Great Article on Cables [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Great Article on Cables



jjjanzen
06-01-2005, 06:52 AM
I've been researching all the pieces of my soon-to-be home theatre setup and came accross this article. As with any type of purchase, from electronics to automobiles, you can spend infinite amounts of money on it. But at what point does the extra money you spend, garner you almost no increase in benefit? From this article, it seems that diminishing returns start very low with speaker cable.

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm (http://)

I don't mean to start a war here, but after reading this article, can anyone provide a coutner argument to it? It seems like a well contructed argument against the powerful marketing of cable manufactureres, but I'm a noob, so I'll gladly eat my words if I'm out to lunch.

As far as I can tell, so long as the impedence of your speaker wire is less than 5%, it doesn't matter if your wires are from Radio Shack.

Thanks

E-Stat
06-01-2005, 07:55 AM
I've been researching all the pieces of my soon-to-be home theatre setup and came accross this article.
That link is as old as grandma's hills and twice as dusty. Most of the references are over twenty years old. While he added a 2001 reference, it is devoid of any tests or substantiation.



As with any type of purchase, from electronics to automobiles, you can spend infinite amounts of money on it. But at what point does the extra money you spend, garner you almost no increase in benefit? From this article, it seems that diminishing returns start very low with speaker cable.
And that was my conclusion in the 80s until I experienced better in my system.



I don't mean to start a war here, but after reading this article, can anyone provide a coutner argument to it?
Use the search archives as you will find many answers. One unanswered question I have posed to the Russell crowd here has to do with RFI. The standard assertion is that LCR (inductance, capacitance, and resistance) are the only relevant factors.



As far as I can tell, so long as the impedence of your speaker wire is less than 5%, it doesn't matter if your wires are from Radio Shack.
That's what Roger says although he never states how he arrived at that figure. Why do you say that is the case?

rw

JohnMichael
06-01-2005, 08:05 AM
Thanks for pointing out the article. I have to admit that I hear differences in cables. I think we can be sensitive to different aspects of sound reproduction. I will change cables and hear an improvement in depth or high frequency extension or any number of sound variables. It is days later when I notice I am playing the stereo less that this was not a positive change. I would find it difficult to AB speaker cables and pick the best one for my system. The cables I am currently using cause me to have music playing all the time. I also notice that when I find my body moving to the music or make a visual image in my head of what the performers are doing that I know I made the right choice. My current cables are solid core. I hear less distortion with them than I do stranded cables. But hey that's just me and what brings me audible pleasure.

musicoverall
06-01-2005, 09:13 AM
I've been researching all the pieces of my soon-to-be home theatre setup and came accross this article. As with any type of purchase, from electronics to automobiles, you can spend infinite amounts of money on it. But at what point does the extra money you spend, garner you almost no increase in benefit? From this article, it seems that diminishing returns start very low with speaker cable.

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm (http://)

I don't mean to start a war here, but after reading this article, can anyone provide a coutner argument to it? It seems like a well contructed argument against the powerful marketing of cable manufactureres, but I'm a noob, so I'll gladly eat my words if I'm out to lunch.

As far as I can tell, so long as the impedence of your speaker wire is less than 5%, it doesn't matter if your wires are from Radio Shack.

Thanks

My advice is for you to try different cables in your system and listen for yourself if they make a difference. Nobody has your ears or your system and is listening in your environment. The objectivist crowd insists that you read papers such as the one you posted (which, as E-Stat hinted, has been rammed down our throats on this board many times before) and not listen to cables. By all means, read the white papers if you like. But do experiment and listen. A pound of personal experience is worth a megaton of theory.

Furthermore, LCR parameters are not - in the opinion of many listeners - sufficient to explain sonic differences. If they were, someone would be able to measure those factors and come up with the reasons why we hear differences. There are too many holes in the known scientific theories. Cables can make a difference. If they will make a difference to you is a question only you can answer.

Resident Loser
06-01-2005, 09:18 AM
...simplistic...RFI? you either experience it or you don't...strikes me as a shielding issue...other than that, how does it pertain to audio cables?

jimHJJ(...just curious...)

E-Stat
06-01-2005, 10:09 AM
...simplistic...RFI? you either experience it or you don't
Unless you are Amish and use a battery powered analog system, then you have at least one source of local RFI - the CD / DVD player situated in proximity to your amplification device(s). I'm not referring to gross amounts resulting in hearing radio or TV broadcasts though the effect is similar by injecting foreign noise into the signal. Perhaps my situation is worse than others because I have three digital cable boxes, five DVD/CDPs, two computers, four wireless phones, and an 802.11 G wireless router. AC current loops throughout a house and spreads all the nasties far and wide.

Back to the question. As SkepticSoundmind would point out, Belden, the patron saint of all things good in cables, produces various kinds of shielded cables, both audio and power alike. They must have some valid reason(s) behind those applications, right? Given their sainthood, they must have objective metrics to quantify the efficacy of their shielding strategies. What is/are those metrics? How do they know if a given amount of shielding is sufficient? What are the test conditions under which the shielding is subjected?

Perhaps you won't duck answering that question as FLZapped has on more than one occasion.

rw

FLZapped
06-01-2005, 10:58 AM
Perhaps you won't duck answering that question as FLZapped has on more than one occasion.

rw

Uhm, I don't work for Belden, so how can I duck a question I don't have the pertinent facts to? Why don't you write to them and ask what their internal metrics are.

-Bruce

Resident Loser
06-01-2005, 11:02 AM
...you mean to infer that RFI from the sources you mention, while not as overt as your local CBer or newscopter, somehow pushes, pulls or otherwise smears your audio signal? I for one don't buy it...I don't think the signal strength is sufficient enough to do such a thing, a part of that whole logarithmic deal. I would also think the levels that should be required to do so would be easily measureable/visible on a 'scope.

Insofar as the good folks at Belden are concerned, given the myriad of circuits that might be involved, levels of shielding are dependent on any number of parameters...hence it's not a one size fits all scenario. I would suppose they test within accepted industrial standards for each requirement and there is a certain overlap in the parameters of the offered cables...whether it's a robotics application or data transmission. These are the folks that count, they require adherence to specs that are far above our puny concerns of 20hz-20kHz...I think it was MM who oftimes spoke of cabling on naval vessels...certainly in what might be a life-or-death situation i.e enemy jamming, shielding is quite high on the list of concerns..."the flute sounds a bit fuzzy" isn't.

My turn: How many of the after-market wiring folks actually do much more than order a sufficient quantity of cable from suppliers(like Belden) and can therefore request(for a price) their name and/or logo to be imprinted on the product rather than the actual manufacturer? Most of the R&D I've seen is marketing-based, e.g. citing patents that are available to anyone paying the required fees, the near obligatory psuedo connection to NASA and the Barnum-like use of jargon and factoids in their supporting documentation.

SOP in telecommunications for dealing with RFI...low-pass filters...cheap AND effective...

It seems as audio is in a league of it's own...

jimHJJ(...you asked, I gave it my best guess...)

nightflier
06-01-2005, 11:23 AM
Then you have at least one source of local RFI - the CD / DVD player situated in proximity to your amplification device(s)....

... it is widely recommended that amps be a bit further away from the rest of the audio system. I definitely noticed a difference when I moved my amp off the rack and added a power center. Hence the issue with shielding. In my experience, there are definite differences in cables but whether one should classify these as improvements or worthy of much higher prices is a different matter altogether. Here is what I have found in my experience:

- Shielding is important (particularly when power and IC cables run close together or with antenna cable).
- Speaker wire gauge (i.e from 16 to 12) comes into play only after 50' or more.
- IC cable length is also important after 8+ feet.
- Generic or off-brand, well built and shielded power chords will give you the same advantages as brand-name ones.
- When remodeling, use fire-spec'd cable in-wall or your building permit will be denied (learned this first hand).
- Materials have character. For some reason, my expensive (in my book, at least) AQ silver cables sound smoother than the lower-cost copper ones. But this is very slight.
- Switchboxes and connectors are almost always a bad idea (especially with video cables) unless quality isn't important.
- A good brand-name power center or power strip may not make a huge difference, but the attached equipment warrantee will.
- Many brands are sold at exhorbitant markups (i.e Monster) at retail stores. Online-only stores almost always have lower cost cables.
- Second-hand is the best way to buy high performance brand-name cables.
- DIY cables are very good and some, like speaker cables, are easy to make.

The bottom line for me is that many of the things that people use to justify a higher price are more issues of taste than real quality. The difference in quality between a $50 interconnect and a $150 one is as insignificant as the difference between a $500 and $3000 one. And although I haven't tried anything more expensive, I would guess that the law of dinishing returns applies here: there is so little difference in quality between a $5000 cable and a $50,000 one, that that money should be used to upgrade other parts of the system first. But that is just what I have found, and I'm still trying out new things everyday. If someone want to send me a $5K cable and a $50K cable to test, please do :) , I could probably get $3K for them on Audiogon when I'm done!


Unless you are Amish and use a battery powered analog system

Isn't the Sutherland PhD phono preamp one of the best and quietest battery-powered preamps available? And I don't think he's Amish.
:cool:

E-Stat
06-01-2005, 11:31 AM
Uhm, I don't work for Belden, so how can I duck a question I don't have the pertinent facts to?
I'm referring to this quote of yours:

<i><b>Cables have been tested to death for decades and no one, but no one has been able to find any property that doesn't boil down to L-C-R. Period.</i></b>

Obviously, that is incorrect given the presence of shielding in a wide range of cables. Here is one of the times I directed this question to you where you did not respond:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=69314&postcount=58

So what is the missing metric? As for pertinent facts, how does Motorola determine how much shielding is required for a given component? Surely you guys don't just make wild guesses, right? I presume you are quantifying and measuring something.

rw

E-Stat
06-01-2005, 11:39 AM
...you mean to infer that RFI from the sources you mention, while not as overt as your local CBer or newscopter, somehow pushes, pulls or otherwise smears your audio signal?
Yes.


Insofar as the good folks at Belden are concerned, given the myriad of circuits that might be involved, levels of shielding are dependent on any number of parameters...etc. etc.
You have still failed to mention that which they would be measuring. You may be able to see the results on a scope, but how do you measure the shield itself?


How many of the after-market wiring folks actually do much more than order a sufficient quantity of cable from suppliers(like Belden) and can therefore request(for a price) their name and/or logo to be imprinted on the product rather than the actual manufacturer?
All the ones that I use or have found beneficial in my system. JPS Labs, Nordost, Kimber, et al.


..you asked, I gave it my best guess
Thank you. Let's see if Bruce will do likewise. I had to jog his memory.

rw

Resident Loser
06-01-2005, 12:18 PM
...I'm not sure how they do it but, if'n it was me...

I'd apply a test signal to the conductors that mimics the signal that would be carried by them and then subject the cable to various forms and levels of RFI then...

I wouldn't apply any signal, connect the appropriate test gear to the conductors and re-do the battery of assaults...

Or vice-versa...

I'd look for differences in the test signal and I'd look for any induced disturbances in the dry conductors...

If I encounter no disturbance in the signal nor any induced artifacts in the conductors, I would assume the shield to be sufficient...

jimHJJ(...then again I'm not them...but I'd wager my protocol to be reasonably close...)

P.S. This of course assumes we already have baseline specs on the unshielded conductors when subjected to the interference...you need a point of comparison for the tests to be valid...

mystic
06-01-2005, 06:51 PM
I've been researching all the pieces of my soon-to-be home theatre setup and came accross this article. As with any type of purchase, from electronics to automobiles, you can spend infinite amounts of money on it. But at what point does the extra money you spend, garner you almost no increase in benefit? From this article, it seems that diminishing returns start very low with speaker cable.

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm (http://)

I don't mean to start a war here, but after reading this article, can anyone provide a coutner argument to it? It seems like a well contructed argument against the powerful marketing of cable manufactureres, but I'm a noob, so I'll gladly eat my words if I'm out to lunch.

As far as I can tell, so long as the impedence of your speaker wire is less than 5%, it doesn't matter if your wires are from Radio Shack.

Thanks

I'll repeat what I said about this article in my post on 3-03-05:

I have used the wire table in the Roger Russell link with mixed results. I relocated a pair of 4-ohm speakers which necessitated going from 8' lengths to 25' lengths of the 14 AWG speaker wire I was using. Much to my disappointment there was a very obvious loss of bass. To eliminate the possibility that the change in speaker location was the reason for the problem, I tried the speakers in the original location using the 25' wire. Again the bass was not as good as it was with the 8' wire. Using a pair of 8-ohm speakers, however, I noticed no difference in performance with the 8' and 25' wires. While the wire table could be a useful guide, it may not apply to all speakers, and some experimentation may be necessary for best results.

Monstrous Mike
06-02-2005, 07:27 AM
My 2 cents worth.

If you Google terms like: RFI shielding, EMI testing, EMC, electromagnetic interference, you get sites like the military, industrial companies, nuclear facilities, educational institutions, etc. When you add to this search terms like: power cord, power cable, shielded power cord, all you get are mostly audio sites, audio forums, audio cable retailers, etc. The few other sites that do come up do not associate a power cord with RFI interference, it just happens to be mentioned separately somewhere on the site. Another interesting search is "audio engineering" and "power cord". You don't get any educational institutions, engineering schools, military, or even recording studios. You get sites that are selling aftermarket power cords and describing why they are important.

A reasonable person, even without an electrical engineering background, should be able to infer something about the above. This inference doesn't prove anything of course but it is usually suspicious when mainstream electrical engineering doesn't even discuss something that audio enthusiasts are raving about and audio cable retailers are describing on their sites.

Resident Loser
06-02-2005, 07:50 AM
...injecting logic and reason into the fray...

jimHJJ(...hope all is well...)

Monstrous Mike
06-02-2005, 08:10 AM
Actually, I'm on a bit of a roll so here goes again.

This is a fine example of an audio website espousing the benefits of upgrading your power cord: http://www.requisiteaudio.com/about_us/news/032304.html. Here are some quotes and my comments.

<b><i>Aside from making the connection, audio grade A/C cables don't work that way. It's more accurate to think of them as a component like an AF Choke. Being engineers, you already know, a choke is just a wire wrapped around a core. Yet, when correctly designed and implemented, it's properties are ideal for removing "hash" from audio. I'm not suggesting that an A/C cable is a choke, just that it's simplicity implies that it can't have an effect, when in fact, it can.</i></b>

So let's see, we can think of audio grade A/C cables as a choke, but that's not suggesting that they are a choke! Well that's good because a choke reduces current flow. (How this applies to the sound coming out your speakers is beyond me)

<b><i>Once you can wrap your thinking around the possibility of making a bad sounding cable, you can use the same logic to understand that, if a cable can be made to sound bad, it is quite possible to make a cable sound better.</i></b>

Huh? Any first year philosophy students out there? Any logicians? If you can take something and make it worse, then logic dictates that you can make it better. I don't think so.

<b><i>But, how much better? Well, that depends on how reactive the equipment you are connecting is to the cable being used. Not every piece of gear will benefit in the same way because different designs are "upset" in different ways by different things.</i></b>

This statement is too technical for me to comment on. You have "reactive" equipment and designs which can be "upset". Sorry, out of my league.

<b><i>The way our A/C cable was developed was not totally scientific using advanced math or that sort of thing. </i></b>

The next time you step into an elevator or aboard an aircraft, consider that the way it may have been designed "was not totally scientific using advanced math or that sort of thing."

<b><i>Truthfully, we don't know exactly why our audio grade A/C cable sounds the way it does. It doesn't show-up on measuring devices as less distortion or better frequency.</i></b>response.

Okay, now I'm beginning to believe this guy.

Anyways, this is typical of an explanation for purchasing aftermarket power cords.

My advice to anyone itching to spend more money on their audio system is to improve your room acoustics. There is one thing certain in audio and that is that there is no such thing as an acoustically perfect room. Using correct logic, this implies that one can always improve the sound of their system by improving their room acoustics.

Monstrous Mike
06-02-2005, 08:45 AM
Obviously, that is incorrect given the presence of shielding in a wide range of cables. Here is one of the times I directed this question to you where you did not respond:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=69314&postcount=58

So what is the missing metric? rw
Since I'm on a roll, here is something for you to read: http://www.floemc.com/applications/shielding_effectiveness/index.jsp

In general, Belden doesn't give any shielding data because shielding effectiveness very much depends on the installation of the cable, the connectors, the length, the environment, the equipement connected, etc. It would be impossible for Belden to come up with data for all of the scenarios their customers use for their cabling. Shielding is not a cable metric, it is measure of protection for the signal in a given environment.

And actual shielding effectivene testing is quite complicated and expensive. When it does happen, it is usually tested for a specific purpose. For example, on our naval vessels, there are several high power emitters like radar, fire control radar, HF communications, etc. So we have done a thorough shielding effectiveness test (usually before a ship is first commissioned and then only infrequently after that) by simulating the actual shipboard radiation it will be exposed to and having all sensitive electronic equipment operational. This is a tedious and expensive process.

During the normal life of a ship, cables and equipment are designed to meet military standands with some manufacturer's testing. Mostly, equipment problems at sea are tackled with troubleshooting and if EMI is the culprit, then measures are taken to eliminate the problem.

I guess an analogy would be designing a skyscraper. You obviously need to consider hurricanes and earthquakes when you design the structure (thickness of steel, use of cement, flexibility points, etc.) but you don't actually do tests on a completed building.


As for pertinent facts, how does Motorola determine how much shielding is required for a given component? rw
Motorola would analyze the range of envirnments the product is expected to operate in and then apply current good engineering practices regarding shielding. They may even do some testing to verify that the shielding is adequate. Sometimes the customer has special requirements which it can identify and Motorola will provide custom shielding (at a higher cost of course).

Monstrous Mike
06-02-2005, 08:57 AM
...injecting logic and reason into the fray...

jimHJJ(...hope all is well...)
Thanks Jim,

Here's a quote for you:

"If you don't think that logic is a good method for determining what to believe, make an attempt to convince me of that without using logic."

Brett Lemoine

jjjanzen
06-02-2005, 09:28 AM
Thanks for all the replies.

As MM points out with his google search method, there is a ton of marketing hoopla out on cables to the effect of "we can't exactly tell you how it makes a difference, but it does!!". Talking with engineers, you would tend to believe that cables do not make a difference, and that any percieved difference is psychological.

A friend of mine is an incredible musician with a terrific ear, and also has his PhD in physics. His recommendation: zip cord. The physics behind cables is well established and it's relatively clear that cable is cable (more or less). The debate, IMO, is on the psychological side. I don't doubt for one second that people 'hear' a difference with different cables. I probably would too if I spent 300/ft :p . The fact that no one can come up with a reason that cables are superior/inferior other than to say "I can hear it", does not inspire me to go out and splurge on expensive cables. Again, I'm not disputing that the don't hear a difference. I just think that the difference they hear is probably only perceived, and may not be 'real'. That doesn't mean they are stupid, only human (insert "humans are stupid" joke here).

Maybe I'm too scepticle, but testing different cables sound is so subjective and at the mercy of so many variables (source equip, proper connection, speakers, listeners mood, the actual song, background noise, time between listening sessions, CD recording quality), that until some guy in a lab coat and glasses with bonafied credentials tells me otherwise, i think my money is best spent elsewhere in my system.

jjjanzen
06-02-2005, 09:29 AM
Haha..

"If you don't think that logic is a good method for determining what to believe, make an attempt to convince me of that without using logic."

Too funny.

nightflier
06-02-2005, 10:34 AM
Thanks for all the replies.

As MM points out with his google search method, there is a ton of marketing hoopla out on cables to the effect of "we can't exactly tell you how it makes a difference, but it does!!". Talking with engineers, you would tend to believe that cables do not make a difference, and that any percieved difference is psychological.

A friend of mine is an incredible musician with a terrific ear, and also has his PhD in physics. His recommendation: zip cord. The physics behind cables is well established and it's relatively clear that cable is cable (more or less). The debate, IMO, is on the psychological side. I don't doubt for one second that people 'hear' a difference with different cables. I probably would too if I spent 300/ft :p . The fact that no one can come up with a reason that cables are superior/inferior other than to say "I can hear it", does not inspire me to go out and splurge on expensive cables. Again, I'm not disputing that the don't hear a difference. I just think that the difference they hear is probably only perceived, and may not be 'real'. That doesn't mean they are stupid, only human (insert "humans are stupid" joke here).

Maybe I'm too scepticle, but testing different cables sound is so subjective and at the mercy of so many variables (source equip, proper connection, speakers, listeners mood, the actual song, background noise, time between listening sessions, CD recording quality), that until some guy in a lab coat and glasses with bonafied credentials tells me otherwise, i think my money is best spent elsewhere in my system.

Scepticle,

I think you misunderstand what most people here are saying: cables will sound different, but the verdict is still out on whether they sound better or whether this should cost much more.

And you can also check with your PhD friend, but there are undeniable physical factors related to distance, gauge, and shielding, that can easily be measured and heard. Typically, these only come into play in specific (read: max/min/limit/extreme) situations.

mystic
06-02-2005, 10:41 AM
My 2 cents worth.

If you Google terms like: RFI shielding, EMI testing, EMC, electromagnetic interference, you get sites like the military, industrial companies, nuclear facilities, educational institutions, etc. When you add to this search terms like: power cord, power cable, shielded power cord, all you get are mostly audio sites, audio forums, audio cable retailers, etc. The few other sites that do come up do not associate a power cord with RFI interference, it just happens to be mentioned separately somewhere on the site. Another interesting search is "audio engineering" and "power cord". You don't get any educational institutions, engineering schools, military, or even recording studios. You get sites that are selling aftermarket power cords and describing why they are important.

A reasonable person, even without an electrical engineering background, should be able to infer something about the above. This inference doesn't prove anything of course but it is usually suspicious when mainstream electrical engineering doesn't even discuss something that audio enthusiasts are raving about and audio cable retailers are describing on their sites.

Mike, you didn't search enough. This link says NASA is spending $11 million on a power cable:

www.spacenewsfeed.co.uk/2005/24April2005_27.html

Don't those NASA people know that a power cord is a power cord.

Monstrous Mike
06-02-2005, 11:04 AM
Mike, you didn't search enough. This link says NASA is spending $11 million on a power cable:

www.spacenewsfeed.co.uk/2005/24April2005_27.html

Don't those NASA people know that a power cord is a power cord.
Nice find.

NASA is designing this power cord for a very specific reason and it isn't to make their equipment sound better. However, as can be easily predictable, sometime in the future somebody is going to market a "nanotube power cord" for audio amplifiers and claim it make them sound out of this world.

Maybe that will be my retirement ticket. I should just shut up and start selling this stuff. Besides, I can write better promo material than half the marketing yahoos in audio.

Resident Loser
06-02-2005, 12:02 PM
...as Mork from Ork would say, "nano-nano"...

jimHJJ(...may the farce be with you...)

Woochifer
06-02-2005, 05:15 PM
My advice to anyone itching to spend more money on their audio system is to improve your room acoustics. There is one thing certain in audio and that is that there is no such thing as an acoustically perfect room. Using correct logic, this implies that one can always improve the sound of their system by improving their room acoustics.

Please frame that!

Frankly, any inquiry about whether or not to go with a high priced cable should auto reply with the above quote. Aside from the shielding on interconnects, I've never encountered any difference worth much in cable listenings.

Room treatments, on the other hand, create very noticeable and objectively verifiable improvements to the sound quality. And by creatively reusing building materials, these kinds of acoustical fixes can be very inexpensive. It's not a quick fix like the constant suggestions to tweak with the cabling, but after navigating the learning curve on acoustics, the sound quality improvements that result are obvious and not subject to interpretation.

Woochifer
06-02-2005, 05:30 PM
A friend of mine is an incredible musician with a terrific ear, and also has his PhD in physics. His recommendation: zip cord. The physics behind cables is well established and it's relatively clear that cable is cable (more or less). The debate, IMO, is on the psychological side. I don't doubt for one second that people 'hear' a difference with different cables. I probably would too if I spent 300/ft :p . The fact that no one can come up with a reason that cables are superior/inferior other than to say "I can hear it", does not inspire me to go out and splurge on expensive cables. Again, I'm not disputing that the don't hear a difference. I just think that the difference they hear is probably only perceived, and may not be 'real'. That doesn't mean they are stupid, only human (insert "humans are stupid" joke here).

To me, what it boils down to is how much improvement are you really getting for the amount of money spent? It's easy to spend thousands of dollars on cabling, and whether or not it's worthwhile depends on your price tolerance and how much you've done elsewhere in your system.

As MM pointed out, the room acoustics are hugely important. The room acoustics are also the most widely ignored part of the audio system because it's not a quick fix that can be readily packaged, marketed, and sold. It actually requires that you learn about sound properties, and preferably do your own measurements before you go about trying to prescribe a solution.

For problems in the low frequencies, cables won't do squat. The physics will tell you that boundary interactions can create all kinds of alterations to the low frequencies. Once you measure them and identify the magnitude of the problem, then you can choose the approach that will address that particular issue.

In general, I would put the speakers and the room acoustics at the very top of the list of priority upgrades. Then, I would look at any analog components you might have. The amplification and front end sources come up next. Cables and interconnects are a much lower priority for upgrading, unless you actually have EM interference problems. And even there, it doesn't take much of a step up before you find cables that have enough shielding to address the issue.


Maybe I'm too scepticle, but testing different cables sound is so subjective and at the mercy of so many variables (source equip, proper connection, speakers, listeners mood, the actual song, background noise, time between listening sessions, CD recording quality), that until some guy in a lab coat and glasses with bonafied credentials tells me otherwise, i think my money is best spent elsewhere in my system.

That's a wise approach, but on the flip side, don't get too caught up in looking for credentials and specs. Audio systems are for listening, and you should indulge your ears as much as possible. You can dissect the causal factors all you want once you've found the sound that you like.

E-Stat
06-03-2005, 05:07 AM
Shielding is not a cable metric, it is measure of protection for the signal in a given environment.
And a very desirable performance parameter as it can lower the noise floor. Would you buy a tire that is NOT resistant to hydroplaning?


I guess an analogy would be designing a skyscraper. You obviously need to consider hurricanes and earthquakes when you design the structure (thickness of steel, use of cement, flexibility points, etc.) but you don't actually do tests on a completed building.
How does that relate to testing completed cables in their real world environments?


Motorola would analyze the range of envirnments the product is expected to operate in and then apply current good engineering practices regarding shielding.
Those being?

Would a Wrigley's chewing wrapper foil work sufficiently? If not, why not?

rw

Resident Loser
06-03-2005, 07:07 AM
...looks like grasping-at-straws time to me...

As MM stated, Belden makes product to fit specific purposes...certain industrial apps are a given...there are formulae, mathematcal models, CAD and the like to aid in design but, it's up to the user(vendor) to determine if that specific design works for them...the real question is: how do these aftermarket companies test for all the items and scenarios you've offered...do they expose their wares to all the possible sources and types of RFI/EMI/EIEIO?

So, if it's not hash from the power source...how many other things can cause problems? proximity to power lines? radio stations? the unique wiring configurations of each home or business? the amount of electronic garbage generated from within?

A simple piece of wire is most susceptible...so maybe a twisted pair is a bit better at keeping the signal coherent and providing a measure of shielding, working it's way up to a CAT5 configuration...keeping in mind, every change in one parameter has an effect on other measurements, in this case capacitance, so designs will make trade-offs...then coax...start with a simple, stranded wrap-aroundwith minimal coverage...then a foil or a tighter weave or perhaps both...then a conductor or two in a foil segregated from other conductors and then all foiled and/or in a weave or both...it's all dependent on use and again remember, in business you buy and pay for what you need...and then there's mil-spec which is usually overkill, based on worst-case scenarios...


And a very desirable performance parameter as it can lower the noise floor

Can it? I thought that to be more of a power supply issue...if the "A" battery provides clean power, I don't know how anything external to it can have an effect, provided that the circuit topography and a well-designed metal case minimize the potential point-of -entry for unwanted interference.


Would you buy a tire that is NOT resistant to hydroplaning?

It can be minimized, there are no guarantees that I'm aware of...too many variables, the a-hole NASCAR/LeMans wannabees being the most egregious...


How does that relate to testing completed cables in their real world environments?

Again, and I sure much like the consumer-level disclaimer, beyond specs, no representation for suitability for each and every application is, or can be, given. It's up to the purchaser to go beyond that level. See my question re: aftermarket providers in paragraph one.


Those being?

I'm sorry, that's a silly question IMO...much like the earlier request for speculation as to Belden's methodology, you are asking someone outside the company to provide info they can't possibly have...asking Motorola would seem to be the logical course of action.


Would a Wrigley's chewing wrapper foil work sufficiently? If not, why not?

Maybe...I've seen some instrument effects pedals that used a simple foil wrap on short jumpers with success...again, too many variables to be any more specific...maybe Reynolds wrap or heavy-duty Reynolds if it's a real turkey.

I think industry has far more possible sources to contend with than our little crumb of the slice-O-pie we're concerned with...they seem so get things done without re-inventing the wheel.

jimHJJ(...is this horse sufficiently dead yet...)

E-Stat
06-03-2005, 01:25 PM
As MM stated, Belden makes product to fit specific purposes...certain industrial apps are a given...there are formulae, mathematcal models, CAD and the like to aid in design but, it's up to the user(vendor) to determine if that specific design works for them...the real question is: how do these aftermarket companies test for all the items and scenarios you've offered...do they expose their wares to all the possible sources and types of RFI/EMI/EIEIO?
As with MM, you danced around the question using far more words than necessary. So there is no common test for RF rejection. Interestingly, their 83803 "fire alarm" cable has multiple shielding strategies as opposed to 19364 "portable cordage" which uses only the "Beldfoil" aluminum shield. Both have been used for audio component power cords.


So, if it's not hash from the power source...how many other things can cause problems?
All the devices I previously mentioned.


It can be minimized, there are no guarantees that I'm aware of...too many variables, the a-hole NASCAR/LeMans wannabees being the most egregious...
My point is simply that there are relevant performance considerations for many devices beyond it's basic metrics.


Again, and I sure much like the consumer-level disclaimer, beyond specs, no representation for suitability for each and every application is, or can be, given. It's up to the purchaser to go beyond that level. See my question re: aftermarket providers in paragraph one.
Ditto as above. LCR ain't the whole story for a range of cables used in audio applications.

rw

Resident Loser
06-06-2005, 05:41 AM
...sorry you feel that I am, but I earlier gave my best guesstimate at what such testing would entail...I have ab-so-lute-ly no idea as to what Belden's test protocols might be.


So there is no common test for RF rejection.

I didn't say that...and I don't believe MM did either...there are standard usages, but anyone can use practically anything for any nearly purpose, generally speaking...example: Teflon coated CAT5 wire is designed to transmit data with maximum signal coherence when wired through common air conditioning returns...it's a fire saftey directive in NYC...you can use Plain ol' CAT5 if you are running it in another environment...so if someone takes this more "exotic" PTFE wire and applies it to interconnects, who is then responsible for "testing"?...and what exactly will they be "testing" for? AND how will they do it?


...their 83803 "fire alarm" cable has multiple shielding strategies as opposed to 19364 "portable cordage" which uses only the "Beldfoil" aluminum shield...

Well, the former has a specific application...and again I'd guess something sold for a "life-or-death" app better be up to the task...The wire will be run where other wires will be cohabiting with it...Power, phone, data, CATV, various control circuits...Belden(or any other wire manufacturer) has no control over the environment in which it will be placed or the forms of "hash" it will have to try to guard against...It does have to work with equipment or circuits appropriate for it's function with no adverse loading effects, etc. so there are other considerations to be taken into account.Do they take a worst-case-scenario philosophy? You would have to ask them...

The latter, non-critical applications with a minimum cost, commensurate with general guidelines for a "class" of purpose...I see it as simply logical business practice.


Both have been used for audio component power cords.

Are the wires themselves rated for such use?..Can they handle the voltage and current for such an application? Does the design of the "new" product in any way compromise the integrity or suitability of the original item? Are they UL listed for this use? You can put yer boots in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits...


My point is simply that there are relevant performance considerations for many devices beyond it's basic metrics.

Ahhh...the wonderful gray area of audiophilia!!! Who has identified these "considerations"? How have they tested and proven their product's "superiority" in any given respect...Use and listening tests?...Sorry, too many variables, ranging from the myriad number of potential gear combinations, to the type and strength of "interference"... NO ONE can possibly test for every scenario, not Belden and certainly these smaller aftermarket specialists...Are you the R&D?...Great if you feel like doin' it...

jimHJJ(...I personally am not up to the task...particularly in light of the dubious qualities of the net results...)

E-Stat
06-06-2005, 09:35 AM
...sorry you feel that I am, but I earlier gave my best guesstimate at what such testing would entail
And I couldn't care less as to how such a measurement is carried out as much as what to measure. You continue to harp on "they can't possibly know all the ways the wire is going to be used" and that is irrelevant for my question. You don't have to know how someone uses a rope in order to measure it's tensile strength. Neither do you have to know how a wire is used in order to measure it's characteristics, either. You have to identify a metric and quantify it. The analysis of the results is then used afterwards for specific application suitability.


Are the wires themselves rated for such use?..Can they handle the voltage and current for such an application?
12/3 and 14/3 is quite sufficient to handle the current needs of most audio amplifiers.


Ahhh...the wonderful gray area of audiophilia!!! Who has identified these "considerations"?
The answer would be every single cable manufacturer who produces shielded audio wires. That would pretty much be all of them.


How have they tested and proven their product's "superiority" in any given respect...Use and listening tests?
Now it's time for me to throw the same irrelevant, "how can I possibly know what Belden and others are thinking in their product offerings" line to you. THERE IS A REASON and it is not based on LCR metrics.


..Sorry, too many variables, ranging from the myriad number of potential gear combinations, to the type and strength of "interference"... NO ONE can possibly test for every scenario, not Belden and certainly these smaller aftermarket specialists...Are you the R&D?...Great if you feel like doin' it...
Forget all that. Bruce (who still hasn't responded) and others continue to harp the simplistic tune that LCR parameters are all that is relevant to the audibility of cables. OBVIOUSLY, that is not the case. Virtually ALL microphone cable, for example, is shielded and LCR metrics don't quantify any aspect of that facet of its design.

rw

Resident Loser
06-06-2005, 12:11 PM
...what DO "they" measure? What do any of the aftermarket guys measure? It's all done by ear? Again, given all the variables, what do they listen for?

Shielding is noise rejection as far as I am aware...straight wire with no gain...nothing added, nothing taken away. It seems as though just about every piece of gear has as it's basic premise, the unsullied passage of a signal's waveform...there are expectations as to the "traffic" and conditions it will encounter in it's travel...If the noise floor is limited by the active devices in the path, what do you expect to do, lower it further by use of a passive one, i.e. wire?

Shielded wire by design "shields"...there are special circumstances that require other designs...

Tensile strength? You may be able to take measurement or estimate a number, but there ARE other considerations, so it's not so simple...and it's use is not irrelevant in the overall equation...There's static and active...rope can haul, but it can be used for other purposes...loads are applied to the point of failure...bang! you get a number...climbing ropes are made specifically for that purpose, same type of load testing, sorta'...HOWEVER, climbing rope has a fixed number of times for which it can be used, how many times it can withstand the stretch/shock stress before it MUST be discarded as per the mfr....it is used for NO OTHER purpose during its active life...You surely would not use a hemp rope of similar load bearing properties in lieu of a certified climber's rope; hence some things ARE purpose specific. Other materials have burst strength, torsional loads, etc. all of which are specified and tested for known entities...as is shielding of cable. With wire, it's the ability to reject any change to the signal being carried...

jimHJJ(...unfortunately, gotta' go...tomorrow's another day...)

FLZapped
07-07-2005, 10:29 AM
Virtually ALL microphone cable, for example, is shielded and LCR metrics don't quantify any aspect of that facet of its design.

rw

No? then why is there a specification for capacitance to the shield?????

-Bruce

E-Stat
07-07-2005, 06:12 PM
No? then why is there a specification for capacitance to the shield?????
Do you believe that has anything to do with quantifying the efficacy of the shield?

rw

FLZapped
07-14-2005, 09:03 AM
Do you believe that has anything to do with quantifying the efficacy of the shield?

rw

That wasn't the statement made. There is both a specification on shield coverage and capacitance to the shield, the latter, seeing as this discussion has been about LCR, would be the more appropriate topic.

-Bruce

E-Stat
07-14-2005, 06:24 PM
There is both a specification on shield coverage and capacitance to the shield, the latter, seeing as this discussion has been about LCR, would be the more appropriate topic.
Bruce, my point since January is that given the plethora of shielded audio cables on the market, there is OBVIOUSLY more to quantifying the performance characteristics of cables that affects audibility other than simply LCR. Comprende?

First attempt:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=69314&postcount=58

Second attempt:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=88803&postcount=10

Let's see if asking the question for the third time will be the charm.

How do you measure the efficacy of various cable shielding strategies?

rw

FLZapped
07-15-2005, 07:21 AM
Bruce, my point since January is that given the plethora of shielded audio cables on the market, there is OBVIOUSLY more to quantifying the performance characteristics of cables that affects audibility other than simply LCR. Comprende?

First attempt:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=69314&postcount=58

Second attempt:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=88803&postcount=10

Let's see if asking the question for the third time will be the charm.

How do you measure the efficacy of various cable shielding strategies?

rw

I wasn't replying to your post, therefore I could care less about your point, which was off topic for the post I replied to.

-Bruce

FLZapped
07-15-2005, 07:22 AM
Forget all that. Bruce (who still hasn't responded) and others continue to harp the simplistic tune that LCR parameters are all that is relevant to the audibility of cables. OBVIOUSLY, that is not the case. Virtually ALL microphone cable, for example, is shielded and LCR metrics don't quantify any aspect of that facet of its design.

rw

And as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. -Bruce

FLZapped
07-15-2005, 07:39 AM
How do you measure the efficacy of various cable shielding strategies?

rw


If you wanted to learn something about shielding, a simple google search would have yielded you all the information you could ever wanted on the subject.....

Start here:

http://bwcecom.belden.com/college/techpprs/tpbroad.htm

http://www.eng.cse.dmu.ac.uk/aeg/alyse/Conventional_Methods_for_Measuring_Zt_and_SE.html

-Bruce

E-Stat
07-15-2005, 12:42 PM
And as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about. -Bruce
That's an informative response. I really didn't believe you had any notion about the role of shielding. You confirmed it.

rw

FLZapped
07-18-2005, 07:19 AM
That's an informative response. I really didn't believe you had any notion about the role of shielding. You confirmed it.

rw

HAHAHAHAHAHA, now you're asking a different question......

I guess you missed the provided links to your previous question.

-Bruce

FLZapped
07-18-2005, 07:53 AM
And I couldn't care less as to how such a measurement is carried out as much as what to measure.

What to measure. Depends on the expected(or recommended) application.



You continue to harp on "they can't possibly know all the ways the wire is going to be used" and that is irrelevant for my question. You don't have to know how someone uses a rope in order to measure it's tensile strength. Neither do you have to know how a wire is used in order to measure it's characteristics, either. You have to identify a metric and quantify it. The analysis of the results is then used afterwards for specific application suitability.

You have it backwards, you need to know the tensile strength of the rope in order to properly use the rope. That's part of your problem, you're perspective is incorrect.




12/3 and 14/3 is quite sufficient to handle the current needs of most audio amplifiers.


If you think that's all there is to it, you're gravely mistaken. You're friends who are using cable designed for limited power applications as power cords as you mentioned, are:

1) Violating the National Electric Code(and maybe several state and local ones) for using a wire with insufficient insulation characteristics.
2) Likely not to be covered by their homeowners insurance in the event of a fire.
3) Putting their safety and the safety of their family at risk for the previously mentioned reasons.

So there are your things that DON'T come down to LCR metrics......

-Bruce

FLZapped
07-18-2005, 08:04 AM
I'm referring to this quote of yours:

<i><b>Cables have been tested to death for decades and no one, but no one has been able to find any property that doesn't boil down to L-C-R. Period.</i></b>

Obviously, that is incorrect given the presence of shielding in a wide range of cables.


rw

No, it's not. Shielding is essentially another conductor, as such, has resistance, capacitance to other condctors, and inductance. This will influence how the cable conducts the desired signal.

-Bruce

E-Stat
07-18-2005, 09:21 AM
If you think that's all there is to it, you're gravely mistaken.
Quite the contrary. For years, my experience using a range of cable products is that shielding of all sorts offers sonic benefits in my environment. Not to mention other aspects of construction as well.

THAT IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG.

As for my comments specifically regarding current, they are sound. A 14 gauge power cord can more than adequately conduct the current of most consumer power amps. Do the math yourself. While my present amp cords are 10 gauge, the original UL listed cords for my 10 amp VTL monoblocks are 16 gauge. Moving much past that requires 20 amp plugs and circuits anyway. The Passlabs XA-200s require such.


You're friends who are using cable designed for limited power applications as power cords as you mentioned, are...
I am friends who are using cables...? I don't have the foggiest notion of what you are trying to say.


So there are your things that DON'T come down to LCR metrics.....
BINGO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Give that man a gold star!

<img src="http://bksschoolhouse.com/cart-imgs/prod13608_sm.jpg">

I enjoyed the benefits of cable shielding and RF suppression years before I read your Googled articles. ;)

rw

FLZapped
07-19-2005, 08:01 AM
Quite the contrary. For years, my experience using a range of cable products is that shielding of all sorts offers sonic benefits in my environment. Not to mention other aspects of construction as well.

THAT IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG.

Your sonic experience is meaningless in the realm of engineering.



As for my comments specifically regarding current, they are sound. A 14 gauge power cord can more than adequately conduct the current of most consumer power amps. Do the math yourself. While my present amp cords are 10 gauge, the original UL listed cords for my 10 amp VTL monoblocks are 16 gauge. Moving much past that requires 20 amp plugs and circuits anyway. The Passlabs XA-200s require such.

Again, current isn't the whole story, which I already explained thoroughly.



I am friends who are using cables...? I don't have the foggiest notion of what you are trying to say.

Funny guy. A simple typo, you can't be that obtuse not to figure it out, although that WOULD explain a lot.



I enjoyed the benefits of cable shielding and RF suppression years before I read your Googled articles. ;)

rw

Whoopie! I'm thoroughly uninpressed.

-Bruce

E-Stat
07-19-2005, 10:33 AM
you can't be that obtuse not to figure it out, although that WOULD explain a lot.
If you are actually making the groundless (no pun intended) claim that high quality aftermarket power cords are unsafe, then perhaps you should go to the Consumer Product Safety Council (http://www.cpsc.gov/) website and check out the results.

At the expense of confusing the issue with facts, you will quickly find recalls for defective Motorola components in 1999 and again in 2002, but none for any cable manufacturers at all.

BTW, Nordost, Harmonic Technology, and others use FEP (Teflon) as the insulation material. NASA also seems to think it works nifty keen as that was used as the outer insulation for the Hubble Space Telescope.

rw

jneutron
07-19-2005, 11:33 AM
BTW, Nordost, Harmonic Technology, and others use FEP (Teflon) as the insulation material. NASA also seems to think it works nifty keen as that was used as the outer insulation for the Hubble Space Telescope.
rwDo not confuse electrical insulation with thermal insulation.. they are entirely different applications.

John

E-Stat
07-19-2005, 01:04 PM
Do not confuse electrical insulation with thermal insulation.. they are entirely different applications.
While that's true, if I understand Bruce's ridiculous speculations correctly, he is referring to fire resistance. In fact, Teflon is specifically designed for electrical cables where fire safety is of high concern.

Teflon fire resistance (http://www.teflon.com/NASApp/Teflon/TeflonPageServlet?pageId=/consumer/na/eng/industrial/applications/applications/cabling/fireSafety/fire_safety.html)

rw

jneutron
07-20-2005, 06:15 AM
While that's true, if I understand Bruce's ridiculous speculations correctly, he is referring to fire resistance. In fact, Teflon is specifically designed for electrical cables where fire safety is of high concern.

Teflon fire resistance (http://www.teflon.com/NASApp/Teflon/TeflonPageServlet?pageId=/consumer/na/eng/industrial/applications/applications/cabling/fireSafety/fire_safety.html)

rw
I would be hesitant to call his speculations as ridiculous...let's examine:

1) Violating the National Electric Code(and maybe several state and local ones) for using a wire with insufficient insulation characteristics. I would categorize "insulation characteristics" as encompassing the following..

A. The material's ability to remain unchanged in the temperature range of interest...flammability, chemical makeup, electrical isolation ability at all temps, it's ability to retain form..all of which can impact the insulation's ability to perform it's function.

B. The ability of the insulation to withstand the application's physical rigors, as in abrasion resistance, ability to survive bending stresses, it's resistance to creep.

C. If ignited, the ability to resist giving off extremely toxic byproducts, as well as self extinguishing characteristics.

It is possible to violate the NEC through the use of an insulation material which is superior with respect to fire resistance. This is because fire resistance is only one of many parameters which the code encompasses.

So, even though some materials may indeed be better in some aspect, use of them can be a violation of NEC, with these ramifications:



2) Likely not to be covered by their homeowners insurance in the event of a fire.
3) Putting their safety and the safety of their family at risk for the previously mentioned reasons.
Just my take on what Bruce stated..

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-20-2005, 06:38 AM
I would be hesitant to call his speculations as ridiculous...let's examine:
I would categorize "insulation characteristics" as encompassing the following..

Do you have any specific information as to Teflon's unsuitability for use as wire insulation (especially since it is widely used)?

The Belden website doesn't like direct links, but go to www.belden.com and search for 83803 for various certifcations.

rw

jneutron
07-20-2005, 07:32 AM
Do you have any specific information as to Teflon's unsuitability for use as wire insulation (especially since it is widely used)?

Here is but one example of Teflon insulated power cord:

Belden 82803 (http://bwccat.belden.com/ecat/jsp/Index.jsp?&P1=undefined&P2=undefined&P3=undefined&P4=undefined&P5=undefined&P6=undefined)

rw
No, I have nothing that would consider teflon as unsuitable in normal applications..I cannot use the stuff, but that is a radiation induced oxygen outgassing thing in liquid helium, and as far as I know, not too many audio applications have to worry about that..but I could be wrong..;)

I am aware of this:
http://www.mikeholt.com/mojonewsarchive/Safety-HTML/HTML/Safety-Toxic-Teflon-Gases~20040520.php

They are now recommending removal of all teflon wires that are not used, rather than leaving in place..

In reviewing bruce's post,

You're friends who are using cable designed for limited power applications as power cords as you mentionedI do believe what he was referring to was the use of too small a guage conductor, or too thin an insulation (low voltage), both of which mean the insulation isn't necessarily up to the task required of a power cord, and as such, would violate NEC.

But, perhaps he can elaborate more..

It would be pleasant, however, to see a reasonably nice discussion here on the topic..a change I would welcome....

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-20-2005, 08:03 AM
No, I have nothing that would consider teflon as unsuitable in normal applications.
Fine. Then we can dispense with all the theoretical speculations that do not apply.


They are now recommending removal of all teflon wires that are not used, rather than leaving in place..
All cabling will eventually burn. The key is removing all unused cable. FEP, however, is more fire resistant than either PE or PVC.


It would be pleasant, however, to see a reasonably nice discussion here on the topic..a change I would welcome....
Indeed. I think it would be far more productive to discuss real products and issues rather than wild assed guesses about imaginary ones. All power cables I use are UL approved.

Leaving the imaginary and returning to the real world, do you believe using a 9 gauge power cord one meter in length that is UL/CL3 listed for use with an amplifier rated at 10 amps will pose a fire hazard? The cable above it is 16 gauge by comparison.

http://home.comcast.net/~ralphwallace/audio/ht.jpg

rw

jneutron
07-20-2005, 12:00 PM
Fine. Then we can dispense with all the theoretical speculations that do not apply. Please explain why the statement"You're friends who are using cable designed for limited power applications as power cords" is theoretical.. Some of the power cord product I've seen on the forums certainly does not meet reasonable safety standards..I believe this is what bruce was referring to..


Indeed. I think it would be far more productive to discuss real products and issues rather than wild assed guesses about imaginary ones. All power cables I use are UL approved.rwHmmm..I have reviewed all my posts, and have not identified what I would consider a "wild ass guess"..please elaborate.


Leaving the imaginary and returning to the real world, do you believe using a 9 gauge power cord one meter in length that is UL/CL3 listed for use with an amplifier rated at 10 amps will pose a fire hazard? The cable above it is 16 gauge by comparison.
rwI believe the term "your friends" means, umm, your friends...I did not notice an accusation that you personally are using cords above their rating..As far as I can recall, I do not believe I have made accusational statements of the type that would warrant the somewhat "strong" response you just provided..I am somewhat at a loss to understand your demeanor...:confused:

As to your power cord...ul approved, very cool indeed..ducks all in a row...nice..

Your segue from bruce's "power limited" to a 9AWG was interesting, although it was a diversion from the actual statement..

I can design a #12 awg power cord which will outperform your 9 guage beast, in your system...in fact, in all systems. However, the solution has not been tested to UL standards. I had gone so far as to inquire on NRE and production costing for the wire, as well as initial queries into the costing of said UL approval...

Needless to say, I am not inclined to stick my legal neck out for a line cord solution that others could mess up and hurt themselves with.

Please re-visit all my previous posts, so that you may realize that I have not attacked you..

Cheers, John

PS...I woulda gone with a different color...purple over a green rug???geeeeeze...;)

E-Stat
07-20-2005, 01:32 PM
Please explain why the statement"You're friends who are using cable designed for limited power applications as power cords" is theoretical..
Because I had specifically referred to Belden 19364 and 83803 cords which are appropriate for use as power cords in every respect. All the specs and UL/CES certifications can quickly be found on the Belden website.


Hmmm..I have reviewed all my posts, and have not identified what I would consider a "wild ass guess"..please elaborate.
That comment was not at all directed at you.


I believe the term "your friends" means, umm, your friends...I did not notice an accusation that you personally are using cords above their rating.
This rant by Bruce is wholly without merit with regards to the two cords I referenced (or others that I use):

"1) Violating the National Electric Code(and maybe several state and local ones) for using a wire with insufficient insulation characteristics.
2) Likely not to be covered by their homeowners insurance in the event of a fire.
3) Putting their safety and the safety of their family at risk for the previously mentioned reasons."


I can design a #12 awg power cord which will outperform your 9 guage beast, in your system...in fact, in all systems. However, the solution has not been tested to UL standards. I had gone so far as to inquire on NRE and production costing for the wire, as well as initial queries into the costing of said UL approval...
While I really have no idea which particular aspect(s) of the Harmonic Technology design are responsible for its performance, I suspect it has more to do with the use of 6N pure OFC silver conductors for the hot and neutral, OFC copper for the earth and multiple layers of UL/CL-3 shielding than the gauge alone. It is eerily quiet and thus detailed.


Please re-visit all my previous posts, so that you may realize that I have not attacked you..
Ditto as above regarding WAGs. Others, however, attack that which they don't understand or that which they simply make up.


PS...I woulda gone with a different color...purple over a green rug???geeeeeze...;)
Yeah, yeah I didn't have a choice. My other JPS Labs cables are all black. Now that the house is going on nine years old, I'll be replacing that carpet soon anyway. I'm going with a gray theme there having painted the walls and covered (some of) my bass traps in gray cloth. I've gotta bribe my wife to finish the stitchery in the remaining traps.

rw

thepogue
07-20-2005, 05:19 PM
...I got a very close friend of mine who been into audio for over 30 years...he's also blind ('68 Nam) and I turst is ears...well...as strange as it sound...more than I trust my ears...when he listens to a peice of gear, speaker, LP, cables...(etc) he has none of the hype that sighted persons deal with....he doesn't read the hype-rag....he's not blown away (or even swayed) by looks and he is as honest and as reliable as the day is long...he sold me his Monster M2.2's and has straight wires all the way around in his system...he swears he can hear the differnece in cables......to be honest...I just plug and play...I love the 2.2, and really loved the used price ;) to be honest I just don't hear that much difference for one cable to the next...but I've never done a ture blue A B...in fact I never A B'ed at all...so I really can say...but this very wise friend...has a saying "you can see my friend, and I cannot....but I can HEAR...and you cannot". I tend to beleive him.

Peace, Pogue



[QUOTE=jjjanzen]



A friend of mine is an incredible musician with a terrific ear, and also has his PhD in physics. His recommendation: zip cord.

[QUOTE]

jneutron
07-21-2005, 05:58 AM
Because I had specifically referred to Belden 19364 and 83803 cords which are appropriate for use as power cords in every respect. All the specs and UL/CES certifications can quickly be found on the Belden website. rw
Ah...ok..what bruce said was referring to the use of unsafe cords, a #14 by design, is not within that category with a 15 amp outlet.. You both are talking past each other..



That comment was not at all directed at you.
rwAh, ok...My apologies for thinking incorrectly.



This rant by Bruce is wholly without merit with regards to the two cords I referenced (or others that I use):
rwHe was referring to others with your beliefs, using undersized cords...you know of several out there that shouldn't even be used to power a nightlight..


While I really have no idea which particular aspect(s) of the Harmonic Technology design are responsible for its performance, I suspect it has more to do with the use of 6N pure OFC silver conductors for the hot and neutral, OFC copper for the earth and multiple layers of UL/CL-3 shielding than the gauge alone. It is eerily quiet and thus detailed.rwI'm confident the purity of the silver is of no merit, nor the purity of the copper. And multiple layers of any copper, silver, or aluminum shielding of any form, is useless for inducted noise..

The design is a curious mixture of extreme overkill with conductor sizing, the silly use of various metal schemes, and just tossing lots of shield at the problem without understanding what they are actually doing engineering wise..It is trivial to actually do it right, but that understanding is beyond them..

BTW, was the cord evaluated as meeting UL requirements after all those layers of shield and insulation were applied? I had an application that totally fried a bunch of #0 size conductor even though only 25 amps was in each cable..the big boss had a tech put zippertube over the bundle of wires while I was on vaca, and the whole kaboodle overheated and melted..

I'm glad that you are happy with the cord, as that is really what counts..and, since I do not provide an alternate, far superior product for you to use, you audio guys really have no choice in the matter....detailing of how to properly build a line cord would impact the aftermarket cord industry in a bad way, I also have no desire to do such..I am sensitive to people earning a living..


Others, however, attack that which they don't understand or that which they simply make up.rwGeeze, so many on both sides of the fence fall into that category....

My statement on civility was just a general one, hoping that the two of you could simply calm down and stop talking past one another..


Yeah, yeah I didn't have a choice. My other JPS Labs cables are all black. Now that the house is going on nine years old, I'll be replacing that carpet soon anyway. I'm going with a gray theme there having painted the walls and covered (some of) my bass traps in gray cloth. I've gotta bribe my wife to finish the stitchery in the remaining traps. rw
Ya gotta love how some of our choices are made..you are lucky in that your significant other puts up with your audio fanaticism...I also am lucky in that regard..

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-21-2005, 09:18 AM
Ah...ok..what bruce said was referring to the use of unsafe cords, a #14 by design, is not within that category with a 15 amp outlet.. You both are talking past each other..
What do you mean by "with a 15 amp outlet"? The spec sheet for 19364 says:

ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Max. Operating Voltage - UL: 300 V RMS
Dielectric Withstand Voltage: 2000 V AC Applied For 1 Min.
Max. Recommended Current: 18 Amps per conductor @ 25 C, 13 Amps per conductor @ 25 C over 50 ft.

Did your amp come with a 12 gauge cord? Most in my experience use an 18 or a 16.


He was referring to others with your beliefs, using undersized cords...you know of several out there that shouldn't even be used to power a nightlight..
So he quotes me on using larger than stock cords and rants about using smaller ones?


The design is a curious mixture of extreme overkill with conductor sizing, the silly use of various metal schemes, and just tossing lots of shield at the problem without understanding what they are actually doing engineering wise..It is trivial to actually do it right, but that understanding is beyond them.
The proof is in the pudding.


BTW, was the cord evaluated as meeting UL requirements after all those layers of shield and insulation were applied?
These folks know what they are doing.


...detailing of how to properly build a line cord would impact the aftermarket cord industry in a bad way, I also have no desire to do such..I am sensitive to people earning a living.
Ridiculous. People build a better moustrap every day. Build it and they will come.


Ya gotta love how some of our choices are made..you are lucky in that your significant other puts up with your audio fanaticism...I also am lucky in that regard..
True, but knew what she was getting into. Here's a pic circa '85 of my first house before we married.

http://home.comcast.net/~ralphwallace/audio/acoustats_pw.jpg

You'll notice the fancy window treatments! Actually that pic was taken right after I moved in. The tapestry behind the sofa was hung on the back wall as damping. We later finished the basement and moved the monoliths there. When I built my current house, I specifically changed the original basement design to accommodate an even larger dedicated space.

rw

jneutron
07-21-2005, 10:47 AM
What do you mean by "with a 15 amp outlet"? The spec sheet for 19364 says:

ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS :
Max. Operating Voltage - UL: 300 V RMS
Dielectric Withstand Voltage: 2000 V AC Applied For 1 Min.
Max. Recommended Current: 18 Amps per conductor @ 25 C, 13 Amps per conductor @ 25 C over 50 ft.

Did your amp come with a 12 gauge cord? Most in my experience use an 18 or a 16.
rw
What I meant by "with a 15 amp outlet", is that a #14 wire, which the belden 19364 is specified as having, is the same conductor guage as the #14 wire within the wall, by code, for 15 amp service... Since a #14-3 is code within the walls for 15 amperes, it is certainly acceptable for use with a 15 amp outlet..

I was going to gently admonish you for your lack of reading skills, but alas, I see that I did not punctuate correctly...I said"Ah...ok..what bruce said was referring to the use of unsafe cords, a #14 by design, is not within that category with a 15 amp outlet.. You both are talking past each other.. " What I meant was ....""unsafe cords. (end of sentence, new thought). A #14 by design, is not in that (unsafe cord) category..

Geeze, estat..can't you read minds??? or, at least, see past incorrect punctuation??

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt1 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by jneutron
The design is a curious mixture of extreme overkill with conductor sizing, the silly use of various metal schemes, and just tossing lots of shield at the problem without understanding what they are actually doing engineering wise..It is trivial to actually do it right, but that understanding is beyond them. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

The proof is in the pudding.rw
As I said, they threw the book at the problem, without actually understanding the problem..

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt1 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by jneutron
BTW, was the cord evaluated as meeting UL requirements after all those layers of shield and insulation were applied? </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

These folks know what they are doing.rw
I did not ask you if they knew what they are doing..From their product, I am well aware of what they know and what they don't know..the fact that they needed silver, multiple shields, and #9 wire, shows that they only marginally know what they are doing..and certainly do not understand what the line cord issues for high end audio really are.

I asked you if they evaluated their end product to UL requirements. This needed only a simple yes or no..the statement"they know what they are doing" is not an answer to the question..but rather, a diversion.

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt1 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by jneutron
...detailing of how to properly build a line cord would impact the aftermarket cord industry in a bad way, I also have no desire to do such..I am sensitive to people earning a living. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Ridiculous. People build a better moustrap every day. Build it and they will come.
You did not understand my intent...my fault..

I can easily design a #12, #10, or #8 guage product that blows all the aftermarket line cords out of the water, yours included...and I can do it for about 2 to 4 dollars a foot...

But the cost of that product, for aftermarket vendors, is the loss of any perceived advantages. The small cable manu's I've corresponded with, I've have no issues with them, and hope they do well..Imagine that big speaker wire company with the stadium named after it (please, no names), being able to sell 25 or 50 dollar line cords that work better than the boutique cords...flood the market with better performing product, patents and all, and slammin everybody who tries to duplicate a trivial design? Yah, everybody'd just love that.

I will not be a part of that..some things are better left unsaid..30 years ago, I'da come in blastin without regard for the people who make cords for a living..my morals and values have changed over the decades.

RE: your living situ: you seem to be having fun...this is a good thing..

Me too..

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-21-2005, 12:00 PM
alas, I see that I did not punctuate correctly.
No problemo.


As I said, they threw the book at the problem, without actually understanding the problem..

I can easily design a #12, #10, or #8 guage product that blows all the aftermarket line cords out of the water, yours included...and I can do it for about 2 to 4 dollars a foot...
I'm perfectly willing to throw away some money on your bold claim. Make me a four foot prototype and I'll get it auditioned by critical ears I know. If your claim is true, I guarantee you significant press by an individual who has had the ear of audio enthusiasts for over thirty years.


Yah, everybody'd just love that.
Every audio enthusiast sure would!

I'm certainly not one who wants to spend more on something than necessary to get equivalency. That's why I have drive/ride Hondas. The perceived panache of high-priced items like Rolex watches and Ferraris requires that the general public recognizes said. There is zero "prestige" value to what 99.9% of the population isn't aware of.

rw

jneutron
07-21-2005, 12:41 PM
I'm perfectly willing to throw away some money on your bold claim. Make me a four foot prototype and I'll get it auditioned by critical ears I know. If your claim is true, I guarantee you significant press by an individual who has had the ear of audio enthusiasts for over thirty years. rw
Honestly, I'm not sure I want any press. I enjoy what I do, and like my simple life..I truly enjoy what I do at the lab, and hoopla in the press has no value or interest to the people who ultimately pay my bills.

I've debated internally, this very issue for years. For now, I'm just in it for the learning and discussions..had any vendors expressed any interest in learning or collaborating, I'da taken them up..they know so little about e/m theory (course, most people don't..)

Turning what is lucrative to many aftermarket manufacturers, into a nickel and dime jellybean coupla dollars per piece profit....has too high a price IMHO.


I'm certainly not one who wants to spend more on something than necessary to get equivalency. rw
Me either. But there's more to life than just undercutting all the PC vendors with a superior product at dirt cheap prices..that's a rat race I do not know that I wish to enter into, nor do I wish to do that to others who do it for a living..

Daily walks along the piers and beach, watching the sunsets hand in hand, is more along the lines of what I prefer now..

Should my employment situation change for the worse..that is a different story.

Cheers, John

thepogue
07-24-2005, 07:13 AM
Let me see if I got this straight...you can make better cables for short money...that will smoke anything out there...but you like your job so much that you don't wanna fuss with it...and beside...none of the dumbarses who make cables to date haven't contacted you (or shown any interest) in getting your formula...so you'll just keep this to yourself?...now that's not very nice is it?...I mean the common man should have the best for less don't you think?...come one...hook a brudda up?...slap somefinn together over the weekend and send them to me...I'll send ya 20 bucks...and I'll be your cheerleader!...In fact cuz you don't want all the fuss and publicity...I'll tell everybody I made them...I don' like my job that much!...I'll take a hit for the team...cool?

:rolleyes:


This ones really spinnin now!!

Pogue

jneutron
07-25-2005, 05:59 AM
Let me see if I got this straight...you can make better cables for short money...that will smoke anything out there...but you like your job so much that you don't wanna fuss with it...and beside...none of the dumbarses who make cables to date haven't contacted you (or shown any interest) in getting your formula...so you'll just keep this to yourself?...now that's not very nice is it?...I mean the common man should have the best for less don't you think?...come one...hook a brudda up?...slap somefinn together over the weekend and send them to me...I'll send ya 20 bucks...and I'll be your cheerleader!...In fact cuz you don't want all the fuss and publicity...I'll tell everybody I made them...I don' like my job that much!...I'll take a hit for the team...cool?

:rolleyes:


This ones really spinnin now!!

Pogue
Assume for a moment, the following..(humor me for a minute.)

1. I understand via e/m theory, why a line cord makes a difference..it doesn't involve either power quality, or PSRR. The basis is entirely the amp's fault..any amp which can be affected by the line cord, is designed without consideration of the problem..

2. I design a cord which gets around the cord contribution to this error, far better than any other cord on the market..

3. Everyone who tries this cord finds it is better..

4..Given the low cost of the materials, it is not picked up by a boutique cord manu...no profit..

5. All who make one DIY, do so using my solution..

6. Thousands are made, perhaps tens of thousands...absolutely NONE of them done with my control over the quality of the assembly.

7. One, two, maybe ten of them are done poorly..leading to an incident, fire maybe..

Who is responsible?..me? No thanks..sure, lots of people could make it capable of surviving a direct hit by lightning..but it's the ones who can't that scare me.

Anyone who posts a power cord solution using a wire construct which is NOT UL approved, in a manner which is not UL approved, posts stupidly, and puts themselves into a position of liability..I try not to be that dumb (sometimes I succeed)..

The best thing that could be done, is have the solution setup as an OEM product. In fact, the better option is not IEC, but hard wired into the amp..

The best and total solution is :

1. Hard wire with my cord.

2. Gut the amp primary wires, with a real wiring harness put in.

3. Gut all the low impedance supply rail and ground runs, and replace with a real wiring harness, up to and including the runs to the output binding posts.

4. Gut the input wiring run, and replace it with a real wiring harness.

The key phrase here being: real wiring harness.. All the amp product I've viewed to date internally, is just schlock..e/m speaking of course...I marvel at some of the craftsmanship and circuit design, but they do not, and I repeat, DO NOT understand magnetics, high slew rate currents, and low impedance circuitry..randomness rules the day..

The only legitimate way forward really, would be to publish..But even IEEE and AES have their problems...

Cheers, John

Resident Loser
07-25-2005, 06:30 AM
...dumbness...are you saying replace all the PCB "common access" power points with dedicated point-to-point wiring?

jimHJJ(...or am I just a complete boob?...)

jneutron
07-25-2005, 06:52 AM
...dumbness...are you saying replace all the PCB "common access" power points with dedicated point-to-point wiring?

jimHJJ(...or am I just a complete boob?...)Any wire within the amplifier which creates a magnetic field external to that wire, or is capable of receiving an external magnetic field, is a culprit. A star ground, while good practice, can allow the non current carrying grounds to intercept mag field from the current carrying ones..that needs to be fixed..

The most significant ones to broadcast are the output rail/output lines, the supply feeds for that output (all the low z stuff), the primary and secondary xfmr runs, the physical size of the supply caps, the power switch wires.

The significant receivers are the input run, and the feedback path.

Run the amp into a full load at 50% power, sine at 5 to 10 Khz..use a magnetic probe, and look for that signal in the amp box, outside the amp box, and (bet you didn't think of this), inside the source component near the output jacks back to the pc board.

If you can find magnetic signal, tis broken, fix it..

When you cannot find any stray field..you are done..

(good luck around those damn supply caps...)

Cheers, John

Oh, forgot this: It's not the IR drop, so that's not what I meant by replacing the wiring harnesses..it's the fact that the traces generate a dipole field..

What is needed is for the amp (and wire) designers to understand that it is not a case of tossing silver, or large wires, or teflon, or cryo, or single crystal yada yada at the problem, it's about engineering the solution.

Resident Loser
07-25-2005, 10:39 AM
...I'd guess all the power wiring should be as segregated as practicable from the signal traces (or wiring) and not run parallel to them at any point...good practice without AND within.

Certainly makes sense..I have an old Fender Bandmaster guitar amp that is somewhat susceptible to hum if you move the interenal wiring a bit too far from it's intended position...and it's all "breadboard" style, point-to-point wiring and all...I'd hazard a guess they arrived at their wiring layout pretty much through trial and error in an effort to optimize s/n and hummmmm. Forty years old and still cookin'!

jimHJJ(...and I do like the idea of the hardwired power cord...)

E-Stat
07-25-2005, 10:53 AM
The best thing that could be done, is have the solution setup as an OEM product. In fact, the better option is not IEC, but hard wired into the amp..

The best and total solution is :

1. Hard wire with my cord.

2. Gut the amp primary wires, with a real wiring harness put in.

3. Gut all the low impedance supply rail and ground runs, and replace with a real wiring harness, up to and including the runs to the output binding posts.

4. Gut the input wiring run, and replace it with a real wiring harness.

The key phrase here being: real wiring harness.. All the amp product I've viewed to date internally, is just schlock..e/m speaking of course...I marvel at some of the craftsmanship and circuit design, but they do not, and I repeat, DO NOT understand magnetics, high slew rate currents, and low impedance circuitry..randomness rules the day..

The only legitimate way forward really, would be to publish..But even IEEE and AES have their problems...
Meanwhile, we who use components not designed this way, given that is virtually all of them, employ what we find that works audibly better given the circumstances.

I have noticed more effort on the part of some manufacturers to specifically add more complex RFI filtering in their products and larger power supplies than conventional engineering practice dictates.

rw

jneutron
07-25-2005, 11:07 AM
Meanwhile, we who use components not designed this way, given that is virtually all of them, employ what we find that works audibly better given the circumstances.
rwYes. And, this is why I have never blasted, or otherwise attacked, those who make the audibility claims..as there are clear paths for coupling.

And, this is why I have attempted to explain why they can make a diff from a purely E/M vantage.

Also, why I speak out against the crap, like needing silver, needing #6 awg, needing multiple shields, needing cryo'd anything. Actual understanding of the issues is much more important..

I had for a while considered putting up a shingle, and doing a retrofit business fixing all those poor designs out there, I've always had fun with wiring harness boards, and it's no-brainer work..(perfect fit for me, I'm well qualified for no brainer stuff..;) ). (actually, I work with a lot of retirees here, they are not paid but come in anyway...and I seriously would entertain coming here and working after I retire..such is life when you have a job that you really love..)

Perhaps sometime in the future I'll setup a DBA, and go for it..maybe something to do when I retire, or maybe if I'm let go..


I have noticed more effort on the part of some manufacturers to specifically add more complex RFI filtering in their products and larger power supplies than conventional engineering practice dictates.rwFor radiating or intercepting RFI, that is a good track to be on..but, what I speak of is not that entity, so RFI solutions are not viable, but may haphazardly change something..

Cheers, John

jneutron
07-25-2005, 11:30 AM
...I'd guess all the power wiring should be as segregated as practicable from the signal traces (or wiring) and not run parallel to them at any point...good practice without AND within.

Certainly makes sense..I have an old Fender Bandmaster guitar amp that is somewhat susceptible to hum if you move the interenal wiring a bit too far from it's intended position...and it's all "breadboard" style, point-to-point wiring and all...I'd hazard a guess they arrived at their wiring layout pretty much through trial and error in an effort to optimize s/n and hummmmm. Forty years old and still cookin'!

jimHJJ(...and I do like the idea of the hardwired power cord...)
What is interesting about loop pickup it how it works. For example, take a flat 3 wire extension cord, and push a kilo through it, a space heater load..run the wire flat and straight..

The center wire of the cord is ground.hot and neutral on either side, like romex...

Run a second cord next to it, one inch away, but do not put a load into it..measure the ground to ground potential.

Next, put the unpowered cord 6 inches away, and repeat the measurement..the voltage is MORE, not less..

Put the cord a foot away..the voltage is even MORE..(granted, the voltages for this example are not gonna be big..

What's going on? As you move the cord farther and farther away, the loop formed by the grounds are trapping more of the 60 hz flux within the loop...faraday's law states that the loop voltage is proportional to the rate of change of the flux within..so, in this case, distance is the enemy...the further away, the worse it gets...this is of course, asymptotically approaching a maximum, it doesn't keep getting bigger.

Faraday's law states.....RATE of change of the flux...60 hz is only the primary, most rectifier circuits draw haversines, 180 hz being very large...the flux rate of change is three times larger per amp..keep going up the odd harmonics..

Then, look at the line cord field with 1,5 or 10 Khz power being delivered to the load...with physically large capacitors...

It seems that your amp vendor had to find the minima coupling path by pushin the wires around to null it..hey, worked for them..

Cheers, John

thepogue
07-26-2005, 12:20 PM
I'm not at all questioning you ability make a better mouse-trap...I just had a hard time swallowing your reasoning for not getting rich with this fact! So I'll return to my first line of questioning...

If you can make a cable (or any other product)..for short $$$..that will smoke most anything out there...am I to believe that you just really don't what to be in the limelight for your new design? (I'm saying new because I'm assuming that no other EE and or audio company had the correct data to make your cable) And that you enjoy you job so much that money (enough to make a man rich) isn't enough motivation to design, produce, and market your cables? It seems so risk free if in fact the cables are as good as you claim.

Or it very well could be...that I'm the one being humored....and I'm just to silly to see!

As stated I'll take you off the hook......no limelight...no risk...just send me all the data...I'll put my name on it...head to my lawyers office for a patient and all that kinda silliness (course Ill have to share the $$$...but what the heck there should be PLENTY to go round!)....and marketing these babies should be a snap because I'm sure the test data will be clearly show the advantages of this cheap and effective product....then lets see.....take you to lunch....buy you a beer...and then the audio world will be better off!! Whadda say ole chum!!!

Pogue (waiting for a payday!!)




Assume for a moment, the following..(humor me for a minute.)

1. I understand via e/m theory, why a line cord makes a difference..it doesn't involve either power quality, or PSRR. The basis is entirely the amp's fault..any amp which can be affected by the line cord, is designed without consideration of the problem..

2. I design a cord which gets around the cord contribution to this error, far better than any other cord on the market..

3. Everyone who tries this cord finds it is better..

4..Given the low cost of the materials, it is not picked up by a boutique cord manu...no profit..

5. All who make one DIY, do so using my solution..

6. Thousands are made, perhaps tens of thousands...absolutely NONE of them done with my control over the quality of the assembly.

7. One, two, maybe ten of them are done poorly..leading to an incident, fire maybe..

Who is responsible?..me? No thanks..sure, lots of people could make it capable of surviving a direct hit by lightning..but it's the ones who can't that scare me.

Anyone who posts a power cord solution using a wire construct which is NOT UL approved, in a manner which is not UL approved, posts stupidly, and puts themselves into a position of liability..I try not to be that dumb (sometimes I succeed)..

The best thing that could be done, is have the solution setup as an OEM product. In fact, the better option is not IEC, but hard wired into the amp..

The best and total solution is :

1. Hard wire with my cord.

2. Gut the amp primary wires, with a real wiring harness put in.

3. Gut all the low impedance supply rail and ground runs, and replace with a real wiring harness, up to and including the runs to the output binding posts.

4. Gut the input wiring run, and replace it with a real wiring harness.

The key phrase here being: real wiring harness.. All the amp product I've viewed to date internally, is just schlock..e/m speaking of course...I marvel at some of the craftsmanship and circuit design, but they do not, and I repeat, DO NOT understand magnetics, high slew rate currents, and low impedance circuitry..randomness rules the day..

The only legitimate way forward really, would be to publish..But even IEEE and AES have their problems...

Cheers, John

jneutron
07-26-2005, 12:58 PM
I'm not at all questioning you ablity make a better mouse-trap...I just had a hard time swallowing your reasoning for not getting rich with this fact! So I'll return to my first line of questioning... You would be well within your rights to question my ability at building a better mousetrap.


If you can make a cable (or any other product)..for short $$$..that will smoke most anything out there...am I to beleive that you just really don't what to be in the limelight for your new design? (I'm saying new because I'm assuming that no other EE and or audio company had the correct data to make your cable) And that you enjoy you job so much that money (enough to make a man rich) isn't enough motivation to design, produce, and market your cables? It seems so risk free if in fact the cables are as good as you claim. I also assume that no other EE or audio company understands what I am talking about. Perhaps someone does, I have not seen anything that would indicate so..


Or it very well could be...that I'm the one being humored....and I'm just to silly to see! :) No. I am not humoring you.


As stated I'll take you off the hook......no limelight...no risk...just send me all the data...I'll put my name on it...head to my lawers office for a patient and all that kinda silliness (course I"ll have to share the $$$...but what the heck ther should be PLENTY to go round!)....and marketing these babies should be a snap because I'm sure the test data will be clearly show the advantages of this cheap and effective product....then lets see.....take you to lunch....buy you a beer...and then the audio world will be better off!! Whatta say ole chum!!! A patent only gives you the right to sue to protect your IP. It is very easy to get around a patent, and very difficult to defend it.

Why do you assume there would be lots of money?? How many a'philes would want a cord...100, 1000? From what I see, that size market doesn't exist..

Between patent costs, NRE for the wire, materials and labor, where would break even occur? I believe that would have to be in the 1000+ regime. Not to mention the liability insurance.

It would probably be better to just pay the NRE on the wire, have it tested to UL requirements, and offer it as a standard product line at say, Belden..

I went through this a while back, when I designed a true 75 ohm RCA jack and plug set..turned out, I posted the design (actually on this forum) exactly 31 days AFTER wbt applied for the patent in Germany...me, a bridesmaid...go figure..

Then, I created a new design which obsoletes that one...big time...mentioned it to a few wbt reps, no interest..hmmm. The cost of the widgit would be in the ten to 20 cent range, so to be worthwhile, even with 5 cents per part profit, it'd be necessary to produce 10 to 30 thousand pieces per week. Market demand could be there if anyone cared about the fact that rca's aren't 75 ohm..but most don't.

Course, it would also obsolete all the wbt 75 ohm rca product..maybe I can get them to pay me NOT to detail it?:p

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-27-2005, 07:40 AM
Why do you assume there would be lots of money?? How many a'philes would want a cord...100, 1000? From what I see, that size market doesn't exist..

Between patent costs, NRE for the wire, materials and labor, where would break even occur? I believe that would have to be in the 1000+ regime. Not to mention the liability insurance.
Exactly. The real business of producing, promoting, supporting, and distributing goods involves a lot more than the raw cost of materials. Many "overpriced" cables are labors of love, not profit.


Course, it would also obsolete all the wbt 75 ohm rca product..maybe I can get them to pay me NOT to detail it?
Yep. Just like the oil companies that bought and moth-balled all those $19.95 devices you could attach to your car's engine to get 100 MPG. ;)

rw

jneutron
07-27-2005, 08:12 AM
Exactly. The real business of producing, promoting, supporting, and distributing goods involves a lot more than the raw cost of materials. Many "overpriced" cables are labors of love, not profit.rw And, unfortunately, my bank does not allow deposits of "labors of love"...they prefer cash..


Yep. Just like the oil companies that bought and moth-balled all those $19.95 devices you could attach to your car's engine to get 100 MPG. ;)rwActually, I did have a car that got 134 miles to the gallon..

Unfortunately, it was antifreeze, not gas..

On the plus side, two of the spark plugs were incredibly clean...steam cleaned...

On the minus side, I hadta keep a coupla gallons of antifreeze in the trunk for the round trip to work..

Cheers, John

E-Stat
07-27-2005, 08:31 AM
On the minus side, I hadta keep a coupla gallons of antifreeze in the trunk for the round trip to work..
Funny! Reminds me of a brother's friend who had a '67 Austin-Healey that leaked oil with a similar thirst. Fortunately, it was a directed leak that could be captured by a coffee can strategically wedged near the block. Once he reached his destination, he simply poured the oil back in the crankcase.

Near real time oil recycling!

rw

pctower
09-25-2005, 03:25 AM
My 2 cents worth.

This inference doesn't prove anything of course but it is usually suspicious when mainstream electrical engineering doesn't even discuss something that audio enthusiasts are raving about and audio cable retailers are describing on their sites.

Does "mainstream electical engineering" generally discuss anything having to do with traditional 2-channel, high end audio?

The big money in cables is Monster sold in mass-market outlets to gulible non-audiophiles. Most true high end audiophiles don't believe Monster is worth a damn.

The rest of the cable industry sells to the very limited, niche high-end market. Dollar-wise, that's a speck of sand compared to the overall electronic industry. "Mainstream electrical engineering" follows the money - and relatively speaking there is no money in high-end audio.

The fact that "mainstream electrical engineering" doesn't discuss audio cables means nothing more than there just isn't enough money involved. If you really think it suggests that cables cannot affect sonics, then I respectfully suggest you are allowing your biases to trump your objectivety and are grasping for straws.

mixadude
09-25-2005, 11:13 AM
I just can't see any point in using some over designed 9ga 1 meter piece of power cable between an IEC connector and a 15 or 20 amp wall outlet that has maybe 50 feet of 12ga or 14ga thhn or romex to the load center.

When I spec commercial installations I put the load center (100A or 200A single or 3 phase depending) right next to the racks, then feed the outlets with 10ga and use 12ga shorty IEC cables to the amps, usually 1 or 2 amps per circuit depending. Some larger amps (QSC PL6 or such) require even larger demands and those circuits are set up accordingly with larger circuits and cable and connectors.

But just a big fat power cord on a questionable mains connection seems silly to me.

Resident Loser
09-26-2005, 08:57 AM
...how's things in the land of the dry heat? Geez, it's like old home week...I was thinkin' about you in reference to another thread re: older(not age-wise), no-longer-active participants. Howdy.


Most true high end audiophiles don't believe Monster is worth a damn.

Do you think part of it may be because it's not expensive or exclusive enough?

Funny thing, there's a small retail chain in my neck of the woods, sells Krell and Sonus Faber to the more well-heeled...the only wiring they carry(after ditching Tara, etc.) is Monster. Now either their patrons aren't "true high end audiophiles" or the retailer is simply looking at the bottom line or there really is no difference or...aw, who really gives a rat's @$$...???

jimHJJ(...I think you know MY answer...)

squeegy200
09-29-2005, 01:17 PM
Anyone have a copy or link to the CalTech study done a few years back?

The tested everything from Ace Hardware Zip cord to MIT and Audiquest speaker wires. Finally they compared the same cables in blind A-B tests to determine if there were sonically perceivable differences.

The Grudge
09-30-2005, 08:54 PM
I find this whole debate very interesting. As mentioned before, it is entirely possible that differences perceived by a listener are perceived because we expect to hear them. In any kind of research if a theory is not testable it can provide no valid data. That is fact. Seeing as people are discussing sound as it is influenced by cabling it would be very important to define what elements in sound can in theory be improved by cabling technology. If these elements can't be isolated no actual testing is possible. If you can agree that it is the audible portion of sound that humans can detect that is in question we can start in my view.

First, there is of course a great deal of science about the dynamic range and sound spectrum humans can detect from the least sensitive to the most sensitive among us. This data can be used to design an experiment. You would never use the human ear itself as this is to variable, you would use measuring equipment with known limitations and sensitivities suitable to the task and of course this implies limitations like the human ear is limited by the nervous system it is connected to the brain with. Next you would need an environment that could not fluctuate in characteristics that could influence sound waves in the range being tested. With these controls in place you at least have the possibility of valid experiment design.

The next step would be to generate music in this highly controlled music that is received by the measuring devices both with special cabling and ordinary cabling. The signal itself must not vary in any quality so the signal being measured must be identical. If the measuring equipment detects statistically significant differences that audiologists would interpret as audible components of sound to the human ear then you have proof. If there is no significant difference the measuring equipment in a stable environment detects then it stands to logic there is no chance any person can reliably hear any difference. Have any such test been performed? If so we can examine the experimental controls, the process and the resulting data to form conclusions. Anything else is far to subjective to be represented as anything more than an opinion.

Please understand, I myself have no opinion one way or the other, I have no data to inspect. If I went and purchased expensive cabling I would form a very powerful expectation in my mind and that in the realm of science would be considered a confounding element in an experiment rendering the information derived invalid and unreliable. If people are going to discuss such issues with any hope of bringing forth anything more than opinions, a scientifically valid experiment needs to be designed, implemented, data analyzed and then interpreted based on the goals of the experiment.

:)

musicoverall
10-03-2005, 06:03 AM
it is entirely possible that differences perceived by a listener are perceived because we expect to hear them. .

:)

In the beginning, I expected to hear differences between pretty much ALL cables. The fact is that during my last set of auditions between several different makes/models, I heard differences between less than half of them. Many of them were indistinguishable from my reference. The Cardas I bought, along with the Nordost Valhalla that I couldn't hope to afford, were notable exceptions. So my expectations were thwarted by the evidence.

Other than that, not much to disagree with in your post. Certainly there should be measurements to support what we hear. As it stands now, current measurements only serve to tell us what ISN'T causing the differences.

squeegy200
10-12-2005, 09:55 AM
In the beginning, I expected to hear differences between pretty much ALL cables. The fact is that during my last set of auditions between several different makes/models, I heard differences between less than half of them. Many of them were indistinguishable from my reference. The Cardas I bought, along with the Nordost Valhalla that I couldn't hope to afford, were notable exceptions. So my expectations were thwarted by the evidence.

Other than that, not much to disagree with in your post. Certainly there should be measurements to support what we hear. As it stands now, current measurements only serve to tell us what ISN'T causing the differences.

The Caltech Study (There are lots of audiophiles on that campus) was revealing. The first phase used objective measurements to identify absolute differences in each cable set. Then the results were compared with A-B tests and finally blind A-B tests. The results were compared afterwards and the Blind phases were of interest because the subjects were unaware of which cables they were auditioning, their expectations were removed.

I can no longer find the file with the actual report.

musicoverall
10-12-2005, 04:49 PM
The Caltech Study (There are lots of audiophiles on that campus) was revealing. The first phase used objective measurements to identify absolute differences in each cable set. Then the results were compared with A-B tests and finally blind A-B tests. The results were compared afterwards and the Blind phases were of interest because the subjects were unaware of which cables they were auditioning, their expectations were removed.

I can no longer find the file with the actual report.

Well, we won't get into whether or not blind testing is valid or sensitive enough because the debates will rage on this board (and probably get deleted or moved to The Audio Lab), just as they do in the general audio community. But I have no doubt that in this test these listeners could not distinguish these cables in these systems in these rooms on these particular days. That's about all any such test shows.

pctower
11-19-2005, 03:03 PM
Hi Jim:

This is the first time I have been back since the post to which you responded.

I see that the eternal debate continues unabated and I feel reassured that all is therefore well with the Universe.

Hope all is well with you. Happy Thanksgiving to you and the rest of the gang. :)


...how's things in the land of the dry heat? Geez, it's like old home week...I was thinkin' about you in reference to another thread re: older(not age-wise), no-longer-active participants. Howdy.



Do you think part of it may be because it's not expensive or exclusive enough?

Funny thing, there's a small retail chain in my neck of the woods, sells Krell and Sonus Faber to the more well-heeled...the only wiring they carry(after ditching Tara, etc.) is Monster. Now either their patrons aren't "true high end audiophiles" or the retailer is simply looking at the bottom line or there really is no difference or...aw, who really gives a rat's @$$...???

jimHJJ(...I think you know MY answer...)