audio-kraut said:
I have never heard a difference in cables, nor have I tried. When recording technology eliminates the pan pot, and the media has been processed to provide accurate localization parameters for MY stereo physical arrangement, then I would certainly try to hear the difference.
When I do so, I will consider the human adaptation aspect of localization, unlike all the DBT tests I've read about. And, I will not use an artificial stimulus pattern that does not exist in nature. It is silly to test humans using auditory patterns which do not exist in nature..
For my wire needs, what I use is sufficient. For my robust needs,I use 12/3 with neutriks. At home, 18 to 24 zip suffices.. but of course at home the system would not benefit from major wire, as it is a 5.1 system costing about 250 dollars..not good for critical listening, but certainly good enough for "lazer totin lizards".
Cheers, John
jneutron said:
Now you're starting into another topic that perhaps needs it's own forum thread. However, I think this is one of those "macro" variables that I was talking about earlier.
Quite often you hear people discuss that their system reproduces the music as if it was "live". However, this would only be a good thing, if all you listened to was acoustic music in excellent acoustical settings.
This obviously isn't the case for the majority of popular music that people are listening to. So, in my opinion, the reproduction quality need only be as good as the mastering engineer's setup.
I'm also a musician, and so is my brother. In fact he just performed at a local club with Wynton Marsalis (a little name dropping for you), and I can tell you that the set would have been a mix of acoustic and electric, and the acoustics are not great. I wouldn't WANT my system to reproduce that performance the way I hear it live. I'd want much better, especially if I was paying for the recording....and the reproduction equipment.
So how do we even qualify the term "better"? I've come to believe that accuracy of parameters like freq response and noise, and distortion perhaps matter less than dynamic range, and the localization that you speak of....
When I'm designing loudspeakers, I've begun to pay more attention to off axis repsonses and phase relationships between drivers as well as the dynamic range capability of the drivers itself. One of the least "accurate" (in terms of FR at least) speaker projects I was involved with, was probably the most exciting I had ever listened to, and utilized the Heil AMT tweeter. An amazing little device for sheer dynamics.
Back to topic: your research with feeding branch circuits vs. mono fed drivers is a very interesting one indeed. It would suggest that in a three way loudspeaker, we should be considering an individual feed for the low pass, bandpass, and high pass portions of the X-over rather than a "common-rail" approach? ( the old bi-wire, tri-wire approach, which I admit I don't adhere to)
However, you're using DC current for saturation of the conductor, and this is not "real world" for a loudspeaker either. I don't know about you but I "start" my crossovers with a series capacitor just for that purpose...to remove any DC that might be on the speaker cable (which really is a protection concern in case there's a fault with the amp, there shouldn't be any DC to contend with normally).
macgyver10 said:
Yes, and yes. Unfortunately, a discussion of audibility of something requires discussing what is audible..necessary evil, unfortunately.
macgyver10 said:
I used DC current only to keep the example simple. In actuality, a dc signal is orthogonal to any sine wave, and is the simplest signal to use as the modulator. It could just as well be done using a 50 hz signal and a 11,876.3 hz signal... I like simple..using dc clearly shows what happens during the peak of the lower freq signal.
Orthogonality of signals means the integrated product of the two is zero.
You are correct that my example suggests using individual feeds for the drivers.
Cheers, John
I agree with all in your above post - except this part.
That seems perfectly logical, until you hear a truly world class system. Then even the most mundane pop recording (or so you might think) has an amount of information and pleasure you would never have expected. I’ve been very surprised!
The same systems are also good at chamber music, orchestral music, small and large jazz and even rock. The very best systems I've heard and worked with are the ones that sound most like "live" music on the tracks you would expect, but can be amazing on pop and rock, too.
That said, I know a lot of guys with PA gear at home who are very happy with it for AC/DC, Iron Maiden, 38 Special, etc. They don't worry too much about cables.
OK, back on subject.
macgyver10 said:
That seems perfectly logical, until you hear a truly world class system. Then even the most mundane pop recording (or so you might think) has an amount of information and pleasure you would never have expected. I’ve been very surprised!
The same systems are also good at chamber music, orchestral music, small and large jazz and even rock. The very best systems I've heard and worked with are the ones that sound most like "live" music on the tracks you would expect, but can be amazing on pop and rock, too.
That said, I know a lot of guys with PA gear at home who are very happy with it for AC/DC, Iron Maiden, 38 Special, etc. They don't worry too much about cables.
OK, back on subject.
Oh no: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/tas/166/editorial.htm
" Fourth, it appears that Class D amplifiers are extremely sensitive to the loudspeaker load and cabling. ..."
But I am not paying $10 to read an opinion in a magazine when the opinions here are priceless!
" Fourth, it appears that Class D amplifiers are extremely sensitive to the loudspeaker load and cabling. ..."
But I am not paying $10 to read an opinion in a magazine when the opinions here are priceless!
jiffynu-tron said:
here i am, paints unzipped, pecker in my hand,
with the other hand, i point to the sky, and shout,
the sun is shinning!
You say, not only has he attained a strange posture,
its night time as well-
ignoring what i'm doing, or why, you know darn good and well
the sun is shinning-
on the other side of the planet!
How wrong would i be?
````````````````````````````````````````````
The Point-
the magnetic field has to be able to rise and collapse,
unimpeaded (and without spelling errors) and
without forming, less than symmetric shapes,
or the signal will shurely be altered.
even more cheer,
tom
tomtt said:
Then we have much bigger problems with the whole recording/repro process than we do in a speaker cable....
Shouldn't that be: the air pressure wave needs to rise and fall and be converted to electromagnetic waves and back again from source to ear or the signal will surely be altered?...
...and round and round we go!....
Re. silver micas, I once put a pair in my system as coupling caps, and my listening impression was consistent with their very low DF. However, my feeling was otherwise that they were not the last word in inner detail, and tended to 'pretty up' the sound a bit. I want to hear my recordings, warts and all (not to say my system is near perfection), and I've reached the point where my analog recordings on my phono playback system often allow
recognition of the record and mastering electronics, aside from the recording and micing quality. And my system is a virtuoso at revealing gain riding and compression. A lot of solid state stuff sounds wiry and grainy on my (triode & DC coupled OTL power amp, as in amplifying DC offsets at the input, damping factor 100 or better) analog playback system. Digital (on vinyl) is pretty recognizably digital, for both good and mostly bad, and the best recordings through the best electronics (relatively few) are glorious. I confess that I often cheat on the imaging using a vacuum tube sonic hologram generator (similar in function to the Carver sonic hologram units) that I designed.
I also keep au courant with a DVDA and SACD compatible DVD player through a Crown K2 on my second system and have been known to go slumming with MP3.
recognition of the record and mastering electronics, aside from the recording and micing quality. And my system is a virtuoso at revealing gain riding and compression. A lot of solid state stuff sounds wiry and grainy on my (triode & DC coupled OTL power amp, as in amplifying DC offsets at the input, damping factor 100 or better) analog playback system. Digital (on vinyl) is pretty recognizably digital, for both good and mostly bad, and the best recordings through the best electronics (relatively few) are glorious. I confess that I often cheat on the imaging using a vacuum tube sonic hologram generator (similar in function to the Carver sonic hologram units) that I designed.
I also keep au courant with a DVDA and SACD compatible DVD player through a Crown K2 on my second system and have been known to go slumming with MP3.
Audio Amatuer published an article on the effects of speaker cable when used with real amps and real speakers. I think the conclusion was that they do indeed cause subtle frequency response differences.
When I was 16-18 years old I could tell the difference quite easily between CAT5, monster, tara labs, carol, audioquest, etc. I could quite easily hear the difference between different resistors(metal film versus carbon composite) in a passive preamp.
Today, I buy the cheapest solid core copper wire I can and call it good. I laugh at anyone who spends more money on a piece of wire than the piece of electronics driving them. Or the speakers they are using.
Wire is cheap and easy to play with. Build yourself a few cables, some using stranded, some solid core, some twisted, and see what you like better. But pity the fool that spends $500 on speaker cable. Place you amps near your speaker and reap the benefits of a short run of cable.
When I was 16-18 years old I could tell the difference quite easily between CAT5, monster, tara labs, carol, audioquest, etc. I could quite easily hear the difference between different resistors(metal film versus carbon composite) in a passive preamp.
Today, I buy the cheapest solid core copper wire I can and call it good. I laugh at anyone who spends more money on a piece of wire than the piece of electronics driving them. Or the speakers they are using.
Wire is cheap and easy to play with. Build yourself a few cables, some using stranded, some solid core, some twisted, and see what you like better. But pity the fool that spends $500 on speaker cable. Place you amps near your speaker and reap the benefits of a short run of cable.
I think this discussion has been going on for the last 30 years, maybe longer. On one side those who think if you can't measure a difference, ergo then you can't hear a difference. And true enough you usually can't measure any differences.
On the other side those who have simply started trying it out, and found something.
I agree with those who say, you shouldn't spend 500$ on a set of loudspeaker cables, unless you simply don't know anything about what you are doing, and have so much money, you don't care.
But i disagree with those who say a speaker cable doesn't matter, and the sound is no different.
I always propose people to make a simple test, the very test that convinced me about 25 years ago.
Take a normal loudspeaker cable, listen to it for half an hour. Then split it up in two separate wires, and listen to the difference. You might be surprised!
There are of course many other factors of the cable that can affect the sound. These are:
Wire Material
Isolator (dielectric) Material
Combinations of the two above with special properties
Chemical Pollutants of the metals (like Oxygen)
Treatment of Wire (Stretching, coldforming etc)
Treatment of isolator (Crygenic)
Wire dimension
Wire Stranding dimension
Distance between conductors
Plating of conductor (i.e. Silver or Gold)
Termination
Magnetic imposition
Electric imposition
In other words ..... almost everything about the construction of the cable. And the same goes for signal cables.
My own experiences are:
Isolator:
PVC : Fuzzy top
Teflon : Precise and clear, but cold (problems w static electricity - also academically referred to as triboelectrice charging).
Cotton : Very good, but with short lifespan
Polyethylene : Best compromise
Conductor:
Solid core copper : dark top, but very good for bass
Stranded copper : fuzzy top, but ok for bass
Solid core Silver : With proper treatment ( stretching, and baking ) very good, even if a bit cold
Stranded copper, silver plated : Very good compromise
Stranded Silver : Very good
You can buy silver wire for a few $ at your local jeweller, to make your cable, no need to pay top bucks for that.
Conductor thickness:
For bass : as thick as possible min 12 AWG (2,5 mm2)
For top: thin, like 20 AWG (0,5 mm2).
So as you see i am a fan of biwiring
On the other side those who have simply started trying it out, and found something.
I agree with those who say, you shouldn't spend 500$ on a set of loudspeaker cables, unless you simply don't know anything about what you are doing, and have so much money, you don't care.
But i disagree with those who say a speaker cable doesn't matter, and the sound is no different.
I always propose people to make a simple test, the very test that convinced me about 25 years ago.
Take a normal loudspeaker cable, listen to it for half an hour. Then split it up in two separate wires, and listen to the difference. You might be surprised!
There are of course many other factors of the cable that can affect the sound. These are:
Wire Material
Isolator (dielectric) Material
Combinations of the two above with special properties
Chemical Pollutants of the metals (like Oxygen)
Treatment of Wire (Stretching, coldforming etc)
Treatment of isolator (Crygenic)
Wire dimension
Wire Stranding dimension
Distance between conductors
Plating of conductor (i.e. Silver or Gold)
Termination
Magnetic imposition
Electric imposition
In other words ..... almost everything about the construction of the cable. And the same goes for signal cables.
My own experiences are:
Isolator:
PVC : Fuzzy top
Teflon : Precise and clear, but cold (problems w static electricity - also academically referred to as triboelectrice charging).
Cotton : Very good, but with short lifespan
Polyethylene : Best compromise
Conductor:
Solid core copper : dark top, but very good for bass
Stranded copper : fuzzy top, but ok for bass
Solid core Silver : With proper treatment ( stretching, and baking ) very good, even if a bit cold
Stranded copper, silver plated : Very good compromise
Stranded Silver : Very good
You can buy silver wire for a few $ at your local jeweller, to make your cable, no need to pay top bucks for that.
Conductor thickness:
For bass : as thick as possible min 12 AWG (2,5 mm2)
For top: thin, like 20 AWG (0,5 mm2).
So as you see i am a fan of biwiring
Lars Clausen said:
and I don't think anyone is disputing the above. Those factors can and will make a difference.
What some of us are questioning is how audiable such a difference is.
I have not seen one single empirical test that shows statistically significant impact from different but reasonablly good speaker cables.
Until then, we are simply having a thereotical discussion that has no bearing on real life experience.
It seems to me that the discussion has moved from ''cables dont make any difference'' to ''ok they make subtle difference''and ''pity the fool......''And this from Daveis who used to hear cable differences when he was 18-19.Now that you dont hear the differences Daveis those who do are ''fool''?
Also we hear some commends from members of this forum which in my opinion are pure exaggerations just to add some more ''weight''to what some friend s here,say.Such commends are that ''believers''spend money on cables that cost more than their amps or speakers.However it is my opinion again that such comments not only fail to make the author's comments more convincing,but they also understate them.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.