That's the thing about the interwebs anyone can state their opinion as if it is as valid as anyone else's. There are folks with elaborate web sites saying Dr. Weiss and the LIGO team faked all their results because because their basic hypothesis were as you say "plain wrong".
I am talking about audio cables not LIGO, audio cables are not transmission lines. They don't have characteristic impedance.
Sorry, if you can state your opinion why I can't?
Last edited:
The source musical source is never accurate. It is a recording. This recording has nothing (or very few) to do with any reality. It has been produced to be the most agreeable (and sometimes credible) as possible, on the studio monitors that are full of defects and colorations, like all the speakers (as a reference).
To try to reproduce the electric signal of the "source" in an "accurate" way is as intelligent as to try to reproduce the profile of a road, with all its defects, "accurately" in a car.
I am Happy that my car's manufacturers tried, better, to find a good compromise between my feeling of good contact and my comfort.
What I do not understand is why those objectivists want to impose otherts ("MUST") to cross the united states in the profile racing shell of a pedal car they believe to be a formula one.
I'm thinking of embarking very soon on an entomologist study of this strange (and happily rare) category of population who, if you tell them, "Oh, listen, I hear a deer" will answer "Provide Data?" and blindfold you for not you can try to perceive the wild animal.
To understand how their frustrations made them so aggressive.
Last edited:
Your misunderstandings of the discussion and intent are breathtaking.
jn
Strangely, you have not answered a very simple question.
When you purchase RG-58, what do you specify as the impedance? A single number, or a complex one.
jn
I am currently measuring loudspeaker cable for another project. I have an 85' sample of a custom cable that has four twisted pairs in two different gauges and twists.
I do need to recheck some of the measurements because they seem to disagree on things like inductance vs frequency response.
I do have someplace a 50 ohm to 8 ohm transformer for using my TDR on loudspeaker cable.
I suspect if I am clever I can use one pair to send a square wave and the crosstalk on another to look at the return.
I do need to recheck some of the measurements because they seem to disagree on things like inductance vs frequency response.
I do have someplace a 50 ohm to 8 ohm transformer for using my TDR on loudspeaker cable.
I suspect if I am clever I can use one pair to send a square wave and the crosstalk on another to look at the return.
Good point, you have talked me out of it, phew...... and you thought you were lazy. I might try your listening test sometime, I don't expect to hear any image shift which should hopefully help in not hearing any image shift. However, personally, I'm not really that bothered whether there would be any shift which may mean I'm more likely to hear any if there is any? I'm beginning to understand why measurement is so important 😱😀
Which is why an ideal system is an active speaker with digital input - optical, wireless, or Ethernet / AES-67.
If you know of better ways to reproduce sound, please share.
Your car narrative would be accurate only if you are talking about reproducing the race.
Actually ScottJ's definition of accuracy in audio reproduction was spot on (even though he didn't realise the implications of what he said) 😀
I already posted several links on hams using ordinary speaker cables as antenna feeds, so the above statement is simply wrong. Any zip cord or twisted pair like CAT5 cable has a characteristic impedance.
The transfer function of information on this list is determined by the characteristic impedance of the individuals...
Or so I have read...
Howie
Ahem... they do, all cable have. It's the input impedance seen in an infinite long cable. It's not stable, it changes if you bend the zip cord, etc... but it's there.
If you need to care about, at audio frequencies, that's a different story.
Hams can be a clever lot. I have a good friend that paid for his EE working at a TV station with his first class commercial earned at 17 after his ham.
Reminds me of some people here l won’t disagree with, deep and correct knowledge always goes to the basics.
Reminds me of some people here l won’t disagree with, deep and correct knowledge always goes to the basics.
I have to wonder what's the purpose of these "exotic" cables other than to intentionally have much higher capacitance and/or inductance than any reasonable cable of the same length, with the intended purpose of sounding DIFFERENT from a reasonable cable, thus giving the listener/potential buyer the idea that they sound better.
Specifically, for audio frequencies it's a non-story. 🙂
Well, let's review the last two days of posts on this thread (about seven thousand posts😀 )
I have been espousing the virtues of using low RF impedance speaker cables because they respond quicker by lowering the line to load match, as well as explaining that the LCR model absolutely duplicates the results....meaning lower inductance and higher capacitance( a byproduct) is good.
Richard details how high L low cap (and by default high Z) cables lose at 10khz and up.
Nelson shows the virtues of low z cables (which by physics are high C low L)
So, everyone is in violent agreement as to how the cables need to go for best results..
A cable vendor needs to make this dry really boring engineering stuff sexy, and they need to distinguish themselves from the pack.
Some lose sight of the fact that many of us are arguing the details on how we all arrive at the exact same result.
Personally, I would not argue with anyone I did not have huge respect for. There is a lot to be said about the saying..gauge someone by the enemies they have.
In this case, those I disagree with are not my enemies..they are people I go to to bounce ideas against. I may not agree always, but mirrors are boring.
PMA, df96, dadod, syno8...I do thank you for your time, effort, and "argument".
Syno8... I was discussing toroids and winding with a coworker today...he has ferrites for DCCT's. I am interested in repeating CB's coupler, and need someone to test the darn stuff. Let me know if you are interested.
It would be great to get a handle on the dual coupler, as a few here have smeared the work of a recognized person (Cyril Bateman) who can no longer defend himself, and I would like to have the air cleared. Either he was mistaken and we can correct his work, or we can show that he was correct, ahead of his time, and those who spoke ill of his work (and him) can apologize.
Jn
Last edited:
When you get to using high strand count wire, you have got my oldest loudspeaker cable design that became West Penn Wire 25210. Thinner and higher dielectric insulation, closer conductor spacing in addition to the heaviest gauge permitted by the NEC at that time for class 2 cabling. Of course that was the 90's. I got a bit upset that they made it a standard catalog item although now obsolete.
My newer designs are proprietary. Currently designing a new version. But there is a reason why I have TDRs, directional hybrids and other toys.
But we will disagree on how much a consumer loudspeaker changes in use. I expect less than a 20% variation in impedance during use.
It is not hard to measure changes with a large low frequency modulation. An AC current drive and AC coupling to the analyzer allow this with very low frequency modulation. (Think .1 hertz)
If you look at how inefficient consumer loudspeakers are, I think you will understand how big the basic resistance is and why it doesn't swing as much as a motor.
The most efficient pro drivers might get up to 30% efficiency. Audiophile loudspeakers are much worse. 0 dB spl is 10e-12 watt! (For normal folks a 100% efficient loudspeaker would produce 120 dB at 1 m at 1 watt of input.).
My newer designs are proprietary. Currently designing a new version. But there is a reason why I have TDRs, directional hybrids and other toys.
But we will disagree on how much a consumer loudspeaker changes in use. I expect less than a 20% variation in impedance during use.
It is not hard to measure changes with a large low frequency modulation. An AC current drive and AC coupling to the analyzer allow this with very low frequency modulation. (Think .1 hertz)
If you look at how inefficient consumer loudspeakers are, I think you will understand how big the basic resistance is and why it doesn't swing as much as a motor.
The most efficient pro drivers might get up to 30% efficiency. Audiophile loudspeakers are much worse. 0 dB spl is 10e-12 watt! (For normal folks a 100% efficient loudspeaker would produce 120 dB at 1 m at 1 watt of input.).
Last edited:
Yes, they do, but this is not important if used in audio as loudspeaker connection or similar, only provokes confusion and helps selling SO expensive ones. It does not mean that there is wave reflection if not terminated with the equal impedance.
I said that loudspeaker cable does not have characteristic impedance, because it is not important and does not behaves as transmission line.
Last edited:
In the transfer functions of a transmission line, don't all the long-line values, and all the lumped LC values, *all* approach zero continuously and monotonically as length approaches zero?
If not, then how is the discontinuity calculated?
All good fortune,
Chris
If not, then how is the discontinuity calculated?
All good fortune,
Chris
When JN is wrong, it's going to be complicated, nowhere near plain. 😀
Maybe a Nanocrystaline toroid core like Vitroperm-standard-types-encapsulated, for example the T60006-L2040-W424.pdf available at Mouser HERE or epay HERE? Should have good AF response since Tribute found it satisfactory for autoformer volume control.
Reminds me of something people say about roads and Rome. 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.