Years ago I discovered that CAT 5e cables sounded more musical than Kimber PBJ. (All 4 pairs used together - Colors and whites/ground. Kept in same plastic outer wrap)
A CAT 5e cable sounded as good as a $500 Nordst RCA digital flat cable.
Bundles of braided CAT 6 wire smoked Kimber 8TC speaker cable - not even close!
Saved a lot of money through the years.
A CAT 5e cable sounded as good as a $500 Nordst RCA digital flat cable.
Bundles of braided CAT 6 wire smoked Kimber 8TC speaker cable - not even close!
Saved a lot of money through the years.
Not surprised about CAT cable verses a lot of high-cost audio cables. IME its possible to do better than CAT, but not at competitive cost (remember retail markup of incremental manufacturing cost in the high end market tends to be about 6x, or maybe even higher for cable; that is as opposed to the normal 3x -5x markup seen for the consumer market). Also, the lump compensated zip cord speaker cable in another thread can be pretty good at low cost.
Last edited:
There is an argument that multiple paralleled CAT5 or above cables are a good thing. Each pair is 100 Ohms impedance. 5 cables (20 pairs) is 4 ohms and will match many speakers. It's controversial of course and a resistor across the speaker terminals can give the same effect but certainly worth considering. After all the time and annoyance of stripping all those ends without one getting nicked and breaking gives one a huge sense of achievement...
IIRC the 100-ohm non-inductive power resistors (TO-220 package?) 1audio once recommended for use at speaker terminals were not all that low cost compared to diy CAT cable or compensated zip cord. Still have the part number around here somewhere, could probably find it if anyone is interested.
What, why would one want series resistance? Professional speaker cable is like 8 ohm per kilometer and costs 1-2e per meter, for example this one https://www.thomann.de/gb/cordial_cls_225_sw.htm. Paint it gold and say it cost 10k to have the status and save 9.95k.
Last edited:
At the risk of being called a heretic, I will say:
The quest for better perceived sound quality is almost entirely based in the realm of dimished returns. You don't really get what you pay for IMHO.
For me, I'm happy if I can get 15 pieces of kit across two branch circuits to "talk" to each other (all single ended) without ground loops etc. As long as I don't have perceiveable hum, I'm happy.
Sometimes that required more expensive (read shielded) cables, but realistically, I don't need "unicorn*" cables for line level signals.
*unicorn can be like snake oil but slightly different. Unicorn is non deceptive - AKA the person selling this is genuine (they believe it). Snake oil implies a rip off by someone trying to deceive IMHO (they know it's horseshit).
The quest for better perceived sound quality is almost entirely based in the realm of dimished returns. You don't really get what you pay for IMHO.
For me, I'm happy if I can get 15 pieces of kit across two branch circuits to "talk" to each other (all single ended) without ground loops etc. As long as I don't have perceiveable hum, I'm happy.
Sometimes that required more expensive (read shielded) cables, but realistically, I don't need "unicorn*" cables for line level signals.
*unicorn can be like snake oil but slightly different. Unicorn is non deceptive - AKA the person selling this is genuine (they believe it). Snake oil implies a rip off by someone trying to deceive IMHO (they know it's horseshit).
Last edited:
True.
However you may get what you pay for if you choose wisely. It can be the same as with test instruments. A $400 100Mhz scope will get you a lot for a low price. If you want fancy differential active probes, 1GHz or higher bandwidth, jitter analysis, etc., then prepare to pay disproportionately compared to the entry level scope.
Of course if you don't choose audio stuff wisely you may end up with unicorns and or snake oil. Its a problem.
How was the comparison carried out? Please share the details so that the readers will have a better understanding of what went on.
What does this have to do with the price of audio cables?
All interconnect and speaker cables are too short to be considered transmission lines at audio frequencies, or even severa times that, so characteristic impedance at audio frequencies is moot.
Series resistance in combination with the impedance vs frequency curve of the load becomes a significant signal modifier.
Oh....her we go!
Expressing a thought about audio cables and expounding on the value of test equipment both involve typing sentences into a forum post.
Perhaps he was trying to perform a mind trick on unsuspecting readers by waving his hand in front of them...
Another thread starting at around: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/zip-cord-for-speaker-test.371099/page-11
I recall sometime, likely in the 1990s or so there was an article in AudioXpress saying it was time to go to balanced interconnects. It would "cost more" for an extra stage to invert the signal and needs precision output and input resistors to balance the impedances and such. There's a mini-XLR connector that would work fine, as it's about the same size as the dreaded "gold plated" RCA. Careful design would be needed so ground currents don't end up in the audio signal (something harder to eliminate with unbalanced connections). By now, even for phono MM or MC connections it would give better audio AND lower cost.
But no ...
But no ...
Interesting. However, the entire “problem” is based on the interaction of a specific amplifier, speaker, cable combination. The “solution” is also specific to that combination, and the magnitude and phase of reflected energy above the audio band, and above 100Khz.
After all the network analysis, isn’t it easier to just scope the amp output and see if it’s breaking into oscillation?
(Hint: most don’t do that.)
and it's not always connected properly.This mentions the problem and shows the solution.
https://www.jensen-transformers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/as085.pdf
I was thinking more along the lines of how to stick an RCA on each end.
QED state that the skin effect doesn't effect audio frequencies ( despite going on about it in their X tube speaker cables - odd, VERY odd since they also use it in 50Hz mains cables ), so why is there a benefit in using slitted foil capacitors ?