Johan, I'll give a couple of examples of situations within my experience where cable differences were evident and the reason why, without resorting to handwaving or voodoo. I hate voodoo.
Example 1: Zipcord versus old Monster Cable (the huge stuff) with some high-end minimonitors and a big solid state amp. The differences seemed clear to all and all agreed on what the difference was: a recessed lower midrange with the zipcord.
On measurement, the zipcord interacted with a fierce dip in the speaker's impedance curve more so than the Monster. No voodoo, but 1.5 dB of unintended equalization. With a little eq applied, the difference went away.
Example 2: A low Z, high C high end cable versus Monster Cable, with some good quality two-ways and a very weedy solid state amp. The Monster Cable sounded hashy and bright, the high end cable was clear and easy to listen to.
On measurement, the high C cable seemed to be having two effects- it stabilized the output of the amp against RF pickup and it acted as a Zobel to make the speaker load a bit kinder. Whichever was the mechanism, the amp with Monster cable squegged and oscillated to the beat of the music, the amp loaded with the high C cable didn't.
My lessons from these and similar incidents: use good low R cable, don't do pathological speaker designs with wild impedance fluctuations, and design amps to be stable.
Example 1: Zipcord versus old Monster Cable (the huge stuff) with some high-end minimonitors and a big solid state amp. The differences seemed clear to all and all agreed on what the difference was: a recessed lower midrange with the zipcord.
On measurement, the zipcord interacted with a fierce dip in the speaker's impedance curve more so than the Monster. No voodoo, but 1.5 dB of unintended equalization. With a little eq applied, the difference went away.
Example 2: A low Z, high C high end cable versus Monster Cable, with some good quality two-ways and a very weedy solid state amp. The Monster Cable sounded hashy and bright, the high end cable was clear and easy to listen to.
On measurement, the high C cable seemed to be having two effects- it stabilized the output of the amp against RF pickup and it acted as a Zobel to make the speaker load a bit kinder. Whichever was the mechanism, the amp with Monster cable squegged and oscillated to the beat of the music, the amp loaded with the high C cable didn't.
My lessons from these and similar incidents: use good low R cable, don't do pathological speaker designs with wild impedance fluctuations, and design amps to be stable.
Panicos K said:
I can only speak for myself and the answer is No. Copper has higher resistance than silver. But that's easily taken care of. All I need is a copper wire with higher gauge and everything is equal. I have yet to see a reason to upgrade my 0.75-sqmm zip cord.
SY said:
You guys know more about the whys than I. But this is what people report about braided interconnects and the, especially by Naim nuthuggers, hated Polk Cobra speaker cable.
Of course, that goes against the consensus that low-C is preferred in interconnects.
Dave, you make a good point, and one I strongly agree with -what are we measuring? Perhaps in years to come previously unknown aspects of physics will rear their heads that we will be able to measure. I hope we do. Once there's nothing left to discover, there's nothing worth living for IMO. What saddens me is when people start to panic about things they don't need to -most of which can be traced back to claims made by cable vendors, many of them the willful or accidental misapplication of scientific principles which have nothing to do with audio -either deliberate lies, or sheer incompetance. All that drivel about skin effect, dilectrics, different geometry forms, OFC... my mind switches off around that point.
phn,you are right in your comments about copper and silver that is actually one of the reasons why silver interconnects are usually and correctly thiner than copper ones.Your preference for copper is respected but doesnt this alone indicate differences between the two metals?
Hi SY,
Mind you, those "weedy" amplifiers most often have the religious followers. 🙄
Hi phn,
Lession: Keep in mind what the rest of the system is doing. Put problems into proper perspective.
-Chris
Yes, I completely agree with you.
Mind you, those "weedy" amplifiers most often have the religious followers. 🙄
Hi phn,
Once you get to connection resistance, crossover losses and amplifier output impedance, it clearly makes no difference in comparison.
Lession: Keep in mind what the rest of the system is doing. Put problems into proper perspective.
-Chris
These cable threads really degrade when people start citing facts and using reason.
Excuse me... I have wiki-up on Heisenberg's Dog.
Excuse me... I have wiki-up on Heisenberg's Dog.
Hi Panicos K,
The purpose of the TV signal example was purely bandwidth related. Yes, r.f. signals are different; phase/bandwidth response is if anything a greater factor there than in audio. I was trying to indicate that a bandwidth of 20KHz is small regarding the influence of copper and insulation. To expand just briefly: If a cable manufacturer writes pages of patent document referring to effects that are really only relevant in the GHz region, like di-electric relaxation effects ....? How can I be expected to believe in his product if he does not know the basic stuff regarding metals and insulation? And what is the big deal about silver? It has a conductance roughly 7% higher than copper, but a worse temperature co-efficient. So?
It saddens me that you refer to what I "believe" or can hear. Firstly what I believe has nothing to do with scientific facts, on the contrary. I was hoping that the latter would be clear; I seem not to have entirely succeeded. With own hearing limited to about 7 KHz
it is not at all subjective; not about me (or this or that another particular individual). Especially Scandinavian research has typified this with selected "educated" listeners and done tests accordingly. Please don't shoot the messenger!
Regarding cables, I don't want to have a run-in with commercial firms, so I am chickening out of your request re cable makes - apologies! Four of them were selling for about $7,50 per 2m, two for over $15 and one for almost $60/2m.
Sy, I agree with you! In fact you were one of the reliable persons reporting previously about the tendency of some amplifiers to misbehave in the presence of cable C. As you said above there are certainly the exceptions. I certainly did not say that cables will never be responsible for anything. I was referring to normal situations; as said, the customer cannot be expected to hunt for a suitable cable to cure what essentially is a design shortcoming in equipment! (which is another subject).
Regards.
The purpose of the TV signal example was purely bandwidth related. Yes, r.f. signals are different; phase/bandwidth response is if anything a greater factor there than in audio. I was trying to indicate that a bandwidth of 20KHz is small regarding the influence of copper and insulation. To expand just briefly: If a cable manufacturer writes pages of patent document referring to effects that are really only relevant in the GHz region, like di-electric relaxation effects ....? How can I be expected to believe in his product if he does not know the basic stuff regarding metals and insulation? And what is the big deal about silver? It has a conductance roughly 7% higher than copper, but a worse temperature co-efficient. So?
It saddens me that you refer to what I "believe" or can hear. Firstly what I believe has nothing to do with scientific facts, on the contrary. I was hoping that the latter would be clear; I seem not to have entirely succeeded. With own hearing limited to about 7 KHz
it is not at all subjective; not about me (or this or that another particular individual). Especially Scandinavian research has typified this with selected "educated" listeners and done tests accordingly. Please don't shoot the messenger!Regarding cables, I don't want to have a run-in with commercial firms, so I am chickening out of your request re cable makes - apologies! Four of them were selling for about $7,50 per 2m, two for over $15 and one for almost $60/2m.
SY said:
Sy, I agree with you! In fact you were one of the reliable persons reporting previously about the tendency of some amplifiers to misbehave in the presence of cable C. As you said above there are certainly the exceptions. I certainly did not say that cables will never be responsible for anything. I was referring to normal situations; as said, the customer cannot be expected to hunt for a suitable cable to cure what essentially is a design shortcoming in equipment! (which is another subject).
Regards.
Yes, I know but you need to read The Heisenberg Uncertainty Priniciple in real life
It made me laugh and I didn't think I had that much to drink yet.
The problem with the uncertainty principle is that it's only correct if and only if you don't understand it...
Johan potqieter,I must apologize if for any reason I made you feel sad,I really had no such intention not only for you but also for any other friend in this discussion.Sometimes to transfer in another language your thoughts can hide trapps.Improving my English is one more positive thing in these discussions.I apologize if you or any other person here felt like that because of me.I''ll try to be more careful next time.
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/oddsends/drabittX/cat5.html
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
dave
- Status
- Not open for further replies.