AC Power Cable suggestions please

[skeptic]

Well, some AC problems a power supply can not overcome such as extreme fluctuation of AC. For example, there was a thread in HT forum where this guy was complaining about his light dimming when somebody was using the elevator in his building. For such instances, a power conditioner or UPS might be good idea.

In this particular case, a UPS is necessary because it is very unlikely that a power conditioner will work. However, one suitable for a high end audio system is usually very expensive. There have been a lot of complaints about the SMPSs in cheap ones causing more problems than they solve.

[E-Stat]

But the thing that puzzle me most about upgrading PC or IC is that given the fact that moving speakers couple of inches from their place does have 100 times more effect on the sound of a system than replacing IC or PC will ever have, then why some folks still choose the ladder!!

I'm sure that multiplier was scientifically arrived at !! You do have a good point about the role of proper speaker placement. One drawback to my big electrostats is that they are an absolute b*tch to position. Over the twenty years I've had the beasts, I have extensively experimented with various combinations of distance from back wall, distance from side walls, and toe in to minimize room nodes and optimize imaging. I use a laser pointer and string to get both speakers symmetrically placed with respect to the center listening spot. Today they live in a large dedicated room where placement of furniture, room treatments, etc. is solely for their benefit. No WAF to deal with.

If you look at most of reviews for cables, they always mention improvement in highs, bass, sound staging, imaging, resolution, etc... as if their system lack those qualities in the first place. What I don't understands is instead of relying on IC to magically transfer their system, why are they not looking into room acoustic, speaker placements, or more radical approach auditioning other speakers, amplifiers or components?

We're on the same page here as to priorities. How many audiofools use any sort of room treatments? One must begin with the best components within a given budget. You have to start with the cake before you can ice it.

And if all the mentioned tweaking have been done and the system is still lacking, then why not look into equalizer/parameter EQ to optimize the sound of their system?

I have a couple of comments on these observations. I do not choose cables for purposes of making my system "warm sounding" or whatever. Truly, they should be totally transparent to the sound AND in today's radio intensive environment, offer appropriate countermeasures to all sorts of RFI that can affect the audible outcome. My JPS Labs cables are exceptionally stiff due to their cable-in-a-copper-tube design. With my CDP, I bypass my preamp and use a pair of passive attenuators instead. This I do because I have yet to hear a perfect line stage. My favorites, the Burmester 808 and the Conrad-Johnson ART II still have a slight character of their own (moreso the case with my Audio Reseach unit) It is common knowledge that capacitance rolls off high frequency content in this application. Using lesser cables would arguably make that factor audible. Using EQ afterwards to boost the response would be a far less elegant approach. I find problem prevention superior to problem resolution. Not only that, equalizers cannot retrieve lost subtle detail that provides imaging and soundstage cues.

For example, currently in the cable asylum, there is a thread... wouldn't you agree that he will get much better [solid] results funneling that money toward new speakers, amplifiers or room treatments instead of piece of [passive] wire?

Yes. I would always work on the fundamentals first.

rw

[mtrycraft]

Sorry E-Stat. Discussion of actual listening experiences is not permitted on this board. Apparently you have mistaken this for an audio board.

It is irrelevant. E-stat makes testable claims here from the looks of it. My listening has nothing to do with his claims. If his claims are questionable, he is the one who needs to explain.

[mtrycraft]

My experience suggests otherwise. Tell me, what equipment do you listen to? What aftermarket cords have you auditioned?rw

If your experience didn't show otherwise you would not post it But, how do you know your experience is true, real and reliable? Or, is that even a question that you entertain and just believe that your experience must be reliable and real?

[pctower]

Taking you, for example, you've been here for a while and know all the objectivist aguments, yet you still believe in cable sonics.

I have been very careful to distinguish what I believe from what I personally experience that gives me pleasure when I'm in my sound room.

I have stated in great detail what I believe and don't believe. Your characterization of my belief is not accurate.

[Rockwell]

I have stated in great detail what I believe and don't believe. Your characterization of my belief is not accurate.

Sorry to mischaracterize your belief as that was not my intent. I may have missed the post where you spelled it out, or perhaps my memory is hazy.

I have been very careful to distinguish what I believe from what I personally experience that gives me pleasure when I'm in my sound room.

I don't understand how you can separate those two. If you experience something in your sound room and attribute that something to cables, then that would indicate a belief in cable sonics.

[E-Stat]

But, how do you know your experience is true, real and reliable?

Based upon your criteria, I don't.

Or, is that even a question that you entertain and just believe that your experience must be reliable and real?

My thirty years of enjoyment listening to music is not based upon empirical substantiation. My nature is to use the same analytical skills with music appreciation as I use in my day job as software developer. My listening experiences are founded on long term familiarity not only with my systems, but others that are better. Much better

rw

[pctower]

I don't use after market cords because I know better

But to be serious, my system is very modest indeed, and going by the "better system, better cables" rule, my system probably will not benefit from upgrading pc-or IC for that matter. But the thing that puzzle me most about upgrading PC or IC is that given the fact that moving speakers couple of inches from their place does have 100 times more effect on the sound of a system than replacing IC or PC will ever have, then why some folks still choose the ladder!!

If you look at most of reviews for cables, they always mention improvement in highs, bass, sound staging, imaging, resolution, etc... as if their system lack those qualities in the first place. What I don't understands is instead of relying on IC to magically transfer their system, why are they not looking into room acoustic, speaker placements, or more radical approach auditioning other speakers, amplifiers or components? And if all the mentioned tweaking have been done and the system is still lacking, then why not look into equalizer/parameter EQ to optimize the sound of their system?

For example, currently in the cable asylum, there is a thread by TomNY (posted January 14) saying that he paid $900 for just one IC (Pursang), and how much difference the IC made in his system. Given the fact that his speakers only cost $2000, wouldn't you agree that he will get much better [solid] results funneling that money toward new speakers, amplifiers or room treatments instead of piece of [passive] wire?

In a way, if power conditioners do help, seems they should help more with less expensive systems where power supplies (theoretically) should not be as good as more expensive stuff.

I am definitely not a Jon fan, but in his defense, if you go to his website, he has a lot of material on room accoustics.

As for equalizers, I've lost the link, but Dr. Toole had an interesting dicussion about ringing caused by equalizers and the importance of using equalization only when it has been specifically designed for the particular speaker it will be used with.

[mtrycraft]

Producing highly regarded components for a number of years.

Highly regarded by whom? The reviewers who would nto know how to do a proper comaprison so they are not biased?



I'll let Ole Lund Christensen of GamuT speak to the issue.
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?f...en&r=&session=


His quote:
So my brain was trying hard to ignore the message from my ears, I was hearing a major improvemnt of the sound.

No mention of him using bias controls to verify what he thought he heard, instead he accepts what he imagined. Not a very good engineer, is he? He has no idea of the basics of science in listening.

[skeptic]

Sorry E-Stat. Discussion of actual listening experiences is not permitted on this board. Apparently you have mistaken this for an audio board.

Any statement within the reasonable bounds of civility is permitted on this board. That certainly distinguishes it from Audio Asylum. What is not permitted by many of the people who post here is for unsubstantiated claims for unproven products to go unchallenged. And that also distinguishes this board from Audio Asylum.

[E-Stat]

Highly regarded by whom? The reviewers who would nto know how to do a proper comaprison so they are not biased?

My guess is that you have little or no experience with any GamuT products. If you would like to find out more check their website.

www.gamutaudio.com

No mention of him using bias controls to verify what he thought he heard, instead he accepts what he imagined. Not a very good engineer, is he? He has no idea of the basics of science in listening.

Read further.

"So the power cord is an antenna, radiating noise to all other components and interconnects. So a shielded power cord reduce the radiation, and different connectors and cable designs affect the high frequency signals.
Today all this is standard stuff, which you are required by law to measure to get EMC/CE approval in Europe, and there is lots of laboratories that measure this every day."

Doesn't sound like accepting what he "imagined" to me.

Not a very good engineer, is he? He has no idea of the basics of science in listening

Evidently, we have different criteria as to what consistutes a good engineer. I base my opinion upon results, not theory. Here is his last comment:

"So I have learned to listen and consider carefully the next strange idea."

Breakthroughs in any scientific quarter are made by those who question every assumption.

rw

[mtrycraft]

My guess is that you have little or no experience with any GamuT products. If you would like to find out more check their website.

www.gamutaudio.com


OK, they put out good power, doubling into 4 ohms. So what? I would like to see it on the test bench performance into reactive and capacitive loads too as the Audio Critic tests them.
How much for this amp? There are certainly others that can do it as well. Nothing special so far, EXCEPT, its tremendous idleing power consumption, 80 watts. Must be class A, no big deal there.



Read further.
"So the power cord is an antenna, radiating noise to all other components and interconnects.
No, it is not an antenna when you have two leads with signal running in opposite direction.




So a shielded power cord reduce the radiation, and different connectors and cable designs affect the high frequency signals.

Where are his data?

Today all this is standard stuff, which you are required by law to measure to get EMC/CE approval in Europe, and there is lots of laboratories that measure this every day."

Then he should have shown his measured data.

Doesn't sound like accepting what he "imagined" to me.

Of course he did. He didn't demonstrate anything audible, not by his proclamation. Worthless anecdote.


Evidently, we have different criteria as to what consistutes a good engineer. I base my opinion upon results, not theory.

He has demonstrated nothing yet. You just fall all over their claim based in unreliable anecdotes. That is your choice.



Here is his last comment:
"So I have learned to listen and consider carefully the next strange idea."
Breakthroughs in any scientific quarter are made by those who question every assumption.
rw

Yes, but he has made no breakthrough, not by his unreliable anecdote. He would have been better not claiming anything.

[skeptic]

"Nothing special so far, EXCEPT, its tremendous idleing power consumption, 80 watts. Must be class A, no big deal there."

Actually, this is almost certainly class AB since a class A amplifier would draw as much power at idle as it would a full output and that would be greater than the rated audio power output.

This amplifier is not capable of handling loads under 1.5 ohms and apparantly shuts itself down when it is confronted by one althought it isn't clear from the advertising how it senses it. I think it is deplorable that expensive modern amplifiers cannot handle ALL passive loads. The Crown DC300 was able to and that was 35 years ago. This suggests that there is far more quality in the advertising than in the engineering.

As for the power cord being an antenna, I'm not sure if they are talking about it being a receiving or a transmitting antenna. If you worry about it being a receiving antenna, any decent power supply should be able to very efficiently filter out rf noise. If it can't filter out rf, what expectation would you have for it filtering out 60 hz ripple? Again this speaks to the quality of the power supply and the amplifier as a whole. As for it being a transmitter, yes all power cords radiate a 60 hz field. But this field is very quickly attenuated with distance and other equipment should both easily filter it in their own power supplies and shield against it by design of their enclosures and there should be effective shielding by by their interconnecting signal level cables including interconnects. They will not radiate at rf frequencies unless they have the dreaded SMPSs (switching mode power supplies) which are a poor cheap substitute for a linear supply I expect on any decent equipment (except my computer and printer of course.)

The use of shielded power cables should be seriously questioned when buying a power cable or equipment supplying one. The most important criteria is that the unit as a whole including the cord be UL listed. By shielding a power cable, heat generated by current flow in it is trapped and restricted from dissipating unless suitable measures are taken. In closed electrical conduits, a certain amount of air space is mandatory. Without a UL listing, you cannot be sure that the cable will not overheat and the insulation melt under prolonged conditions of heavy current draw creating a risk of shock and fire. From the power requirement of 240 volts, these units are apparantly meanufactured in Europe for use in Europe, my guess is the UK and would not be subject to American safety standards unless there are export versions. Personally, I avoid purchasing such equipment since my experience living in Europe some 30 years ago makes all European manufactured electrical equipment intended for domestic use suspect in terms of both safety and reliability. My examination of some European imports during the intervening 30 years of both a consumer nature and of industrial equipment has not reduced my concerns, the latest being a Cuisinart food processor failure a couple of years ago. IMO, there is a great deal of BAD engineering in products coming from Europe.

[E-Stat]

This amplifier is not capable of handling loads under 1.5 ohms and apparantly shuts itself down ... I think it is deplorable that expensive modern amplifiers cannot handle ALL passive loads. The Crown DC300 was able to and that was 35 years ago. This suggests that there is far more quality in the advertising than in the engineering.

The Crown and GamuT amplifiers are designed for different duty: the GamuT is primarily designed for reproducing music. At which it handily beats the old Crown using musical content. I had one decades ago while in high school (coincidentally at the time I owned the Citation 11 preamp). Rugged, heck yes! I inadvertently welded a screwdriver to the output posts by slipping and shorting the outs. It shut down, I removed the screwdriver and brought it back up just fine. I was using it to drive a double pair of Advents at the school pageant. As for the load "limitation" of the smaller GamuT amps, I know of precious few high fidelity speakers (including my otherwise difficult to drive electrostats) that present an under 2 ohm load. I'm not concerned how many PA bins my home amplifier can or cannot drive.

The use of shielded power cables should be seriously questioned when buying a power cable or equipment supplying one. The most important criteria is that the unit as a whole including the cord be UL listed. By shielding a power cable, heat generated by current flow in it is trapped and restricted from dissipating unless suitable measures are taken.

Indeed such are important design considerations. And likely to factor in to their relatively high cost. My own JPS Labs cords are rated up to 300 volts for approval by UL and CSA.

rw

[skeptic]

The musical attributes aside, you'd think that after all this time, designing amplifiers, especially expensive ones to handle any conceivable passive load would be de rigeur for any electrical engineer. Sadly this is not the case. Whatever qualities you get in an amplifier that you like, reliability should be among the top considerations. There is nothing more frustrating than an amplifier that breaks down, especially when you've paid a lot of money for it.

It seems to me that when people manufacturing expensive power cords go to the extremes of machining the plugs out of a single piece of metal, using shields, ferrite impregnated outer jackets, and other bizzare techniques, they have invented a solution looking for a problem which generally doesn't exist and have not only found a gullable ready market for it but have created a host of new and much worse problems in the process.

[E-Stat]

The musical attributes aside...

That would seem to wrap up your perspective.

... you'd think that after all this time, designing amplifiers, especially expensive ones to handle any conceivable passive load would be de rigeur for any electrical engineer.

Except for when such a design can provide audible benefits. The GamuT designs use a single pair of power MOSFETs per channel. Do you think that Christensen doesn't know about paralleling devices? Massive paralleling of output devices involves a different set of compromises.

rw

[skeptic]

Except for when such a design can provide audible benefits. rw

Can you find a single manufacturer of an expensive amplifier who doesn't claim that his design quirk whatever its drawbacks doesn't produce better sound from the connected loudspeakers than anybody elses? Everybody is better than everybody else. Well guess what, you be very hard put to identify ANY amplifier by sound alone. As for reliability, IMO, that ranks number one. And if the damned piece of junk can't handle low impdedence loads, it makes you wonder just what else it can't handle. Frankly, I don't think they publish the price simply because they are afraid of scaring the suckers, I mean customers, away.

[Tony_Montana]

As for equalizers, I've lost the link, but Dr. Toole had an interesting dicussion about ringing caused by equalizers and the importance of using equalization only when it has been specifically designed for the particular speaker it will be used with.

Howdy

I have been using EQ in my system for over 20 years, and I have never notice any ringing distortion. Also if you look at quality EQ's specification such as S/N ratio, THD/IM distortion or frequency response, it is much lower than component's specifications they are hooked up to.

As far as using EQ in a particular speaker it was designed for, that don't make any sense. EQ are used to compensate shortcomings acoustically (and to lesser extend speaker shortcomings) which can not be solved using classical methods such as speaker placement or room treatments. And since every listening environment is different and different speakers will react differently with its environment , using equalization only when it has been specifically for the particular speakers don't seem to have any meanings

[bturk667]

12345

[FLZapped]

The Crown and GamuT amplifiers are designed for different duty: the GamuT is primarily designed for reproducing music. At which it handily beats the old Crown using musical content.

rw

Really, and just how would these objects made of metal, plastic and silicon know the difference between a sinewave, pink noise, or music so that they could do some wonderous magic you're apparently claiming? May I also suppose from your comment that Crown is designing their products just to heat someone's feet.

-Bruce

[E-Stat]

Really, and just how would these objects made of metal, plastic and silicon know the difference between a sinewave, pink noise, or music so that they could do some wonderous magic you're apparently claiming?

Are you kidding, Zap? I would surely be insulting many a poster here to point out that the design criteria and engineering compromises of PA equipment is much different from that of musical equipment.

rw

[FLZapped]

Are you kidding, Zap? I would surely be insulting many a poster here to point out that the design criteria and engineering compromises of PA equipment is much different from that of musical equipment.

rw

Really E-Stat, you are surely insulting well known manufacturers such as Crown, Crest, QSC, Mackie, JBL, etc. by insinuating that music reproduction isn't a concern to them.

Besides, you missed, or sidestepped the point. You made a statement that would appear as though those inanimate objects, known as amplifiers, somehow knew the difference between pink noise and a musical signal being fed through them. Or for that matter, a live performance vs a recorded one.

-Bruce

[E-Stat]

Really E-Stat, you are surely insulting well known manufacturers such as Crown, Crest, QSC, Mackie, JBL, etc. by insinuating that music reproduction isn't a concern to them.

You're pulling my leg again, right? I'll let Skeptic explain it to you:

Advice on this Board

...amplifiers, somehow knew the difference between pink noise and a musical signal being fed through them

I made no such assertion. Does a Ferrari know the nature of roads better than a Hyundai? What a silly comment. Audio components designed to produce good static measurements often fail miserably when reproducing dynamic musical material. The Crown family, especially the older IC-150 preamp and DC-300 amps, are poster children of this effect. With their simple LM301 and ua739 op amps driven to "maximum amounts of overall feedback", they were simply dreadful sounding. Yet their measurements based on static test tones with claimed THD figures of .001% would suggest otherwise.

rw

[mtrycraft]

With their simple LM301 and ua739 op amps driven to "maximum amounts of overall feedback", they were simply dreadful sounding. Yet their measurements based on static test tones with claimed THD figures of .001% would suggest otherwise.

rw

Is this sheer speculation or you have some real evidence behind it?

[FLZapped]

You're pulling my leg again, right? I'll let Skeptic explain it to you:

Advice on this Board

You're twisting again. No, a skating rink isn't going to be concerned with accuracy because it is a SKATING RINK! So, would your fancy-assed amp perform any better there???? You seem to be implying again that it could fix all their problems. Once again, you are mixing things together that are unrelated, this discussion is about amplifiers. AMPLIFIERS. Not the acoustics of a skating rink. Tell ya what, hire an acoustic consultant to help with the design a skating rink and you'll probably be able to have concerts there as well.

Back on topic. You were claiming that the amp companies I mentioned, specifically Crown, have no concern for their products ability to reproduce music, it's time you back up that claim.

What's even funnier, is that you keep harping about musical reality, yet it is these very systems containing Crown, Crest, QSC, equipment are what people listen to when they go to a concert and are comparing their home systems against.

Audio components designed to produce good static measurements often fail miserably when reproducing dynamic musical material.

Fine, prove it. You've made the claim, back it up.

The Crown family, especially the older IC-150 preamp and DC-300 amps, are poster children of this effect. With their simple LM301 and ua739 op amps driven to "maximum amounts of overall feedback", they were simply dreadful sounding. Yet their measurements based on static test tones with claimed THD figures of .001% would suggest otherwise.

rw

Fine, prove it. You've made the claim, back it up.

-Bruce
(Where's the Beef)