OK, i don't know if this is the right place to post this - and if it isn't, then please move it where it belong.
Anyway, i'm planning on directwire my Clearaudio TT-3 tonearm completely from the cartridge clips to the RCA's going to my phonostage with van den hul MCS 150 M wires. And i was thinking on doing it like this:
Twisted MCS 150 M wires, put in teflon tubing, then inside silk tubing, which then goes into plastic tubing with screen/braid outside.
Am i right that to minimise capacitance between screen and conductors, one should have a larger distance between the shield and the conductors?
Also js 95% coverage braid good enough, or should i look at any foil-screening instead?
Anyway, i'm planning on directwire my Clearaudio TT-3 tonearm completely from the cartridge clips to the RCA's going to my phonostage with van den hul MCS 150 M wires. And i was thinking on doing it like this:
Twisted MCS 150 M wires, put in teflon tubing, then inside silk tubing, which then goes into plastic tubing with screen/braid outside.
Am i right that to minimise capacitance between screen and conductors, one should have a larger distance between the shield and the conductors?
Also js 95% coverage braid good enough, or should i look at any foil-screening instead?
You are asking for a boat load of trouble. The wire used and the exact length is there to keep the tonearm in balance and to not restrict the movement of the carriage. VdH cable is too stiff and will act like a spring. Also all the extra stuff you want to put around is going to restrict movement even further.
You're better off using the best interconnect you can get and leaving the wiring alone.
You're better off using the best interconnect you can get and leaving the wiring alone.
The VdH is a 7strand 34.6AWG litz wire, you probably are compairing it to MCS 150 S which is solid core version with teflon outside. so i would say this is probably less stiff than the original wire. check the wire here - Take Five Audio - Canada's Online Source For DIY Audio, Parts and Accessories - Van den Hul MCS 150M Cryo Treated
On my "old" TQ-i i did just put a Clearaudio Sixstream there, which worked fine - but i don't know the awg rating of that cable, but would guess around awg 34 (clearaudio doesn't say).
Anyway - let's get back to the question about how to design the litz protection/wire with rca when it gets outside the tonearm. Any ideas? how does my idea above sound?
On my "old" TQ-i i did just put a Clearaudio Sixstream there, which worked fine - but i don't know the awg rating of that cable, but would guess around awg 34 (clearaudio doesn't say).
Anyway - let's get back to the question about how to design the litz protection/wire with rca when it gets outside the tonearm. Any ideas? how does my idea above sound?
Listen to reason...
Even if u tightly wrap 34awg wire to another conductor (the shield or whatever) the capacitance will be minimal b/c 34awg wire has ver little surface area. the capacitance in the pickup coil is probably dominant by several 'orders of magnitude'. But yeah, seperating two conductors will decrease their interactive capacitance.
Even if u tightly wrap 34awg wire to another conductor (the shield or whatever) the capacitance will be minimal b/c 34awg wire has ver little surface area. the capacitance in the pickup coil is probably dominant by several 'orders of magnitude'. But yeah, seperating two conductors will decrease their interactive capacitance.
Well - i just try to make it as good as possible. When i do something - i always like to make it as good as possible. This is why i will do two wire system with left/right channel in separate teflon tubing, shielding and so on. The only place they will be common is at the tonearm end, since they need to go common to the cartridge.
Anyway, i'm starting to look at the tubular braiding they sell at hificollective - and place a teflon tubing inside that one. ( Tubular braiding: BTUBE1.5 Hifi Collective )
Anybody else having anything to add, then i'm glad.
Anyway, i'm starting to look at the tubular braiding they sell at hificollective - and place a teflon tubing inside that one. ( Tubular braiding: BTUBE1.5 Hifi Collective )
Anybody else having anything to add, then i'm glad.
What's the DCR of your proposed setup? This could be important if you're using an MC cartridge, much less so with an MM.
IMO, you're risking more problems by solving one that likely doesn't exist. The biggest improvement in cartridge/preamp interfacing is going fully balanced with a high common-mode rejection preamp input. I can turn up the volume on my system, touch the cartridge pins with my finger, and no hum!
IMO, you're risking more problems by solving one that likely doesn't exist. The biggest improvement in cartridge/preamp interfacing is going fully balanced with a high common-mode rejection preamp input. I can turn up the volume on my system, touch the cartridge pins with my finger, and no hum!
the DCR of the wire is approx 0R9/Meter and i will probably use approx 1,4M total (including the part on arm, and the "interconnect" wiring.
I will use this to Paradise Phono-stage, so no balanced design.
At least i have had good results with "direct wire", to minimize contacts on the way to the phono-stage.
I will use this to Paradise Phono-stage, so no balanced design.
At least i have had good results with "direct wire", to minimize contacts on the way to the phono-stage.
I have many different cartridges, all from 4R up to approx 50R.
So you are saying you think it would be better keeping the RCA's and use low impedance cable from tonearm RCA to Phono-stage input?
At least earlier i have had great results with direct-wiring tonearms. But i haven't compaired with same quality wires. The question is still there - whats most important, getting lower impendance in the cables or less contacts?
So you are saying you think it would be better keeping the RCA's and use low impedance cable from tonearm RCA to Phono-stage input?
At least earlier i have had great results with direct-wiring tonearms. But i haven't compaired with same quality wires. The question is still there - whats most important, getting lower impendance in the cables or less contacts?
So presumably MC. DCR is important, and should be less than 50% (or so) of the cartridge DCR to prevent significant noise degradation. You want low triboelectricity (silver/Teflon is notably poor in that respect). You want good shielding. You want good, solid plugs and connectors (replacing the RCAs with more industrial connectors may be helpful).
At that point, any other changes are more driven by fashion and superstition than electrical realities.
At that point, any other changes are more driven by fashion and superstition than electrical realities.
Yes, i only run MC cartridges.
If you check out the tonearm - its not that easy to do it in any other way than direct-wire OR rca's - because the last piece of wire is "free air" just the twisted litz-wires, and they need to be as light as possible, to not physically interfere with the carriage. This is the main reason i looked at MCS 150 M.
So the question is:
1. should keep the original wire WITH rca's?
2. should i rewire to MCS 150 M and keep rca's?
3. should i direct-wire with MCS 150 M and put RCA's at the end?
4. Try to check if it is possible to something like a SME din-plug instead of RCA's? (are they even better?)
5. any better idea?
If you check out the tonearm - its not that easy to do it in any other way than direct-wire OR rca's - because the last piece of wire is "free air" just the twisted litz-wires, and they need to be as light as possible, to not physically interfere with the carriage. This is the main reason i looked at MCS 150 M.
So the question is:
1. should keep the original wire WITH rca's?
2. should i rewire to MCS 150 M and keep rca's?
3. should i direct-wire with MCS 150 M and put RCA's at the end?
4. Try to check if it is possible to something like a SME din-plug instead of RCA's? (are they even better?)
5. any better idea?
Then from the standpoint of actual performance, you'll do best to look elsewhere in the chain and direct your resources accordingly. The wire and connector part is doing its job properly.
There's a lot of superstition and fashion in the wire stuff, and I'm afraid I can't help you there. Pursuing that path, the best case is that you don't significantly degrade your setup.
There's a lot of superstition and fashion in the wire stuff, and I'm afraid I can't help you there. Pursuing that path, the best case is that you don't significantly degrade your setup.
Well - as said, when i direct-wired my old Clearaudio TQ-i i heard an improvement - the problem is that clearaudio doesn't tell me what AWG their wire is - and measuring resistance is impossible with a multimeter.
I'm looking around and start thinking about trying this wire instead maybe, if they ain't to thick? 5-Litz-7 Direct Re-wire | 1877PHONO, Zavfino
I'm looking around and start thinking about trying this wire instead maybe, if they ain't to thick? 5-Litz-7 Direct Re-wire | 1877PHONO, Zavfino
Of course there is little gain - you can also compensate higher capacitance with higher loading.. but the thing is - when making a new cable, why not make it as good as possible?
I actually have ordered the 1877 phono, 33awg litz wire. Since they had 20% discount at partsconnexion. I will try that one at first, and see how i do later.
I actually have ordered the 1877 phono, 33awg litz wire. Since they had 20% discount at partsconnexion. I will try that one at first, and see how i do later.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.