Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth3si 
thanks. but i wasn't particularly impressed by what i learned....granted it doesn't improve performance but doesn't it reduce RF interference which introduce the possibility of other unwanted noises.
Quote:
that's why i'm getting the high quality cable - it's coxial = shielding = more shielding > rca. i have ots of rca cables. they're not coaxial and there fore are more susepctible to noise rf interference. i say this from first hand experience.Originally Posted by SAM64
where do you get this stuff from?
Coax cables are inherently shielded, otherwise they wouldn't be coaxial cable.
where do you get this stuff from?
Coax cables are inherently shielded, otherwise they wouldn't be coaxial cable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk
That sounds to me like an advertising claim that was designed to impress small boys.
Reality is that excellent shielding isn't a panacea, it frequently provides no actual audible performance advantage, and that cables with outstanding shielding (e.g. Quad-shielded RG-6) are sold for pennies a foot.
I say that excellent shielding is not a panacea because on the best day of its life, shielding primarily addresses only a fraction of the noise pickup problem. Cables pick up noise from both electromagnetic and electrostatic fields, but shielding primarily addresses only electrostatic fields. For example, shielding has no effect on noise due to ground loops and most other grounding problems.
I say that excellent shielding generally provides no actual audible performance advantages because environmental noise pickup is not a serious audible problem for most interconnects. This is particularly true for digital interconnections, which are becoming more and more prevalent. Most people who are setting up systems today are interconnecting them with digital links like 100BTX digital networking and HDMI. Noise has minimal effects on digital interconnects unless the noise is so great that it actually overcomes the signal. Moderate contamination of the signal is rejected at the receiving end.
Another example is speaker cabling, where the signal is so large and robust that it has large amounts of inherent rejection of outside noise sources.
Finally, the unbelievable pricing of high end cabling is belied by the simple fact that commodity cables with incredible shielding such as quad-shielded RG6 sell for literally pennies per foot.
Nice try, but no cigar!
That sounds to me like an advertising claim that was designed to impress small boys.
Reality is that excellent shielding isn't a panacea, it frequently provides no actual audible performance advantage, and that cables with outstanding shielding (e.g. Quad-shielded RG-6) are sold for pennies a foot.
I say that excellent shielding is not a panacea because on the best day of its life, shielding primarily addresses only a fraction of the noise pickup problem. Cables pick up noise from both electromagnetic and electrostatic fields, but shielding primarily addresses only electrostatic fields. For example, shielding has no effect on noise due to ground loops and most other grounding problems.
I say that excellent shielding generally provides no actual audible performance advantages because environmental noise pickup is not a serious audible problem for most interconnects. This is particularly true for digital interconnections, which are becoming more and more prevalent. Most people who are setting up systems today are interconnecting them with digital links like 100BTX digital networking and HDMI. Noise has minimal effects on digital interconnects unless the noise is so great that it actually overcomes the signal. Moderate contamination of the signal is rejected at the receiving end.
Another example is speaker cabling, where the signal is so large and robust that it has large amounts of inherent rejection of outside noise sources.
Finally, the unbelievable pricing of high end cabling is belied by the simple fact that commodity cables with incredible shielding such as quad-shielded RG6 sell for literally pennies per foot.
Nice try, but no cigar!
thanks. but i wasn't particularly impressed by what i learned....granted it doesn't improve performance but doesn't it reduce RF interference which introduce the possibility of other unwanted noises.
Of course good shielding has some effect on RFI's impact on audio cables, if its a problem. That turns out to be a big if.
The impact of RFI on audio cables is vastly reduced by the fact that the well-designed equipment receiving a signal from the cable is generally very insensitive to RFI.
Anybody who says that the sound of their system was improved by using hyper-shielded cable is basically admitting that their equipment is substandard, unless they live right next to a high-powered transmitter.
If you want to score points for fixing a problem, the problem first has to exist! ;-)
The fact that quad-shielded RG6 is somewhat of an industry standard reflects that. But the way RG6 is usually used is vastly different than how audio interconnects are used.
Improved shielding is not a justification for expensive cables because making well-shielded cable is not an expensive proposition:
http://www.markertek.com/Cables/Bulk-Wire-Cable/Bulk-Video-Cable/West-Penn-Wire-Corp/HQ841.xhtml
The everyday low cost of the above quad-shielded, high conductivity cable is less than $0.15 per foot in reasonable quantities. So, what sort of premium price would using it justify?
Quote:
i use to hear people talking from my subwoofer and speakers...like a radio ghost just passed by.
People say all sorts of crazy things on audio conferences. Of all the audio gear types that I can think of, a powered subwoofer should be near the top of the list for being insensitive to RFI. After all, a subwoofer generally rejects everything input to it above about 150 Hz. The most common real interference problem with subwoofers is due to ground loops, which are totally unaffected by the shielding of the wire.
