The one I'm using is mechanically decoupled by stripping off insulation and shield for about 6-8" from the tonearm pug. Not that this was a deliberate design choice- I did that because of the furshlugginer non-standard tonearm plug that came with my arm, which was molded onto the old (unbalanced) cable. I had to do some cutting, stripping, and swearing.
Cardas makes a plug, but it's stupid-expensive and I can't in good conscience line the pockets of a rip off artist (yes, I feel the same way about Harlan Estate).
Cardas makes a plug, but it's stupid-expensive and I can't in good conscience line the pockets of a rip off artist (yes, I feel the same way about Harlan Estate).
scott wurcer said:
I must agree with all of the above.
Both sides can be guilty of the same sloppy thinking it's true. What I find interesting is how a person (no one in particular here) can become so paranoid in their own castle. I'd put it down to doubt at a sub concious level, as in 'protesting too much'.
fdegrove said:
There are thousands of people obducted by aliens every year. Tens of thousands that see Elvis in a local supermarket every saturday night, and perhaps millions who still don't believe we went to the Moon.
Should we be really wasting science on debunking any of those ?
When application that are far, far more demanding on signal purity (than a bragging rights of a local golden ear) don't stress over whether piece of wire is 99.99 or 99.99999999999% oxygen free, use stainless connectors instead of Japanese ancient silver over rhodium over Egyptian gold, at the same time having practically unlimited resources, I think logic is simple. And that is why science doesn't waste time convincing people like you otherwise.
Of course, you can simply join the other thousands/millions; say hi to Elvis for me 😀
How do you experience microphonie in cables? I've never encountered that problem.
The only time I thought I had that problem - the connector was not soldered on properly, so every time I touched the cable the signal deteriorated.
Microphonics can be a big problem in some cables, but usually into high impedances. Guitar cables, mesurement cables, that sort of thing. Don't know if it applies to speaker cables.
I have worked in labs working on brainwave measurements with tubed amps and pre amps (it was the mid to late sixties)and we used cable runs of up to twenty feet from the cages to the equipment, and microphonie never came up as an issue.
(cages because we were measuring drug effects on cats brains)
And those were just regular shielded mike cable we used, nothing fancy.
I also run ten feet balanced from my TT's to the phono preamp, with no issues at all (RCA out to neutrik) from MC systems.
If it "might be" an issue in pro - why should it be an issue in the home. It is apparently not even an issue in studios, using regular neutrik or belden cables.
Chairs at concerts do not usually have high backs but chairs used by audiophiles often do have high backs. It is another indication that many audiophiles may be struggling to recognise sound quality in any real technical sense. If you wish to quantify the strength and type of the influence for yourself it is an easy experiment to perform.SY said:
CAT5 isn't designed for uV usage and has none of the filler or damping techniques used in even the most generic, white-label microphone cable. It's not witchcraft, it's industry standard design practice. And yes, I have run into microphonics using improper cable with microphones.
rdf said:
Is there a physical/construction difference between a cable designed for uV/low level and a 'regular' cable?
jd
Still doesn't answer the question why it should be of concern to the regular Hi Fi joe or hi ender at his'n her home.
Science does not waste time debunking any of these because they are not part of the day-to-day scientific process. Scientists may get involved in debunking it as a hobby interest or for other reasons but it will be outside the process of "doing science" and non-scientists (e.g. Randi) may get involved for a range of reasons but this again is outside the process of "doing science".Bratislav said:
In order to start the process of "doing science" one needs an interesting observation and a scientific hypothesis (a testable one). If we consider audiophile cable sound then neither of these is present. Why audiophiles perceive differences has long been established even if they do not like the reasons and the alternative hypotheses put forward by those with an interest in audiophile cable sound are almost never scientific ones.
rdf said:
Nope. Of course, the impedances are low and the common mode rejection is high.
The only seriously microphonic interconnects I've used have all been Teflon-based.
analog_sa said:
So you don't know how AC works?
Andy, even in a high backed chair, one can tell that live music is live music. Of course, in my living room, one's posterior is planted on a couch when the music is playing...
Not all cables sound the same, not all cables sound different either. It's a matter of sorting through the snake oil and smoke and finding what works best in your rig.
janneman said:
Yes definately, check out Keithley instruments for electrometer cables and some good literature on low level measurments.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.