A cable is a cable. A capacitor to ground is an electrical model of a cable. Whether or not it's an effective model depends on many things.
Once again, the most reasonable doubt in my mind is the effect that cables have on the rest of the system, the most vulnerable being the relatively weak buffer that usually drives the cables at the output of much audio equipment. If the cable loading, including the capacitance and inductance, alter the phase margin, stability and hence the performance of this buffer, then there could be an audible difference. Don't know. Really depends on the buffer and parameters of the cable. But it's certainly possible. And audible artifacts, like TIM distortion, may occur well before there's any noticeable roll-off in the high frequencies.
Then there's also the EMI affecting the output buffer, followed by contact resistance, dielectric properties of the insulation material, like whether it's linear and how much dielectric absorption there is, thermocouple effects of dissimilar metals touching one another, metallurgy of the copper including impurities and grain structure. Etc etc. It could very well be argued that some or all of these things are insignificant. And there's certainly a lot of smoke and mirrors trying to convince people of things like OFC makes all the difference in the world. But it's all there to consider.
Last edited:
You are over complicating things, for audio signals (or any low frequency analogue signal) these things are not going to be a problem if you get a reasonable cable... Dielectric, wouldn't worry as to the metallurgy of copper and signals, not a problem and one of the more ridiculous audio myths, same with grain structure. Thermocouple effect!
As to equipment, output buffers are usually line drivers, chosen to drive a signal down a cable, so for a correctly engineered unit no problem.
I am playing about doing some PCBs on a customer site now work, where we are looking at cables as well to connect the various modules and NOT ONE of the things you mention have come into any of the discussions, the only criteria we have to concern ourselves with is current capacity, shielding and cable temperature range (this will mean we may have to use a silver plated copper cable, because of the wider temp range than a simple domestic set up).
No one is worrying about what you have mentioned because it has no noticeable effect and is not worth worrying about... Domestic audio is not rocket science...
The specification you require have been mentioned, low capacitance mainly, shielded preferably with a good quality low resistance shield covering 100% and decent connectors at each end.
JCX has listed some sources above, look at them.
Unless the cable is unusually long or unusually incompetent, or the source is unusually incompetent, there will be no problem. That is why you can't find a cable spec.Dave2 said:
It doesn't take long to consider it. A few back-of-envelope calculations should convince you that these things are insignificant, except where serious mistakes have been made in design or construction.
So theory says all is well. Curiously, experiment confirms this: genuine ears-alone tests find that people can't distinguish interconnect cables i.e. all good interconnects 'sound' the same. Only bad interconnects sound different, for genuine engineering reasons.
Maybe some research on signal transmission and cables (there is a lot of info out there) would benefit some, then once you understand what is going on the audiophool fantasies regarding cables and magic properties can be laid to rest...
I know it may sound shocking but a lot of this was sorted out years ago (including twisted pairs) by a dude called Oliver Heaviside, working on some stuff by another guy named Maxwell.......
I know it may sound shocking but a lot of this was sorted out years ago (including twisted pairs) by a dude called Oliver Heaviside, working on some stuff by another guy named Maxwell.......
Thread reopened. This thread is a discussion about the merits of SE amplifiers, keep the discussion on topic. Other threads exist where wire and other ephemera may be discussed. A vacation from diyAudio will be the reward of those who fail to heed this warning.
Speakers are indeed the area where the biggest progress can be made. That's why I spend the vast majority of my audio equipment budget on speakers. And 2th comes acoustics.
I know Accuton publishes distortion data for their chassis. And there's the data from Stereophile and other independent measurements.
"Speaker distortion is bigger"
Yes, it's bigger in numbers. But in my experience, speakers distort the sound in different ways than amplifiers do. I can put a great amp behind crappy speakers and still tell it's a great amp playing. The amp doesn't correct the speakers. But there will still be that level of clarity there that only comes from a good amp.
Yes, it's bigger in numbers. But in my experience, speakers distort the sound in different ways than amplifiers do. I can put a great amp behind crappy speakers and still tell it's a great amp playing. The amp doesn't correct the speakers. But there will still be that level of clarity there that only comes from a good amp.
Last edited:
The thing is: You don't hear with your ears. You hear with your brain. And the brain uses everything it has to make a perception.
Knowing what amp is playing, is used by the brain to make a perception.
If you think the amp has inferior technology, it will sound worse.
If you think the amp has superior technology, it will sound better.
If the amp looks impressive, it will sound better.
If its played back louder, it will sound better.
That's why people who try to be as honest as possible, do level matched blind (not knowing what is being tested) tests to come to a conclusion.
Hopefully you did this to.
The speaker manufacturers that I have seen publishing distortion data usually do so for SPLs that are approaching 100dB and most were for around 90dB to 96dB.
I can't recall seeing data for 80dB, nor for 70dB, nor for 60dB.
I would bet that if such data were shown we would see that distortion, as a percentage of the output level, would drop to even lower levels than the 1% to 0.1% of 2nd & 3rd I usually see.
I can't recall seeing data for 80dB, nor for 70dB, nor for 60dB.
I would bet that if such data were shown we would see that distortion, as a percentage of the output level, would drop to even lower levels than the 1% to 0.1% of 2nd & 3rd I usually see.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.