Here's my take on internal speaker cables, which is exactly the same as external cables to the amp:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/cons...p-wires-what-do-you-guys-use.html#post2087965
Coax for speakers offers certain advantages with respect to low series inductance, which likely won't be a problem with fullranges since non-electrostatic FRs tend to show benign impedance curves, but coax also works well in noisier RF environments such as cities since it doesn't propagate RF crud back to the feedback loop.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/cons...p-wires-what-do-you-guys-use.html#post2087965
Coax for speakers offers certain advantages with respect to low series inductance, which likely won't be a problem with fullranges since non-electrostatic FRs tend to show benign impedance curves, but coax also works well in noisier RF environments such as cities since it doesn't propagate RF crud back to the feedback loop.
Rather than ask "what impact does skin effect have...?", I was just reading about it here:
Skin Effect Relevance in Speaker Cables — Reviews and News from Audioholics
I'm sure there are other articles that arrive at different conclusions, but this author argues skin effects are real, but insignificant in audio applications.
Skin Effect Relevance in Speaker Cables — Reviews and News from Audioholics
I'm sure there are other articles that arrive at different conclusions, but this author argues skin effects are real, but insignificant in audio applications.
Malcolm Hawksford - Publications
G4 ARTICLE: THE ESSEX ECHO: MAXWELLIAN THEORY AND INTERCONNECT MEMORIES, M.O.J.Hawksford, Hi-Fi News and Record Review, vol.30, no.7, pp.27-33, August 1985
Unfortunately no download, it is republished in the Vacuum State Cables Cookbook.
Some people dis the math, but i haven't seen a clear counter argument. Malcolm is no slouch.
dave
G4 ARTICLE: THE ESSEX ECHO: MAXWELLIAN THEORY AND INTERCONNECT MEMORIES, M.O.J.Hawksford, Hi-Fi News and Record Review, vol.30, no.7, pp.27-33, August 1985
Unfortunately no download, it is republished in the Vacuum State Cables Cookbook.
Some people dis the math, but i haven't seen a clear counter argument. Malcolm is no slouch.
dave
maybe, because no such argument exist ...
Amen.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Last edited:
intersting...i wonder if this is available to read online so i can read AROUND the subject rather than rely on a quote?
Id also like to know/understand HOW copper oxidation causes rectification of an AC signal, within a stranded cable. I agree that more SA equals more area to oxidise, however the bit that is soldered will not be oxidising under the solder. More specifically silver plated or solid silver stranded cable although oxidised wouldnt suffer from this, that is even if it is as bad as the quote would advocate, in copper.
File:Vdorna globina.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Another thing that bewilders me, is how on earth Litz wire would be good for a speaker? with all the fine wires, insulated from eachother, i would have thought it would form a fairly good capacitor. although having an equalised EMfield would be good, im not sure the capacitance would be all that low.
are you sure you didnt mean the G3? i downloaded that and it seemed to follow the thread plot....
Logically, mathematically, there is a delay and phase shift of the current. I see that and learnt that doing EE, but have never seen it derived.
However, And i hate to do this as i feel like ill get flamed for doing so:
just over 1ms delay at 100hz? whilst i agree with the calcs, i cant help but feel that 1 or 2 ms delay is NOT audible. If there is definitive proof that we can indeed hear that level of delay, id truely love to see it.
I say this as 2 identical waveforms, mixed equally and delayed (aka chorus), will exhibit 'phasing' colouration from around 6-10ms, and at the smaller end of the delay scale(6ms) the phasing colourations are only just within the audible range of hearing, and decrease in frequency of excitation as delay increases.
By this token, i would think that distortions created by a 1-2ms delay of the current wave would likely affect the frequencies far above our upper hearing limit, and should any other modulations of AUDIBLE frequencies be present, they i would imagine would be of extremely low magnitude.
However, im taking what positives i can away from it and i agree that current and voltage phase being different and a current 'LAG' is true...just under 1mm dia cores seem reasonable to carry maybe 3 amps peak, i might have to try it and see if i HEAR a difference, though i suspect the added resistance will only decrease damping and increase driver q
This makes an interesting, and more readable read lol
i particularly like the last 2 pages
Skin Effect and cable impedance
i particularly like the last 2 pages
Skin Effect and cable impedance
There's a problem with a hard & fast calculation of delay: how long must the wire be to exhibit this effect? 100 kilometres? 1 kilometre? 10 metres? 1 metre? Eventually one ends up with a reductio ad absurdum where a 1 cm length of wire will delay 100 Hz by a millisecond. Moreover, where does this effect start? If it comes in at metre lengths, then the AC power at one end of a house will be substantially out of phase with the AC at the other, and ring mains in the UK would fail in a most entertaining way.
But in other news, that level of delay is definitely audible in the low hundred Hertz. At a recent BAF Iain McNeill demoed his speakers, first with linear phase filters, then with 8th order phase shifts added. While I had a tough time discerning any effect at the 3 kHz tweeter crossover, the 250 Hz midrange crossover phase shift was noticeable as a softening of snare drum transients, and the effect was not subtle.
Kunchur's research shows that at least some people (5 out the 5 in his research) can hear 5 usec time differences. 1 msec is 200 times as large.
dave
unfortunately, i smell snake oil
5usecs? are you smoking the mary? in that time the sound wave advances 1.6mm. and you think you can hear that 1.6mm advancement? to do that you would have to be able to echo-locate like a bat, in ultrasonics.
i suspect even a blind man couldnt hear part of the sound arriving 2mm ahead of another part. This would constitute AUDIBLE V.E.R., something which i believe hasnt actually been proven or anywhere near to being proven.
Skin Effect Interview with Dr. Howard Johnson — Reviews and News from Audioholics
5usecs? are you smoking the mary? in that time the sound wave advances 1.6mm. and you think you can hear that 1.6mm advancement? to do that you would have to be able to echo-locate like a bat, in ultrasonics.
i suspect even a blind man couldnt hear part of the sound arriving 2mm ahead of another part. This would constitute AUDIBLE V.E.R., something which i believe hasnt actually been proven or anywhere near to being proven.
Skin Effect Interview with Dr. Howard Johnson — Reviews and News from Audioholics
lol yes indeed, along with the 3phase current imbalance issues and neutral currents thus generated, in not JUST the UK my friend.....
with a 8th order filter it would be....Dave correct me if im wrong:
8th order filter will display a 720 degree phase shift, which is 2 cycles.
at 250 1/F = 1/250 = .004 seconds
thus time delay in that situation can be approximated as 2*0.004 seconds
ie = 8ms which is NOT 1-2ms.
anything over about 5ms i KNOW is audible, these speakers would indeed have sounded awful with an 8th order phase shift applied, which is why youd have to be mad to use and 8th order filter for anything
and this is JUST the phase change in one filter, the net phase difference may be more still
my point is that i dont believe that delays of less than 1ms is audible, and certainly not audible below 3figures of Usecs, even they, and even more contentious, is the level of perceivable colouration from sub millisecond delays.
Last edited:
People here have the understanding of phase shift of about 1938. Things have progressed since then. I can show examples from 1938 when OHM'S LAW OF ACOUSTICS was believed, to research at Bell labs, to some of the latest data. Most here are completely in the dark about time delay and its effects.
i could see a 5usec time delay, on a scope. or 5usec 'hangover' if it were measured. like and extra parasitic cycle at the end of a 20khz tone burst...that would be about 5usec period time.
If it was a more reasonable delay time quoted, (read possible to reproduce without 'release' cycles), and centred at 1 or 2 kHz then id find it an easier pill to swallow.
since it wasnt and since the spectral decay on most, if not all loudspeakers is greater than 5usecs i find this incredibly hard to believe, unless someone made a loudspeaker that can reproduce a toneburst of 5usecs with zero hangover oscillation.....
Last edited:
5 years of research. 2 different methodologies. Published in 3 accredited scientific journals. Duplicated by another researcher.
You don't get much solider than that.
dave
Prepare to have your world shaken. You & i exist today because our ancestors developed that kind of aquity... otherwise they would have been lunch.
dave
whilst i dont doubt the tests have been done, by however many people, and credited, i cannot automatically believe it. Just the same as i cannot discredit it either. i just dont 'believe' (the operative word here).
surely if we could create a driver which could reproduce a 5usec pulse with zero hangover, then we'd all be clamouring for one?
Also, im not even sure an anechoic chamber decay time is much less than 5usec, or even the eardrums decay envelope.
The methodology of this test clearly makes all the difference to the result obtained-until i learn of the actual procedure, and consider it myself, i will not be able to "have my world shaken".
essentially Newton was wrong, but the science worked until Quantum mechanics arrived, and now even that is also in dispute, and new theories emerge. that is the way of science and i greatly respect those that try to push the boundaries of understanding and theory. On that path , however, mistakes are made, theories proved and subsequently disproved, only for another theory to evolve.
Any(past or present) theory based on subjective evaluations is highly questionable, whether its a blind, double blind or other test. Back to the subject: i HAVE tried several types of wire, and never heard any difference other than a 'choking' of quality when using smaller (apparently better...) gauges of solid wire. I have good hearing and i am a competant musician, like many here, so its not deafness at fault. maybe if i were listening in an acoustically perfect or near as environment, with little or no reverb, then i may hear something. since im not, and dont intend to, i dont see the fuss.
surely if we could create a driver which could reproduce a 5usec pulse with zero hangover, then we'd all be clamouring for one?
Also, im not even sure an anechoic chamber decay time is much less than 5usec, or even the eardrums decay envelope.
The methodology of this test clearly makes all the difference to the result obtained-until i learn of the actual procedure, and consider it myself, i will not be able to "have my world shaken".
essentially Newton was wrong, but the science worked until Quantum mechanics arrived, and now even that is also in dispute, and new theories emerge. that is the way of science and i greatly respect those that try to push the boundaries of understanding and theory. On that path , however, mistakes are made, theories proved and subsequently disproved, only for another theory to evolve.
Any(past or present) theory based on subjective evaluations is highly questionable, whether its a blind, double blind or other test. Back to the subject: i HAVE tried several types of wire, and never heard any difference other than a 'choking' of quality when using smaller (apparently better...) gauges of solid wire. I have good hearing and i am a competant musician, like many here, so its not deafness at fault. maybe if i were listening in an acoustically perfect or near as environment, with little or no reverb, then i may hear something. since im not, and dont intend to, i dont see the fuss.
You can't say he was wrong. You can only say that at extreme scales it starts to break down.
And Newtonian Physics were only a part of his contributions.
dave
yes it was a generalisation-but thats essentially what i was saying
my dry englishness seems to confuse people
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.