Due to lack of a deep enuff background on the subject, i'm not able to comment on this. I will reproduce this graph of actual measures. If the phase can be related to time delay, and one can take the know human time displacement threshold and convert it to frequency (unknown), then one needs to look at these out to 50 kHz.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The supporting narrative is here http://www.t-linespeakers.org/oddsends/drabittX/cat5.html (i have to fix the picture link on that page)
dave
From the picture, looks like he tested CAT5 as-if it were Litz wire.
Didn't split out the ends as true parallel 100ohm transmission lines.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting what I see in the photograph?
12x 100ohm pairs (3 CATs) in parallel makes an awfully good 8.3 ohm
ladder network. I wonder how that would have scored in his test?
Then again, he would have needed a resistive load at the far end to
see L and C begin to cancel each other out... I can't think any easy,
cheap, or off the shelf way to measure that effect with anything
other than 50 ohm antenna analyzer. Which is obviously not gonna
measure properly into 8.3 ohms...
You could thus measure two pairs in parallel. but I don't know how
much that tells you truthfully about 12 pairs bundled in parallel?
Didn't split out the ends as true parallel 100ohm transmission lines.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting what I see in the photograph?
12x 100ohm pairs (3 CATs) in parallel makes an awfully good 8.3 ohm
ladder network. I wonder how that would have scored in his test?
Then again, he would have needed a resistive load at the far end to
see L and C begin to cancel each other out... I can't think any easy,
cheap, or off the shelf way to measure that effect with anything
other than 50 ohm antenna analyzer. Which is obviously not gonna
measure properly into 8.3 ohms...
You could thus measure two pairs in parallel. but I don't know how
much that tells you truthfully about 12 pairs bundled in parallel?
Last edited:
Here is the 1st post on the methodology.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...ables-make-any-difference-25.html#post1030764
dave
thanks peeps
well its a very informative lot of info here...benefits may just be subjective, and maybe better suited to FR speakers in SOME cases...i dont have FR speakers but posted here as there are some people here that have great knowledge or experience that arent into the multi-way thing. Some here like you dave, have a fist in every pie so to speak. Either way in many ways both fullrangers and woof tweeters people are often seeking the same goals, albeit in different ways and accepting different compromises. Got a bit of HQ CAT5 LAN cable here and might just try it---but since i have a 30watt SS amp and 2 way speakers of some 87dB/W, it may prove less impressive than the current cable i have, or i may be surprised; or even not notice any change at all.
food for thought at least, and an experiment. I WAS thinking of using lighter gauge for tweeters and heavier for woofers but that may NOT be a good idea, judging by the last posts
well its a very informative lot of info here...benefits may just be subjective, and maybe better suited to FR speakers in SOME cases...i dont have FR speakers but posted here as there are some people here that have great knowledge or experience that arent into the multi-way thing. Some here like you dave, have a fist in every pie so to speak. Either way in many ways both fullrangers and woof tweeters people are often seeking the same goals, albeit in different ways and accepting different compromises. Got a bit of HQ CAT5 LAN cable here and might just try it---but since i have a 30watt SS amp and 2 way speakers of some 87dB/W, it may prove less impressive than the current cable i have, or i may be surprised; or even not notice any change at all.
food for thought at least, and an experiment. I WAS thinking of using lighter gauge for tweeters and heavier for woofers but that may NOT be a good idea, judging by the last posts
Hey, wire does make a difference. I went to friend's house that had just purchased an NAD integrated amp and a pair of B&W's. Really sounded like crap. (He thought it was great.) I took an audiophile friend over to his house and could tell by the look on his face he agreed. I ducked out pretending to get a Coke and went home to get a pair of Kimber Kables. HUGE difference over his patch cord. My only test instruments are a good DVOM and my ears. The ears gave a thumbs up!
Also, for yucks I made a set of cat five patch cords for a friend for Christmas. They were noticably better than his @#$%& Shack patch cords and not much different form the Kimbers. I used three strands, two for gound and one for positive and wound by hand, ala Kimber. Next I plan to try them as speaker cables. Don't knock it till you try it. My audiophile friend is a union teladata tech. Read free cat 5 remnants.
Also, for yucks I made a set of cat five patch cords for a friend for Christmas. They were noticably better than his @#$%& Shack patch cords and not much different form the Kimbers. I used three strands, two for gound and one for positive and wound by hand, ala Kimber. Next I plan to try them as speaker cables. Don't knock it till you try it. My audiophile friend is a union teladata tech. Read free cat 5 remnants.
Cat5 can not only be a good cable, but with a little work, it can be a great cable. Read the Cat5 shootout earlier in the thread. There was also a TNT review a few years back? After years of trying mega dollar esoteric cables, I fell upon the Cat5 craze and began experimenting of different configurations. First and most importantly…loose the outer jacket, it only smears the sound and makes it harder to prepare (yea I know it is a little work to remove, but well worth it). Secondly take the time to braid the inner wires. You can decide how many conductors you want to use and how much time you want to spend braiding, but a good mix seems to be 8 to 12 pairs of wires. For the 8 or 12 pair version, first braid the four twisted pairs together into one set. Do this for all sets (each Cat5 cable has 4 twisted pairs). Then twist the 2 sets (8 pair version) or braid the 3 sets (12 pair version) together. It takes a little time to do, but not as bad as trying to braid all 8 or 12 pairs at one time (tried it, never again). Next and just as important, when you terminate the braided cable, connect all solid color wires together and all stripped color wires together, rather than just 2 or 3 pair sets, it does make a difference.
I have tried both 8 and 12 pair twist/ braid and 8 pair fully braided cable (ala Kimber Kable) and happened to have the 8TC Kimber Kable on hand to compare the outcome, for the money the Cat5 held its own (I sold the Kimber). You can choose either the 8 pair or 12 pair, made the same way (twisted/ braided pairs) with the 12 pair having a little better base and better for longer runs. The last step is to get the cable off the floor (especially if you have carpet or vinyl floor) with little cardboard or aluminum pyramids (no plastic).
Currently using the 12 pair version, only bettered (different) by a pair of 1” copper foil/Teflon sandwich cables (ala Allen Wright’s Super Cable Cookbook- a must read), but they cost more to build. Also built a 1” Silver foil version for a friend, but $$$$. I use XLO solid 24awg copper/Teflon twisted interconnects, and 40awg solid Silver/Teflon in the phono stage. I like sound of solid core cables a lot. My reference system is vinyl, MC, Fet/Tube, DHT tube, SET300b, FE167 in ML-TQWT
BTW the 12 pair cable makes one heck of an AC cord.
I have tried both 8 and 12 pair twist/ braid and 8 pair fully braided cable (ala Kimber Kable) and happened to have the 8TC Kimber Kable on hand to compare the outcome, for the money the Cat5 held its own (I sold the Kimber). You can choose either the 8 pair or 12 pair, made the same way (twisted/ braided pairs) with the 12 pair having a little better base and better for longer runs. The last step is to get the cable off the floor (especially if you have carpet or vinyl floor) with little cardboard or aluminum pyramids (no plastic).
Currently using the 12 pair version, only bettered (different) by a pair of 1” copper foil/Teflon sandwich cables (ala Allen Wright’s Super Cable Cookbook- a must read), but they cost more to build. Also built a 1” Silver foil version for a friend, but $$$$. I use XLO solid 24awg copper/Teflon twisted interconnects, and 40awg solid Silver/Teflon in the phono stage. I like sound of solid core cables a lot. My reference system is vinyl, MC, Fet/Tube, DHT tube, SET300b, FE167 in ML-TQWT
BTW the 12 pair cable makes one heck of an AC cord.
I was following you until i reached...
"The last step is to get the cable off the floor (especially if you have carpet or vinyl floor) with little cardboard or aluminum pyramids (no plastic)."
Explain how this has any affect, how wood floor might be better than carpet or vinyl, and how cardboard would be better than plastic. Sounds like gibberish to me.
"The last step is to get the cable off the floor (especially if you have carpet or vinyl floor) with little cardboard or aluminum pyramids (no plastic)."
Explain how this has any affect, how wood floor might be better than carpet or vinyl, and how cardboard would be better than plastic. Sounds like gibberish to me.
Belief engine to a large extent, not that that's necessarily a negative all the time. If you believe it works for you, then it's done its job, even if it hasn't had any physical effect. It's when the wire companies flog them on the back of a bunch of outright marketing lies & pseudo-science that I get irritated. OTOH, most of the commercial examples are bought by people with huge amounts of disposible income, who want something simply for the sake of having it, so whether it makes any difference from that POV is another story.
Hell's bollocks, but I'd be very careful about using Cat5 as a power lead...
Yes, there was a load of stuff on TNT a few years back. Started off with what they called the 'FFRC' about a decade ago, which was based on all sorts of quackery masquarading as 'truth' in a related article. They published the double-sized 'Triple-T' a short time afterward. Since then, elsewhere, there's been the Venhaus Cat5 reciept, the 'Gomer' variation (run for the hills, the VC are coming!) and goodness knows how many others. Most should do a decent job, although in many cases, such as the FFRC, an awful lot of rubbish is drooled about skin effect, dilectrics, 'strand-jumping' (give me strength) & other such nonsense. It's a reasonable speaker wire, although best for shorter lengths due to the bulk involved in making something substantial enough to keep voltage-drop minimal for longer-runs on the end of a high DF amp. Doesn't need dressing up with a load of pseudo-science. I prefer zip cord or ring-mains wire myself, but it's OK, aside from the more extreme types partnered with amps liable to oscilation if presented with too high a capacitance.
Hell's bollocks, but I'd be very careful about using Cat5 as a power lead...
Yes, there was a load of stuff on TNT a few years back. Started off with what they called the 'FFRC' about a decade ago, which was based on all sorts of quackery masquarading as 'truth' in a related article. They published the double-sized 'Triple-T' a short time afterward. Since then, elsewhere, there's been the Venhaus Cat5 reciept, the 'Gomer' variation (run for the hills, the VC are coming!) and goodness knows how many others. Most should do a decent job, although in many cases, such as the FFRC, an awful lot of rubbish is drooled about skin effect, dilectrics, 'strand-jumping' (give me strength) & other such nonsense. It's a reasonable speaker wire, although best for shorter lengths due to the bulk involved in making something substantial enough to keep voltage-drop minimal for longer-runs on the end of a high DF amp. Doesn't need dressing up with a load of pseudo-science. I prefer zip cord or ring-mains wire myself, but it's OK, aside from the more extreme types partnered with amps liable to oscilation if presented with too high a capacitance.
Last edited:
Damn right! As an E/EE im not even sure that Cat5 is rated for mains voltages(110 or 230 for that matter), and it most certainly would be insafe had the outer sheath been removed too....does double insulation mean anything to the OP? And what about the earth???? asking for a nasty shock if you ask me....lol
I have always used twin core mains wire of the normal unsophisticated appliance flex type, 13amp or similar. Failing that i just buy cheap zip speaker cord of about 0.75mm² to 1.5mm² or just look for many strands as possible and rated about 15 - 20 amps. Never noticed a cable sounding better than ordinary cheapo cable. The most i ever spent on cable was £0.80/metre and now i can get the same stuff for £0.19/m i wont be doing that either.
seems a lot is dependent on the driving amplifier, and valve amps seem to be the major use. As they have poor damping factors anyway i doubt a resistive cable would ruin things much more...
also does any of the cat5 advocates realise that paralleling the cores will add their respective capacitances? sure cat5 is low in C to start with, but really.... 12 cores paralleled makes it much worse than most speaker cables, and surely it would be more inductive when twisted/braided.
so i guess alot of it is 'Belief engine' as you put it. pyschosematic. fooling ones-self. maybe using cable R to tune a poorly designed over damped or bassless speaker to give useful bass...
Last edited:
Tell me about it. Cat5 is a low voltage cable & not designed for those kind of power / current demands. I can well imagine the insurance company declining to pay out in the (likely) event of a problem, and you could even leave yourself open to criminal prosecution if, God forbid, a fire broke out & it spread to other properties, someone was injured, or both. As far as I can see, using Cat5 as a power-lead IMO is begging for it at best, stark raving lunacy at worst.
Not all valve amps have a high output impedance, just as not all SS amps have a low output impedance. Either way, assuming the amp in question is well designed to its particular criteria, it's not a 'poor' damping factor; merely a low one, & such designs are typically specifically intended to be partnered with very highly damped HE speakers.
A main object of many of the fancy Cat5 reciepts is to reduce inductance compared to, say, a twin-feeder, with high capacitance being the price. Always considered that (and other types with that goal) OTT myself -it regularly causes more problems than anything else.
Last edited:
The idea behind that is that the dielectric is a major player in how cables differ (in an ideal world the electric field is actually on the outside of the wire from the surface outwards) and that carpet and vinyl are not as nice a dielectric as air. Further raising the cables would create a physical environment where the dielectric is more closely symmetrical.
This is all just theory to me, but i do raise my cables... but the purpose is to keep the dog from chewing them.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.