fredex said:Last night I swapped an IC, coax for shorter twisted pair Kimber. I liked the sound of the system better after the swap.
Does this mean that the new cable has a different sound to the coax?
No. It just means that, "I liked the sound of the system better after the swap."
When changing cables yourself you are also changing the measuring equipment, if you are aware of this you won't jump to conclusions.
Hi,
Excuse me for saying so but I fail to find the logic....
Ciao,
I thought I'd post an example of how small loading change can effect measured data. Measurements were taken at the terminals of a full range diver just pulled out of the baffle.
The measured data attached have a few differences I should mention.
The top graph:
1. My original basline.
2. Chipamp using SMD resistors.
3. Impedance compensation in speaker enclosure because of large filem capacitors.
The bottom graph:
1. Test relayout.
2. All non-SMD resistors.
3. Impedance compensation on amp board and uses bipolar caps to reduce size. The design is also changed such that the impedance is slightly flatter.
How do they sound? Well, the top has pretty good cymbal transients, but the soundfield has less depth and a bit less focus in the mids. The lower has better image depth, bit more focused, with some glare in the cymbals.
Hope this encourages some other measurements.
The measured data attached have a few differences I should mention.
The top graph:
1. My original basline.
2. Chipamp using SMD resistors.
3. Impedance compensation in speaker enclosure because of large filem capacitors.
The bottom graph:
1. Test relayout.
2. All non-SMD resistors.
3. Impedance compensation on amp board and uses bipolar caps to reduce size. The design is also changed such that the impedance is slightly flatter.
How do they sound? Well, the top has pretty good cymbal transients, but the soundfield has less depth and a bit less focus in the mids. The lower has better image depth, bit more focused, with some glare in the cymbals.
Hope this encourages some other measurements.
Attachments
Must be a different amp to the one I had in mind, which apparently doesn't have an inductor in the output, and relies on the cable having inductance, but not a low capacitance (and a minimum length of cable at that, apparently). I believe it also sounds the same running with solid core mains flex.
rdf said:If you're keep in mind many cable swappers are also aware of this, you won't jump to conclusions about them.
Yes
I believe there is a difference between just saying one is aware, to the personal discovery of just how powerful this effect can be. If we ignored all the uncontrolled sighted tests, then what remained would truly be worth investigating. IMHO of course.
soongsc said:
Can't speak to that model but by coincidence a partially disassembled TA1100 sits on the floor beside my feet awaiting a gutting and conversion to a Peter Daniels chip amp. The original circuit blew up too many times to merit a fourth repair. Nice case though, good use of purple.
D OB G said:
Seems to sound like an incredible success story in the marketplace for over 30 years. The very first specimen are still holding their resale value on the used market better than most "unconditionally stable" amps. Possibly because the values haven't been determined through proper DBT methodology
As of whether the sound suffers more cable neurosis, i am not at all sure. Never noticed a NAP250 to be more sensitive than any other amp. Then again none of my cables are high capacitance abominations.
hihopes said:
I believe it is important to understand all (as far as is possible) the possible influences that can cause "cable effects" so that the right test can be done. I, for one, have witnessed cable effects. Thus far I have found them to be so subtle that I don't bother about cables beyond ensuring that they are of a sufficiently good quality*.
I am currently (until proven wrong) in the camp that believes that the effects are due to cable/electronics interaction**, so I don't need to be convinced of cable effects.
* i.e., good shielding, low capacitance & inductance in the audio band and good electrical contact for interconnects (I use RG-59 + Neutrik RCA's) and sufficiently low resistance for speaker cables (3-4mm diameter multi-strand copper cable).
** As mentioned, marginally stable amplifiers (de-)tuned by ear or designer not concerned with out-of-band influences such as emi and loading.
fdegrove said:Hi, Sure, I know what you mean but what matters to the relevance of the cable swap is whether or not you were expecting to hear a change. Ciao,
I was open to the possibility, and from previous experiences I already had an inkling of what to expect. But in my mind there was another thought process that was saying there is no way it can make a difference.
None of the above would matter if I could just forget all previous experiences and thoughts and just listen.
However the influence that the mind can exert is not something that is totally under our conscious control. The unconscious mind is very powerful and it is possible to consciously expect one thing and experience another.
Apart from the people who believe in undiscovered electrical effects the situation is IMO that cables electrically measure differently and, depending on what is connected at each end, can affect the electrical signal differently. Because these effects are very very small in most systems (it can be measured) the audibility of this is hotly debated with one side minimising the mind's contribution while maximising the ear's abilities, the other side doing the opposite. You can accurately measure the electrical effects of a cable change in a system and the ear's sensitivity, but to measure or eliminate the mind's contribution we must use Blind Testing, as you just can't turn it off.
Maybe a yogi in a meditative state could be exempt
hihopes said:
More,after a few members said they can take a test,this discussion seems to have taken a strange direction:We are suddenly talking about a protocol,or,comments that indicate to an effort that cables under tests should measure the same etc......Perhaps next thing will be to be asked to tell is the difference between two totally identical cables.When till now many were saying ironically that a "high-end"cable makes no difference to a radio shack one,surely this is not what they meant.Also,when a true audiophile compares two interconnects for example,he surely doesn't know,or care for that matter,if the two cables measure identical or not.What he cares for is to find one within his budged that suits his system better.The issue here was not why cables sound different,but if someone can hear them.A simple matter of comparing two cables has suddenly become an issue without end.And finally,I am 100% sure that anyone here,believer or not can hear a difference and make a choice in his system.Or they want us to believe that all are using cat5 or radio shack as interconnects without any listening?
A very interresting thing also,would be to hear what system many are using and make these comments.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.