they are not made from steel, it is aluminium or brass, galvanized.
This is standard RF stuff. Available from here, for example:
< https://telemeter.info/de/hf-mikrowellentechnik/gehause-und-frasteile/frasgehause >
or
< GHFN E ..., Gehuse fr die HF-Technik, Gehuse f.case, Fischer Elektronik >
Thanks for the links. I was too late to edit my post wrt steel vs aluminum. Although if you need that kind of magnetic isolation, and have a sturdy desk... ;-)
way beat "fair and balanced"
maybe took a decade to become close enough that there still isn't good refereed disproof
maybe took a decade to become close enough that there still isn't good refereed disproof
Got the article and the boards. Although these days I am leaning more towards the Bill Whitlock designed InGenius chips for line receivers. I also have procured enough silentswitchers such that the first point ground is required is the power amp. Probably won't make the blindest bit of difference to how things sound in a domestic system, but I will know I have done the best that my budget allows to preserve signal integrity.. Of course in your line of work the studio walls themselves tend to need to be screened rooms
The Benchmark are well engineered low BS designs, but why assume Cambridge Audio don't do the same. After all they have many years of superb products. If you look at their turnover vs Benchmark and the cheaper casework there is no logical reason why the dacmagic plus should not be as good. The Benchmark will have a higher pride of ownership and that may tip the balance for those who cannot head a difference blinded.
For me, I need 5 channels of D/A so will slum it with my miniDSP until it becomes the limiting factor.
Got the article and the boards. Although these days I am leaning more towards the Bill Whitlock designed InGenius chips for line receivers. I also have procured enough silentswitchers such that the first point ground is required is the power amp. Probably won't make the blindest bit of difference to how things sound in a domestic system, but I will know I have done the best that my budget allows to preserve signal integrity.. Of course in your line of work the studio walls themselves tend to need to be screened rooms
Hey Bill,
Yeah I have always regarded Bill Whitlock as a smart guy and the links between our consoles at WXYC are Jensen transformer isolated which allow me to run balanced audio all over the audio plant without any grounding issues at all, but some people donna like transformers...I hate the noises caused by grounding issues even worse. The basic Control Room signal path is dead quiet, but we have musicians come in to play live when I'm not there to supervise and they run direct cables from guitar amps to an aux live console which can lift that console chassis from an AC mains perspective...transformers to the rescue.
The THAT 1200 series is a really smart idea, and despite having an electrolytic cap in the CM signal path, I have never heard any issue with them, but of course the cap has almost no voltage across it or current through it, and it is only handling CM signals, not the differential signal. It is a really innovative solution to a real problem most engineers don't even know they have in practice.
Cheers!
Howie
in any home audio system I put together, the inter-connecting cables and speaker cables are all short as possible/reasonable and carefully routed. isolated grounds etc is all that I have ever needed. now studio and console and long cables, that's another story.... but not the home audiophiles story. Unless it is a home multi-room distributed installation. So, I have rarely tried balanced wiring in preference to simpler circuitry.
THx-RNMarsh
THx-RNMarsh
Sorry, but this is no cure. Short cables are not enough and isolated grounds (isolated connectors) make more troubles than expected.
Short cables don't do anything, really. In fact sometimes they cause really bad instability. A fellow on another forum needed at least 11" cables on his Ncore based amplifiers or they would dump noise into the speakers... Also reflections on digital coax are worst under 6 foot, so goes a very old tale from years past on the internet.
Few audiophile products have true balanced XLR connections, suffering from pin1. Pin1 is actually universally good for XLR, but for RCA it is not. Too many radio/ham guys with different needs seem to spout Pin1 being advisable for all equipment. Frankly there's too many parasitic problems with many devices, particularly amplifiers, for it to always be a good idea.
Marsh, while you've stopped communicating I will at least give you this advice... For all AC cables in a stereo the most important factor is that they have equal gauge size for the hot/signal and ground/neutral. Coaxial and anything else are disappointments and the only factor I can find is that difference. Some cables project it more, others less. I use simple 2 wire twisted for signal, Canare 4S11 for speaker, and simple 3 wire for AC (often high copper purity). They could not be any more simple and so long as they're not of any bizarre patterns, unequal conductor sizes, or crappy copper, they're as good as ever will be needed.
The second factor is connector design. The average speaker connection is trash. When possible try to use connectors that don't make 90* turns or have strange shapes. Mentally try to picture how awful their fields look, and their capacitor to share. But this isn't as important as just simple twisted cables.
The one oddball in this factor is turntable cables that need to be shielded. The ones on my turntable don't seem to be as problematic as the average awful sounding coax. Perhaps it's simply a function of overall power levels flowing through them. I'd love to develop a shielded cables for TT's that have identical conductor gauges but one is a shield. It's that or use XLR connectors, but phono preamps that use them aren't that popular.
Few audiophile products have true balanced XLR connections, suffering from pin1. Pin1 is actually universally good for XLR, but for RCA it is not. Too many radio/ham guys with different needs seem to spout Pin1 being advisable for all equipment. Frankly there's too many parasitic problems with many devices, particularly amplifiers, for it to always be a good idea.
Marsh, while you've stopped communicating I will at least give you this advice... For all AC cables in a stereo the most important factor is that they have equal gauge size for the hot/signal and ground/neutral. Coaxial and anything else are disappointments and the only factor I can find is that difference. Some cables project it more, others less. I use simple 2 wire twisted for signal, Canare 4S11 for speaker, and simple 3 wire for AC (often high copper purity). They could not be any more simple and so long as they're not of any bizarre patterns, unequal conductor sizes, or crappy copper, they're as good as ever will be needed.
The second factor is connector design. The average speaker connection is trash. When possible try to use connectors that don't make 90* turns or have strange shapes. Mentally try to picture how awful their fields look, and their capacitor to share. But this isn't as important as just simple twisted cables.
The one oddball in this factor is turntable cables that need to be shielded. The ones on my turntable don't seem to be as problematic as the average awful sounding coax. Perhaps it's simply a function of overall power levels flowing through them. I'd love to develop a shielded cables for TT's that have identical conductor gauges but one is a shield. It's that or use XLR connectors, but phono preamps that use them aren't that popular.
Last edited:
Van Den Hul - D - 502 HYBRID (Halogen Free)* | Product (cable) used to to be standard SME fitment. Screened twisted pair, so you could run them balanced with RCAs if your phono pre is wired for it. No pin on as the screens connect to a bolt on the outside of the preamp (all 3 of them).
I note you recognize that 'audiophile products' and 'well engineered products' do not necessarily inhabit the same area in a venn diagram. The biggest issue IMO is that 'balanced' and 'differential' are two different things. You can have a single ended signal that is balanced. Many fall into this trap and develop differential interfaces that don't have much CMRR. Luckily you can usually tell those by the number of zeros on the price tag
I note you recognize that 'audiophile products' and 'well engineered products' do not necessarily inhabit the same area in a venn diagram. The biggest issue IMO is that 'balanced' and 'differential' are two different things. You can have a single ended signal that is balanced. Many fall into this trap and develop differential interfaces that don't have much CMRR. Luckily you can usually tell those by the number of zeros on the price tag
Last edited:
Glass full / 2 :
in any home audio system I put together, the inter-connecting cables and speaker cables are all short as possible/reasonable and carefully routed
Glass empty / 2 :
Sorry, but this is no cure. Short cables are not enough and isolated grounds (isolated connectors) make more troubles than expected.
in any home audio system I put together, the inter-connecting cables and speaker cables are all short as possible/reasonable and carefully routed
Glass empty / 2 :
Sorry, but this is no cure. Short cables are not enough and isolated grounds (isolated connectors) make more troubles than expected.
I'll come over and swap cables, barring bad equipment, you doubtfully will be ale to hear the difference if they follow my principles.
Bill, that cable looks perhaps useful. But I dont really trust your ears. Its not considered good practice to have matcbing conductor gauges. But I suspect theres a few measurements never taken that may support them. You seem to forget the complexity at times. For instance current drive amps are higher distortion but have less back EMF, but if you only look at the distortion then you could get carried away with insulting nick names.
Matching conductors make a lot of sense from the basis of Kirchhoff's law. you have a current loop, so why make one conductor a different impedance. In my case I have a balanced phono stage on the build and so the resistance in each leg needs to be identical. I would be astounded to find a good practice guide with a shred of credibility that suggests different conductor sizes.
The world of Flooby might disagree, but I don't live in that world.
Oh and I really care not a jot what you think about my ears, my hifi, my choice of music or my interior decor.
The world of Flooby might disagree, but I don't live in that world.
Oh and I really care not a jot what you think about my ears, my hifi, my choice of music or my interior decor.
They don't suggest different sizes but its very common to recommend coax, which is... there are benefits to lower resistence for a ground on a cable so that you can bleed off some mutual parasitic rf, but then you have a mismatch in the audio band. Again, priorities rule here. For the HAM guy that just wants a signal not saturated so he can get legible reception, the fidility of a music instruments timbre and body isnt really a forethought.
I have to admit, some of these things really confuse me.
Not the part about someone might see problems with short cables in a particular case that they don't see with longer cables. Maybe that could be sometimes. But if so, I'm not sure why someone would expect the same effect in most other cases. It seems like maybe most of the time it would more likely work out the other way around. Certainly, people often report problems with long cables that get better when they switch to short cables. So, even if weird things happen sometimes, it seems hard to believe there is a one size fits all prescription for avoiding all problems.
Regarding reflections on short digital coax, don't know why under 6 foot length would be more problematic, but it could be. Propagation delay in the cable is probably around 2ns/ft, so round trip time in a 6 foot cable might be around 12ns. But, not clear why a 12ns reflection, or partial reflection, would be a problem. For shorter length cables, even less delay. So, it sounds like the claim is here that reflections taking longer than 12 ns to bounce back to the source are okay, but, if so, why would that be? Maybe the transmitter doesn't like prompt reflections? I don't know, but would like to know more about it. Like is it claimed to affect every transmitter chip or circuit, or only some? Have measurements been able to help understand whatever is going on?
Okay, I will stop here. But, there are also some other claims that leave me with more questions, rather than leaving a feeling that I now know more useful stuff about wiring than before. Not sure what to do about that though. But, I guess maybe its worth a try asking some of the questions.
And, before a helpful engineer joins in to help, I know the theory already. I'm just trying to understand where the claims are coming from and figure out how much is really understood scientifically, and how much is hypothesized or similar, in some of the explanations that might otherwise seem a little unexpected based on, shall we say, elementary textbook theory.
And, I'm trying not to jump to conclusions. If somebody has something new maybe I can learn from, I'm willing to listen and think about it. And ask questions about any parts that don't make sense to me.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.