tinitus, I was only joking, I agree with you, there is an optimum wire dia for each freq band.
Andre Visser said:
Still. Double check the calibration with some known components. Like I say, those seem way too close for cables of different constructions.
The inductance and resistance measurements were probably spurious- the lowest inductance range on that meter is 200uH, and measuring below an ohm usually requires a 4 wire probe. What was your hook-up method for each measurement?
For an interconnect, the DCR is very secondary- it's capacitance that's the big deal. Speaker cables are different- DCR is a very big deal.
SY, for capacitance measurement the 'other' end of the cable were left open, for resistance and inductance I've shorted the 'other' end. I'm using the meter regularly to match components and I have no reason not to trust the readings, I don't think it is very suited for low R readings though, it can do only two digits after the point.
The two coaxial cables are constructed very similarly, I will have to measure with a vernier for differences.
The two coaxial cables are constructed very similarly, I will have to measure with a vernier for differences.
Hi,
As in no sound at all.
He meant a single run of solid core for each leg for sure.
@Tinitus: Try to use the same gauge of solid core as used for the inductor of that unit and keep them about an inch apart.
Cheers, 😉
SY said:
As in no sound at all.
He meant a single run of solid core for each leg for sure.
@Tinitus: Try to use the same gauge of solid core as used for the inductor of that unit and keep them about an inch apart.
Cheers, 😉
Hi,
In what way are those IC different from each other, other than what you mention?
I agree with SY in that there's not enough difference between the coax and the shielded twisted pair.
BTW, does your twisted pair actually need extra shielding?
Cheers, 😉
Andre Visser said:
In what way are those IC different from each other, other than what you mention?
I agree with SY in that there's not enough difference between the coax and the shielded twisted pair.
BTW, does your twisted pair actually need extra shielding?
Cheers, 😉
tinitus said:I see now, thank you
Actually, it sounds more like I have got more midrange 🙄
More,or,clearer and better balanced ?(Less aggressive,less thick and more refined)
fdegrove said:
I see, good joke, Im slow it seems 😀
Yeah, same wire
Thats also what I think could be part of whats happening
Same wire for both tweeter and midrange
And I did get much closer to wire used in series inductor
I wonder, could that also be why I prefer wire wound inductors rather than foil ones 😕
fdegrove said:
The one coaxial cable use 'normal' OFC multistrand copper, the other two use 'long grain crystal' multistrand copper.
fdegrove said:
I was also surprised by the similar readings between the two, I've checked them again with the same results.
The twisted shielded cable are made like that. I've made a set of twisted cable without shield and I can't hear any interference.
Key said:
Very much alike,when you get the the wires right after the crossover.Frank has just given a nice formula🙂
Hi,
@Andre:
From the description of the cable it sounds as if you're in the rice business....Long grain and all that.😀
Sure the elongation of the Cu crystals is not going to make for a measurable difference all else kept equal.
As for the twisted pair, I doubt you'd need any extra shielding. Most cables sound better without it IME so unless you really need it, lose it.
Which doesn't explain the close readings between the three cables.....................
Also, as SY very correctly pointed out, ICs are NOT doing the same thing speaker cables do.
IMHO, differences between various speaker cables are rather tiny compared to ICs.
Ciao, 😉
@Andre:
From the description of the cable it sounds as if you're in the rice business....Long grain and all that.😀
Sure the elongation of the Cu crystals is not going to make for a measurable difference all else kept equal.
As for the twisted pair, I doubt you'd need any extra shielding. Most cables sound better without it IME so unless you really need it, lose it.
Which doesn't explain the close readings between the three cables.....................
Also, as SY very correctly pointed out, ICs are NOT doing the same thing speaker cables do.
IMHO, differences between various speaker cables are rather tiny compared to ICs.
Ciao, 😉
And the beat goes on...
Hum mmm,
That thread was started
May 25 2003.
I guess it is an indication of the size of the debate at hand!
😀
Cheers
a.
Hum mmm,
That thread was started
May 25 2003.
I guess it is an indication of the size of the debate at hand!
😀
Cheers
a.
No regrets, Coyote, we just come from such different sets of circumstances.
(sorry, couldn't resist)
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Re: Re: Loss of Information
The way I see it, in the absence of any added noise and distortion, the max amount of information a system can reproduce is dependant on its bandwidth. (And this shouldn't be an issue with even modest sytems.)
If the addition of 'unwanted stuff' is not the prime mechanism by which information is lost what is ?
Andre Visser said:
The way I see it, in the absence of any added noise and distortion, the max amount of information a system can reproduce is dependant on its bandwidth. (And this shouldn't be an issue with even modest sytems.)
If the addition of 'unwanted stuff' is not the prime mechanism by which information is lost what is ?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.