I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2,081
fredex said:
Andre. Glad you still have your sense of humour intact😀 But I didn't make myself clear, I mean in all the millions 😉 of experiments you have conducted with countless cables, were you using the same speakers and amps each time? Maybe just maybe your findings don't apply to other speakers and amps. Smarter people than me say what's at each end affects the results, if you take that further what part does the listener play ? 😀
Click to expand...

I have found the effect to be the same on several different systems, I would agree that the optimum diameter cable might vary from system to system, on a system that sound harsh one will probably choose a larger dia cable. It would be interesting to know if someone else has a different experience.

The listener played a large role, without him the effects would not have been observed. 😀
 
#2,083
Just come across this:

http://82.95.237.142/mhsoft/spk_calc.asp

Scroll to the bottom to find the cable impedance calculator.


For 5 metre cable length (think of cable return the practical cable length would be 2.5 metre), diameter 1mm2, conductor Copper, impedance 0.08R. conductor Silver, impdeance 0.0793R.

So Silver is 1% better than Copper in conductivity based on the same diametre 1mm.

We all have golden ears to find the difference between the sound of silver and copper.

Someone is going to argue that the material difference, not the impedance, that gives the "difference" in sound.

Enjoy cabling.
Bill
 
#2,086
cbdb said:
I think alot of the effects you talk about in this thread are minimal to negligible.
1) Microphony: mic cables usually have at least 30 db of gain and are at least 20 ft long.
Try setting up a preamp with a shorted input into a tape recorder (any recorder) and record while playing loud music in the room. Does any of the music end up on tape? Then its not in the interconect.
...
Click to expand...

This is indeed a nice experiment ...

I agree, that you will normally not hear any music recorded from
that vibrational impact ... although in case of a tube preamp
i would not be that shure ...

My setting would be different:

Use the preamp, pump up the volume. Connect a complex signal
(e.g. Square wave, Sawtooth) to the input at low level.

Examine the recorded signal when the components were
exposed to strong vibration against the recorded signal in absence of vibration.

Shure there will be no measurable difference ?

I would not say, that a feedback signal is coupled into the
components by vibration, but the transmission parameters
may change due to vibrational impact ...

You think it is impossible ?

Kind regards
 
#2,089
It would be one of several possible test arrangements ...

Every kind of "accepted" distortion (nonlinear, phase and
freq. intermodulation) is tested under normalized conditions,
which do not imply typical (music) signals and (environmental)
conditions.

Am i wrong ?

"Science" is what you search for. If you do not search, you will
find nothing ...
 
#2,090
LineArray said:
It would be one of several possible test arrangements ...

Every kind of "accepted" distortion (nonlinear, phase and
freq. intermodulation) is tested under normalized conditions,
which do not imply typical (music) signals and (environmental)
conditions.

Am i wrong ?

"Science" is what you search for. If you do not search, you will
find nothing ...
Click to expand...

So establishing that an extreme and far removed case validates the idea that effects can be observed and audible in typical application?

It seems better to me to test under regular application conditions, establish audibility and any measurable effect and not hypothesis with examples that aren't indicative.

The reason you need extreme to see anything is because you need to hunt the problem to make it be seen. More fruitful enterprises to high fidelity are abound.
 
#2,091
There seems to be a misunderstanding:

I don't need newly defined methods for detecting
and measuring "vibrational induced distortion".

I make suggestions how to detect and measure them
for those who cannot hear them.

I am fine with clearly hearing them and optimizing my
chain step by step by calming down components and
interconnects.

The Problem is: You cannot change one single connection or
component and be shure to hear a reproducable difference.

In the beginning, there is always a component, which
causes more trouble than the component under question.

As you treat ALL components time after time, the chain changes
its behaviour. Little measures applied to all components are
preferable to applying "big measures" to only a single
component.

The process takes time and normally gives only subtle
results concerning a particular component
(like a CD Player and its signal processing boards e.g.).

Concerning the whole chain, the reproduction of music
changes in a way, which makes it impossible for me to go
back to the times, when i ignored those effects.

Kind regards
 
#2,092
LineArray said:


I make suggestions how to detect and measure them
for those who cannot hear them.
Click to expand...


A noble endeavour 🙂

Have you considered that in many cases attached equipment (amps/preamps/sources) is more sensitive to vibration than the cables themselves? The cables are quite efficient at picking up air borne vibrations and feeding them to whatever boxes they connect.

Regarding the measurements: i'm not holding my breath.
 
#2,095
analog_sa said:

...
Have you considered that in many cases attached equipment (amps/preamps/sources) is more sensitive to vibration than the cables themselves?
...
Click to expand...

Yes i feel this might often be the case ...

I thought once about surrounding cables near the connectors
with some kind of
damping plasticine or bread ? / some layers of damping tape ?
to adress that ...

Ringing boards and cabinets of the components seem to be
the worst problem indeed. Many components can be tuned by
bracing and damping the boards.
Tube amps react very surprisingly on damping sockets and
the tubes themselves.

Kind regards
 
#2,096
SY said:
Why not? I can't see a molecule, but determining its structure is interesting to me.
Click to expand...

Fully agree. To me everything, including somewhat "weird"
measurements e.g. , is allowed to form a picture for oneself
of what might be going on.

As long as i get good results with experimenting and listening
i for myself do not spend big efforts in measurement.

For someone more at home in the scientific or technical domain,
"creative measurements" might be the way to go on.

Kind regards
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom