How about this argument as to why cables sound different.

[Tony_Montana]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

[skeptic]

"It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."[/b]"
[/QUOTE]


That statement seem very plausible only to a neophite. Mathematically, the cable is part of a network which consists of the source, the cable and the load. When you measure the numbers and plug them in, the cable becomes an insignificant factor. The source impedence is very low, the load impedence is relatively high to the source, and the cable as well as the differences between one cable and another are insignificant. It comes as no surprise to engineers who "run the numbers" that the differences are inaudible. That's the result they expect, that's the result you get. You want to know why electrical engineers are "objectivists" on this issue? That's way. The only exception is when you have an amplifier with a relatively high source impedence (low damping factor) a long run of cable, and a low impedence loudspeaker. Then you need something special. And that special thing is heavier gage wire to reduce the series resistance so it becomes insignificant again.

Good try Tony but again NO CIGAR!

And NO SOUP FOR YOU TODAY!

[mtrycraft]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

Then all his speculations as that is all it is, can be detected under bias controlled listening.

Bring it on :)

They will try all sorts of excuses before they can even demonstrate audible differences in the first place. Why is that?

[Beckman]

While arguing in CA, a member named Sean gave this argument as to why each cables cause different systems to sound different.

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.

? impedance, reactance = 1/impedance, same thing - inverse

? dielectric absorbtion = capacitance, included in impedance

? sonic perceptions - does this mean how the sonic percieves the music?

I agree that different cables can sound different. I also believe that if people replaced their expensive cables with 12 AWG zip cord and listened carefully they would find their system sounds equal or better.

[bturk667]

that I can hear the difference between cables in my system.
For those you can't, well, good.

[Beckman]

that I can hear the difference between cables in my system.
For those you can't, well, good.

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?

[pctower]

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?

Well, here's one reason:

http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/Loudspeakers&RoomsPt3.pdf

Pages 28-31.

Of course, even if cables had the capacity to equalize, they would do even a worse job.

Seems to me that if similar cables of similar gauge and length really can sound different, the goal should not be to use cables as "tone control" or "equalizers", but use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them (if, in fact, a cable really is capable of doing sonic "damage").

[skeptic]

"use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them "

If by damage you mean distortion, then one cable is pretty much like another. Electrical engineers are aware of two types of distortion, linear and non linear. Linear distortion, the change in frequency/phase response is correctable through equalization. That's what you do in your color tv set when you adjust the tint control. Non linear distortion meaning harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, and noise, are not correctable.

Linear distortion has been shown to vary among different speaker cables by at most two or three tenths of a db at 20khz, an insignificant quantity to anyone but those out of touch with reality. For interconnects, even that infinitesmal quantity cannot be accounted for because if the divergence were that great at 20khz, the lesser cable would not pass a 6mhz NTSC signal and yet even the least expensive ones can do it virtually perfectly. We usually think of requiring ten times the analog bandwidth transmitted to be acceptable so the cheapie interconnects for vcrs video output to tv video input should have a bandwidth of 60 mhz or more, 3000 times what is needed for high fidelity audio. All audio interconnect cables should easily meet this criteria.

As for non linear distortion, I have only John Curls numbers to go on showing (for the umpteenth time in case someone hasn't seen it before) that the worst case measured ($1 RS) was minus 120 db for the 7th harmonic of 5 khz and the best case (very expensive) was minus 135 db for the 7th harmonic of 5khz, both cases being entirely inaudible under any possible circumstances in any audio playback system. Of course there are the theorists like Jon Risch who speak of dielectic "memory" and other highly esoteric rationale for their claims of superiority of sound of one cable over another but when it comes to demonstrating electrical differences in distortion (or damage as you put it) they are at a complete loss.

When challenged with a demand for some objective proof that these differences exist and are not just imagined such as a DBT where the advocate could pick out one cable from another by sound alone, they are not only at a complete loss to give any hard evidence but at sites like CA, they refuse to even allow discussion of it under the pretense that it would only provoke flame wars. Is it any wonder then that some people viewing these claims are "skeptics?"

[pctower]

"use the ones that do the least damage to the signal passing through them "

If by damage you mean distortion, then one cable is pretty much like another. Electrical engineers are aware of two types of distortion, linear and non linear. Linear distortion, the change in frequency/phase response is correctable through equalization. That's what you do in your color tv set when you adjust the tint control. Non linear distortion meaning harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, and noise, are not correctable.

Linear distortion has been shown to vary among different speaker cables by at most two or three tenths of a db at 20khz, an insignificant quantity to anyone but those out of touch with reality. For interconnects, even that infinitesmal quantity cannot be accounted for because if the divergence were that great at 20khz, the lesser cable would not pass a 6mhz NTSC signal and yet even the least expensive ones can do it virtually perfectly. We usually think of requiring ten times the analog bandwidth transmitted to be acceptable so the cheapie interconnects for vcrs video output to tv video input should have a bandwidth of 60 mhz or more, 3000 times what is needed for high fidelity audio. All audio interconnect cables should easily meet this criteria.

As for non linear distortion, I have only John Curls numbers to go on showing (for the umpteenth time in case someone hasn't seen it before) that the worst case measured ($1 RS) was minus 120 db for the 7th harmonic of 5 khz and the best case (very expensive) was minus 135 db for the 7th harmonic of 5khz, both cases being entirely inaudible under any possible circumstances in any audio playback system. Of course there are the theorists like Jon Risch who speak of dielectic "memory" and other highly esoteric rationale for their claims of superiority of sound of one cable over another but when it comes to demonstrating electrical differences in distortion (or damage as you put it) they are at a complete loss.

When challenged with a demand for some objective proof that these differences exist and are not just imagined such as a DBT where the advocate could pick out one cable from another by sound alone, they are not only at a complete loss to give any hard evidence but at sites like CA, they refuse to even allow discussion of it under the pretense that it would only provoke flame wars. Is it any wonder then that some people viewing these claims are "skeptics?"

My comment was directed solely at the issue of equalizers. I thought I had chosen my words carefully enough to avoid going down the do-cables-really-matter path again for the 1,389,048,201th time. I even bothered to mention cables at all in hopes of avoiding some sanctamoneous speech from someone who felt the need to jump in and point out that any problem Toole refers to in his article about equalizers would apply even more to cables, IF they even might make a difference (which was clearly a subject I had no interest in getting into on a general level, as it has been beat to death here beyond the cruelest torture man could possibly devise).

Apparently, however, that truly is the only issue anyone on this board is capable of discussing. I guess it is just too much of a temptation for the regulars here to avoid the need to repeat their canned stump speach at least 3 or 4 times daily.

[skeptic]

...I thought it was only the 1,389,048,200th time.

[pctower]

...I thought it was only the 1,389,048,200th time.

I stand corrected. Math was never one of my strong suits. Come to think of it, I don't recall anyone ever pointing out to me exactly what my strong suits are.

[Tony_Montana]

My comment was directed solely at the issue of equalizers. I thought I had chosen my words carefully enough to avoid going down the do-cables-really-matter path again for the 1,389,048,201th time.

PC, that speech is like caffeine for Skeptics in the morning. That is the only way for him to "get up and go" in the morning. Note the time of speech :D

I have thought about this issue (cable interfacing with component), and everybody got a good point on this issue which is valid considering ideal situation. But what situations that are not ideal?

For example, what about if amplifier's output impedance have low damping factor or not low by design (such as tube, valve, FET, etc..), or difficult speaker load that dip too low and or long speaker cables?........same concept can be applied to ICs.

Wouldn't these oddities coupled with cable's parameter make a component sound different (again, assuming the cable is not as transparent as it should be)? Just look at Audioholics testing of different cables and one can see that some cables have too much capacitance or some have too much inductance, and some have too much of both.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/SpeakerCableFaceoff.htm

I believe some of these cables couple with abnormality of components mentioned above might indeed make a sonic change if cables are swapped out :)

[E-Stat]

I believe some of these cables couple with abnormality of components mentioned above might indeed make a sonic change if cables are swapped out :)
I too, find that theory does not always fully describe the real world.

rw

[Lowdef]

Why doesn't anyone talk about the environment our cables and components are in. As in room temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure and so on. Any of these conditions could cause differences and as they change so might our sound. After all didn't the space shuttle blow up once for being too cold and once for being too hot. It's evident that all their instruments could not work properly under extreme conditions causing major malfunctions. Back on earth the effect might be more subtle on our sound systems but it might be audible when listening carefully and this might account for some of the differences we hear or think were hearing.

Knowlege is worthless without Common Sense
Rich :)

[mtrycraft]

Just look at Audioholics testing of different cables and one can see that some cables have too much capacitance or some have too much inductance, and some have too much of both.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/SpeakerCableFaceoff.htm

I believe some of these cables couple with abnormality of components mentioned above might indeed make a sonic change if cables are swapped out :)

That cable with such a high Rs wich is equivalent to about a 22ga or smaller is not recommended for speaker cable application unless it is a very, very short run. Greenfield demonstrated audible differences between cables this thin and 16 ga and 12 ga cables. The 22 ga is just not comparable to 12-16 ga cables.

If you check the others, they are bunched together with less than, what, .1 dB difference.

Those are speaker cables :)

[mtrycraft]

Why doesn't anyone talk about the environment our cables and components are in. As in room temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure and so on. Any of these conditions could cause differences and as they change so might our sound.

I am sure someone could measure the differences in response due to all these. And you will find it minsicule, below threshold of detection.



After all didn't the space shuttle blow up once for being too cold and once for being too hot.

Well, some rubber o-rings failed due to temperature. Failed enough to cause the explosion. What does this has to do with audibility due to humidity change?



It's evident that all their instruments could not work properly under extreme conditions causing major malfunctions.

Not evident at all. Overlooked something. And, the o-ring was not instrumented.




Back on earth the effect might be more subtle on our sound systems but it might be audible when listening carefully and this might account for some of the differences we hear or think were hearing.

I go along with your last statement, "or think were hearing" as that is what is happening.

[Norm Strong]

Apparently, however, that truly is the only issue anyone on this board is capable of discussing. I guess it is just too much of a temptation for the regulars here to avoid the need to repeat their canned stump speach at least 3 or 4 times daily.[/QUOTE]

Of course. That's because this is the Cable Forum. If you want to discuss equalizers, take it someplace else.

[pctower]

PC, that speech is like caffeine for Skeptics in the morning. That is the only way for him to "get up and go" in the morning. Note the time of speech :D

I have thought about this issue (cable interfacing with component), and everybody got a good point on this issue which is valid considering ideal situation. But what situations that are not ideal?

For example, what about if amplifier's output impedance have low damping factor or not low by design (such as tube, valve, FET, etc..), or difficult speaker load that dip too low and or long speaker cables?........same concept can be applied to ICs.

Wouldn't these oddities coupled with cable's parameter make a component sound different (again, assuming the cable is not as transparent as it should be)? Just look at Audioholics testing of different cables and one can see that some cables have too much capacitance or some have too much inductance, and some have too much of both.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/SpeakerCableFaceoff.htm

I believe some of these cables couple with abnormality of components mentioned above might indeed make a sonic change if cables are swapped out :)

Well, perhaps the interface with components could be significant. But I wonder why anyone would design components with such adnormalities. People talk about synergy, but I've never seen much actual research. But then again, I've never even seen a valid demonstration of actual sonic differences.

Who knows. I'm tired and I'm fed up with all that crap over at PropHead. What the hell is wrong with people?

[RobotCzar]

Tony,

The point is simply this: while variations exist in the electrical characteristic of the circuits created by using different components, are the differences large enough to hear?

If the electrical differences are known, it is possible to calculate the magnitude of the effects on the sound produced. Studies have established how strong the differences in sound have to be before humans can detect a difference (our hearing does not have infinite resolution). Some differences are so small we can't tell the differences among them. The calculated (and measured) values for some things (like cables) are not loud enough for us to distingush. And, when we simply test if people can hear a difference, we confirm that they cannot.

I must say that I thought skeptic gave a really nice summary above, especially in how he worked in the postions of the couple of high-end gurus he mentioned.

E-stat, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have a clue. "Theory" IS predicting what he precieves (of course).. The "theory" is the effect of various psychological factors on perception, which has been well understood for decades. He simply doesn't know, understand, or accept the theory that is responsible for what he is "hearing".

[Pat D]

Well, perhaps the interface with components could be significant. But I wonder why anyone would design components with such adnormalities. People talk about synergy, but I've never seen much actual research. But then again, I've never even seen a valid demonstration of actual sonic differences.

Who knows. I'm tired and I'm fed up with all that crap over at PropHead. What the hell is wrong with people?
Well, yes, a low output impedance and a high input impedance are more or less stamdard with good equipment so interconnects should be inaudible. A low output impedance on an amplifier is desirable and so is low resistance in speaker cables, if accuracy is the goal. Perhaps those who design equipment otherwise have different goals.

The effects of a high output impedance in an amplifier are well documented, and indeed, Stereophile measures the frequency response of amplifiers into the IHF simulated 8 and 4 ohm speaker loads quite regularly (these are standard loads so that the results with different amplifiers can be easily compared). BHK labs also does similar measurements for Soundstage, and Audio magazine used to do them as well.

I am not at home but I have some articles showing differences between speaker cables of small and large gauge where the length is sufficient to make an audible difference. Anyway, mtry has given the references often enough and if you haven't bothered to look them up, that's not our fault. But it's relatively easy to ensure that the speaker cables will not make an audible difference, if that is desired.

[E-Stat]

E-stat, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have a clue... " He simply doesn't know, understand, or accept the theory that is responsible for what he is "hearing".
I'm in very good company with quite a few others. :)

rw

[woodman]

I'm in very good company with quite a few others. :)

rw

Yes, I know. Sad isn't it? Gullibility among humans is rampant on the planet at this time ... especially when it comes to consumer electronics, unfortunately.

[woodman]

He said:

"Cables all sound the same...by themselves.

It is the electrical characteristics of each component interphase combined with the characteristics ( impedances, levels of reactance, materials used, dielectric absorption, etc... ) of the cable itself that causes variations in sonic perceptions. Change one variable in the equation ( active component or cable ) and you've change the electrical characteristics ( and sonics ) of the circuit."

That statement seem very plausible assuming the fact that all cables are not as transparent as they should be. May be that explain (to some extent) why each cable used with different systems sound different.


No, Tony, it doesn't. Dedicated, die-hard wire-nutzies go to great lengths - grasping at invisible straws - reaching desperately for something, anything to explain their obsession with spending vast sums on something that either:

a: makes NO difference whatsoever in the performance of their system, or
b: makes such a small, minuscule difference that it belies common sense

This quote is a classic example of this phenomenon. Although the statements - in and of themselves could be considered accurate and truthful, what is left unsaid is what's most important. That is, that these changes in electrical parameters are meaningful and therefore audible ... which they have very little chance of being. Very close to zero, in fact.

[E-Stat]

Yes, I know. Sad isn't it? Gullibility among humans is rampant on the planet at this time ... especially when it comes to consumer electronics, unfortunately.
Uh Woody, you missed one. You haven't posted an "E-Stat is gullible" message on the "Is a heavy guage (sic) power cord helpful" thread to match the other two. Are you a slacker or what?

rw

[pctower]

Uh Woody, you missed one. You haven't posted an "E-Stat is gullible" message on the "Is a heavy guage (sic) power cord helpful" thread to match the other two. Are you a slacker or what?

rw

Wouldn't it be nice to go through life that sure of things. Actually, I'd settle for anything - just one tiny little thing - that I could be that sure of.

Then I'd sit in confident judgment of anyone who lacked my God-granted certainty, glowering down at those mere mortals who remain mired in their Terminal Confusion.

[dvjorge]

Buy a well designed speaker cable from Audioquest, Kimbler, or DH labs,etc, and you will know if you can hear a better sound or not. You dont need to spend $1000..... my system changed as night and day when I bought high quality cables. After spending $$$$$ in B&Ws, Paradigm Studio, Arcam Amplifier, Nad cd player, Sony reference SACD, my system was nothing. Cables have done a great job. I had to listen to all my cds again to enjoy a real hi-fi system.

[mtrycraft]

Buy a well designed speaker cable from Audioquest, Kimbler, or DH labs,etc, and you will know if you can hear a better sound or not. You dont need to spend $1000..... my system changed as night and day when I bought high quality cables. After spending $$$$$ in B&Ws, Paradigm Studio, Arcam Amplifier, Nad cd player, Sony reference SACD, my system was nothing. Cables have done a great job. I had to listen to all my cds again to enjoy a real hi-fi system.


Interesting. Cables do a great job alright. Try it without one :)

[jamie_the_dude]

Why spend money on cables to alter the sound of your stereo when you can do the same thing with much more control using an equalizer?


An equalizer can only boost or cut frequencies to balance sound levels within a room to adjust for its environment which naturally may cut or boost frequencies. You battle this by doing the opposite with an equalizer. Cables can chnage the sound, not...........It can add detail to highs, clean up lows, and add warmth to sound, etc. An equalizer cannot exactly do this.

And my take- I can tell cables in my sytem too- that is all I know. With a receiver and a couple bookshelf speakers like I had in college- I could not. Good cables simply do not "mess up" already good sounding equipment. But, they can tweak the sound a bit.

Byt he way- lets all start a post about the airplane at the speed of light turning on its headlights! SWEET!

[mtrycraft]

Cables can chnage the sound, not...........It can add detail to highs, clean up lows, and add warmth to sound, etc.




Where did you get this nonsense? If it is evidence based, please expand on this evidence.

And my take- I can tell cables in my sytem too- that is all I know.

And my take is that you perceive something. That is different from hearing things that are real.
How about imaginating all this nonsense? That is a real possibility too. You will never know what you really heard unless you conduct your comparison DBT. Simple.


Good cables simply do not "mess up" already good sounding equipment. But, they can tweak the sound a bit.


Yes, if you can hear .2dB -.5dB at 16kHz and above. Good luck. Your chances are zero though.

[Thomas_A]

Completely off-topic,

but here is some interesting stuff collected on one page.

http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/links/index-en.html

BTW,

I've seen one person making a measurement of Monster M1 and 4 x Supra Classic 2.5 mm2 (equals about 4 x 13 AWG standard loudspeaker copper cable connected in parallell I think).The equipment was a high-quality amp, a tone generator, and cable length exactly 5 meters.

With a scope the voltage was set to exactly 5000 mV at the amps loudspeaker binding posts. The wires were terminated with an 8 ohm resistor. Then the voltage drop was measured on one branch of the cable. The result was the following using a square-waves:

10 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 750 mV (loss)
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

1 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 550 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

100 Hz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 250 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

Anybody that can confirm such a loss from the Monster M1?

T

[jneutron]

I've seen one person making a measurement of Monster M1 and 4 x Supra Classic 2.5 mm2 (equals about 4 x 13 AWG standard loudspeaker copper cable connected in parallell I think).The equipment was a high-quality amp, a tone generator, and cable length exactly 5 meters.

With a scope the voltage was set to exactly 5000 mV at the amps loudspeaker binding posts. The wires were terminated with an 8 ohm resistor. Then the voltage drop was measured on one branch of the cable. The result was the following using a square-waves:

10 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 750 mV (loss)
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

1 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 550 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

100 Hz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 250 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

Anybody that can confirm such a loss from the Monster M1?

T

I can't confirm the loss...

I can, however, confirm the horrible measurement errors caused by that ridiculous setup..

The way you describe it, the person that did it that way needs a refresher course in test methods and e/m theory..

Cheers, John

[Thomas_A]

I can't confirm the loss...

I can, however, confirm the horrible measurement errors caused by that ridiculous setup..

The way you describe it, the person that did it that way needs a refresher course in test methods and e/m theory..

Cheers, John

Can you elaborate?

regards,

T

[Richard Greene]

"I stand corrected. Math was never one of my strong suits. Come to think of it, I don't recall anyone ever pointing out to me exactly what my strong suits are."

RG
LAWSUITS, what elks?

[Beckman]

Completely off-topic,

but here is some interesting stuff collected on one page.

http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/links/index-en.html

BTW,

I've seen one person making a measurement of Monster M1 and 4 x Supra Classic 2.5 mm2 (equals about 4 x 13 AWG standard loudspeaker copper cable connected in parallell I think).The equipment was a high-quality amp, a tone generator, and cable length exactly 5 meters.

With a scope the voltage was set to exactly 5000 mV at the amps loudspeaker binding posts. The wires were terminated with an 8 ohm resistor. Then the voltage drop was measured on one branch of the cable. The result was the following using a square-waves:

10 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 750 mV (loss)
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

1 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 550 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

100 Hz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 250 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

Anybody that can confirm such a loss from the Monster M1?

T

Can't confirm, but interesting results. Only problem is speakers have an 8-ohm impedance, not an 8-ohm resistance. It would be interesting to use a resistive and inductive load instead of just a resistor.

Actually, a square wave? Square waves contain harmonics that are well above the human range of hearing. The entire experiment was flawed. I am willing to bet that if a sine wave was used the results would be quite different.

[mtrycraft]

Completely off-topic,

but here is some interesting stuff collected on one page.

http://www.physto.se/~vetfolk/links/index-en.html

BTW,

I've seen one person making a measurement of Monster M1 and 4 x Supra Classic 2.5 mm2 (equals about 4 x 13 AWG standard loudspeaker copper cable connected in parallell I think).The equipment was a high-quality amp, a tone generator, and cable length exactly 5 meters.

With a scope the voltage was set to exactly 5000 mV at the amps loudspeaker binding posts. The wires were terminated with an 8 ohm resistor. Then the voltage drop was measured on one branch of the cable. The result was the following using a square-waves:

10 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 750 mV (loss)
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

1 kHz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 550 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

100 Hz square wave:

1. Monster M1: 250 mV
2. Supra 2.5: 25 mV

Anybody that can confirm such a loss from the Monster M1?

T
Great link, all in one place.

I am at a loss why they woul duse a square wave to test loss at audio frequencies?

4x 13ga = 7 ga, 1/4 of DC resistance of 13ga. Not sure what ga the M1. The Supra seems to be close as the resistance is about 1/2% of the 8 ohms. Maybe the M1 is about 16ga?

[Thomas_A]

Can't confirm, but interesting results. Only problem is speakers have an 8-ohm impedance, not an 8-ohm resistance. It would be interesting to use a resistive and inductive load instead of just a resistor.

Actually, a square wave? Square waves contain harmonics that are well above the human range of hearing. The entire experiment was flawed. I am willing to bet that if a sine wave was used the results would be quite different.


Well, it's not fair to say that the experiment was flawed if there was no technical problems. There was no other conclusions drawn except that there was difference between the cables using squarewaves. Audibility is a completely different matter than measurements. I think however that there is a suprising loss from the M1, indicating an inductance that is not ideal for a loudspeaker cable.

T

[Thomas_A]

Great link, all in one place.

I am at a loss why they woul duse a square wave to test loss at audio frequencies?

4x 13ga = 7 ga, 1/4 of DC resistance of 13ga. Not sure what ga the M1. The Supra seems to be close as the resistance is about 1/2% of the 8 ohms. Maybe the M1 is about 16ga?


mtry,

I don't know why he used a squarewave.

Regarding sizes AWG 13 equals 2.63 mm2 and AWG 14 equals 2.08 mm2. The Supra Catalogue claims a resistanse of 6.8 ohm/1000 meter and an inductance of 0.45 µH/meter for Supra 2.5.

T

[Beckman]

Byt he way- lets all start a post about the airplane at the speed of light turning on its headlights! SWEET!

Ok.
In a vacum only electromagnetic waves can travel the speed of light. If an airplane approached the speed of light and turned on its headlights to an observer in the airplane the light emmited by the headlights would be traveling at the speed of light and would appear the same as thought the airplanes was not moving. To an observer in a referance frame in which the airplane appears to be moving near the speed of light the airplane would actualy appear much shorter and the light emmitted from the headlights would be moving the speed of light. However, there would be a shift in the wavelength of light emmitted by the headlights. Just like there is a change in the frequency of the sound emmited by a train as it rolls past someone. This is known as the doppler effect. At the begining I noted that only electromagnetic waves can travel the speed of light in a vacum. Through air the apparent speed of light is actualy less, c/1.000029, through water c/1.5. This is not because the light is traveling slower, but actualy because it has to travel further due to the wave like charectristics of light and the molecules that the light is traveling through.

[mtrycraft]

mtry,

I don't know why he used a squarewave.

Regarding sizes AWG 13 equals 2.63 mm2 and AWG 14 equals 2.08 mm2. The Supra Catalogue claims a resistanse of 6.8 ohm/1000 meter and an inductance of 0.45 µH/meter for Supra 2.5.

T

Now you are confusing me about the resistance. You stated 4X 2.55mm2. I shtat 4 conductor of 13ga or what? 13ga has that equivalent resistance of 6.8 ohms at 1000meters.

The monster must have a higher inductance and most likely resistance too. But that 10kHz Sq wave has a very broad band, so its voltage drop is not meaningful in respect to audio band. The 2nd harmonic is already at 20kHz. The first odd harmonic is 30kHz, then 50kHz, on and on.
All we know what happened with the SQ wave signal, not much more, really.

[mtrycraft]

I think however that there is a suprising loss from the M1, indicating an inductance that is not ideal for a loudspeaker cable.

T


We cannot tell from this experiment using Sq wave what the loss is at 20kHz, can we?
That is the problem I see. That is the problem using Sq wave to try to imply something at 20kHz.

[Thomas_A]

Mtry,

the Supra is a basic loudspeaker cable (here connected as 4 x 13 AWG in parallell) which can be bought very cheap as no-name brands, as stated many times here.

http://www.jenving.se/image/page3.jpg

What suprises me is the difference between the M1 and the Supra regarding frequency-dependent loss. According to Davis, that ordinary 12 AWG copper cable is more than ideal as loudpeaker cable, and here there was basically no loss observed for the Supra even for the square-waves. What can be done, if we get the RCL characteristics, simulate the loss of the M1 and compare it to ordinary 13 AWG loudspeaker cable (i.e. identical to the Supra Classic).

I am not sure what confuses you about resistance. 5 m 13 AWG will be around 34 mohm. 4 wires in parallell is 1/4≈8.5 mohm.

T

T

[mtrycraft]

Mtry,

the Supra is a basic loudspeaker cable (here connected as 4 x 13 AWG in parallell) which can be bought very cheap as no-name brands, as stated many times here.

http://www.jenving.se/image/page3.jpg

What suprises me is the difference between the M1 and the Supra regarding frequency-dependent loss. According to Davis, that ordinary 12 AWG copper cable is more than ideal as loudpeaker cable, and here there was basically no loss observed for the Supra even for the square-waves. What can be done, if we get the RCL characteristics, simulate the loss of the M1 and compare it to ordinary 13 AWG loudspeaker cable (i.e. identical to the Supra Classic).

I am not sure what confuses you about resistance. 5 m 13 AWG will be around 34 mohm. 4 wires in parallell is 1/4≈8.5 mohm.

T

T


What confuesd me is how the 4 wire is hooke up, all 4 cable to 1 terminal, 2 cable to 1 terminal and the other 2 to the other terminal? If two cables are used, then it is 10ga., All 4 cables are 7 ga. So, what ga was tested? 13ga? 10ga? or 7 ga?
What ga is the Monster M1?
Oh, 5m one way, 5m the other way:)

[Thomas_A]

What confuesd me is how the 4 wire is hooke up, all 4 cable to 1 terminal, 2 cable to 1 terminal and the other 2 to the other terminal? If two cables are used, then it is 10ga., All 4 cables are 7 ga. So, what ga was tested? 13ga? 10ga? or 7 ga?
What ga is the Monster M1?
Oh, 5m one way, 5m the other way:)

4 cables to one terminal was used = AWG 7. I tried to look at the Mosnter homepage, but couldn't find any ga for the M1.

And yes, 5 meter is the other way as well. :cool:

I was confused with what the tester meant with "measured on one branch of the cable".

T

[jneutron]

Can you elaborate?

regards,

T

It takes good technique to measure hf currents. That is why coaxial shunts are used, to remove the mag storage field collapse from the resistive reading. If a CVR is used incorrectly, there is a rather large lagging error component, which will skew the measurement quite a bit..at low immpedances, it gets very bad, as the error component becomes large w/r to the signal being measured.

The test you detailed, has one measuring the current across one wire length (by measuring the voltage drop across it). To measure that, they created a very large inductive pickup loop with the test leads..So, what exactly was measured?

I can hook up a zip cord in that fashion, to a low z load, connect my test leads, run 10Khz, and while the test signal is going on, vary the measured results by simply rotating the zip. The setup is very susceptible to geometry, so anyone with a predisposition to do so, can easily skew the setup to produce desired results.

Cheers, John

[jneutron]

Here is a CVR...it is 250 micro-ohms in resistance.

It has approximately the equivalent resistance of 4 #13 awg's in parallel.

If one measures the voltage across it by using simple test leads, then, at 20Khz and one ampere of current, you will measure 333 millivolts across it..

Leading one to assume that it is 333 milliohms, instead of the actual 250 microohms.

If you look carefully, you can see a teflon tube covered solid wire going into the plate structure. That wire has been carefully formed to travel the slot length in the center of the resistor, so that it picks up zero self induced magnetic field.. Now, this resistor reads 250 microvolts when a 1 ampere signal is put into it at 20Khz. Before that wire was used, it read incorrectly..

Cheers, John