Uh Oh....
Hi,
Yeah, get yourself a real good one too...😉
Remember "Sneakers" license plate 180-IQ?
Guess not,😎
Hi,
Yeah, get yourself a real good one too...😉
Remember "Sneakers" license plate 180-IQ?
Guess not,😎
Koinichiwa,
Well, the problem IS the conductor. Let's assume 99.97% pure Silver or Copper. You will have a hard time finding anyone to assay a much higher purity that that anyway - claims by cable makers of "six nines" (I always somehow read that sixitynine - I guess I have a dirty mind).
Now within our conductor we will have many very long, drawn out (from the processing of the wire) crystals. So the 99.97% of our wire that copper or silver form crystals. So, where are the 0.03% "other stuff"? Yup, at the crystal boundaries, where they will have to be traversed by the conduction process, especially as such layers are often too thick to be "jumped" by the EM Field traveling around the conductor anc actually carying the signal.
As you are somewhat versed in Physics and Chemistry I think I can save myself writing any more. And we ever so much do want to avoid to enlighten such people as Eddy San's, whose ignorance again and agauin proves a source of great merriment to me....
Anything that comes my way. I do have my stereo primarily to enjoy music and sound in films.
Much of my recordings are late 1950's to late 1960's analogue stuff, before multitracking, solid state crap and the like FUBAR'd the recording process and SNAFU'd the capacbilities of previously excellent recording engineers, a process much accelerated and made worse with the Digital "revolution" about 20 Years ago and now finally completed with 56kbps MP3 and ATRAC-CD.
Sayonara
ThomasLMcLean said:
Well, the problem IS the conductor. Let's assume 99.97% pure Silver or Copper. You will have a hard time finding anyone to assay a much higher purity that that anyway - claims by cable makers of "six nines" (I always somehow read that sixitynine - I guess I have a dirty mind).
Now within our conductor we will have many very long, drawn out (from the processing of the wire) crystals. So the 99.97% of our wire that copper or silver form crystals. So, where are the 0.03% "other stuff"? Yup, at the crystal boundaries, where they will have to be traversed by the conduction process, especially as such layers are often too thick to be "jumped" by the EM Field traveling around the conductor anc actually carying the signal.
As you are somewhat versed in Physics and Chemistry I think I can save myself writing any more. And we ever so much do want to avoid to enlighten such people as Eddy San's, whose ignorance again and agauin proves a source of great merriment to me....
ThomasLMcLean said:
Anything that comes my way. I do have my stereo primarily to enjoy music and sound in films.
Much of my recordings are late 1950's to late 1960's analogue stuff, before multitracking, solid state crap and the like FUBAR'd the recording process and SNAFU'd the capacbilities of previously excellent recording engineers, a process much accelerated and made worse with the Digital "revolution" about 20 Years ago and now finally completed with 56kbps MP3 and ATRAC-CD.
Sayonara
Hi,
And a burden to others, so I thank you for taking the baton, T.L.
Cheers,😉
P.S. No Shaolin priest has come forward yet since none of the candidates were neither blind nor deaf...my bad luck. 😉
And a burden to others, so I thank you for taking the baton, T.L.
Cheers,😉
P.S. No Shaolin priest has come forward yet since none of the candidates were neither blind nor deaf...my bad luck. 😉
Kuei Yang Wang said:
You don't have to have it assayed unless you want to know the compoision of the impurities. Residual resistivity tests can tell you the amount of impurity down to very small amounts.
Well, in ETP copper, they're typically bound up with oxygen atoms.
Rather, they end up as small inclusions within the crystals, which are easily seen under a metallurgical microscope.
<center>
<img src="http://microstructure.copper.org/images/D1_017m.JPG">
</center>
If that were the case, then copper wire would simply be unusable and wouldn't counduct anything to speak of.
Where do you get this stuff? Audio cable marketing literature?
se
fdegrove said:
Yes, I do tend to be a burden to those who can only parrot marketing literature from audio cable companies who often just make stuff up either out of thin air or uninformed intuitive notions.
se
fdegrove said:
That's precisely what I'm trying to do. I'm sorry if that gets in the way of the fantasy and mythology you seem to prefer.
se
Hi,
Rest assured, there's no fantasy involved, no mytholgy either...just us poor engineers/listeners trying to establish that, yes, It does make a difference.
Try, experiment, do whatever you like instead of leaching.
Follow your blind Shaolin priest for a change...😉
P.S. Be a true DIY-er and do some experiments instead of arguing, Steve?
After that, we may still disagree but at least you'd tried iso depending on others doing the dirty work for you?
Oh, and in case you need hard facts e-mail Phelps-Dodge, after all they make all I wish for and have an army of engineers to answer all your Qs.
In case you need an introduction I might consider providing one...
Cheers, 😉
Rest assured, there's no fantasy involved, no mytholgy either...just us poor engineers/listeners trying to establish that, yes, It does make a difference.
Try, experiment, do whatever you like instead of leaching.
Follow your blind Shaolin priest for a change...😉
P.S. Be a true DIY-er and do some experiments instead of arguing, Steve?
After that, we may still disagree but at least you'd tried iso depending on others doing the dirty work for you?
Oh, and in case you need hard facts e-mail Phelps-Dodge, after all they make all I wish for and have an army of engineers to answer all your Qs.
In case you need an introduction I might consider providing one...
Cheers, 😉
Gentleman:
A very enjoyable exchange. May be again next Sunday?
Kuei:
I have heard the story of the copper crystals. I have even peered through a microscope and carefully made drawings of copper crystals with bark inclusions and the layered borders. I have also measured current a couple hundred electrons at a time and signals in the micro volts. The nature of copper was never one of the problems.
I guess I agree with electronic Zen Master Pass: Better to spend your money on matched pairs then magic metal wires. (This is, of course, is a paraphrase). The next best thing to buy is a good oscilloscope. Magic comes in Blue leds, polished wood, turned aluminum panels (like old Ferraris), and other world heat sinks
A foot note:
I missed a couple of exchanges while I was typing this including Steves photomicrograph. I went to college a long time ago and we were poor so they made us go it by hand. Or maybe they knew that we would never forget what we saw.
A very enjoyable exchange. May be again next Sunday?
Kuei:
I have heard the story of the copper crystals. I have even peered through a microscope and carefully made drawings of copper crystals with bark inclusions and the layered borders. I have also measured current a couple hundred electrons at a time and signals in the micro volts. The nature of copper was never one of the problems.
I guess I agree with electronic Zen Master Pass: Better to spend your money on matched pairs then magic metal wires. (This is, of course, is a paraphrase). The next best thing to buy is a good oscilloscope. Magic comes in Blue leds, polished wood, turned aluminum panels (like old Ferraris), and other world heat sinks
A foot note:
I missed a couple of exchanges while I was typing this including Steves photomicrograph. I went to college a long time ago and we were poor so they made us go it by hand. Or maybe they knew that we would never forget what we saw.
fdegrove said:
But literally ANYTHING can "make a difference" when it comes to subjective perceptions. However I'm not talking about anything that "makes a difference" with regard to subjective perceptions. The issue is physics and objectively observed behavior as that is the context in which the claims were made. If you've no interest in such things, then don't try and mix the two and just stick to what sounds good to you.
I've tried and experimented with many things over the years. However my resultant subjective perceptions do not establish any sort of objective physical reality. Which is why unlike yourself and others, I don't make claims of physical realities based on such subjective experiences.
If one is going to make claims regarding objective physical realites, then objective physical evience is what's required to substantiate them. Not this pseudo-science "I listened to this and it sounded much better, ergo I have proved that wire behaves like a diode" crap. That's the same sort of nonsense that the so-called "creation science" crowd tries to pass off on their idiot followers.
I'm not depending on anyone to do my dirty work for me. I'm simply asking those who have made objective physical claims to substantiate them. That has absolutely nothing to do with listening or having anyone do my dirty work for me.
It's pretty simple, Frank. If you want to talk physics, talk physics and forget about listening experiences. If you want to talk listening experience, talk listening experience and forget about physics.
Don't make claims regarding physics and then when you're asked to substantiate those claims tell someone to go and listen for themself. Stick to one or the other.
The engineers at Phelps-Dodge weren't the ones who made the claims here, Frank. That was you. Or are you trying to get the engineers at Phelps-Dodge to do YOUR dirty work for you?
se
Measurements?
Does anyone have any thoughts about measurements of loudspeaker cables? I've just just replaced 1.5m of 1.5mm diameter twisted pair enamelled copper wire with the same length of twisted 1.5mm fine silver in PTFE sleeving. The blasted stuff sounds better, and I'd like to know why. I've been wondering about a waterfall frequency response at the loudspeaker terminals.
Does anyone have any thoughts about measurements of loudspeaker cables? I've just just replaced 1.5m of 1.5mm diameter twisted pair enamelled copper wire with the same length of twisted 1.5mm fine silver in PTFE sleeving. The blasted stuff sounds better, and I'd like to know why. I've been wondering about a waterfall frequency response at the loudspeaker terminals.
Re: Measurements?
Could be any number of reasons, up to and including purely pscyhological effects. So if you TRULY want to know why, then the first step is to establish actual audibility. Short of that would be nothing but speculation and speculation doesn't answer questions. It's just the first step toward an answer.
se
EC8010 said:
Could be any number of reasons, up to and including purely pscyhological effects. So if you TRULY want to know why, then the first step is to establish actual audibility. Short of that would be nothing but speculation and speculation doesn't answer questions. It's just the first step toward an answer.
se
What about no cable at all?
How about if you soldered the output pins of your Gainclone chip or whatever right onto the speaker driver terminals? Would that not be considered the ultimate? Ultimate in low cost anyway. How could anyone reason that this approach would be undesirable, sound-wise?
How about if you soldered the output pins of your Gainclone chip or whatever right onto the speaker driver terminals? Would that not be considered the ultimate? Ultimate in low cost anyway. How could anyone reason that this approach would be undesirable, sound-wise?
Musicality Is The Key...
When the system is sitting nicely and clearly, just about any music sounds good.
For example, the other day I bought a copy of 'Canned Heat - On The Road Again'.
This track on most systems is an ear bleeder.
Sure the recording is revealled as not fantastic, but it is the music that gets through without additional system embellishment, and this allows it to be entirely listenable, and heel tappingly enjoyable.
I have plenty of other recordings that sound rotten on other systems, but on mine sound as good and as musical as they can be.
Rough sounding systems can cause sounds that clash with the program, clean and clear systems let the music through without adding ear grating harshness.
Some of these discordant sounds are attributable to discordant sounding materials, others due to amplifier load behaviour - low inductance LSP wire helps here.
Power sourced via pleasant sounding conductors can make a strong improvement.
I have devised a method that 'filters' discordant sounds, and preferentially allows sounds that we regard as chordant or musical through, and this adds the icing on the cake.
With my systems, there is no such thing as tinnitus inducing discordant sounds.
Eric.
Just about anything from 60's through to present.
When the system is sitting nicely and clearly, just about any music sounds good.
For example, the other day I bought a copy of 'Canned Heat - On The Road Again'.
This track on most systems is an ear bleeder.
Sure the recording is revealled as not fantastic, but it is the music that gets through without additional system embellishment, and this allows it to be entirely listenable, and heel tappingly enjoyable.
I have plenty of other recordings that sound rotten on other systems, but on mine sound as good and as musical as they can be.
Rough sounding systems can cause sounds that clash with the program, clean and clear systems let the music through without adding ear grating harshness.
Some of these discordant sounds are attributable to discordant sounding materials, others due to amplifier load behaviour - low inductance LSP wire helps here.
Power sourced via pleasant sounding conductors can make a strong improvement.
I have devised a method that 'filters' discordant sounds, and preferentially allows sounds that we regard as chordant or musical through, and this adds the icing on the cake.
With my systems, there is no such thing as tinnitus inducing discordant sounds.
Eric.
Re: What about no cable at all?
Well, I suppose one could argue that while you've eliminated a loudspeaker cable, you now have to make up for it with a much longer interconnect cable.
So I guess it would depend on which of those two cables one feels is the most important. Which could arguably be the interconnect seeing as it's handling lower level signals and will have at least one more gain stage that comes after it unless your power amp is just a follower.
It's rather like the law of conservation. You can't gain something somewhere without giving up something someplace else. Ultimately one has to strike a balance that works for them. Which will not necessarily work for everyone else.
se
Circlotron said:
Well, I suppose one could argue that while you've eliminated a loudspeaker cable, you now have to make up for it with a much longer interconnect cable.
So I guess it would depend on which of those two cables one feels is the most important. Which could arguably be the interconnect seeing as it's handling lower level signals and will have at least one more gain stage that comes after it unless your power amp is just a follower.
It's rather like the law of conservation. You can't gain something somewhere without giving up something someplace else. Ultimately one has to strike a balance that works for them. Which will not necessarily work for everyone else.
se
from what I get from this thread is....lets just wire up the transformer to the speaker and blow it up and then we will get an actual REAL sound of a live performance and even get the smoke show for free....come on guys.... This is not NASA....It`s DIY.....good cabling and sound practice works for everyone😡
DIRT®
DIRT®
Seems quite a bit has transpired while I was away. I was celebrating my silver anniversary yesterday, so my apologies to everyone for not replying sooner.
Thomas, thank you for your kind words about my site.
What is becoming apparent in this post is a division amongst members over subjectism and objectism. This in itself is not unhealthy.
What is, very often in audio circles, is the intolerance they have toward each other. The obvious outcome of this intolerence is hostility, and it is this hostility that discourages members who are in their infancy in audio from persuing their passion further. I am sure none of us have that intention, but nontheless, the impression given is less than inspirational.
My participation in this forum is simply to share my knowledge so that new members can be better prepared and hopefully don't have to go through the difficulties that I had to. I have no need to prove myself in debates because I have a business and a family to attend to. In the end, what really matters to me is making a living by doing what I like. With customers paying me up to S$40,000/- for an amplifier, I don't think I am doing that badly.
Thomas, thank you for your kind words about my site.
What is becoming apparent in this post is a division amongst members over subjectism and objectism. This in itself is not unhealthy.
What is, very often in audio circles, is the intolerance they have toward each other. The obvious outcome of this intolerence is hostility, and it is this hostility that discourages members who are in their infancy in audio from persuing their passion further. I am sure none of us have that intention, but nontheless, the impression given is less than inspirational.
My participation in this forum is simply to share my knowledge so that new members can be better prepared and hopefully don't have to go through the difficulties that I had to. I have no need to prove myself in debates because I have a business and a family to attend to. In the end, what really matters to me is making a living by doing what I like. With customers paying me up to S$40,000/- for an amplifier, I don't think I am doing that badly.
mcp said:
No, that's not it at all. At least as far as my involvement in this thread. It's not about subjectivism versus objectivism. It's about those who try and pass the two off as if they were both one and the same.
se
i will be one to admit that there is probably differences among cables...are they audible...i dont think so unless we're talking about extreme cases like superconductors and stuff along those lines...i have done listening tests with el cheapo 5 dollar interconnects and some medium cost 70 dollar monster cable interconnects...i notice nothing...now maybe i dont have "high quality" cables or working around airplanes have jaded my hearing...i take hearing tests twice a year in the navy and have no hearing loss (yet hehehe) i am very picky but not to this point...if we're talking about hundredths or thousandths of an ohm of resistance change...i'd almost guarantee you that not a single one of us could discern between cables...or if copper was used instead of ofc then everyone could automatically tell...tell what??? their buddies how much money they wasted on cables...but thats just my opinion...im not trying to add fuel to the fire but my ears dont discern...
dipoles to the rescue
dipoles to the rescue
Koinichiwa,
Well, I have to take your word. If you are familiar with HFN and Ben Duncans work than perhaps you can explain better than the concept of "milli/micro-volt diodes" what causes the various effects he documented in cables?
I remember one particulary interesting test where a 5m single loop of cable was measured using a comprator system and wideband noise (output from the cable minus the input to the cable, adjusted for the RLC parameters of the cable in situi) and the subtracted signal showed, depending upon the cables (all commercial units) anything from -100db to -70db, or translated into percentages 0.001% to 0.03% distortion, this distortion BTW being not present with a simple sinewave when measured as timple THD.
Whatever the real reasons for these effects is, I have heard at least two reasonable explanations (Ben Duncans Microvolt Diodes and Pierre Johannets MDI) and interestingly both BD and PJ take note of a sensitivity of the effects to the conductor metal. I have to go with Baker Street Resident SH/CD - "The explanations fit observed fact".
How did money spend on cables come into a discussion of the chemical and physical properties of metals? This is what really pisses me off. Whenever the "objectivist" fraction feels they wish to end an exchange with a "victory" they dig this "don't spend money on cables" chestnut out.
This is a DIY Board. Most people here probably make their own cables (to varying degrees - from taking an off the schelf piece of coax and fitting plugs to the rather extreme measures I take) and for many here it is probably interesting to understand at least the basic theories on potentially negative effects in audio cables advanced and the proposed measures to combat these.
It is interesting that in general there seems an agreement (among those who actually research the subject) that solid core wire is preferable to stranded wire and that in certain conditions silver is preferable to copper, especially where the bare, uncoated wire is exposed to air (oxygen and other contaminants). The Dielectric properties of insulation material are generally well understood too.
Now if and how audible all this is I will readily agree gives reason to debate and I shall again recommend to anyone interested in a basic test to obtain some Category 5 or better Computer Network Cable (Trunk Type with solid copper conductors - beware, copperclad steel and aluminum have been reported, also there are stranded versions of the wire - you want solid copper conductors).
Using this cable simply take pairs out of the Cable to make up some interconnect cables using inexpensive, nickelplate, plastic cover RCA's from Radioshack (most goldplated connectors are gold over Nickel or Gold over silver over Nickel - nasty combinations).
Then make a set of Speaker cables, simply tightly braiding 4 equal length of Cat 5 and in order to avoid excessive capacitance and making the comparison unfair by making a very low inductance cable wire in each of the 4 pcs of Cat 5 Cable all the 8 indiviual wires together and connect the resulting 4 "Litzwire" sections in starquad using the cheapest Radioshack Spade connectors (these are goldplating over copper) and crimping the connection VERY HARD before soldering.
The resultant interconnect and speakercables are sufficiently similar in RLC Parameters to generic interconnects and 12-Gauge "Speaker" wire that a direct comparison is fair.
As the Cat 5 Cable is normally Copper in PE insulation the key differences between the proposed "test" cables and generic Radioshack "Goldpatch" interconnects and generic transparent sleeve Radioshack 12 - Gauge will be the absence of stranding of the individual wires and the slightly lower DA dielectric.
Note, I do not claim that either the Interconnect or the Speakercable made from Cat 5 cable as noted above are in any way exceptionally good, but they provide a good method of comparison. In my experience the difference between the various cables is quite audible, refitting the entire signalpath (all Interconnects and Speakercables) maximises the contrast. Re-wiring a system consisting of CD-Player or Digital Processor, Preamplifier, Poweramplifier and Speakers with a 3m Pair of speakercables and 2 1m Pairs of interconnects should be accomplished for around 20 Bucks or a little above that.
In fact, for a reality-check, anyone with expensive commercial cables using stranded conductors is also invited to make the comparison. Do your test any way you like, but be honest about your reactions.
Sayonara
ThomasLMcLean said:
Well, I have to take your word. If you are familiar with HFN and Ben Duncans work than perhaps you can explain better than the concept of "milli/micro-volt diodes" what causes the various effects he documented in cables?
I remember one particulary interesting test where a 5m single loop of cable was measured using a comprator system and wideband noise (output from the cable minus the input to the cable, adjusted for the RLC parameters of the cable in situi) and the subtracted signal showed, depending upon the cables (all commercial units) anything from -100db to -70db, or translated into percentages 0.001% to 0.03% distortion, this distortion BTW being not present with a simple sinewave when measured as timple THD.
Whatever the real reasons for these effects is, I have heard at least two reasonable explanations (Ben Duncans Microvolt Diodes and Pierre Johannets MDI) and interestingly both BD and PJ take note of a sensitivity of the effects to the conductor metal. I have to go with Baker Street Resident SH/CD - "The explanations fit observed fact".
ThomasLMcLean said:
How did money spend on cables come into a discussion of the chemical and physical properties of metals? This is what really pisses me off. Whenever the "objectivist" fraction feels they wish to end an exchange with a "victory" they dig this "don't spend money on cables" chestnut out.
This is a DIY Board. Most people here probably make their own cables (to varying degrees - from taking an off the schelf piece of coax and fitting plugs to the rather extreme measures I take) and for many here it is probably interesting to understand at least the basic theories on potentially negative effects in audio cables advanced and the proposed measures to combat these.
It is interesting that in general there seems an agreement (among those who actually research the subject) that solid core wire is preferable to stranded wire and that in certain conditions silver is preferable to copper, especially where the bare, uncoated wire is exposed to air (oxygen and other contaminants). The Dielectric properties of insulation material are generally well understood too.
Now if and how audible all this is I will readily agree gives reason to debate and I shall again recommend to anyone interested in a basic test to obtain some Category 5 or better Computer Network Cable (Trunk Type with solid copper conductors - beware, copperclad steel and aluminum have been reported, also there are stranded versions of the wire - you want solid copper conductors).
Using this cable simply take pairs out of the Cable to make up some interconnect cables using inexpensive, nickelplate, plastic cover RCA's from Radioshack (most goldplated connectors are gold over Nickel or Gold over silver over Nickel - nasty combinations).
Then make a set of Speaker cables, simply tightly braiding 4 equal length of Cat 5 and in order to avoid excessive capacitance and making the comparison unfair by making a very low inductance cable wire in each of the 4 pcs of Cat 5 Cable all the 8 indiviual wires together and connect the resulting 4 "Litzwire" sections in starquad using the cheapest Radioshack Spade connectors (these are goldplating over copper) and crimping the connection VERY HARD before soldering.
The resultant interconnect and speakercables are sufficiently similar in RLC Parameters to generic interconnects and 12-Gauge "Speaker" wire that a direct comparison is fair.
As the Cat 5 Cable is normally Copper in PE insulation the key differences between the proposed "test" cables and generic Radioshack "Goldpatch" interconnects and generic transparent sleeve Radioshack 12 - Gauge will be the absence of stranding of the individual wires and the slightly lower DA dielectric.
Note, I do not claim that either the Interconnect or the Speakercable made from Cat 5 cable as noted above are in any way exceptionally good, but they provide a good method of comparison. In my experience the difference between the various cables is quite audible, refitting the entire signalpath (all Interconnects and Speakercables) maximises the contrast. Re-wiring a system consisting of CD-Player or Digital Processor, Preamplifier, Poweramplifier and Speakers with a 3m Pair of speakercables and 2 1m Pairs of interconnects should be accomplished for around 20 Bucks or a little above that.
In fact, for a reality-check, anyone with expensive commercial cables using stranded conductors is also invited to make the comparison. Do your test any way you like, but be honest about your reactions.
Sayonara
- Status
- Not open for further replies.