quasi said:
He wasn't measuring a speaker, he was measuring the cable... the 0.22R was used to shelve the whole works up, then it was normalized out. A cable with no resistance & no phase shift would then overlay the X axis.
dave
planet10 said:
Well, that's the point for me. For me, I don't want the cable to change ANYTHING as far as possibly. So I look for low impedance which means good damping, and I look for low L and low C. Ideally I would want thick buss bars of 1 inch length between my amp and speaker, but that is a bit impractical.
As I said, I can understand that other people look for cables that "complement" their speakers in that they change, subtle or not, the sound color or balance because they like it that way - fine with me.
But having different goals naturally we end up with different choices. One not inconsequential advantage of "my way" is that I can get nirwana on 3 $ a foot 😉
Jan Didden
Capacitance and inductance are a trade off. Some transistor amplifiers (Naim spring to mind) used to blow if the high capacitance cables are used. These are the ones that were basically two metal tapes with an insulator sheet between them and were meant to be a reasnable impedance match to a speaker. The opposite extreme is the DNM Reson type which looks like a VHF antenna ribbon cable with an RF impedance of several hundred Ohms.panomaniac said:
I suspect class Ds maybe less affected by cables because the output filter has to be very effective at RF frequencies and will act as a short circuit to any RF signals picked up. Most traditional amplifiers are not well designed for RF rejection.
I have an older brother who has been there, seen it all and done it many times over who maintains that differences in the sound of cables cannot and do not exist and that measurement and science confirm this.
He then sits and listens when I change out cables only to shrug his shoulders when he too hears a difference.
The shrugging of the shoulders comes from hearing something he KNOWS can't happen, happen.
And of course the fact that to him that its such a small difference as to be inconsequential. He then goes home and listens on his all-in-one Sony system and don't give a damn, he just likes the music that comes out.
Must be a moral there somewhere?
He then sits and listens when I change out cables only to shrug his shoulders when he too hears a difference.
The shrugging of the shoulders comes from hearing something he KNOWS can't happen, happen.
And of course the fact that to him that its such a small difference as to be inconsequential. He then goes home and listens on his all-in-one Sony system and don't give a damn, he just likes the music that comes out.
Must be a moral there somewhere?
It's OK to tell your brother that even hard-core rationalists and engineering types accept that cables can make a difference. If he cares. The difference is that the hard-core guys don't believe (and there's no evidence to believe) that any of the differences are anything mysterious. R, L, C, noise pickup, amp stability, they're all well-known and easily dealt with.
The Polk cables mentioned earlier were notorious amp-killers. I suspect even your brother would admit that an amp with blown output transistors will sound audibly different.
The Polk cables mentioned earlier were notorious amp-killers. I suspect even your brother would admit that an amp with blown output transistors will sound audibly different.
janneman said:
If you redo the math... the change in damping from any of these cables is insignificant, but the phase effects in the top octaves sure aren't.... choose your poison i guess.
Big Bucks... my cables run <10 cents a foot.
dave
One thing for sure that makes a difference
Polk did a speaker wire some years back where they actually did a 8 ohm wire. I suspect its the one mentioned by Pass in the chart a few pages back.
Matt Polk told me that it was just a mess, becuase the wires would blow up sometimes rather good amps. His conclusion was, hey, its a transmition line, and the reflections wack the amp out.
That's not a quote, but my summary.
I suspect that's only one affect wires can have.
I suspect that tube amps have pretty high output impendances and damp the affect to a large degree.
Solid state, A or A/B amps likely are most affected as the output isn't such poor input once your operating above and beyond the closed loop gain.
I don' t make any real claims about all this, just a hunch.
It still kind of amazes me that no one has really figured it out yet.
Hey, maybe someone did, I really haven't been reading to careful.
It seems a speaker wire should be terminated at high frequencies by series RC such that the R is the characteristic impedance, and the C small enough to be well out of audio, but large enough to catch any standing waves.
I think this is actually way more important in line level stuff though.
Regards,
Mike
Polk did a speaker wire some years back where they actually did a 8 ohm wire. I suspect its the one mentioned by Pass in the chart a few pages back.
Matt Polk told me that it was just a mess, becuase the wires would blow up sometimes rather good amps. His conclusion was, hey, its a transmition line, and the reflections wack the amp out.
That's not a quote, but my summary.
I suspect that's only one affect wires can have.
I suspect that tube amps have pretty high output impendances and damp the affect to a large degree.
Solid state, A or A/B amps likely are most affected as the output isn't such poor input once your operating above and beyond the closed loop gain.
I don' t make any real claims about all this, just a hunch.
It still kind of amazes me that no one has really figured it out yet.
Hey, maybe someone did, I really haven't been reading to careful.
It seems a speaker wire should be terminated at high frequencies by series RC such that the R is the characteristic impedance, and the C small enough to be well out of audio, but large enough to catch any standing waves.
I think this is actually way more important in line level stuff though.
Regards,
Mike
Re: One thing for sure that makes a difference
aka Cobra Cable -- blew up many a PS audio amp around here
dave
Portlandmike said:
aka Cobra Cable -- blew up many a PS audio amp around here
dave
Hi,
I finished up a cat-5 , ~12 AWG, gomer style cable, about 5' long.
I did an A/B (left/right) test with it going up against my 15' 10 AWG monster cable on my UCD based amplifier.
The difference? None noticed whatsoever, neither in the highs or lows.
Regards,
Chris
I finished up a cat-5 , ~12 AWG, gomer style cable, about 5' long.
I did an A/B (left/right) test with it going up against my 15' 10 AWG monster cable on my UCD based amplifier.
The difference? None noticed whatsoever, neither in the highs or lows.
Regards,
Chris
I'm not sure that I can tell the difference between Cat5 and silver plated copper multistrand stuff on my Class d amp.
But I can on the tube amp and the Gainclone.
But I can on the tube amp and the Gainclone.
I hope the discussion is now lively enough!
But I think an objective view of what is on the table is required: I do not detect anyone taking part on this thread, supporting a certain subjectivist position that objective measurements are unimportant compared with the subjective impression gained by listening tests, and where the two contradict the measurements may be dismissed. As said one must respect folks' experiences, but then by the same token also the results of well organised tests.
Very often such tests consist of too few samples to be statistically valid. A simple example will be where a coin is tossed and the expected result is 50% correct guessing - as is indeed shown in tests of 200 samples or more. But in one where I was involved, some called correctly in 8 out of 10 successive tosses. (I was sometimes wrong in 5 out of 7 instances.) This could clearly be interpreted as a result one way or the other, yet the full test of 200 tosses showed a very close 50% result.
To go to the very neat graphs presented: if I understood correctly the investigator used a "perfect" 0,22 ohm load (achieving this by normalising). I see that some showed a 45 degree phase angle at about 50 KHz, a convenient value because ths is where the reactive impedance equals the resistive load. Calculation shows that the cable inductance is then 0,7 uH, a value in the region of my own measurements and others.
But if we put this in a practical circuit, an 8 ohm load would show a phase shift of only 1,26 degrees at 50 KHz. (And this ignores the fact that an 8 ohm loudspeaker goes up past some 20 ohms at 20 KHz.) This result is far from the conclusion made by the investigator that there is definite phase shift in the audio band.
I am also confused where the cable "impedance" is brough into the scene at audio frequencies - this does not enter the picture unless the length is several hundred metres (approaching 0,15 wavelength or more).
As far as hearing is concerned, I would agree with the exceptional properties of the ear in some respects; I was involved in research regarding that. But hearing can tolerate copious amounts of 2nd harmonic distortion and some 3rd harmonics, and the memory of the ear is quite poor. In music the 2nd harmonic is an octave higher; much music could be heard as improved by this. I understand that 3rd harmonics can make string instruments sound more crisp; again something that can sound quite acceptable.
I would be the first to adopt any cable with undisputable proof of superiority, but so far I have not seen that. This in no way compromises anyone's right to use what sounds best to him/her, but there is much evidence that this remains contradictory, and while such is the case one has to be a little more strict before declaring this or that cable as superior. And I definitely draw the line where I am required to accept that 3+5=11 simply because some heard something.
Thanks for patience!
But I think an objective view of what is on the table is required: I do not detect anyone taking part on this thread, supporting a certain subjectivist position that objective measurements are unimportant compared with the subjective impression gained by listening tests, and where the two contradict the measurements may be dismissed. As said one must respect folks' experiences, but then by the same token also the results of well organised tests.
Very often such tests consist of too few samples to be statistically valid. A simple example will be where a coin is tossed and the expected result is 50% correct guessing - as is indeed shown in tests of 200 samples or more. But in one where I was involved, some called correctly in 8 out of 10 successive tosses. (I was sometimes wrong in 5 out of 7 instances.) This could clearly be interpreted as a result one way or the other, yet the full test of 200 tosses showed a very close 50% result.
To go to the very neat graphs presented: if I understood correctly the investigator used a "perfect" 0,22 ohm load (achieving this by normalising). I see that some showed a 45 degree phase angle at about 50 KHz, a convenient value because ths is where the reactive impedance equals the resistive load. Calculation shows that the cable inductance is then 0,7 uH, a value in the region of my own measurements and others.
But if we put this in a practical circuit, an 8 ohm load would show a phase shift of only 1,26 degrees at 50 KHz. (And this ignores the fact that an 8 ohm loudspeaker goes up past some 20 ohms at 20 KHz.) This result is far from the conclusion made by the investigator that there is definite phase shift in the audio band.
I am also confused where the cable "impedance" is brough into the scene at audio frequencies - this does not enter the picture unless the length is several hundred metres (approaching 0,15 wavelength or more).
As far as hearing is concerned, I would agree with the exceptional properties of the ear in some respects; I was involved in research regarding that. But hearing can tolerate copious amounts of 2nd harmonic distortion and some 3rd harmonics, and the memory of the ear is quite poor. In music the 2nd harmonic is an octave higher; much music could be heard as improved by this. I understand that 3rd harmonics can make string instruments sound more crisp; again something that can sound quite acceptable.
I would be the first to adopt any cable with undisputable proof of superiority, but so far I have not seen that. This in no way compromises anyone's right to use what sounds best to him/her, but there is much evidence that this remains contradictory, and while such is the case one has to be a little more strict before declaring this or that cable as superior. And I definitely draw the line where I am required to accept that 3+5=11 simply because some heard something.
Thanks for patience!
Hi,
In the case of my test I'm used to making small changes to the system and picking up on the nuiances.
With the cat-5 type cable reportedly being one of the best out there to the expensive voodoo based cables, and less than a meter long as opposed to 15' of 10 gauge monster cable, I half expected "some" difference. On the other hand, this is the type of amplifier that maintains tonal character from one speaker to the next.
I first I thought I heard a difference and was impressed with the cat-5. My friend disagreed. We switched places and I took optimum listening position while he slide the balance over back and forth. In the right listening position I could honestly not detect any other difference than the speakers usually have with one another, and must conclude there really was no difference.
This impressed me with the amplifier over anything else, but I'm glad with the result because I was tempted to cut a few feet off my monster cables before in order to make them a little bit more "optimal". As it turns out they perform at least as good as a cable less than half that length, and I'll be leaving them alone.
Regards,
Chris
In the case of my test I'm used to making small changes to the system and picking up on the nuiances.
With the cat-5 type cable reportedly being one of the best out there to the expensive voodoo based cables, and less than a meter long as opposed to 15' of 10 gauge monster cable, I half expected "some" difference. On the other hand, this is the type of amplifier that maintains tonal character from one speaker to the next.
I first I thought I heard a difference and was impressed with the cat-5. My friend disagreed. We switched places and I took optimum listening position while he slide the balance over back and forth. In the right listening position I could honestly not detect any other difference than the speakers usually have with one another, and must conclude there really was no difference.
This impressed me with the amplifier over anything else, but I'm glad with the result because I was tempted to cut a few feet off my monster cables before in order to make them a little bit more "optimal". As it turns out they perform at least as good as a cable less than half that length, and I'll be leaving them alone.
Regards,
Chris
🙄
how many of these threads do we need? WHY do people discuss this stuff? i dont care which camp you are from, the issue will never be resolved, and comes to one of two conclusions:
1.) the measurement guys arguing against the believers
2.) the thread being closed by moderators
how many of these threads do we need? WHY do people discuss this stuff? i dont care which camp you are from, the issue will never be resolved, and comes to one of two conclusions:
1.) the measurement guys arguing against the believers
2.) the thread being closed by moderators
I think our brains are pretty smart and and if we want we can not hear what may be there, or add in what's missing if we want.
Maybe some folks can A/B compare cables and hear a difference, but it doesn't really matter if you only have A or B. Brains make up the difference. 🙂
Maybe some folks can A/B compare cables and hear a difference, but it doesn't really matter if you only have A or B. Brains make up the difference. 🙂
raintalk said:
To me that's like saying roseanne bar = pam anderson because my brain said so. My brain doesn't lie to me like that though, not even with beer googles.
I think it most likely has alot to do, or everything to do, with the amp in question, as previously stated, because of marginal stability or something along those lines. Kind of a chicken vs the egg situation.
actually, i think all of you need to brush up on psychology before making claims in its regard.
yes, your brain does make up things. its not THAT easy to fool though. everyone says that you cant possibly hear a difference unless its a blind test. not true. you can know which system is which and still accurately hear differences. you just cant have any bias to do this test. if you dont care which is which, you can hear any differences.
and secondly, your brain CAN trick you. the common misconception is that YOU are in control of your brain. this is not true. your brain is running the scene, your consciousness is just a kinda trick to make you think you know whats going on for the most part.
yes, your brain does make up things. its not THAT easy to fool though. everyone says that you cant possibly hear a difference unless its a blind test. not true. you can know which system is which and still accurately hear differences. you just cant have any bias to do this test. if you dont care which is which, you can hear any differences.
and secondly, your brain CAN trick you. the common misconception is that YOU are in control of your brain. this is not true. your brain is running the scene, your consciousness is just a kinda trick to make you think you know whats going on for the most part.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.