2-Channel Analog Interconnects/Speaker Cables - Page 15

No, I do understand how the subconscious works. But this doesn't explain every choice. Too simplistic, and totally ignores what is heard.

I'm going to really push your buttons one this one . These were impressions of the five different interconnects, as I recall (from cheapest to most expensive):

1. Highs sounded grungy and smeared out details in complex sections of music. Otherwise, neutral.
2. A well-balanced cable. Highs were noticeable cleaner than cable 1. Slightly warm sounding. I could live with this cable.
3. Similar to 2. except cool to neutral sounding. Definitely not a good match for my system and preferences.
4. This cable let more low-level detail pass through and gave me a greater sense of space and ambiance. I didn't really hear warmth of coldness, just seemed more accurate and lifelike.
5. This cable was very similar to 2. in cleanness and tonal balance, but was nothing special and certainly not worth the asking price.

Keep in mind these subjective findings were not immediately apparent, but required an extended listening session to determine. One exception was cable 1. It was apparent within 5-10 seconds of listening to a complex music passage that something was wrong. I would take the DBT challenge on this cable any day.

No it doesn't ignore what is heard at all. In fact if anything it overemphasis it by suggesting to control all non-relevant variables. Until you control everything else, you can not accurately pinpoint what it is you are hearing. It is a simple logic.

Agreed. But subjective opinion still holds a place in evaluation.

"spectrum" isn't a parameter, buddy.

try again

Heard? Hardly. Perceived, more likely.


What place would that be? Please be more specific.

"spectrum" implies more than one frequency and amplitude (complex amplitude, which gives phase as well). Thus when we add up all the frequencies + amplitudes + phases, we get more than two parameters. Is that broken down simply enough for you?

"frequencies + amplitudes + phases

Do you feel that different frequencies on the same channel have different phases?

Completely depends on the particular signal over a given time window.

OK. You really lost me. What do you mean by "subjective"? Do you mean "sighted"? I thought we both agreed on the merits of "blind" testing.

Not taking sides on this subject but some reasons why sighted "tests" and knowing which cable is playing would be a factor in picking one cable over another:

1-one is buying because one "falls in love" with the looks of a cable which may bias him into thinking it's also the best sounding because he wants it to be.

2-one chooses because of brand name. He may be more familiar with a brand so he "trusts" that one more than some more obscure brand.

3-if he knows the price. Maybe the most expensive one is too expensive and he never buys the least expensive because he's always perceived least expensive with being cheap quality. So he goes with one in the middle of the pack because he believes he'll get the benefits of the trickle down sq from the top of the line.

4-maybe he has a friend who's opinion he respects, maybe alot, because this guy does alot of tinkering with his equipment, owns more expensive equipment then he does or owns what he believes is equipment better than his own and this friend recommends a certain brand or says something like he wouldn't buy anything else. Now he's listening to the same cables and this is in the dark recesses of his mind, or even that he doesn't want to look like a fool to his friend since his opinion is trusted.

5-maybe he's read reviews and the reviewer has pointed out flaws or downsides in what he heard but another review where the reviewer doesn't mention anything about flaws in another cable not because there weren't any but he just didn't mention any or he talked about the great synergy with whatever pre or amp or other equipment he was using and he just happens to own the same piece.

6-maybe he has a bias to copper, silver, solid core etc.

So maybe he thinks he's buying because of what he hears but in reality there are other factors contributing conciously or unconciously.

Then you should definitely do a DBT. Sooner the better.

AHHHHH, IT'S A MAD HOUSE...A MAD HOUUSSE.
Charlton Heston, Planet of the Apes

I didn't know Charlton Heston Died. What a bummer!

Your place. Have you evaluated various cables in extended listening? If so, name the cables and the associated equipment used.

Have you done the DBT you repeatedly suggest? Name the methods used, the cables auditioned, speakers and the ancillary electronics. Being an expert on the subject, this information should be easy to produce. You did document your findings, right?

You do realize that the test you suggest has been conducted time and again in the past with similar findings. Do you want to guess what the results have been?

Have you gone to space and seen that Earth is round?

cool it guys...

First, I want to say that I agree with your perspective on cabling, however, you are obscuring some things that actually do occur in cabling and it can become relevant at much higher frequencies. As far as this discussion, which is entirely concerned with "analog interconnects and speaker cables," these concerns are irrelevant, and your characterizations are fair. The only thing that is going on here is basically effects to amplitude, which can be frequency-dependent, but are easily measurable to a degree of precision that FAR exceeds our auditory capabilities.

However, at very high frequencies, cable capacitance becomes a concern(among other things), which is a serious issue with digital signals, and will affect jitter across the interface. This is an obscure impact, but it is one that affects the temporal integrity of the signal. I would definitely agree that this is not an audible issue, as has been described in several AES papers, however it is fair to say that cabling can have an impact on the temporal aspects of digital signals, and this can be measured. However, whether that jitter even matters at ALL (let alone audible) depends on what the signal is, and in most cases jitter has absolutely no impact because the audio signal is not real-time PCM, but compressed so the clock gets recreated later on anyway making the whole thing moot.

I have, and I did. It was on a several hundred thousand dollar system (probably closer towards a million if you include the dedicated treated room (the best I've ever seen and heard), which is a fundamental part of the system as well).

There has never been a blinded test of speaker cabling of reasonable lengths and appropriate gauge that has ever yielded audible results. EVER.

If it wasn't a blinded test then the test is utterly useless.

What exactly about the cable's capacitance (among other things) becomes a concern Chris? Is it simply a matter of the raw value?

No, not the raw value obviously. Only after the value after you grill or stir-fry the cable.

The two parameters are frequency and amplitude, phase is the relationship between voltage and current in a reactive system.
The spectrum describes a range of frequencies. The fact that you're unaware of this very simple fact is very revealing.

Thanks. I freely admit that I've only learned enough about this stuff to understand audio, which leaves me open to the charge of oversimplification when the discussion gets more general.

What you're describing reminds me of the old skin effect canard. Very real at high frequencies, but irrelevant down here at audio level. Still, a useful bit of smoke for the pseudoscientist types.

Hah! Another goober who believes in burn-in!

I was hoping for some additional info from you (I did ask yesterday) about that scope trace you posted. What was it connected to and what were the test parameters? Whatever it was displaying sure had some serious peaks and dropouts, then a real drop off. How long did you have to google to find a trace that looked like that?

I hope you did not see the GRAPH I posted from Canare about the FR characteristics of their cable and ASSUME it was a scope trace.

That would be sooooo embarrassing for you.

Now back to YOUR toys. How about some actual numbers that relate ACCURATELY to your cables' claims?

Yes exactly. Just like impedance is very real and quite critical at video/digital audio/data frequencies, but entirely irrelevant with analog audio. Same with the skin effect, a very real thing that has major impacts, but is entirely irrelevant with analog audio. Fraudulent cabling companies then frequently use these kinds of things and lie to unknowing consumers by telling them that they are designing cables to take all of these effects into account when they have absolutely no impact on the signal at all in the given circumstances.

Since these wallet drainer cable guys like interesting names for their products and since they are concerned about electron roadblocks in standard legit cables somehow impeding the full FR to a speaker, I suggest that a new tag name be given to these amazing creations- WhooshWire.

With these cables, no electron will be left wandering in circles (elliptical orbit) or just give up in dismay as he/she tries to make the trip to party inside the speaker VC and then safely back to the amp.

With these cables EVERY single electron, regardless of frequency or instrument of origin will have an equal opportunity for self expression.

For speaker cable, the very low cost 12 gage zip from www.monoprice.com (which I have and use) is likely the best value that I've come across.

For interconnect cables, either digital or analog, I recommend and use the BJC Belden 1694A Digital Audio Cable, which include the Canare RCAP RCA connectors, found here: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/...udio/index.htm

The one minor downside to these is that their solid center conductor does not lend itself to any serious bending.

Also at 1st glance these cables might seem to be not cheap, but their Canare RCAP RCA connectors are the best, and cost roughly $4/each (see www.markertek.com), making a stereo pair (4 connectors) a rather good low-cost deal.

Not to mention that you can get them to the nearest foot, and if you don't like them you can get a refund!!


Cheers

Actually, the drift speed of electrons is very slow (< 1 mm/s), and with audio signals having all frequency components >~20Hz, all the electrons will be confined to move at most ten or so microns in either direction (in 18 AWG wire, with a current of 10 Amps) from where they started. So, the only electrons that will be partying inside the speaker are the ones that were there in the first place. So, as clever as your idea may seem, the laws of physics just won't allow it. Sorry, couldn't resist .