I Was Wrong About Cable

[TBrennan]

One could certainly design patchcords as filters, no doubt of that. And some might find a certain sound subjectively better. But this begs the question of whether or not such changes are hi fidelity or euphonic coloration.

Delusion is also a possibility, especially with patchcords and speaker wire. Double-blind tests are needed to convince the skeptical and one SHOULD be skeptical as so many con men are involved in the wire game.

Years ago I was in a speaker building club and we conducted double blind tests with various RCA cords and speaker wires, both mundane and "audiophile" types. We tested for the ability to tell a difference not for preference. And nobody, I mean nobody, could tell a difference under double-blind conditions.

[@silverfox@]

Would'nt be the resulant wether subjective or not , that since a new
veriant has been added the total will in some minute or substantive way

alter the total impedance of the electrical path thus
presenting a new set of values to the speakers ,which obtaining its
oragional values

has to perform its function baised on what it receives and not preceive.

What is herad is therefore a legimate change.

[Gilbert]

The thing is... why would an interconnect make so much difference in sound quality when the internal wiring of an electronic component is probably of inferior quality? I could understand it if the electrical component's internal wiring, the interconnect and the speaker cables were all changed for cables of better quality. That makes sense to me... [*-)]

I think the word impedance matching has been mentioned about 3 or 4 times already. That would make sense to me.

[Erik Mandaville]

Gilbert:

"As far as the 3 key ingredients and the physics of wire,.... yea right,......"

It is exactly right. If not, please explain why very long lengths of interconnect are not recommended for 'passive' preamplifiers or active preamps with high output impedances. Why are some cable dielectric materials favored over others? Why do some manufacturers recommend that larger AWGs (aka bigger conductors) should be used for longer runs of speaker cable? I've read books on audio and speaker design by very knowledgable authors where in one case it was suggested that if one happens to have longer than necessary cables from amps to speaker (as in several feet), that it isn't prudent to coil the amount of extra wire into a circular shape. Will you tell me what is formed when one coils (hint, hint) a piece of wire? What is another name for a 50 foot length of coax between a passive preamp and amplifier? Why do you think there is this constant debate over power?

It ALL has to do with physics, Gilbert; and in the case of electronics, the three main elements that constantly come into play, even with something as seemingly benign as an interconnect, are -- if you are not familiar with R,C, and L -- R(resistance), C(capacitance), and L(inductance). Another critical element is IMPEDANCE.

Anyone with a a basic understanding electronics theory will tell you the same thing.

Erik

[Erik Mandaville]

To what do the symbols in the diagrams refer?

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/biwiring2.htm

[Duke Spinner]

.

How on earth am I going to face my Hi-Fi dealer friend after all the ribbing and ridicule I have bestowed on him over the last ten years? [:S]

Lie ......

perhaps your original cables ....sukked ... ??

[Erik Mandaville]

Perfect diagram:

All the properties shown in schematic form with symbolic representation of C(capacitance) R(resistance) and L(inductance). People wonder why cables can and do sound different (the associated 'better' or 'worse' of which remains subjective and may be unrelated to cost), and the reason has to do with one's own preference for the way in which the elements of C,R,L and impedance associated with a given cable interacts with their equipment. Cable companies use different wire geometries, conductor material, and conductor insulation matererials, and all of those will have some effect on the electrical 'behavior,'as it were, of the cable in question. Craig mentioned the fact that he had measured lengths of cable in another similar thread, and I have the means (believe it or not!) to do the same thing (it's a vintage tester but very accurate when compared to a modern counterpart). What is being measured is a cable's capacitance, which is listed in picofarads/foot. This is one area where people often are able to distinguish a difference between one cable and another. This is why cables with high values of capacitance are not well-suited to some kinds of equipment (and it's related electrical properties and characteristics, not the least of which is impedance). On the opposite end of the situation, there are cables (Nordost is one that comes to mind) that tend to strive for very low levels of capacitance and inductance, which is why this brand may sound bright and 'edgy' for some listening tastes. This fact doesn't make the cable a bad cable. It simply means that the sound quality it imparts to the system in question doesn't integrate very well in terms of the person doing the listening.

Craig also mentioned doing this on a circuit level, which is one way of 'voicing' a component. Mark does the same thing. For example: If one happens to be using a 6SN7 driver, what happens in terms of related Miller Effect, and plate resistance if the two sections of that tube are paralleled? What happened for me was that I ended up with an input/driver stage on the Moondogs which sound very, very much like that of the 5687 in the parafeed Horus amps. In other words, by making those changes, I changed the electrical properties of the tube, which in turn made it behave differently enough to be audible, to me, in a way I happen to really like. I have done similar though different experiments in the past which were dreadful sounding. One of which involved an error, too, in the form of a grid leak value resistor of an output tube. I misread the resistor code banding, and instead of installing 220K ohms, I put in 220 ohms. Can you guess what this sounded like?

Like it or not, it's all physics.

Erik

[DrWho]

edwinr,

Just a quick experiment for ya...Try using one of the old interconnects for just the L channel and one of the new ons for the R channel. Select a song that you know to have a very strong central image and then give it a quick listen and report back on your findings. If you notice a difference, then try moving one of your speakers back and forth until the image comes back...

[edwinr]

edwinr,

Just a quick experiment for ya...Try using one of the old interconnects for just the L channel and one of the new ons for the R channel. Select a song that you know to have a very strong central image and then give it a quick listen and report back on your findings. If you notice a difference, then try moving one of your speakers back and forth until the image comes back...

Good experiment, Mike. It's strange but there appears to be a loudness difference between the left and right channel. Not much, but the central image in a mono recording has drifted a few degrees to the right channel, which is the Gryphon interconnect. When the left cable is changed, the image locks firmly back to the center. Also there appears to be a deeper, blacker background to the music with the Gryphon.

I'm wondering if the subjective impression of more and extended bass is the result of lower background noise. Plus this could result in the music signal sounding louder for a given input. Or maybe the Gryphon cable doesn't suck as much level out of the signal. I have little technical background - so I have to rely on what I hear.

[NOSValves]

One could certainly design patchcords as filters, no doubt of that. And some might find a certain sound subjectively better. But this begs the question of whether or not such changes are hi fidelity or euphonic coloration.

Delusion is also a possibility, especially with patchcords and speaker wire. Double-blind tests are needed to convince the skeptical and one SHOULD be skeptical as so many con men are involved in the wire game.

Years ago I was in a speaker building club and we conducted double blind tests with various RCA cords and speaker wires, both mundane and "audiophile" types. We tested for the ability to tell a difference not for preference. And nobody, I mean nobody, could tell a difference under double-blind conditions.

Good ammo to agrue why double blind testing is near worthless. The mind just can not judge the difference or descern it quick enough. Cables especially IC's can and do make a difference. I have always in personal use said I want mine to have the least difference possible.

Craig

[DrWho]

If there is a loudness difference, then you could probably argue that one of the cables isn't working properly...louder is almost always percieved as better. It's kinda wierd though that the difference is consistent across both cables of the same type...Perhaps the newer cables simply have a smaller resistance? If you could somehow AB between them and adjust the volume knob at the same time instantaneously, then I don't think you'd be able to percieve a difference... But I suppose if louder is percieved as better, then you might as well go with the louder cables []

[edwinr]

[

Good ammo to agrue why double blind testing is near worthless. The mind just can not judge the difference or descern it quick enough. Cables especially IC's can and do make a difference. I have always in personal use said I want mine to have the least difference possible.

Craig

Well I've certainly learnt something, Craig. Cables CAN make a difference. As Mark Deneen points out, you can measure electrical differences in cables. But the measured difference may be too insignificant to hear. Or maybe not...

[TBrennan]

"Good ammo to agrue why double blind testing is near worthless.

You seem to be saying that if the testing doesn't confirm your notions the testing isn't valid. Note that I haven't denied that sound diiferences from wires can exist but it seems they may not exist as often as some think.

"The mind just can not judge the difference"

If one can't judge a difference in sound then there is no difference.

"or descern it quick enough"

Tests can having switching at short or long intervals.

In any event one should at least try DB testing and see what one thinks of the experience. No harm there.

Kind Regards

[TBrennan]

"Good experiment, Mike. It's strange but there appears to be a loudness difference between the left and right channel."

Maybe it's simply your preamp not tracking each channel exactly the same. And you hadn't noticed it before because you weren't listening for it.

[wheelman]

Nordost is an expensive cable for someone not believing in cables making a difference. [A]

I'm just glad someone else hears a difference other than me, and a few others who duck for cover when this subject is brought up. Maybe i'm not going crazy. Unless we both are.[]

[TBrennan]

"I just have my doubts, I think it is suspect."

Perhaps with subtle differences. But it should suffice to identify the kinds of gross differences audiophiles often report. If they exist.

[wheelman]

I never heard a "huge" difference, but a difference on some cables ( not all). Then again I never spent alot of dough on cables. I can tell you this I failed the pepsi challenge when I was younger. I was a die hard pepsi fan, and bull headed so I stuck with my pepsi even though I preferred the coke taste at the time. Guess what? Now I drink coke. I do like pepsi fountain drinks better though. It could of been something I ate that just went better with the coke at the time of the challenge. I find when I eat certain donuts with my coffee it's spectacular![]

[NOSValves]

I've never said the differences in cable are always huge. I will say that ABX testing is worthless IMHO. I could careless to debate it. I've made up my mind from personal experience with it and until somthings proves differently with my own eyes and ears no amount of debating is going to change that. Now if someone else believes they are valid that is fine with me. I'm just here sharing my opinion. I hate debating because in the end it rarely proves anything and every often ends ugly.

Craig

[wheelman]

I've never said the differences in cable are always huge. I will say that ABX testing is worthless IMHO. I could careless to debate it. I've made up my mind from personal experience with it and until somthings proves differently with my own eyes and ears no amount of debating is going to change that. Now if someone else believes they are valid that is fine with me. I'm just here sharing my opinion. I hate debating because in the end it rarely proves anything and every often ends ugly.

Craig

I had to go back to read your post, because I thought you maybe referring to me. I had to mention "huge" to cover my own arse. I agree with ya 100 percent. I'm beginning to think debate is just another word for argue. I'll get out while the gettin's good not that this is a heated debate. I'm just not that knowledgable in this to "debate" anything other than what I hear for myself.

[edwinr]

Maybe this whole double blind testing is worthless. For amps, speakers or cables. What does it prove? Nothing really other than some unknown component maybe sounds different to another unknown component.

What I like about hands on testing of components is you can directly compare the products and get a feel of how it looks and performs in your system. Also I guess the sound quality issue is very subjective. I like how the Gryphon cable plugs and unplugs. It is easier to move the actual cable around and it stays where you put it. I like the red color of the CD interconnect and the blue color of the preamp and power amp interconnect.

Also the Gryphon cable definitely has a lower noise floor than the Nordost. I can hear hiss with the Nordost connected and some little pops and crackles when I turn other components off and on. The Gryphon doesn't add any noise at all. Maybe it has better insulation agaisnt RF interference. Or maybe the connectors are better quality.