivly long cable (1m cables are common, you would be hard to find a trace on a PCB that runs anywhere near that long) exposed to all the EM noise around, through connectors with their own losses etc etc to another box, also addibng the problem of possible hum due to the difference in ground potentials.
The best cable is no cable, but as that isn't practicle we have to use them, and they are usualy the cause of problems in any system that uses them, not just your home audio, and probably one of the main causes of EMC failure.
The good thing about PCB's if they are designed right is you can control the impedance, of the signal path. Not so critical for analgue, though nice, but megga important for digital and RF.
Larry365, there have been some excellent discussion on this forum regarding signal transmission down cables, all genres of signals, trouble is they are spread all over. Basicly the problem with cables is you are coming out of a shielded (one would hope) and controlled envoironment of the box, down a relitivly long cable (1m cables are common, you would be hard to find a trace on a PCB that runs anywhere near that long) exposed to all the EM noise around, through connectors with their own losses etc etc to another box, also addibng the problem of possible hum due to the difference in ground potentials.
The best cable is no cable, but as that isn't practicle we have to use them, and they are usualy the cause of problems in any system that uses them, not just your home audio, and probably one of the main causes of EMC failure.
This all takes me back to my original post.
CHOICE is the optimal word.
Why provide expensive interconnects when the customer is going to replace them anyway.
OK $1 interconnects are going to be rubbish but the better quality Hi-Fi components normally come with reasonable gauge cables with gold plated connectors.
CHOICE is the optimal word.
Why provide expensive interconnects when the customer is going to replace them anyway.
OK $1 interconnects are going to be rubbish but the better quality Hi-Fi components normally come with reasonable gauge cables with gold plated connectors.
Last edited:
It's unfortunate that cables need to be included with components at all. AndrewT illustrates that; he has cables that he has no use for, as we all do after a short while in this hobby, that probably were included with some product purchased a while ago.
Even the most inexpensive appropriate cable could be adding 50c to the manufactured cost of a relatively inexpensive HiFi product. By the time that box reaches the consumer it will have added dollars to the retail price. A collection of 20 still-wrapped RCA interconnects could represent $100 out of your pocket over a couple of decades easily; yet we have little use for them except as spares.
But the manufacturer does not dare to avoid including them; out of the box a new component should at least be capable of working with a system. Having to return to the store for a cable is sure to result in invectives directed at the manufacturer, something they surely wish to avoid for such a simple reason.
It's a bigger problem with inexpensive products where the relative cost of an included cable could be 3 or 5 or even 10+% of the entire product manufactured cost, yet this is where an included cable is most likely, as buyers of the inexpensive are the ones most likely to need one in the box.
In an ideal world no cables would be included with anything, and it would be common practice to select a few at the store as required, or not. Since it would be standard practice, everyone would be familiar with the routine and customers or staff would not forget. I seem to recall HP stopped including USB cables with it's printers a few years ago, and not everyone was happy about it, because it was assumed there would be one in the box as it had been in the past or still is with other manufacturers of similar products. Grumblings about returning to the store soon followed.
Even if the selected cable is of the "throwaway" variety, at least by buying at the store as needed, your investment would be dollars, not a hundred of 'em.
It would be sobering and perhaps even depressing if anyone in this hobby were to do an inventory of the wire laying about unused and do a cost summary. Certainly in my case $100 would be a refreshing reduction versus the grim reality, and I have zero exotic name-brand cables in my collection, unless you count the ones I make myself "exotic".
Considering the situation as a whole, I guess that throwaway cables included with stuff is the least harmful compromise. But I would not complain if the industry practice were changed somehow to none in the box and buy only what you need as an extra.
Even the most inexpensive appropriate cable could be adding 50c to the manufactured cost of a relatively inexpensive HiFi product. By the time that box reaches the consumer it will have added dollars to the retail price. A collection of 20 still-wrapped RCA interconnects could represent $100 out of your pocket over a couple of decades easily; yet we have little use for them except as spares.
But the manufacturer does not dare to avoid including them; out of the box a new component should at least be capable of working with a system. Having to return to the store for a cable is sure to result in invectives directed at the manufacturer, something they surely wish to avoid for such a simple reason.
It's a bigger problem with inexpensive products where the relative cost of an included cable could be 3 or 5 or even 10+% of the entire product manufactured cost, yet this is where an included cable is most likely, as buyers of the inexpensive are the ones most likely to need one in the box.
In an ideal world no cables would be included with anything, and it would be common practice to select a few at the store as required, or not. Since it would be standard practice, everyone would be familiar with the routine and customers or staff would not forget. I seem to recall HP stopped including USB cables with it's printers a few years ago, and not everyone was happy about it, because it was assumed there would be one in the box as it had been in the past or still is with other manufacturers of similar products. Grumblings about returning to the store soon followed.
Even if the selected cable is of the "throwaway" variety, at least by buying at the store as needed, your investment would be dollars, not a hundred of 'em.
It would be sobering and perhaps even depressing if anyone in this hobby were to do an inventory of the wire laying about unused and do a cost summary. Certainly in my case $100 would be a refreshing reduction versus the grim reality, and I have zero exotic name-brand cables in my collection, unless you count the ones I make myself "exotic".
Considering the situation as a whole, I guess that throwaway cables included with stuff is the least harmful compromise. But I would not complain if the industry practice were changed somehow to none in the box and buy only what you need as an extra.
Last edited:
Lots of interesting opinions and points, one that struck me is "throwaway cables". I don't believe for one minute that big hifi separate manufacturers would undo all the development, production, marketing, distribution by placing cables inside the box which degrade their products. These companies want you and me to buy more of their products, they want us to develop brand loyalty; why would they compromise the chances of this happening by including cables which do not do the job?
No hard proof...correct. Soft proof..thats a different subjective story. I for one have heard differences...but you have to look at this arguement from only the perspective of sound...not cost per sound. If that makes any sense. You cant argue every point with technicalities when there are other factors to consider. Technical vs subjective vs snake oil...they all have their place.
That's the point. They do do the job.
Something more expensive may do the job better.
I was advised to purchase Chord Chorus Interconnects with my CD player. They were intermittent and awful. My DIY RG58 with Nackamichi Gold RCAs are far better and only cost £50 against the £250 for the Chords.
How much Snake Oil you want to apply can be up the individual.
Something more expensive may do the job better.
I was advised to purchase Chord Chorus Interconnects with my CD player. They were intermittent and awful. My DIY RG58 with Nackamichi Gold RCAs are far better and only cost £50 against the £250 for the Chords.
How much Snake Oil you want to apply can be up the individual.
This means that there is no scientific proof as to why they sound different (improved), So isn't this fraud on the part of the manufacturers?
No, not necessarily. I guess it would depend on how they phrase it. If some manufacturers suggest they hear a difference, then why argue about it.
Like those little pebbles that are sold to "improve" sound quality...some people say they actually hear a difference. Personally, I would not try it. Just my personal choice. But as far as other things that peak my interest, like cables, I give myself the leeway to do so. I decided to design my own cables because I didnt want to spend the money on such things. I would rather spend it on equipment.
Because they believe that their equipment is well designed and so will not sound any different with any reasonable* cable?Larry365 said:
* reasonable = good conductor (e.g. copper), good insulator, reliable plugs, inductance and capacitance not too high, near 100% screening, conventional construction (e.g. coax or shielded twisted pair).
Given these parameters, you can spend as much or as little as your wallet and taste allows.
The company I work for produces quite a few boards for the broadcasting industry. This stuff is mostly HD, so you can imagine the bandwidths needed. These studios are filled with miles and miles of cable, so there's not going to be anything there other than the cable that does the job at lowest cost (mind you, this isn't cheap cable). In our testsystem RG59S2 is used, and these make very nice SPDIF interconnects too...
I have seen some equipement sites already used PCB design as a marketing point, boasting multilayer design for digital layout is one I have seen...
Yep, like e.g. the Metrum Octave. But in industrial electronics multilayer boards are the norm. And quite a few of them are gold-plated (ENIG), so I don't perceive them as "special" anymore.
And this is probably limited to a few lines at most in the marketing waffle, they seem to go crazy when it comes to interconnects, though...
The PCBs for the broadcasting industry I mentioned above are good examples of that. But anyone at home can rip the cover off their PCs and have a look at the traces on the motherboard and wonder why many are doing the slalom...
I will admit that I don't use cheapo interlinks anymore. I found out that most have marginal shielding at best. For some diy projects I cut the plugs of these cheapo interlinks and found that on many the shielding was very, very poor, rather more resembling a conductor running in parallel to the core than a neatly woven mesh around it... These made a one way trip into the bin.
I do like the other aspects of more expensive cables too, such as quality feel and looks. What I don't believe in, though, is that a four figured price for an interlink is justified.
Last edited:
I agree, $99.99 is too much.
$10 to $20 is probably plenty to meet DF's definition of a good and adequate interconnect.
$1 to $2 of materials content is probably too cheap/poor quality.
Only my thoughts,
It depends on how or how well a cable is driven...
Also the level of signal going through it and current. The frequency of the signal and this isn't just high frequency "Bass" comes to mind. It depends on the resistance it is driving into and the dielectric because a cable is a capacitor..
As to the snakeoil well thats each to his own..and a twisted pair may be better than a screened cable..the construction again makes a difference and how revealing the system is..
Make your own...you can use anything..I prefer PTFE but thats just a personal choice..you can use silver from a jewellery maker and use PTFE sleeving just for fun..many will say its not 99% pure who cares?
I make my own inside the amp...and mains cable also...but that is again a personal choice...does platted sound different to twisted pair... does a drain wire work better than just a screen..do you use multi strand or single core..It goes on.. LOL
The thing about the shorter a cable the better is not always true...it depends what you are doing with it....and that starts the question put the power amp by the speaker and drive an interconnect.." Damping comes to mind"..
Each to his own..does the type of joint make a difference...I think it does but again thats a personal choice..
And here is the cruncher does it matter what type of amp and speaker you are using to the type of interconnect...I think it does but again that is just an opinion.
Regards
M. Gregg
It depends on how or how well a cable is driven...
Also the level of signal going through it and current. The frequency of the signal and this isn't just high frequency "Bass" comes to mind. It depends on the resistance it is driving into and the dielectric because a cable is a capacitor..
As to the snakeoil well thats each to his own..and a twisted pair may be better than a screened cable..the construction again makes a difference and how revealing the system is..
Make your own...you can use anything..I prefer PTFE but thats just a personal choice..you can use silver from a jewellery maker and use PTFE sleeving just for fun..many will say its not 99% pure who cares?
I make my own inside the amp...and mains cable also...but that is again a personal choice...does platted sound different to twisted pair... does a drain wire work better than just a screen..do you use multi strand or single core..It goes on.. LOL
The thing about the shorter a cable the better is not always true...it depends what you are doing with it....and that starts the question put the power amp by the speaker and drive an interconnect.." Damping comes to mind"..
Each to his own..does the type of joint make a difference...I think it does but again thats a personal choice..
And here is the cruncher does it matter what type of amp and speaker you are using to the type of interconnect...I think it does but again that is just an opinion.
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.