gpapag said:
Hi,
As an ex-cable designer I shouldn't comment on what I meant as a bit of a cynical remark.
All materials (metals and plastics mostly in this case) have a sonic fingerprint even if there's no measuring gear to make it visible it's still audible to some.
Another pretty obvious phenomenon that's not readily measurable in the usual way is microphony of cables, multistrand versus single core etc.
Either way it's really amazing that this thread is still running after all those years. I said what I still feel is true about the matter so there's little point in me rehashing the whole thing again and again.
BTW, the cable in Salas' pic is one of Deltec's designs. I remember them from some audio shows in London about 20 years ago. They were not bad at all but I'm sure there's better stuff on the market nowadays.
Surely some of our British forum members must be more familiar with those cables than I am.
Cheers, 😉
That cable came with a ''Little Bit'' Deltec that I bought in 1990. It was about a directivity experience I had with it, so I found it and opened it, as I have promised in page 46.
I use a Stereovox XV2 nowadays.
I use a Stereovox XV2 nowadays.
"Other dogs bite their enemies, I bite my friends to save them"
( Diogenes of Sinope, one of the first Cynics and probably the most extreme one)
Regards
George
Hi. The article makes a sensible point, quote "....if the cables no longer act as antennas, the type of cable becomes irrelevant!....."gpapag said:
Of course our HiFi electronics should be built so they are un-affected by RF fields in our rooms.
fredex said:
I can't agree that it is RF alone that influence the sound, in that case the CS4.45, ES4.45 and MS4.45 cables should sound the same and it doesn't.
http://www.ecossecables.co.uk/Tables/table_frameset6.html
André
fdegrove said:
So if there is no measuring gear (that you are aware of) to detect these sonic apparitions (which exist according to you), exactly what were you designing as an "ex-designer"?
fdegrove said:
Other than a keyboard and internet connection, do you have any factual data/evidence of anything you assert? Can you share this with us please? Thanks.
p.s. "I heard this" and "I heard that" are great for ghost stories, but provide no potential for me to improve the soundwaves impinging upon my ears after emanating from my loudspeakers - in the really real world - outside of peoples minds.
cheers,
AJ
This thread has been taking itself a bit seriously. For the antidote ... presumably most of you have seen this link - but if not, it is well worth reading through these reviews.
Denon Cable Reviews on Amazon
🙂
Denon Cable Reviews on Amazon
🙂
From that url, quote; "...laid in a substantial bed of cotton yarn, bound with paper and surrounded in a soft PVC sheath."Andre Visser said:
A tasty dish indeed....and expensive no doubt.
I don't know if it is just RF or something else, but RF seems more plausible than the intrinsic properties of the cable itself changing the sound. I say this because of the blind cable tests done by many. It could be said that if changing cables makes a big difference to the sound of a system the system could be faulty or badly designed as it is affected by RF. But if one is convinced that cables have their own sound, there is no incentive to look for other causes. RF interference seems a reasonable cause to me.
Hifdegrove said:
Do you have any resources on this matter? I read lots about various materials affecting sound quality. As you say there is no measuring gear to make it visible but some hear it.
My question, is there any agreement amongst those that do hear these effects as to what these "sonic fingerprints" actually sound like? eg bright, dull, fast, slow, dynamic, compressed, etc etc.
fredex said:
My reasoning behind the sonic differences between the named three cables is that RF should have exactly the same influence on all three of them because the only difference is the copper conductors, the rest is exactly the same.
André
fredex said:
Related topic is wave field synthesis. By a wfs- speaker screen in front of the listener become possible restore the soundfield physically in all 3 dimensions:
http://www.syntheticwave.de/sound field transformation.htm
RF is tricky stuff, even with the same cables if they are physically moved slightly there can be a huge difference in the RF pickup, even total cancellation. I would be more interested in your comments if you could pick the differences in a blind test. If it doesn't change your mind completely it will surely tell you something about your ear/brain system and what is important to getting better sound from your HiFi system.Andre Visser said:
AJinFLA said:
Hi,
Of course there is measuring gear, peoples ears and very sophisticated equipment as well should it matter to you.
Do you really think materials don't matter?
If so, why don't use lead IC and speaker cables covered with your granny's socks?
Show some respect on a forum or at least make an effort to educate yourself, bashing others is the passtime of the frustated.
Cheers, 😉
Frank, at ETF a few years back, a presenter demoed a box that had different wire materials in it, all switchable. Different sorts of copper, silver, mixtures, whatever. The presenter's pick (blind) was a length of solder.
FWIW.
😉
FWIW.
😉
I would not be surprised. There are some amp/speaker combinations that might jusr require that.SY said:
SY, soongsc, in UK people made their own ICs with solder. Two runs stuck between sticky tape. Everything has been tried. 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.