DIY Speaker Cable Face Off!

[gene]

Courtesy of Mudcat

This effort is an offshoot of my search for a decent performing large OD cable, which will be used for my DIY speaker cables. When I bought my first really good pair of speakers, the salesman sort of talked me into a set of Monster MCX-1S cables. I had been/ am a zip cord type of guy and did not know any better. Well, after purchasing those particular cables, and speakers, I had a bit of buyers remorse. Not over the $1400 pair of speakers, but the $75 pair of cables. At the time, my wife and I were dismantling the recording studio we had in the basement and selling it off in pieces, and saving some for a home theater. And after a lot in internet searches, I found Audioholics among others, and my education really started.

DIY Speaker Cable Face Off

 

[warnerwh]

I think you should give us a review of the sound of each of these cables. What good are specs without knowing how they actually sound. I'll bet the cat 5 probably sounds like spaghetti and the Monster sounds like green slime. Speaking of slime, Monster cable is suing a used clothing store in Camas, Washington for using the word "Monster" in their name which is "Monstervintage" clothes. It's a little store maybe ten miles from here. No doubt a used clothing store like this has cost Noel Lee millions.

 

[Unregistered]

I would like to see PSaudio and ONIX SP-200 reviewed in this as well, or measured.

 

[gene]

I think you should give us a review of the sound of each of these cables. What good are specs without knowing how they actually sound.

The measurements are directly responsible for the sonic signature a cable imposes on a particular system or the lack thereof with the preface that well designed cables are sonically indistinguishable.

We don't discuss the subjective chocolately midrange performance of cables. We leave that to other publications and audio enthusiasts that wish to pursue cables that color the sound in their systems. Instead we do what others don't, objectively analyze and measure cables with the ideal that the best cable is no cable at all or the one that comes closest. This review demonstrates which cable comes closest based on that goal.

Stating CAT5 cable probably sounds like spaghetti and the Monster sounds like green slime serves little purpose other than to ignite a flame war.

WE are aware of the pending lawsuit and reserve final judgement at this time. Realize there may be more to the story than what you have heard on the internet.

 

[Unregistered]

Charlie

I'm sure many people will disagree with your weightings for L,C,R, etc. Especially for capacitance, which should perhaps be much lower. Have you seen this article?... http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_10_2/ultralink-CL414-cable-5-2003.html

Colin Miller in this article says about capacitance....

"Capacitance is a parallel impedance factor in a cable. The impedance of a capacitor falls as frequency rises. If you took a tiny capacitor and put it in parallel with your loudspeaker terminals, it would reduce the bass. That is why they are used with tweeters in crossover networks. If it were a big enough capacitor, your amplifier would have a hissy fit, drive tons of current through it at high frequencies (as it'd look like a short), and smoke or blow a fuse. Except for long runs of exotic cables with lots of individually insulated conductors connected to inherently unstable amplifiers, there's not enough capacitance in a hundred feet of speaker cable to make any competent amplifier raise an eyebrow."

 

[gene]

Charlie;

The reason why we weighed capacitance so heavily was so that many of the high capacitance, exotic speaker cables would be penalized. Granted moderately high capacitance cable (50-100pf/ft) would have little effect on system frequency response, much higher capacitance cables (seems to be the norm for exotics) can do 1 of 3 things:
1) Frequency peaking in amplifiers with high unity gain crossing
2) Premature roll off of of amplifiers with high output impedance
3) Amplifier oscillation for marginally stable high bandwidth amplifiers which can lead to parasitic oscillation and cause distortion, stability issues, or waste of power

Resistance is by far the most important metric for speakers cables which is why it is weighed most heavily, followed by inductance and capacitance.

High resistance cables can cause frequency variations depending on the output impedance of the amp and impedance variation of the loudspeakers electrical impedance characteristics.

 

[Leprkon]

Table 6

Gene and Cat,

the editorial note for Table 6 says that the lower the number the better the score. This seems to be opposite of all the other info in the paper. It also contradicts the statement following about the higher cost cables performing so poorly.

Is the editorial note wrong ? Should the note apply to the "Final Rank" category (where 1 is better than 17), not the 1-10 scale, which is the "Final Weighted Rank" (where 10 would be better than 1) ?

 

[briansmith]

Gene and Cat,

the editorial note for Table 6 says that the lower the number the better the score. This seems to be opposite of all the other info in the paper. It also contradicts the statement following about the higher cost cables performing so poorly.

Is the editorial note wrong ? Should the note apply to the "Final Rank" category (where 1 is better than 17), not the 1-10 scale, which is the "Final Weighted Rank" (where 10 would be better than 1) ?

First off, great article! Secondly, I agree. The charts were unclear, at best. I was scratching my head trying to figure out what came first, what came second, etc. Sure would be nice to have a list that we can read:

First Place: Cobalt Cables
2nd Place: River
3rd: Monster
Etc.

 

[briansmith]

Cat 5 seems to measure the best. Why is this? The multiple strands or the teflon covering?

-Brian

 

[gene]

the editorial note for Table 6 says that the lower the number the better the score. This seems to be opposite of all the other info in the paper.

I know the ranking system is a bit confusing and I too had discussions with Mudcat about this.

Basically the higher the scoring# for the R,L,C rankings, the better the cable performed in this regard. (IE. A cable with the lowest resistance scored a 10 and the cable with the highest resistance scored a 1, same for inductance and capacitance). For the Technical and Final Ranking, the scoring was in order from best to worst where best was a score of 1 and worst was a score of 10, like 1st, 2nd, 3rd place, etc... I updated the editorial notes on this to be a bit more clear. Hope this helps.

There are some amendments I have to get Mudcat to make on the table that ranks all cables with those from Face Off I and II. He used the Ls figures for the Stealth cables assuming the conductors were closely spaced together. I had to tape them together to get these measurements. Most people using these cables will let them dangle and as a result inductance will be almost 2x what we published in those tables. This will affect the rankings a bit so we shall update it during the week.

Cat 5 seems to measure the best. Why is this? The multiple strands or the teflon covering?

It has nothing to do with the dielectric material. Check out my editorial note on page3

Editorial Note

By braiding multiple conductors in close proximity you have taken advantage of mutual inductance by cancellation of self inductance to minimize the overall inductance of the cable. For more detailed information on cable inductance check out our article: Calculating Cable Inductance

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Do you have any idea how tiring it is to neatly braid Cat 5?

You shoulda hired some Boy Scouts!

 

[warnerwh]

"Stating CAT5 cable probably sounds like spaghetti and the Monster sounds like green slime serves little purpose other than to ignite a flame war."

Gene: I had no intention of starting a flame war with the above statement, it was just something that came to mind and I was only kidding! I've used the same pair of 12 ga zip for 15 years and have been in the hobby for over 30. The cable between my Audio Research LS 16 and Parasound Hca 3500 is Canare. I'm well aware that the audibility between wire is the least of our problems. It didn't dawn on me that the people at this site which I recently found would be offended by a statement referring to spaghetti or slime when talking about the "sound" of wire. At audioasylum definitely. It's driven me nuts over the years having people ask questions like "What cable do I need to tame brightness" when the obvious answer is speaker/room related. In the future I'll think about what I say that could be construed as something other than what I meant it to. But I still bet the Cat 5 looks like spaghetti! Cheers

 

[mtrycrafts]

Cat 5 seems to measure the best. Why is this? The multiple strands or the teflon covering?

-Brian

Teflon? What would that do for any of the measurements at these scales of measurements?

I would say the gauge, geometry, insulation thickness allowing closer distances and the weighting issues and cost.

 

[mtrycrafts]

You shoulda hired some Boy Scouts!

Giving them a new Merti Badge

 

[mtrycrafts]

Courtesy of Mudcat

This effort is an offshoot of my search for a decent performing large OD cable, which will be used for my DIY speaker cables. When I bought my first really good pair of speakers, the salesman sort of talked me into a set of Monster MCX-1S cables. I had been/ am a zip cord type of guy and did not know any better. Well, after purchasing those particular cables, and speakers, I had a bit of buyers remorse. Not over the $1400 pair of speakers, but the $75 pair of cables. At the time, my wife and I were dismantling the recording studio we had in the basement and selling it off in pieces, and saving some for a home theater. And after a lot in internet searches, I found Audioholics among others, and my education really started.

DIY Speaker Cable Face Off

Thanks to Mudcat and you for making this possible. A worthwhile endevor.
I am still raising my question elsewhere though about a possible frequency response plot of these cables in the future?

 

[gene]

I am still raising my question elsewhere though about a possible frequency response plot of these cables in the future?

One of these days when I have a bigger support staff, I can dedicate more time to the cable stuff and do what you just say. I plan on taking all the data from faceoff II and generate frequency plots into 8 ohm loads. I also plan on measuring these cables response with a real amp and speaker load as well. Perhaps I will take the best and worst cable from Mudcats article and throw them in the mix. So much to do, so little time

If anyone reading this is proficient in PSPICE and/or Mathcad, I could use your help

Teflon? What would that do for any of the measurements at these scales of measurements?

Actually changing the dielectic material will affect the capacitance measurement of the cable as I showed in the article Dielectric Absorption Debunked In Speaker Cables

 

[mtrycrafts]

One of these days when I have a bigger support staff, I can dedicate more time to the cable stuff and do what you just say. I plan on taking all the data from faceoff II and generate frequency plots into 8 ohm loads. I also plan on measuring these cables response with a real amp and speaker load as well. Perhaps I will take the best and worst cable from Mudcats article and throw them in the mix. So much to do, so little time

If anyone reading this is proficient in PSPICE and/or Mathcad, I could use your help



Actually changing the dielectic material will affect the capacitance measurement of the cable as I showed in the article Dielectric Absorption Debunked In Speaker Cables

Thanks for both
I checked Steve Lampen's book Wire, Cable and Fiber Optics... and explained it well in combination with your link.
Now, what that small capacitance difference will do

 

[Unregistered]

"If anyone reading this is proficient in PSPICE and/or Mathcad, I could use your help "

Gene, I had more than enough hours logged into Pspice and Matlab during college (all of less than 6 months ago!). If you need someone, I'd love to help out. Send an email to bknauss (at) polkaudio (dot) com



Brian

 

[Mudcat]

I'm sure many people will disagree with your weightings for L,C,R, etc.....

My original weightings really penalized high capacitance cables. Gene talked me down some. Also, my original algorithm used a log equation to determine the dimensionless factors. Again Gene talke me down.

The reason why we weighed capacitance so heavily was so that many of the high capacitance, exotic speaker cables would be penalized.

I'm sure that making this statement will make our old friend Mr. Steve Nugent very happy. (For all those new to these boards, Steve Nugent is some bigwig at Empirical Audio, proud makers of $176.5/ft speaker cables.)

I'll bet the cat 5 probably sounds like spaghetti and ....

IT sure looks like it. Actually "It feels like warm apple pie."
Really though, they sounded good. I never keep them after I made and tested them. Now Gene wants two pair. This time I'll play them for a while and try and take some voltage and current measurements to fit into the equations below.

...the Monster sounds like green slime.

Felt like it though, after finishing the report and knowing how much I paid. But, bear in mind, a 12 foot pair of the CAT5 V5 finished with the GLS locking banana plugs and two layers of techflex, shrink wrap, and plastic dip will cost about $80. Not cheap either. Of couse the bear wire version shown it the picture will cost about $15 (including the GLS plugs).

I think you should give us a review of the sound of each of these cables. What good are specs without knowing how they actually sound.

Do you hear that Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability......My name is NEO.

While it is possible to indicate an absolute level of sound energy in watts/meter² (Intensity), and sound pressure in microbars (Pascals), all practical measurements are comparative. Sound levels and ear response cover such a great range that it is convenient to use a nice dimensionless number (man, I'm getting good at all of these dimensionless numbers, pretty soon I'll understand imaginary numbers too) called the bel.

Power Level in bels = log₁₀ (W/W₀)

Sound Pressure Level in bels = 2*log₁₀ (P/P₀)

But nobody has ever heard of a bel, while everyone know decibels.


Power Level in decibels = 10*log₁₀ (W/W₀)

Sound Pressure Level in decibels = 20*log₁₀ (P/P₀)

In each of the above equations:

W = watts = I² R = E²/R
W₀ = reference level = 10^-12 watts/m²

P = pressure in microbars
P₀ = reference pressure = 0.0002 microbars


Intensity is directly correlated to Pressure by the relationship

1 x 10^-12Watts/m² = 0.00002 Pascals/Air Density

What we can do with this is equate the measured cable parametrers (specifically resistance) using 10log₁₀ (W/W₀) , take into account the speakers efficiency and using very accurate equipment (Wayne Kerr something or other, or any sillyscope) see if there is a difference in the SPL by using 10log₁₀ (P/P₀). Or some such nonsense. We can do this because the W is watts and watts is E²/R. Obviously R is one of the measured parameters, which we can replace with Z.

So if there is a difference in sound, it is because of R (I hope, or I'll have to admit I'm wrong, which I'll never do). I'll work on the relationships for Inductance and Capacitance later, I'll also get into why power is 10 times the log and SPL is 20 times the log. Right now I got to talk to a man about a horse.

 

[mtrycrafts]

. Again Gene talke me down.

Oh, you are so easy




W = watts = I² R = E²/R
W₀ = reference level = 10^-12 watts

P = pressure in microbars
P₀ = reference pressure = 0.0002 microbars

What we can do with this is equate the measured cable parametrers (specifically resistance) using 10log₁₀ (W/W₀) , take into account the speakers efficiency and using very accurate equipment (Wayne Kerr something or other, or any sillyscope) see if there is a difference in the SPL by using 10log₁₀ (P/P₀). Or some such nonsense. We can do this because the W is watts and watts is E²/R. Obviously R is one of the measured parameters.



How do we know these are facts, proven? Maybe the originator made a mistake someplace> Maybe his instruments were not calibrated, or ceritfied? How do we know anything? LOL

anonymous poster is contageous. I need th eother pill