Audio Cables Science or Religion?

The way I look at it if I can hear a marked difference in cables then I don't care about the theory. I have spent thousands on cables over the years and can easily hear differences in my system. Some of you might think I am crazy but hey its my opinion an my money. Just like some of those high-end wine drinkers out there... audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

[gene]

Quote

The way I look at it if I can hear a marked difference in cables then I don't care about the theory.

Miles;

Nobody is arguing that cables can sound different.  However, we are questioning many of the claims these "exotic" cable vendors make to justify their prices.  Most of the claims these vendors make are based on half engineering truths, misapplications of engineering principles, or just plain wrong.  The problem arises when they convince the unknowning of their so called "theories" to lure them into buying their products.

What makes matters worse is when a cable vendor deliberately does things to the cables such as ultra high capacitance and/or inductance, to make them act as tone controls.  This is why we expend such an exhaustive efforts on cables by making consumers aware of these issues.

See the lastest entertainment at the ''Asylum."

Cable Asylum

I guess Teflon is now obsolete. audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=''>

The thing with cables and interconnects is the maker(s) often try to say that their cables do things science cannot explain.  

One example is to say that capacitance is irrelevant since resistance is all that matters.  Basically what we are trying to achieve is the least coloration possible.  Colorations from cables in 4 different ways:

resistance
inductance
capacitance
interference (of any sort)

the first 3 come down to proper design and construction.  Using the right grade of metal (i refuse to go into the copper/silver debate), the right construction (whether it is zip, coax style, twisted pair, etc), and the right termination (using a pin made of aluminum isnt exactly a good thing).  Your goal in this stage is a feat of compromise, get the best balance of each while striving for the lowest readings possible.


Now interference, can be anything from corrosion of copper wires (that green stuff is NOT conductive), to emi emissions from other cables (mains cables mostly).  for the corrosion, through the cable, replace it if you think it's affecting anything (anyone who honestly buys the "strand-jumping" theory should be fine with this corrosion since it should alleviate "strand-jumping" one way or another), but for the termination, ALWAYS solder.  I can't stress it enough. Crimps are good, but a solder connection will stop air from reaching the contact point or the wire.  No air, nothing to make oxides with (corrosion).

To deal with the emi interference, all you need is a good shield.  Grounded foil shields are quite common in the telecom industry (the cables have a special ground cable on each end that attaches to a ground lug on the equipment on each end. Some new ones have special jacks and cable connectors so there is no need to run a wire to a ground lug, also gives a better ground).  Trust me, when you have 1200 phone lines in 2 square feet of equipment face, emi interference is the highest priority.  If it's good enough for them, it's definately good enough for us.

But, if you want to drop your money on a cable due to its looks, or any other factor then go ahead.  Just remeber that everything physical can be measured, and measurements don't lie.


---
About wine, you can chemically ananlyze wine to know how it will taste too, it's just prohibitively expensive.  Same goes for cigars, beers, foods, etc.  



And yes, I do use zip cord...why?  It works.  No frills, no surprises, it just works.  And look inside your speakers sometime.


laters, peace all.

-Nutz

I forgot one other thing...if a speaker cable cannot do what it's supposed to on it's own merit, it needs to be re-designed.

I am talking smack about Zobel's being added to the cable to stop oscillations.  That is just ridiculous that such a thing needs to be added to a cable.  Zobel networks do have their place, and that place should be either in an amp or inside the speaker.  I would lean more towards having it in the speaker, if an amp has one, they are just expecting people to do bad things to it.

It's like if a tick is biting you...do you just numb your arm somehow or remove the tick?  I'd say remove the tick, since the cause of the issue is gone instead of being covered up. Much like the pains that amp is feeling will be numbed through applying that zobel, when replacing the offending cable would be a better solution.

I'm ranted out for the day, g'night all.

-Laters

Nutz

[gene]

Nutz;

Your post does not match your name  

Thank you very much for sharing your sensible assessment with everyone here on our cable forum.  I am quite pleased with everyones responses here.  It seems that many audio hobbyists have more sensible viewpoints about cables than some exotic cable manufacturers sometimes credit them for. I agree with all of the points you have raised, and given my telecom background, I can personally vouch for the importance of twisted pair, and well shielded interconnects and sometimes speaker cables, in a very noisy EMI/RFI environments.

Guest : .... but for the termination, ALWAYS solder. *I can't stress it enough. Crimps are good, but a solder connection will stop air from reaching the contact point or the wire. *No air, nothing to make oxides with (corrosion). To deal with the emi interference, all you need is a good shield. *Grounded foil shields are quite common in the telecom industry (the cables have a special ground cable on each end that attaches to a ground lug on the equipment on each end. Some new ones have special jacks and cable connectors so there is no need to run a wire to a ground lug, also gives a better ground). *Trust me, when you have 1200 phone lines in 2 square feet of equipment face, emi interference is the highest priority. *If it's good enough for them, it's definately good enough for us. Nutz, A couple of points. A proper crimp is a cold weld, it is by definition, air tight.  Unless actual liquids entire the area of the crimp, and corode fro the edges of the crimp in, then it will do no worse than a solder joint.  I wil note that by the time this becomes an issue for a proper crimp, that the solder joint will also be corroded. Second, equating the phone line requirements to audio is not exactly kosher.  Limited bandwidth signals with a limited dynamic range, with specialized grounding practice does not mean that a simple foil shield will suffice for analog audio use. Besides, I guess you have never heard other folks talking in the background on a long distance line before. Jon Risch Reply With Quote 05-20-2003, 12:47 AM #18 Guest With crimps, yes a good crimp should be air tight, but even with the proper crimp dies (and I also suspect most people buy one of those crimper/stripper/cutter abominations that really don't work all too well), I have always seen some form of oxidation of the conductor upon loosening the crimped connector and slioding the wire out. I feel its better to have any kind of oxidation outside of the joint, and not inside.  That is why I prefer to solder the joints.   Also note that air molecules are far smaller than evporated water molecules, which are in turn smaller than normal water molecules.  If water can get in, so can air.   Given though, this point seems to have followers on both ends, and is about as religious to some as the whole burn-in debate is for some. About telco apps. When I was talking about telco apps, I was talking about T-1 lines in particular, not POTS. POTS lines vary widely in quality from region to region. POTS stands for Plain Old Telephone Service, and is used to discern from it and analog trunk lines, digital trunks, fiber, etc. T-1 lines have a higher standard for signal quality and reliability.  Also T-1 equipment tend to be very high density.  Imagine a unit the size of 3 standard sized recievers with 50 T-1 lines coming out of it...thats a capacity of 1200 callers. For POTS lines, the factors that can cause your crosstalk issue is quite complicated, but the major factors are the premise wiring on both ends, the switching systems used through the entire route of your call, and the presence of a PBX on either end. Some PBXs don't play well with certain switching equipment/other PBXs...which leads to a very noticable echo. In cross-country calls crosstalk is very common, and can at most times be narowed down to switching equipment differences.  See in europe they use a different telephony standard than us, and the general signal parameters are quite different.  I am not sure about what switching systems are used in the other continents however. Also in many rural areas the lines and switching equipment are generaly ignored until a good number of service complaints are filed.  So it's not too uncommon to find crossbar swithes still in use (which are notorious for crosstalk). If you are so bothered by foil shields, european spec for telehony cable EMI grounds is a 9th wire in the cable that is only fou grounding purposes.  Some hardware makers here in the states choose to use it on their gear though.  Mostly in order to make their gear pass FCC testing. Either way, if adding extra EMI grounding makes you feel good, go for it.  I just feel that the return would be negligible.  I do not have the money to go to FCC labs to verify however.  Maybe we can take to the EMI dicussion to another thread sometime. well, take care man.  It's been good chatting. -Nutz Reply With Quote 06-01-2003, 04:12 AM #19 Bob2of3 Audiophyte Bob2of3 is a forum member in good standing Join Date May 2003 Posts 3 Thanks Given 0 Thanks Received 0 Now can someone actually name these exotic cable companies? Where is the data that proves theses cables aren't all they claims to be. I'm new to this HT thing but not internet forums so I'm not bent cause I think my cable are getting flamed, I just need to get edumacated LAter Reply With Quote 06-02-2003, 11:34 AM #20 gene Supreme Audioholics Overlord gene should be listened to Join Date Jul 2002 Location Florida Posts 5,831 Thanks Given 819 Thanks Received 2,403 Bob; The proof is in the pudding.  Here you go. Speaker Cable Face Off There will be many others to follow as we are just beginning   Gene DellaSala President, Audioholics Pursuing the truth in audio & video... Reply With Quote Page 2 of 4 First 1234 Last Jump to page: « Previous Thread | Next Thread » Posting Permissions You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is On Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules -- Audio 2013 -- Default Mobile Style Audioholics.com Privacy Statement Top All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 PM. Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. vBulletin Services by vbskinstudio.com Copyright 2013 AUDIOHOLICS, LLC

With crimps, yes a good crimp should be air tight, but even with the proper crimp dies (and I also suspect most people buy one of those crimper/stripper/cutter abominations that really don't work all too well), I have always seen some form of oxidation of the conductor upon loosening the crimped connector and slioding the wire out. I feel its better to have any kind of oxidation outside of the joint, and not inside.  That is why I prefer to solder the joints.  

Also note that air molecules are far smaller than evporated water molecules, which are in turn smaller than normal water molecules.  If water can get in, so can air.  

Given though, this point seems to have followers on both ends, and is about as religious to some as the whole burn-in debate is for some.


About telco apps.

When I was talking about telco apps, I was talking about T-1 lines in particular, not POTS. POTS lines vary widely in quality from region to region. POTS stands for Plain Old Telephone Service, and is used to discern from it and analog trunk lines, digital trunks, fiber, etc.

T-1 lines have a higher standard for signal quality and reliability.  Also T-1 equipment tend to be very high density.  Imagine a unit the size of 3 standard sized recievers with 50 T-1 lines coming out of it...thats a capacity of 1200 callers.

For POTS lines, the factors that can cause your crosstalk issue is quite complicated, but the major factors are the premise wiring on both ends, the switching systems used through the entire route of your call, and the presence of a PBX on either end. Some PBXs don't play well with certain switching equipment/other PBXs...which leads to a very noticable echo.

In cross-country calls crosstalk is very common, and can at most times be narowed down to switching equipment differences.  See in europe they use a different telephony standard than us, and the general signal parameters are quite different.  I am not sure about what switching systems are used in the other continents however.

Also in many rural areas the lines and switching equipment are generaly ignored until a good number of service complaints are filed.  So it's not too uncommon to find crossbar swithes still in use (which are notorious for crosstalk).

If you are so bothered by foil shields, european spec for telehony cable EMI grounds is a 9th wire in the cable that is only fou grounding purposes.  Some hardware makers here in the states choose to use it on their gear though.  Mostly in order to make their gear pass FCC testing.


Either way, if adding extra EMI grounding makes you feel good, go for it.  I just feel that the return would be negligible.  I do not have the money to go to FCC labs to verify however.  Maybe we can take to the EMI dicussion to another thread sometime.

well, take care man.  It's been good chatting.

-Nutz

[Bob2of3]

Now can someone actually name these exotic cable companies? Where is the data that proves theses cables aren't all they claims to be.

I'm new to this HT thing but not internet forums so I'm not bent cause I think my cable are getting flamed, I just need to get edumacated

LAter

[gene]

Bob;

The proof is in the pudding.  Here you go.

Speaker Cable Face Off

There will be many others to follow as we are just beginning