Do speaker cables make any difference?

[Portlandmike]

Originally posted by Johan Potgieter


Portlandmike,

I am also not one to continue where the road seems to have ended or become unproductive, but with all this post we do not appear to be there quite yet - and points have been raised that beg answers. Let us at least bow out without loose ends.
Johan

Johan,

I feel compelled to at least tell you why I don't wanna argue anymore.

It has to do with little old ladies.

I once was responsible for an acoustic product, a headphone. Not a great headphone, but one that filled the classrooms of a couple generations of Yank's. It was a mature product to say the least. I got a call one day, that the product was experiencing big yield issues at final test. The product was tested by THD at several stages, and only failed the final listen tests where a sweeped sine was put through it. This was the same sweep used for THD.
Sure enough, it was a hidious buzz. Anyone could have heard this.
I spent the next few days trying to devise a test to actually measure the problem. Turns out it was never a good test for production. I had to FFT the distortion output from a AP System one. It was a 14th order distortion down 80dB from the fundimental. That's 0.01%, and it was totally obvious even to non-audiophiles.

I agree with ohms law when I want to measure volts and amps and stuff.
There is another example where a good friend of mine with what I refer to as phonographic hearing built an amp. He has the gift that he can recall how something sounded for hours, days, months and even years. Well, he built this amplifier. By the way, he didn't even have a scope!, just a sharp pencil, a volt meter, and his ears.

He called me one day to ask me why this or that would matter. It had to do with a very subtle trim on a low gain 2nd stage diff amp. His trim pot had something like a 75uA range on a pair that was running at almost 10mA. I told him he was smoking to much pot.
Then, I went to visit him. Amp sounded great, one of the best (he made another type for me) I'd ever heard. You were there!
Anyways, he got to turning the trim pot. I about fell off my chair when I heard the whole amp colapse.
I studied the circuit a bit, but kind of just accepted that it worked.
Its very similar to the Solid state sting called "distroyer" if you want to look at the topology.

So, you assume ohms law, and state some dB criteria. That might just be a mistake. If things down 80dB be heard and wierd stuff like that discribed, then the the whole shooting match of when it matters needs to change.

I've ran into to many things in my life to pretend I can predict the sound of all things. That's me though. I'd just rather listen to the music.

On double blind. I find that put on the spot, I get nervous and guess. I need lots of time to come to good conclustions. I also like to have help. two or three pairs of ears help.
Some tests are just obvious, like bad (but ohm out right) RCA cables and speaker cable examples I've personally had, but when it gets to fine tuning, I think coherent detection is important i.e. not blind. That is to say, blind test in the detailed developement of audio gear I find as a incumbrence.
Maybe for final, debunking its okay

Ohms law is believed to be mostly right, although M-theory may modify the results. ;>) The errors come in the assumptions about how good it needs to be, and low and behold, the secondary affects (down 80 dB). Assumptions matter!



Regards,

Mike

[Portlandmike]

Originally posted by Portlandmike

Then, I went to visit him. Amp sounded great, one of the best (he made another type for me) I'd ever heard. You were there!
Anyways, he got to turning the trim pot. I about fell off my chair when I heard the whole amp colapse.
Mike

The amp didn't collapse, the stage and musicality did. It got flat sounding, and you could tell the sound was comming from the speakers. Oh, maybe that was good though, since that was actually what was happeings ;>)

Regards,

MIke

[Johan Potgieter]

Hi Mike,

OK.

You got me to ponder for a long time on what you posted, and that does not happen too often these days (please pardon if this sounds like vanity; not intended).

Having worked in a research lab for most of my employed life, "loose" ends often kept us up into the small hours and were then mostly solved. It gave a rewarding feeling, but then perhaps it was unfortunate in another sense.

Also I have perhaps suffered from too much flak from folks with an attitude of "I have made up my mind - don't confuse me with facts". (and I am NOT including you in that brigade). It came up in talk, writing and lectures. One builds up a defence mechanism with time. I am sure you know what I mean.

I think I have put my views as well as I am able to - the things that do not make sense, not because of possible doubt or lack of knowledge, but because of contradiction in what we are certain of, however small that area might be.

And yes (before I create the wrong impression), I also do sit down and simply just listen - not as often as I would like to because of daily demands - but still.

I appreciate your respectful and courteous debate, and wish you well with your undertakings. I will end my participation then, except perhaps for answering whatever quieries I feel equipped to.

Warm regards,
Johan

[Pano]

Hey guys, don't run off just when things are getting interesting!

For me, this is not an emotional charged issue because I'm on the fence about the cable thing. I don't think it should make a difference (except for current capacity) but I have heard a difference, or thought I have.

With cables, like a lot of other audio stuff, there is a lot of the "Emperor’s New Clothes" syndrome. If my audiophile buddy or some reviewer says he can hear a big difference in cables, I don't want to appear a tin-eared idiot, so I feel obliged to hear it too. And if those $200 cables make such a difference, then $2500 cable must sound sooooo much better.

It's well known that if you set up a test to fool people, you will fool them. Show business is based on this. The test with the guy pretending to switch cables is a good example. Also Thomas Edison's test of live orchestra vs. recorded - who would be fooled by that? Many people were.
AB test results can easily be skewed by which item is tested last. People tend to favor the second choice. Want to test Coke vs. Pepsi? Put the one you want to win second.

OK, back to the science.
Points and questions:

Wavelength of the signal has been quoted as a factor in signal reflections. Can you explain why? I ask because the ringing in video and VGA can be seen at fairly low frequencies, e.g., 36KHz or 48KHz scan rates. Even at the lowly 15KHz video rate. I have seen it in 30cm cables as well as 50 and 100M cables. It appears to be the same. Granted, the bandwidth of these signals is high, up to 50MHz or more, but the ringing seems to be related to the scan rate, not the bandwidth. Could this be happening in speaker cables?

I don't believe that we don't have the means to measure what could be causing the sound of cables (if there is one), it's just that we don't know what to look for - yet.

[Johan Potgieter]

Panomaniac,

Regarding your question about reflections, the highest frequency would be the one that needs accomodating. You would know that reflections get serious over a 1/4 wavelength of cable. (The quarter wave transformer, etc, most useful in r.f.) But if we take a cable of 20m, which is already quite long for domestic use; that is a factor of 120 shorter than a quarter wavelength at 20 KHz (also bringing in a propagation factor of say 66%).

There seems to be agreement that this will show negligible influence regarding matching, line impedance effect, refections etc. As said before there are also comparative effects; considering the substantial variation in load impedance presented by a loudspeaker, a less that 1% further influence by lack of matching is hardly significant - the effect of the loudspeaker impedance will totally mask it.

I might point out that someone published exactly such an experiment, claiming that certain aberations found in square wave rise time did prove that cable impedance mattered. But the frequency components contained in those aberations were quite above the audio spectrum.

Regards.

[ddoyle]

Hi, I am new to fourm. I enjoy the info on all the threads. I would like to state that I am an novice. I have tried several kinds of cable, but none of the high end stuff. I like my cat5 cables, after all I built them, and I have no test equipement but my ears. Anyway my question/thoughts are, if I tune in a good strong fm station it can play loud with little distortion that I can hear, sure not as clear as from a source like a cd or even a phono, but still very good for having no hardwire connection between the source(fm transmitter) and my speakers.
What it we had no speaker cables at all, just some type of transmitter at amp and receiver at speakers?
Dan

[AudioFreak]

No matter what you do, you still need a connection between the amplifier and the speakers even if the source is not directly connected. Transmitting at the source is at least semi practical. Transmitting after the amplifier and then receiving at the speakers is not.

[phn]

What it we had no speaker cables at all, just some type of transmitter at amp and receiver at speakers?

Should work perfect with digital playback if you place the D/A converter in the speakers. But why go thru the trouble?

[Nanook]

after all, all they do is carry the signal!(argueable)

Arguements concerning what we hear or not and the reasons why or why not kinda bore me... It's all be done before.

Most folks look for complicated answers, while ususally simple ones answer the question.

my criterion for cables may differ from yours, but I look at the complete system, within the cable, and then the complete "macro"system:
1) good quality conductors
2) good quality dielectrics
3) constructed using proper methods
4) good quality mechanical connectors.

Any variance of resistance, or capacitance "creates" a change. (just look at Bruce Brisson's designs, Transparent audio, MIT etc, that "box" on the end of the cable is a tuning network used to alter the performance of the cable by minimizing or enhancing various electric properties of the cable). The dielectric, seems to me, often overlooked by us "layman". It has a profound effect on the degradation of the signal. Most cables are constructed using appropriate construction techniques and materials. There is a huge vaiety of the quality of the mechanical connectors.

In the macro system , how does the cable equipment interface work and more importantly how does it sound? It all depends on the voicing of the equipment (all equipment is voiced unless viewed as an aplliance by the manufacturer). How well does the equipment match the other in terms of electrical characteristics?

Planet10 one lined it.. but ya

cables DO make a difference.

[tomtt]

Originally posted by Trebla


Yes 26 years and still no definitive answer.
Which rather suggests that there isn't one.

Even if in the year 2050 it turns out that all cables do sound the same. It doesn't alter the fact that swapping two sets of cables (speaker or interconnect) usually results in an audible difference, whether it be subtle or obvious.
So the electrical and mechanical properties of the individual cables must be changing the way that the amp and/or speakers work.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There Is a Definitive Answer

and was proven 21 years ago


http://stereophile.com/reference/1095cable