Teflon Cat5 GC Loops
I constucted a couple of GC Loops from Teflon Clad Cat5 wire. There were four sets of twisted pairs and these pairs were twisted together after the outer sheath was removed. I did not place the three pieces of shrink wrap on the loops. My loops have been mounted on banana plugs which facilitate the ability to quickly swap loops in and out of my system.
I first listened to a few selections with the 30-gauge mag wire loops to attempt to set a point of reference. I then removed them and listened to the system without loops. The sound collapsed and sounded compressed/muffled. The depth and localization of instruments and vocalist was lost when the loops were removed.
I then placed the Cat5 loops in the system. Initially, nothing seem to have changed except some overly pronounced highs. I removed the loops and listened again. The highs were de-emphasized.
The Cat5 loops were re-installed. The sound stage collapsed and there was an annoying overtone/ringing in the upper register. I had to turn the volume down in order to stay in the same room. The precise location of the musicians was hard to discern.
After about 2 hours the system seemed to have gotten much louder. the annoying sounds in the upper register were tamed. There seemed to be some
more depth to the performance. The performers location was more stabilized. Just short of 3 hours it was my perception that the volume had been turned up on the system. There was a definite blooming of the bass. There seemed to be some depth to the sound stage, but the breadth that had been there with the mag loops was not apparent.
This roller coaster effect with the sound I have experienced before when burning in various capacitor and cable topologies. The sound stage with Teflon seems to really expand and contract before it stabilizes. I am hoping that things will improve over the next week or so.
I am concerned that small gauge litz wire has more surface area and that the dielectric allows the conductors to be in closer proximity to each other. I don't know if there is any validity to this supposition, but I will build another set of Cat5 loops with multiple ( 3 or 4) sets of cables. Each cable will have 4 sets of twisted pairs.
I have no preconceived expectations.
I am using CAT5 because I have that and mag wire on hand. I am considering purchasing litz wire, but I am just having fun building and listening at this point.
I constucted a couple of GC Loops from Teflon Clad Cat5 wire. There were four sets of twisted pairs and these pairs were twisted together after the outer sheath was removed. I did not place the three pieces of shrink wrap on the loops. My loops have been mounted on banana plugs which facilitate the ability to quickly swap loops in and out of my system.
I first listened to a few selections with the 30-gauge mag wire loops to attempt to set a point of reference. I then removed them and listened to the system without loops. The sound collapsed and sounded compressed/muffled. The depth and localization of instruments and vocalist was lost when the loops were removed.
I then placed the Cat5 loops in the system. Initially, nothing seem to have changed except some overly pronounced highs. I removed the loops and listened again. The highs were de-emphasized.
The Cat5 loops were re-installed. The sound stage collapsed and there was an annoying overtone/ringing in the upper register. I had to turn the volume down in order to stay in the same room. The precise location of the musicians was hard to discern.
After about 2 hours the system seemed to have gotten much louder. the annoying sounds in the upper register were tamed. There seemed to be some
more depth to the performance. The performers location was more stabilized. Just short of 3 hours it was my perception that the volume had been turned up on the system. There was a definite blooming of the bass. There seemed to be some depth to the sound stage, but the breadth that had been there with the mag loops was not apparent.
This roller coaster effect with the sound I have experienced before when burning in various capacitor and cable topologies. The sound stage with Teflon seems to really expand and contract before it stabilizes. I am hoping that things will improve over the next week or so.
I am concerned that small gauge litz wire has more surface area and that the dielectric allows the conductors to be in closer proximity to each other. I don't know if there is any validity to this supposition, but I will build another set of Cat5 loops with multiple ( 3 or 4) sets of cables. Each cable will have 4 sets of twisted pairs.
I have no preconceived expectations.
I am using CAT5 because I have that and mag wire on hand. I am considering purchasing litz wire, but I am just having fun building and listening at this point.
Well don't stop!!!!! I would suggest that you may find Teflon to be a bit much. Certainly the correct direction for Dielectric Constant but the thresholds for charge holding are higher than polyilefin. Litz wire, the real stuff, type 2 with individually insulated strands that have both a low and high, very thin, Dielectric Constant insulation coating are the easiest to "tune" with bits of extra material. Doesn't mean there aren't better materials, so, in your experiments don't ignore mixed metals.......
Bud
Bud
Just had a look at the Walker site, regarding the "Eliminator Directional Antenae" wot a joke...well it would be if it wasn't
such a bad engineering idea.
$275 for two bits of silver wire to hook on your system, you'd be better of buying Henry Ott, Electromagnetic
compatability Engineering, (approx $95) because adding antenna to any system goes against ALL EMC engineering principles,
you do not try and add noise to your system.
such a bad engineering idea.
$275 for two bits of silver wire to hook on your system, you'd be better of buying Henry Ott, Electromagnetic
compatability Engineering, (approx $95) because adding antenna to any system goes against ALL EMC engineering principles,
you do not try and add noise to your system.
Teflon GC Loops
I had the CD on repeat and the volume turned down. While watching the two Washington NFL football teams compete on TV, I noted that the volume seemed to be increased. Possibly gremlins!
I took a listen to the loops after 9 hours of burn-in. The performance image was flat and between the speakers. The performance, in my opinion, was unlistenable. it sounded as if all the performers were standing atop each other. I went through a series of selections, and there seemed to be no depth to the soundstage at all. I was at the point of abandoning this experiment, but I decided to let the loops burn in overnight.
The loops now have more than 30 hours of burn in. The soundstage now has depth and breadth. The tizzyness in the upper register I had noticed earlier is gone. The performers are spread out and easily discerned as to their location. There is a certain crispness to percussive sounds and reverberation of the recording venue is apparent. It least things are moving in the right direction.
I will let these loops continue to burn in up to 100-hours. It has been my prior experience with Teflon that it takes at least that long for imaging to stabilize.
If one has the patience to wait for the Teflon loops to settle down, I would recommend the DIYer to try this. Teflon clad Cat5 cable is readily available (here in the US plenum CAT5 is available at home improvement stores). For a relatively minimal expense and the time it takes to strip and solder the wires you are in business.
Magnet wire yields direct results, but the extra effort that is required to remove the insulation may be an impediment to casual DIYers.
Bud,
I realized after twisting the four twisted pairs that I had a type 2 Litz arrangement. Although, my twisting is not as uniform as a commercially manufactured Litz cable.
I had the CD on repeat and the volume turned down. While watching the two Washington NFL football teams compete on TV, I noted that the volume seemed to be increased. Possibly gremlins!
I took a listen to the loops after 9 hours of burn-in. The performance image was flat and between the speakers. The performance, in my opinion, was unlistenable. it sounded as if all the performers were standing atop each other. I went through a series of selections, and there seemed to be no depth to the soundstage at all. I was at the point of abandoning this experiment, but I decided to let the loops burn in overnight.
The loops now have more than 30 hours of burn in. The soundstage now has depth and breadth. The tizzyness in the upper register I had noticed earlier is gone. The performers are spread out and easily discerned as to their location. There is a certain crispness to percussive sounds and reverberation of the recording venue is apparent. It least things are moving in the right direction.
I will let these loops continue to burn in up to 100-hours. It has been my prior experience with Teflon that it takes at least that long for imaging to stabilize.
If one has the patience to wait for the Teflon loops to settle down, I would recommend the DIYer to try this. Teflon clad Cat5 cable is readily available (here in the US plenum CAT5 is available at home improvement stores). For a relatively minimal expense and the time it takes to strip and solder the wires you are in business.
Magnet wire yields direct results, but the extra effort that is required to remove the insulation may be an impediment to casual DIYers.
Bud,
I realized after twisting the four twisted pairs that I had a type 2 Litz arrangement. Although, my twisting is not as uniform as a commercially manufactured Litz cable.
Last edited:
I made two sets of 6" loops, one set using 18awg Cardas hookup wire (which is high purity magnet wire with an overall teflon insulation) and the other set using 16 twisted strands of 30awg Radio Shack magnet wire (no overall insulation except for a few short pieces of heat shrink to hold the bundle together as per Bud's design). The RS loops have proved to be one of the best tweaks I've ever tried and would recommend everyone try them. The cost is negligible.
Speedskater, they reccomend the black, negative post of the amplifier. I still think it is both complete and utter BS and a silly thing to do, and may have minimal influence in that position. the other problem is transmitting, the wrong frequency noise in the system and they could transmit.
I think it needs to be pointed out at this stage that from the theoretical standpoint Groundside Electrons have no right to work either, and indeed should be harmful to the sound for the very reasons you mention above.
So let's not get carried away before someone has the opportunity to prove in an actual listening test that "Eliminator Directional Antenae" don't work - or otherwise.
Whether they infringe on BudP's intellectual property or not is another matter of course.
So let's not get carried away before someone has the opportunity to prove in an actual listening test that "Eliminator Directional Antenae" don't work - or otherwise.
Whether they infringe on BudP's intellectual property or not is another matter of course.
Not getting carried away, but the Walker device is advertised, named and sold as an antenna to absorb rf in a room, but from a point of view of EMC design it is NOT good practice. It is the calling it an antenna (which it is) and the description of what it does that goes against the grain. In the UK as BT Vision and other powerline communication systems gain ground and get exemtions from OFCOM (!!!!) there will be more and more radiated mush entering the listening envoironment, as more and more audio equipement is digital based or has digital sections, the requirement for good EMC practice will become more critical, and for the home hobbyist or tweeker having the equipement to do EMC engineering will be limited. So good EMC practice needs to be followed, where possible, and personaly and from experience I dont think hanging atennas on equipement is a good idea.
And with regard to Bud's pig tails I have stated that to add them on digital equipement is not a good idea full stop from an EMC point of view. As to whether it does anything else that is up to the users, and yes it also can act as an antenna.
To rock the boat further I do not subscribe to listening tests only, as hearing can be fickle, but like measured data, so that there is empirical data to give hard results as to support the cahnge in sound and to determine what has caused it.
And with regard to Bud's pig tails I have stated that to add them on digital equipement is not a good idea full stop from an EMC point of view. As to whether it does anything else that is up to the users, and yes it also can act as an antenna.
To rock the boat further I do not subscribe to listening tests only, as hearing can be fickle, but like measured data, so that there is empirical data to give hard results as to support the cahnge in sound and to determine what has caused it.
While I'm certainly a fan of data, having a science degree, I can imagine cases where data shows a difference and that knowledge makes listeners hear a difference that is, in fact, inaudible. I think that applies to some speaker data in particular. Placebo effect in reverse. Not to start anything...
Personally, I think that the "number believers" are:
1) people who have poor hearing, or who do not trust their ears (which amounts to the same thing)
and / or
2) people who get "turned on" by the numbers themselves, rather than music - sort of like CPU overclocking maniacs.
To me hearing is all the proof I need; I have absolute hearing, I can play a few different instruments, I have been going to philharmonic performances since I was a kid - I have every reason to trust my ears, and I do.
And what I hear often goes completely against the so called scientific knowledge - which, to me only proves that a lot of what we call science now, will be called superstition in a hundred years.
My point is, current science cannot accurately and exhaustively describe all the processes that take place in the sound reproduction and perception, which means that science alone can only take us so far - beyond that, the only way to improve is through experimentation and listening. Which, rather perversely means that a TRULY scientific approach would take into account all the non-explainable phenomena - so long as they are audible and reproducible.
1) people who have poor hearing, or who do not trust their ears (which amounts to the same thing)
and / or
2) people who get "turned on" by the numbers themselves, rather than music - sort of like CPU overclocking maniacs.
To me hearing is all the proof I need; I have absolute hearing, I can play a few different instruments, I have been going to philharmonic performances since I was a kid - I have every reason to trust my ears, and I do.
And what I hear often goes completely against the so called scientific knowledge - which, to me only proves that a lot of what we call science now, will be called superstition in a hundred years.
My point is, current science cannot accurately and exhaustively describe all the processes that take place in the sound reproduction and perception, which means that science alone can only take us so far - beyond that, the only way to improve is through experimentation and listening. Which, rather perversely means that a TRULY scientific approach would take into account all the non-explainable phenomena - so long as they are audible and reproducible.
I have always been pleased by the following report from Dave Davenport.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/102180-groundside-electrons-25.html#post1756617
Marce you are spot on for your comments about NOT connecting these things to a digital ground. My now retired cheap Sony CD player lost it's ability to sync up with an external DAC for Red Book, within seconds of my first and only experiment with digital grounds and loops of Type 2 Litz wire. It's still retired for this reason!
Which brings me to another question. Can anyone point to testing of type 2 Litz wire as a stub antenna? Or, any other form of antenna for that matter? I am using it as unshielded interconnect cable and do not appear to have any audible pickup from airborne EMF, where an unshjelded stranded non Litz cable (both 2 meters in length) is quite a good antenna.
Bud
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/102180-groundside-electrons-25.html#post1756617
Marce you are spot on for your comments about NOT connecting these things to a digital ground. My now retired cheap Sony CD player lost it's ability to sync up with an external DAC for Red Book, within seconds of my first and only experiment with digital grounds and loops of Type 2 Litz wire. It's still retired for this reason!
Which brings me to another question. Can anyone point to testing of type 2 Litz wire as a stub antenna? Or, any other form of antenna for that matter? I am using it as unshielded interconnect cable and do not appear to have any audible pickup from airborne EMF, where an unshjelded stranded non Litz cable (both 2 meters in length) is quite a good antenna.
Bud
Uncle Leon, yawn, that is the usual reply, and not unexpected.
Cbdb, I have one of the first sets of enabled drivers (FE207's were in a Curvy Chang, now in an OB with 2 15" per side) done by Dave on Planet 10, so though it may surprise the only need ears fraternity, I am open to some insanity and will experiment and try new and esoteric ideas. I have also enjoyed the discussions these ideas on Bud's various threads, which by their very nature seem to invite very polarised views.
As to hearing, it was evidence and pointers for research put forth on this site that made me question not how good human hearing is; but how it can be affected by so many things, and as stated regarding the psychoacoustics', not only physical but mentally. Also my youngest son has neurological deafness that is more prominent in the higher frequencies, so I have spent the last 12 years taking him to audiologists and speech therapy, and surprisingly have learnt a little of these people regarding hearing. And finally I work for a company (Tactical Communications and Surveillance) that actually uses both measurements and listening tests (though run in a viable way, all participants' have their hearing tested so that there is a metric against what they hear, all done blind, multiple participants) these being modified rhyme tests and similar. And finally age, as the augurs' of hear all and design by ears only get older, their measuring equipment starts to deteriorate, and is much harder to replace than a good scope.
For the record I was brought up in a very musical household, my mother was a trombonist with Ivy Benson Dance Band, my father was into opera in a big way.
dorothy england
I had piano lessons from a very early age (and had no choice when it came to practicing every day), also played trombone (in the local Brass Band) and played bass guitar for a number of years in a band until work and the realities of life took over. So probably have some idea what music is, and using my ears.
Why have I spat my dummy out... Because I am fed up of being told, my hearing is defective, my system is not up to it etc etc, because I question beliefs and ask for some empirical data (Captain Capricorn syndrome), other than I can hear the difference...We need both measurements and listening impressions.
As to cant be measured (another repeated elucidation), in the electrical environment, I would speculate that any change that can produce and audible difference can be measured, get hold of a 13GHz scope and have a look at some wave forms...and before you all get on my case I did use the caveat of an audible difference regarding measurements. And finally when it comes to power supplies and digital design, hard empirical measurements are a necessity, though some of the hypothesises beginning to come out of the ever expanding DIY audio digital design, would be almost hilarious if it wasn't that they promote and influence BAD engineering practice.
As I have said before, we are creating a music reproduction system, so should use good engineering practices, we are not creating musical instruments...
Anyway rant over, this forum is better than therapy some times...
My apologies to Bud for his patience and to any Audiophiles I haven't upset today, keep up the good work, and as to the rest of us Have Fun
Cbdb, I have one of the first sets of enabled drivers (FE207's were in a Curvy Chang, now in an OB with 2 15" per side) done by Dave on Planet 10, so though it may surprise the only need ears fraternity, I am open to some insanity and will experiment and try new and esoteric ideas. I have also enjoyed the discussions these ideas on Bud's various threads, which by their very nature seem to invite very polarised views.
As to hearing, it was evidence and pointers for research put forth on this site that made me question not how good human hearing is; but how it can be affected by so many things, and as stated regarding the psychoacoustics', not only physical but mentally. Also my youngest son has neurological deafness that is more prominent in the higher frequencies, so I have spent the last 12 years taking him to audiologists and speech therapy, and surprisingly have learnt a little of these people regarding hearing. And finally I work for a company (Tactical Communications and Surveillance) that actually uses both measurements and listening tests (though run in a viable way, all participants' have their hearing tested so that there is a metric against what they hear, all done blind, multiple participants) these being modified rhyme tests and similar. And finally age, as the augurs' of hear all and design by ears only get older, their measuring equipment starts to deteriorate, and is much harder to replace than a good scope.
For the record I was brought up in a very musical household, my mother was a trombonist with Ivy Benson Dance Band, my father was into opera in a big way.
dorothy england
I had piano lessons from a very early age (and had no choice when it came to practicing every day), also played trombone (in the local Brass Band) and played bass guitar for a number of years in a band until work and the realities of life took over. So probably have some idea what music is, and using my ears.
Why have I spat my dummy out... Because I am fed up of being told, my hearing is defective, my system is not up to it etc etc, because I question beliefs and ask for some empirical data (Captain Capricorn syndrome), other than I can hear the difference...We need both measurements and listening impressions.
As to cant be measured (another repeated elucidation), in the electrical environment, I would speculate that any change that can produce and audible difference can be measured, get hold of a 13GHz scope and have a look at some wave forms...and before you all get on my case I did use the caveat of an audible difference regarding measurements. And finally when it comes to power supplies and digital design, hard empirical measurements are a necessity, though some of the hypothesises beginning to come out of the ever expanding DIY audio digital design, would be almost hilarious if it wasn't that they promote and influence BAD engineering practice.
As I have said before, we are creating a music reproduction system, so should use good engineering practices, we are not creating musical instruments...
Anyway rant over, this forum is better than therapy some times...
My apologies to Bud for his patience and to any Audiophiles I haven't upset today, keep up the good work, and as to the rest of us Have Fun
As to your other problem Bud, I would say its an EMC issue, one othe these links may help, conducted suseptability.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990208.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990407.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=500.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990810.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991005.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991215.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=388
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=406
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=280
http://www.nutwooduk.co.uk/currentissue/article.asp?artid=588
First Link Requires Login
http://www.compliance-club.com/KeithArmstrong.aspx
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart1.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart2.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart3.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart4.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart5.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart6.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart7.pdf
EMC Design
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990208.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990407.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=500.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990810.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991005.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991215.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=388
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=406
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=280
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990208.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990407.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=500.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990810.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991005.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991215.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=388
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=406
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=280
http://www.nutwooduk.co.uk/currentissue/article.asp?artid=588
First Link Requires Login
http://www.compliance-club.com/KeithArmstrong.aspx
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart1.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart2.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart3.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart4.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart5.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart6.pdf
http://www.compliance-club.com/pdf/EMCTestingPart7.pdf
EMC Design
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990208.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990407.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=500.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/990810.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991005.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/991215.htm
http://www.compliance-club.com/currentissue/print_article.asp?artid=388
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=406
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/print_article.asp?artid=280
I take it that the distinction here is Type 2 vs. Type 1, Because I'm pretty sure that hams use Type 1 in antennae for its high Q.
Otherwise, even Type 1 should be somewhat immune to antenna effects, and yet it is used as a low loss antenna wire for crystal radios and such.
Hmmmm. Maybe it is the case that a twisted pair that is not connected at their ends are fairly immune to pickup, but once connected at the ends fully acts as an antenna.
i think you are correct George. When Sy and Morgan Jones hung a pair of Ground Control items on Morgan's amplifiers, in a venue with suspect power, they could not detect any change. Just what you would expect from a Morgan Jones designed and built amplifier. Sy had the same results with his personal system, again what you might expect.
Fortunately for the GC product, that level of professionalism is not the norm.
Fortunately for the GC product, that level of professionalism is not the norm.
I was skeptical as hell of both these loops, and to a lesser extent, EnAble, but after reading many of the accounts I'm more than open, and at this point believe there is a better than average probability they work. So, A.) I've got BG-Neo 3 tweeters, so I don't think they would benefit by EnAble, but just got Tang Band 4" titanium FR's to use as midranges, can I order some stencils to EnAble them and B.) I can't afford to buy these Audio Prism type devices, but would the wire from old voicecoils work to make my own? C.) Those felt triangles from Mssr. Gamboni(?) seemed promising from the start, and I need to take the driver out of my Velodyne sub to replace the surround anyway, what is the prescribed application protocol? D.) I don't have mid-woofers yet, but I guess I'll want to do both processes to the 8" inchers when they arrive. Has Sir Nelson Pass given any statements on any of these tweaks? (this is about a tri-amp system coming together, for HT I'm just using NHT Super Ones).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.