Cable Myths Continued

[Mallette]

put it all into a single, smaller box that contains everything.

How many times have I said over the years that if I could get a little black box with a volume control that presented a signal to my ears that was as close to the original acoustic time/space event as possible I'd be totally happy.

It's the unified audiophile theory.

Dave

[Don Richard]

Double post.

Edited February 1, 2014 by Don Richard

[dtel]

put it all into a single, smaller box that contains everything.

How many times have I said over the years that if I could get a little black box with a volume control that presented a signal to my ears that was as close to the original acoustic time/space event as possible I'd be totally happy.

It's the unified audiophile theory.

Dave

37, that was 38, I have been counting.

All this cable myth BS, it's true you need the cables, it's not a myth

[Mallette]

Hey, dtel...OT. Are you Christy, or any others of your wonderful bunch coming to the late March rabble planning to lynch the Hope Arts Council? It's gonna be good...

Dave

[ZAKO]

The last recording I made was with the ST.LOUIS PHILHARMONIC, USEING 4 Phased array Sennheiser mics... Behthoven SYM. #9 It was a disaster,,,You cant do it with just 4 mics..run with 200 feet of cable to a room off stage..

[Mallette]

The last recording I made was with the ST.LOUIS PHILHARMONIC, USEING 4 Phased array Sennheiser mics... Behthoven SYM. #9 It was a disaster,,,You cant do it with just 4 mics..run with 200 feet of cable to a room off stage.

Would like to know more, on or offline.

Dave

[dtel]

Hey, dtel...OT. Are you Christy, or any others of your wonderful bunch coming to the late March rabble planning to lynch the Hope Arts Council? It's gonna be good...

Dave

I wish we could but no, part of the reason I have read very little about it, kind of makes me sick missing it.

[Don Richard]

I'm still selecting components. What I've done till now is to run experiments to prove a concept; my goal is to reduce the clutter of having a processor and 3 amplifiers connected together with enough wire to choke a horse and put it all into a single, smaller box that contains everything. I'm investigating class D amplification to see if that would be suitable for some or all of the channels, then I'm probably going to build it all myself. It's a work in progress.

What's the selection process or criteria?. What would make you pick one small box over the other?

The box would have to be large enough to contain all of the parts that it would take to do the job, no bigger than necessary. We recently did a job for an industrial application where we built an enclosure that contained 3 high power lasers along with power supplies and control circuitry. The box had 1/2 inch radius corners and we had it powder coated. It was quite attractive and I'm leaning in that direction for this project.

Edited February 1, 2014 by Don Richard

[psg]

If your premise is that 15 feet of speaker wire can alter the sound signal so much from what it should be, then isn't it a lost cause considering the hundreds of feet of ordinary wire the signal had to go through to get recorded? It must be messed up beyond recognition by then.

Consider a commercial CD. Everything that went into making it is unknown to the guy about to put it in his CD player at home. There may be lots of assumptions at how it was made, but that's all. What you are holding is a container with two AC signals encoded. Nothing else.

Now you want to use it to make sound in the room. The sound you end up with, is directly related to the gears you run that signal through. Are you using a

-Small table radio?

-A massive stereo comprised of 6 amplifiers, massive theater sized speakers, computerized equalizers?

-Modest stereo with a $200 receiver?

Whatever system it is, it can be simulated by an equivalent circuit. Every resistance, every capacitance stray or otherwise, every inductance, every reactance and admittance no matter where it is located - even in wires, no matter how small or large, goes into the final sound. The circuit in total begins with the laser and ends with the speaker. Nothing in that chain can be excluded from the equivalent circuit. Everything contributes to the final sound. The reason the sound is different in each of those systems above is because the electrical properties of the things in the circuit are different. There is no other reason. All sonic differences are the result of changing the electrical properties of things in that circuit. Everything in the circuit therefore can alter the sound produced REGARDLESS OF WHAT WENT ON TO MAKE THE CD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Most people understand then that all parts of the circuit have influence. That's the physics at work. What they argue about are the small influences and whether or not they can hear them or care about them.

"I think the soup has a pinch too much salt!"

"Really? I never noticed."

Yeah well, it's hard for me to apply theory to the reproduction for very short wire lengths and disregard it for the production stage where much longer ones are used.

You end your circuit at the speakers, because that's where the electrical ends. But the sound still needs to reach your ears. Do you care as much care with room acoustics as you do with speaker wire? Do you measure the room and add treatments?

(WARNING: This next part is not directed specifically at you.) I gotta laugh when I see some pictures of people's setup showing off their new speaker $500 wires and the room is an acoustical nightmare. When I point it out, some say that they can change the speaker wire but have whatever room they have and can't change it. When I ask whether the many feet of ordinary wire inside their speakers or inside their components make the few feet of speaker wire irrelevant, they argue the same as you above that they can't change that or the room but can change the speaker wire. It like pretending that changing speaker wire dramatically alters the sound and that all other wires within the gear must be perfect. Except for the interchangeable power cord of course. Swapping that out for a $500 makes all the difference in the world as well in spite of the hundreds of feet of ROMEX in the house that the power had to go through to get to it. They are looking at that piece of cable or speaker wire as significant in the end sound because it's the only thing that they feel that they can change.

[minermark]

this thread still rolling on?

:facepalm:

It appears so, please shoot me now.

[psg]

If your premise is that 15 feet of speaker wire can alter the sound signal so much from what it should be, then isn't it a lost cause considering the hundreds of feet of ordinary wire the signal had to go through to get recorded? It must be messed up beyond recognition by then.

Consider a commercial CD. Everything that went into making it is unknown to the guy about to put it in his CD player at home. There may be lots of assumptions at how it was made, but that's all. What you are holding is a container with two AC signals encoded. Nothing else.

Now you want to use it to make sound in the room. The sound you end up with, is directly related to the gears you run that signal through. Are you using a

-Small table radio?

-A massive stereo comprised of 6 amplifiers, massive theater sized speakers, computerized equalizers?

-Modest stereo with a $200 receiver?

Whatever system it is, it can be simulated by an equivalent circuit. Every resistance, every capacitance stray or otherwise, every inductance, every reactance and admittance no matter where it is located - even in wires, no matter how small or large, goes into the final sound. The circuit in total begins with the laser and ends with the speaker. Nothing in that chain can be excluded from the equivalent circuit. Everything contributes to the final sound. The reason the sound is different in each of those systems above is because the electrical properties of the things in the circuit are different. There is no other reason. All sonic differences are the result of changing the electrical properties of things in that circuit. Everything in the circuit therefore can alter the sound produced REGARDLESS OF WHAT WENT ON TO MAKE THE CD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Most people understand then that all parts of the circuit have influence. That's the physics at work. What they argue about are the small influences and whether or not they can hear them or care about them.

"I think the soup has a pinch too much salt!"

"Really? I never noticed."

Yeah well, it's hard for me to apply theory to the reproduction for very short wire lengths and disregard it for the production stage where much longer ones are used.

You end your circuit at the speakers, because that's where the electrical ends. But the sound still needs to reach your ears. Do you care as much care with room acoustics as you do with speaker wire? Do you measure the room and add treatments?

(WARNING: This next part is not directed specifically at you.) I gotta laugh when I see some pictures of people's setup showing off their new speaker $500 wires and the room is an acoustical nightmare. When I point it out, some say that they can change the speaker wire but have whatever room they have and can't change it. When I ask whether the many feet of ordinary wire inside their speakers or inside their components make the few feet of speaker wire irrelevant, they argue the same as you above that they can't change that or the room but can change the speaker wire. It like pretending that changing speaker wire dramatically alters the sound and that all other wires within the gear must be perfect. Except for the interchangeable power cord of course. Swapping that out for a $500 makes all the difference in the world as well in spite of the hundreds of feet of ROMEX in the house that the power had to go through to get to it. They are looking at that piece of cable or speaker wire as significant in the end sound because it's the only thing that they feel that they can change.

Acoustic treatment is a huge variable in the sound of any system. And for some attributes of sound it is the largest variable. For instance, when it comes to the frequency response below 200Hz, treatments will have more effect than anything I can think of. But for me, and I know many others, frequency response per se, is farther down the list of problems than other attributes. One reason for this is that there is not much of a reference for frequency response. If you go to a hall or auditorium, every section you sit in will have a different frequency response. Some seats will have boomy bass, others no bass, some will have exaggerated upper midrange, or dips in the midrange. But none of that usually ruins the experience of the performance. I've never left the symphony hall and remarked, "Gee, the bass was a little thin at my seat."

I said earlier to Don (I think) not to look to wires to do anything about peaks and valleys. That's not the dimension they influence. And, that's not the reason most people prefer wire A over B. It's because of those other dimensions, like spatial location and clarity.

I'm a near field listener. I arrange the speakers and sitting position to produce a reasonable FR. I am not in the least concerned with the sound anywhere but where I sit. I am not trying to create a good sonic hall for many listeners, or because I want to walk around and listen. So, my style of listening doesn't require too much room treatment. BUT, I can see how that might be important to others.

Again, we come back to listening objectives. I wonder if everyone realizes how different these objectives can be? We all start talking about this amp and that player, and this wire and that speaker, but we don't often declare our listening style and purpose. Mine is always to create the fantasy that a 3D space in front of me really has some musicians in it. And that illusion doesn't need a flat FR, to name one example. If we begin talking, and you don't know my purpose, and I don't know yours, you can see how we are at cross purposes, right?

Sure the room affects FR, but it affects much more that affects how the sound sounds. The third dimension of time is super important: Echos and reverberation at various frequencies. I'll bet the room affects what you hear even near-field.

Dismissing room treatments as some simple flat frequency-response chase, as opposed to your chasing the fantasy that a 3D space in front of me really has some musicians in it is not fair. I think that creating the fantasy that a 3D space in front of me really has some musicians in it is a common goal, and is better achieved through room treatment than speaker wires.

[oldenough]

Yeah, appearance is probably the number one reason people buy components. 'Blue Meters' and all that stuff. I like good looking stuff too. But, in the end I listen to it and use my listening opinion as the final arbiter.

in that direction for this project.

Glad we got that settled.

So very true, but try to get anyone to admit it.....

[psg]

I began my argument about wire and cable with a simple premise: They can be audible. That's the premise. I have never even hinted that they are my #1 way, or the best way, or the most valuable way to make improvements in sound. Others, like yourself, have created that position as a straw man you can beat away at. It's patently silly, and transparent. Saying that cables can be heard, is not in the least saying it is the most important thing to do.

I don't recall saying that was your position. Your position is that they matter enough to affect the sound and to worry about. Mine is that they don't unless you go too small or too long.

And finally, you claimed above that my expressly stated goal of "creating the fantasy that a 3D space in front of me really has some musicians in it" is a common goal. If so, I haven't heard it expresses in these forums as such. Mostly what I have heard specifically is the desire to "reproduce whatever is on the CD or LP." That's not the same thing.

You say tomato... It doesn't have to be a different thing. The wire and other tweaks crowd don't have an exclusive on seeking audio bliss. I resent it when you imply it.

I don't think I dismissed room treatments at all. I just tried to differentiate their purpose. In my near field listening, I just haven't found room treatment to be as helpful to my goals as other things. [cut]

In my systems I focus on speakers, then phono cartridges, then amplifiers, then turntable, then digital sources, then wires. That's the usual order of things. That's my typical priority.

You don't dismiss room treatments, but they don't appear in your list that goes down to wires.

Is room treatment the most important aspect of near field listening? Not in my years of experience. The speaker and amp is everything (other than sources).

Did I say it was the most important thing to near field listening? Now who is building a strawman... I said I'll bet the room affects what you hear even near-field.. more so than speaker wires anyway. That is where we disagree. The room isn't even on your list.

[Deang]

A braided cable will provide shielding, which provides rejection, and lowers noise, which is distortion. The Kimber is too expensive for me, so I guess I'll be checking out Blue Jean Cable - thanks for that valuable information.

[Schu]

The Kimber is too expensive for me, so I guess I'll be checking out Blue Jean Cable - thanks for that valuable information.

Blue Jeans has been a godsend Dean... not because it's trendy or unique but because they give me exactly what I need at a good price.

Like the X-Over... I don't think I will ever shop anywhere else.

[Thaddeus Smith]

I use 10ft. Panduit brand Cat6 cables. They lay nice and flat and have good quality 24AWG stranded conductors (8x) individually insulated and twisted into pairs. I split them in half and utilize two pairs per terminal (4x 24AWG), with the ends twisted together and tinned. No extra connectors added. They've always sounded good with indiscernible noise and distortion.

[Mallette]

I said I'll bet the room affects what you hear even near-field..

Entirely dependent on your definition of "near field." In my office I listen on speakers flanking the monitors toed in and about three feet to my ear. Room is entirely irrelevant. Probably have to be a gym or an anechoic chamber before you'd hear any effect.

Dave

[Fjd]

I began my argument about wire and cable with a simple premise: They can be audible. That's the premise. I have never even hinted that they are my #1 way, or the best way, or the most valuable way to make improvements in sound. Others, like yourself, have created that position as a straw man you can beat away at. It's patently silly, and transparent. Saying that cables can be heard, is not in the least saying it is the most important thing to do.

I don't recall saying that was your position. Your position is that they matter enough to affect the sound and to worry about. Mine is that they don't unless you go too small or too long.

I think the original premise may have been in post 37 & 41 of the first cable myth thread. I'm actually patiently waiting for Thebes to start a thread on connectors at the ends of the cables.

https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/147903-cable-myths/page-3

[Don Richard]

I said earlier to Don (I think) not to look to wires to do anything about peaks and valleys. That's not the dimension they influence.

Don does not believe a word you just wrote.

And, that's not the reason most people prefer wire A over B. It's because of those other dimensions, like spatial location and clarity.

I have no earthly idea why some people do the things they do, and I really don't want to know. What I do know is that the cables we use to hook our equipment up with has measurable parameters like capacitance, inductance, resistance and dielectric absorption. I also know that the wires we use form a low pass filter consisting of series resistance and inductance with parallel capacitance. This forms a low pass filter and when I computed the corner frequencies of several likely cable configurations and lengths I came up with numbers in the megahertz range, with the lowest being 1 MHz. That is well into the radio frequency range, in the middle of the AM broadcast band, 50 times the highest audio frequency that will pass through that cable. A filter like that hooked to a loudspeaker that has crossover filter frequencies of 400 Hz and 6000 Hz can't do anything to affect the crossover points. If I'm missing something, please tell me what it is that I'm missing here.

Now, please tell me something about those "other dimensions" that affect spatial location and clarity. Are you perhaps referring to the unknown dimensions predicted by string theory and M theory? If so, you need to stop posting here and start communicating with Steven Hawking immediately. If you have actually discovered the nature of any of the 6 or 7 heretofore unknown dimensions predicted by these theories you would have made one of the most important discoveries in human history and would certainly win a Nobel Prize in Physics.

I'm sitting here anxiously waiting with bated breath.

[Fjd]

I use 10ft. Panduit brand Cat6 cables. They lay nice and flat and have good quality 24AWG stranded conductors (8x) individually insulated and twisted into pairs. I split them in half and utilize two pairs per terminal (4x 24AWG), with the ends twisted together and tinned. No extra connectors added. They've always sounded good with indiscernible noise and distortion.

Isn't the four pairs inside the cables all twisted differently? If so, it seems like you could end up with different wire lenths.

And, that's not the reason most people prefer wire A over B. It's because of those other dimensions, like spatial location and clarity.

Now, please tell me something about those "other dimensions" that affect spatial location and clarity. Are you perhaps referring to the unknown dimensions predicted by string theory and M theory? If so, you need to stop posting here and start communicating with Steven Hawking immediately. If you have actually discovered the nature of any of the 6 or 7 heretofore unknown dimensions predicted by these theories you would have made one of the most important discoveries in human history and would certainly win a Nobel Prize in Physics.

I'm sitting here anxiously waiting with bated breath.

I realize that there is different slang used in various parts of the country, but I find it interesting that the words "that affect" can be substituted for the word "like" in a sentence and have the sentence still mean the same thing. Oh, so much to learn as I thought spatial location and clarity meant that 3D sound and were just other dimensions of the music experience that some found important, not some string theory .....

Edited February 1, 2014 by Fjd