johnmath,
unlike you I have no technical training or actual operational experience so I am not 'preprogrammed' to expect anything. At it's most basic level every society programmes it's young to perceive life in a particular way, perhaps the best way to describe this programming is brainwashing.
In the 60s and 70s' lots of students experimented with LSD, it was always the science undergrads that had the bad trips because they had been 'programmed to 'see' in very rigid ways - when everything went 'wayylined' a lot couldn't handle it. Some were certain it was bad acid and some became paranoid about 'drugs' - LSD is not a narcotic aka it is not addictive unless you have serious mental health problems.
When I became serious about my sound system I bought into commercial cables but I never got caught up in the mind game that more expensive = better. Around 2010 I decided that I would buy materials to make my own. To start with I replicated the 'accepted wisdom' and found it to be complete bllcks. The commercial cables were made the way they were because that was the cheapest/quickest way to make cables ergo more profit.
So I started to experiment - using shielding/not using shielding. What I found seriously interesting was what I had learned reading a layman's guide to particle physics - the Dancing Wuli Masters. This book enraged me with the knowledge of how badly I had been taught science at school.
One of the first things I learned is that - all systems tend towards self perpetuation, easily seen in religion,politics and in the audio world. Accepted wisdom - very often turning out to be complete and utter b/s. That's why when the little boy shouts out - the emperor is bollock naked everyone turns on him because he hasn't been brainwashed yet or he refuses to be brainwashed.
After 4 years of experiments and with the help of suggestions by a dear Dutch friend who is no longer with us I arrived at a design, materials and construction method for i/connects and after offering examples of silver/plated copper and high purity silver for others to test that I use to this day. I had 'expected' that there would be different opinions, some liking the s/plated copper and others liking the silver - all preferred the silver. The only difference between the two types was the colour of the sheathing and no one except me knew which type of conductor had been used. The s/plated copper was found to be very neutral whereas the silver added a touch of warmth, exactly what I had found myself. The testers were from different continents and of different ages.
Quite by chance having time on my hands in hospital I thought that oxygen cables which are soft and very pliable would be good to use as an outer casing to absorb any external vibrations. I found through actual testing that FEP is way better than PTFE even though they are from the same family of fluorocarbons, so this is what I use as dielectric. Here I disagree with you about the importance of dielectric though my comment is, at this moment specifically related to i/connects.
So my first speaker cable is going to be 2mm solid core copper ( I never use stranded wire for signal, sound science) inside oversized FEP tubing. I am already preprogrammed not to like it but I must try as - all theory should come from practice. I am preprogrammed to like the alternative - 4 x 0.5mm solid core each inside it's own oversized FEP tubing which will be encased inside the oxygen tubing. This 4 x conductors is what I use for i/connects - I started with 1 x and ended with 4 x because that sounded best - 1 x is far, far easier to construct and cheaper.
Once I had read and accepted that 'air is the best dielectric' I had to try oversized PTFE tubing and then FEP for i/connects and now for speaker wiring. This immediately ruled out any kind of tightly wrapped/air excluding covering of the conductor which is normally and usually made of signal absorbing material (which is cheap).
I am now about to test 2 different types of speaker cable and will pit these against a speaker cable that I have used for over 12 years - the UBYTE 11 found on TNT-Audio an audio forum for which I have great respect along with diyaudio since most of the others have degenerated into tiny mutual back slapping clubs for Brownshirts that attack anyone who dares to challenge 'their' take on audio reality.
I particularly like your rational - the cost of the cable is not the important factor, the electromechanical construction is and - ears are not spectrum analysers and - the transfer function between two devices, you make other cogent points as well but these will suffice.
Who knows maybe the UBYTE 11 will be better than either of the types I have constructed or shock/horror they may sound the same but only actual experiments will tell and that's the point - all theory should come from practice. I should also point out I never use connectors for speaker cable and would love to use connectors for i/connects that have been designed from scratch not those developed for commercial use aka XLRs or RCAs, commercial requirements are totally different from those in the home.
No one on this thread has questioned the stupidity of putting passive or active x/overs inside a box speaker where they will be exposed to considerable vibration and sound pressures, why?
unlike you I have no technical training or actual operational experience so I am not 'preprogrammed' to expect anything. At it's most basic level every society programmes it's young to perceive life in a particular way, perhaps the best way to describe this programming is brainwashing.
In the 60s and 70s' lots of students experimented with LSD, it was always the science undergrads that had the bad trips because they had been 'programmed to 'see' in very rigid ways - when everything went 'wayylined' a lot couldn't handle it. Some were certain it was bad acid and some became paranoid about 'drugs' - LSD is not a narcotic aka it is not addictive unless you have serious mental health problems.
When I became serious about my sound system I bought into commercial cables but I never got caught up in the mind game that more expensive = better. Around 2010 I decided that I would buy materials to make my own. To start with I replicated the 'accepted wisdom' and found it to be complete bllcks. The commercial cables were made the way they were because that was the cheapest/quickest way to make cables ergo more profit.
So I started to experiment - using shielding/not using shielding. What I found seriously interesting was what I had learned reading a layman's guide to particle physics - the Dancing Wuli Masters. This book enraged me with the knowledge of how badly I had been taught science at school.
One of the first things I learned is that - all systems tend towards self perpetuation, easily seen in religion,politics and in the audio world. Accepted wisdom - very often turning out to be complete and utter b/s. That's why when the little boy shouts out - the emperor is bollock naked everyone turns on him because he hasn't been brainwashed yet or he refuses to be brainwashed.
After 4 years of experiments and with the help of suggestions by a dear Dutch friend who is no longer with us I arrived at a design, materials and construction method for i/connects and after offering examples of silver/plated copper and high purity silver for others to test that I use to this day. I had 'expected' that there would be different opinions, some liking the s/plated copper and others liking the silver - all preferred the silver. The only difference between the two types was the colour of the sheathing and no one except me knew which type of conductor had been used. The s/plated copper was found to be very neutral whereas the silver added a touch of warmth, exactly what I had found myself. The testers were from different continents and of different ages.
Quite by chance having time on my hands in hospital I thought that oxygen cables which are soft and very pliable would be good to use as an outer casing to absorb any external vibrations. I found through actual testing that FEP is way better than PTFE even though they are from the same family of fluorocarbons, so this is what I use as dielectric. Here I disagree with you about the importance of dielectric though my comment is, at this moment specifically related to i/connects.
So my first speaker cable is going to be 2mm solid core copper ( I never use stranded wire for signal, sound science) inside oversized FEP tubing. I am already preprogrammed not to like it but I must try as - all theory should come from practice. I am preprogrammed to like the alternative - 4 x 0.5mm solid core each inside it's own oversized FEP tubing which will be encased inside the oxygen tubing. This 4 x conductors is what I use for i/connects - I started with 1 x and ended with 4 x because that sounded best - 1 x is far, far easier to construct and cheaper.
Once I had read and accepted that 'air is the best dielectric' I had to try oversized PTFE tubing and then FEP for i/connects and now for speaker wiring. This immediately ruled out any kind of tightly wrapped/air excluding covering of the conductor which is normally and usually made of signal absorbing material (which is cheap).
I am now about to test 2 different types of speaker cable and will pit these against a speaker cable that I have used for over 12 years - the UBYTE 11 found on TNT-Audio an audio forum for which I have great respect along with diyaudio since most of the others have degenerated into tiny mutual back slapping clubs for Brownshirts that attack anyone who dares to challenge 'their' take on audio reality.
I particularly like your rational - the cost of the cable is not the important factor, the electromechanical construction is and - ears are not spectrum analysers and - the transfer function between two devices, you make other cogent points as well but these will suffice.
Who knows maybe the UBYTE 11 will be better than either of the types I have constructed or shock/horror they may sound the same but only actual experiments will tell and that's the point - all theory should come from practice. I should also point out I never use connectors for speaker cable and would love to use connectors for i/connects that have been designed from scratch not those developed for commercial use aka XLRs or RCAs, commercial requirements are totally different from those in the home.
No one on this thread has questioned the stupidity of putting passive or active x/overs inside a box speaker where they will be exposed to considerable vibration and sound pressures, why?
To whatever extent cables affect sound, it doesn't seem to be due to harmonic distortion (except maybe if bad connectors). However cables may introduce linear distortions, act like antennas, create ground loops, allow for transverse to differential mode coupling of EMI noise, etc.
Don't understand why people often tend to assume the only thing to look for is HD?
Don't understand why people often tend to assume the only thing to look for is HD?
I recall seeing a actual test on Youtube
and the difference was there.
But was at some ridiculous small amount the answer is " no " difference
Somewhere around .0001 % difference
Non Audible.
Otherwise with RF interference it is the usual methods.
Shortest cable length as possibly. And electronic design on the amplifier output
using the well known Zobel/Boucherot Cell
and the difference was there.
But was at some ridiculous small amount the answer is " no " difference
Somewhere around .0001 % difference
Non Audible.
Otherwise with RF interference it is the usual methods.
Shortest cable length as possibly. And electronic design on the amplifier output
using the well known Zobel/Boucherot Cell
If those experiments are none double blind, they won't give you objective results.
I said "there are very significant differences in electromagnetic properties of polar and non-polar dielectrics" which have significant implications for cable performance. You said yourself that "FEP is way better than PTFE". Does that not mean we agree that dielectric properties make a difference?
Perhaps because the thread is about cable it is cable that is being discussed. There are other threads about capacitors and the the mechanisms that cause nonlinearities, including mechanical and voltage stresses. I think that inductor electrical and mechanical stress and its effect on inductor nonlinearity has been discussed elsewhere as is the construction of resistors used for crossovers.
Here's a capacitor thread, for example. If you wade in deep enough the effect of pressure variations and vibrations on capacitor performance does come up.
Should You Change Crossover Capacitors – The Great Debate
What I wanted to ask is that when a cable makes a response difference and you correct this separately, what is the result?
You've answered your own question: the result is it is corrected.
When it is simply possible to apply basic physics and engineering correctly and mitigate the cause, why treat the symptom?
I should correct a statement in the post you referred to. I used the word "fixed" when I should have said "mitigated". In the analogue world there are no absolutes, only diminishing returns.
That poster named BlueWizard also has no technical training or actual operational experience.
Actual measured difference in HD was .006 %
Between standard 14 gauge wiring and 2 brands of highend cables
It took me awhile to find the video.
So its incredible impossible to hear the difference.
He measured
Rac) AC resistance of cables
Ls) Inductance of cables
Cp) Capacitance of cables
THD of cables with 8 ohm dummy load
THD of cables with 8 ohm speaker load
The high end cables did measure lower AC resistance
and also lower inductance.
Which all in all has a very very slight effect above 10 kHz
And as known, fancy cables tend to have higher capacitance per foot.
But overall distortion and signal loses between normal 14 gauge wire and high end cables
had no real effect. On a normal scale all the measured lines were the same.
You had to zoom way in on the scale to see a slight difference.
Assuming most cant hear a 3 dB difference, and " Golden Ears" lol
might be able to hear 1 dB difference.
The difference is roughly .06 dB
otherwise known as impossible to hear.
Assuming most of us listen to direct radiator speaker types.
Speaker distortion is already at 1 to 3% distortion
Assuming you had the most amazing direct radiator in the world with
1% distortion.
With " junk" cable, speaker distortion would be 1.006 % THD
and a high end cable would be ....................... 1.000% THD
Basically the end, you cannot hear it.
Speaker Cables Really Don't Make Much of a Difference? - YouTube
Last edited:
As far as I am aware 'premium" is a marketing term, not a scientific one. Your question asks what is the difference between a 'common' cable with unknown properties and a 'premium' cable also of unknown properties, in an unspecified environment with unspecified equipment which has its own set of input and output characteristics. The answer is therefore unknowable.
Cables have basic electrical properties of series R, series L, parallel C and skin effect. The values of C and L are affected dynamically by the stiffness with which the conductors are held in constant geometry; the ability to move causes 'microphonic' effects as the L and C values change.
Cables have other properties such as design of screening (lapped, woven, solid film, multiple layers, etc) and % of coverage (0% - 100%). Cables are susceptible to external magnetic and electric fields and 'leak' external electrical and magnetic fields. Even unscreened conductors vary in their susceptibility and generation of external magnetic and electrical fields, affected by factors such as the number of conductors, the diameter of the conductors and the distance between the conductors. (Inductance is the property of current enclosing an area of permeable material, including air and dielectrics insulators, capacitance is the property of voltage across between two areas of conductor separated by dielectric material.)
Insulating materials have variable degrees of non-linear dielectric and/or permeability properties. In addition dielectric constants and permeabilities of some common construction cable materials are modulated by stress - voltage stress for dielectric materials and magnetic field strength for permeability. Also dielectric properties for some common insulating materials can change value under mechanical stress, possibly also true for permeability.
The extent to which sound reproduction might be affected by these properties is dependent on the system under consideration. All 'real' sources and all 'real' loads have frequency dependent (and hence time variant) characteristics. Any sound system will exist in its own unique set of external interference fields, will have different lengths of interconnect and speaker cables, and will have sources and loads with different frequency dependent impedances.
Is it odd that interconnecting cables affect the transfer function between source and load? It would be extraordinary if cables didn't, in fact it would break the laws of physics!
Any subjective observation (e.g. excessive sibilance) for one sound system may be irrelevant to another different sound system, which might be one reason why cables are so contentious. Don't forget also the expectation effect works equally well both ways: you will hear what you expect to hear, and may not hear what you expect not to hear.
Do cables make a difference? I have measured very large differences in microphonic pickup and EMI, both of >>20db from shop 'premium' cables. This matters a lot for turntables. At line levels this also reduces out-of-band junk (inaudible signals) being fed into the next stage which may exacerbate non-linearities in the amplification in that stage.
If there is a readily noticeable difference in sound between two cables, at least one is deficient. Quite possibly both are deficient, making a choice between cable purely subjective most of the time. Analogue, having no absolutes, means that measured with the best laboratory equipment, diminishing differences that can still be measured may be perceptibly small for most people. At some point, the pursuit of perfection becomes pointless. That point is different for every individual.
Whether the effects of a cable are significant is a function of the particular cable for the application, system dependent and listener dependent. Different listeners have different hearing acuity and different experience. Expectations for quality vary widely. Some people drink bulk wine, some only premium aged bottlings. Who is to say person one is right and one person is wrong? But to say there is no difference in the wine would be silly. And because I am not a wine connoisseur gives me no right to be snide to someone who is. The quality of the wine I drink is less important to me than the quality of sound reproduction I enjoy, that is all.
Because really good cables can be manufactured for not much more than junk cables, and typically much less that shop 'premium' cables, I make technically competent cables for each application.
I have conducted dozens, if not hundreds, of blind tests of speaker cables over the years, and even made my own "self administered" blind comparator for the purpose of both speaker and interconnect cable comparisons. My experience is that cables appropriate for the application, technically and competently manufactured according to the well understood electromagnetic phenomena of physics consistently will outperform most shop cables, regardless of price.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.