Truth about Cables and Interconnects

gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic"><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/truthcablesinterconnects.php"><IMG style="WIDTH: 125px; HEIGHT: 46px" alt=[esp] hspace=10 src="http://www.audioholics.com/news/thumbs/esp_th.jpg" align=left border=0></A>Our good friend Rod Elliot from Elliot Sound Productions wrote such an interesting and thorough article on cables and interconnect that we deemed it an <B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">absolute must read</B> and asked his permission to publish it on Audioholics for the benefit of our readers.<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><I><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">"I refuse to prove that my cables will make your system sound better", says the snake oil vendor, "for proof denies faith, and without faith, you will hear nothing."<o:p></o:p></SPAN></I></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><I><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></SPAN></I></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic">This article is full of excellent facts, common sense, and humor.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Whether you’re a cable soothsayer, follower&nbsp;or skeptic, there is much to be learned from this article and we welcome your feedback and insights.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic"><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"></SPAN></SPAN>&nbsp;</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-style: italic"><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">[Read the Article]</SPAN></SPAN></P>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
L

Leprkon

Audioholic General
not inspiring confidence here

quoting Douglass Adams not only hampers credibility, it's grounds for a pretty white room with really soft walls and a tie-in-the-back white leather tuxedo....

some things are so stupid they are funny... others (like the HitchHiker's Guide) are so stupid they are stupid. you can't even get drunk enough for it to be not stupid and still be able to read.....
 
C

cstanley

Enthusiast
the power to believe (not the king crimson album) is very influential -
i've seen this working in a recording studio:
- i've printed a mix that i think sounds pretty good; when playing it
back for a client (who was not impressed) i heard it in a different
light.
- i've had clients say "that bass is boomy", "put more ummph into
the guitars", etc - i've made changes to the eq on the board but
never activated the eq, the clients say "that sounds much better"
(that is why the console i have - a 1983 sound workshop 34 - has
dummy buttons labeled "pop", "oomph", "balls", etc - partially in
jest, but to some folks they work).
- i've fooled myself the same way - i'm busy tweaking eq or a
compressor, only to find out its not actually in line.
- ones ears adjust very quickly to sound, which is why recording
studios have at least 2 different pairs of monitors to switch between.
i find that in 2-5 minutes your ears adjust to a speaker.

the truth is it is very hard to remain objective about audio, and it
takes alot of ear training in order to hear differences in audio. a/b ing
different settings is the best way i've found.

-carl

ps - then again a recording studio's main purpose is very different from
a audiophile - a recording studio is trying to the the music to sound
best across a wide variety of playback systems (which is why most studios
have a pair of small crappy monitors (NS10) to compare), a audiophile is
trying to get the best possible sound out of his/her system for
their own enjoyment. If it takes buying >$500 speaker/interconnect cables
to do so (where they are changing their own perception as opposed to
the actual waveforms hitting their ears) then it is still making the
system sound better...
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
My comments on Mr. Elliots information…
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Truth About Interconnects and Cables
Tuesday, November 16 2004

by Rod Elliott from Elliot Sound Products


Introduction:


1.) Rod "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God,
"for proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing."
The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams
-----------------------------

1.) Curtis Larson Delta Omega Engineering...
[a snake oil vendor-Designer: SOVD for short]
[free lance R&D; not tied to any one Company]

Seems Douglas Adams and Rod Elliot
knows an esoteric 'god' of some kind, but not mine...
for our Father in Heaven allow all of us to know who He is
based on application of faith and gain-able knowledge.

The more you follow His commandments the more
you gain knowledge of His ways, His existence and His love
for you individually and for all of us in general.

First: faith to try His way of living and then as you follow Him
you gain knowledge, knowledge builds more faith and so on...
Gospel of Jesus Christ...
Truth: defined:
the knowledge of things as they were
as they are; and as they always will be...
-----------------------------
2.) Rod: The above could just as easily be re-phrased - for example ...

"I refuse to prove that my cables will make your system sound better",
says the -- snake oil vendor (SOV),
"for proof denies faith, and without faith, you will hear nothing."
----------------------------
2.) CL: well Gene; here we are in the open forum;
we will play it out here if you wish:
I sent you answers and an opportunity for you and your staff to examine
my 'proof', alas; here is better than nothing....

As I am willing to address the topics raised here, by you and Rod...

For, by the application of knowledge guided by experience
we will come to the TRUTH.
SOVD
-----------------------------
1 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)

3.) Rod: The tenets of faith are an absolute requirement for many of the
claims that are made for many (probably most) of the "esoteric" hi-fi additions that you will find everywhere on the web.
There is no real information, technical, scientific or otherwise, and the only terms you
will hear will be of a subjective nature
- for example "solid, sparkling, sweet, musical"
will be contrasted with "muffled, veiled, grainy, harsh"
- the very selection of the words is designed to sway you to their position,
preferably subconsciously.
--------------------------------
3.) CL: We agree the measurements have to correlate to what is heard
to produce "real information..."
Many vendors use a very limited level of equipment and at that
simple tests are performed: L,Xl; C,Xc; etc.; which is seldom
'tested' against subjective listening.

"esoteric"
unfortunately the 'knowledge' that a few cable designers have
is poorly or rarely understood; the few who understand the
'insider' knowledge is ironically forced by the academics to be
restricted from coming forth and kept by a few'...

And when technical terms in 'our', SOV-Ds, information is provided, it is
refused as not being applicable to an audio signal, like:
Skin effect, group delay, polar plots; etc
SOVD
-----------------------------------
4.) Rod: The marketing is often very subtle, and extremely persuasive,
and there is no confusing techno-talk in there to confuse the
non technical reader. While it may seem like Nirvana, the claims are nearly
all completely false.

Faith (in the religious sense) is based on the premise that
faith is God's proof that God's existence is truth and does not rely on facts.

Indeed, if facts were available, then faith is not required - so in a sense,
faith can be seen to be based on an absence of evidence - a fiction.
-----------------------------------
4.) CL: dear friends; that kind of 'faith' is blind ignorance
and not my religious premise...
First: faith to try His way of living and then as you do follow Him
you gain knowledge, knowledge builds upon the faith and so on...
Gospel of Jesus Christ...
Fact: objective reality; my God uses facts to teach and help us,
His children, to develop while here on earth;
Fact: you live a good life by following the basic-laws of the
10 commandments then real blessings are given us; etc
Fact: my God does not want us or anyone to believe in Him in
ignorant-blind-faith;
He wants His children to literally know who He is and to love Him...

Truth: defined: "the knowledge of things as they were as they are; and as they always will be"
SOVD
------------------------------------------
2 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
5.) Rod: Believers may also qualify faith as either representing truth or
they will represent it as being above and beyond our understanding.
Truth becomes a consequence of faith which is the believer's
recognition of the absence of evidence.
Truth is therefore defined according to a circular perception.

I am not about to dispute the religious beliefs of anyone - these are sacrosanct, and belong to the individual alone. When the same arguments are used for audio, this is a different matter.
Audio (unlike religious beliefs) is based on science.
-----------------------
5.) CL: Then lets drop your 'religious' allegories towards audio...
Your belief is based on unknowable perceptions; (?)
- mine is based on experience, knowledge and obedience...
- besides science is subservient to
religion : the foundation of all truth…
for science is only the compilation of mans subjective thoughts…

True Audio refinements ARE based on technical and 'scientific' knowledge;
it is just you and many like you; who have little or no experience
in 'esoteric' research and the knowledge on how to apply the correct
tools to bring the 'empirical' into the realm of systematic analysis and in line
with current 'theories'.

Charlatans: unfortunately, technical-academics tend to be of little
help and stop short of being able to pursue any
'esoteric' ideas that push the walls of the sand-box...

Too, the application of academic-knowledge got the Audio-world
into this mess in the first place.
Then when some SOVDs come along analyzing the mess the
current Audio-World is in we get academic-tized to death;
'you can not do that'; it is not in the 'books'…

Well: here are some areas for examples of academic-messes:
1. the use of 'power-supply' filters used for crossovers
2. Speakers that are of the wrong shape for acoustic wave
development
3. Thoughts that a power cord : a transmission line : can not
affect audio ...
4. poor applications of modern test equipment and
interpretation thereof.
SOVD
--------------------------------
6.) Rod: But ... you must believe, for the magic will surely be dissipated
instantly should you attempt even the most rudimentary scientific
test, or even request any technical information.

----------------------
6.) CL:
A few brave cable companies do publish 'specification' but due to poor understanding of the general public; caused by the years of the
mis-information from audio companies and academics-ranting on-on endlessly on like: you cant do that' added no real support to try and clean up the
years of incorrect information... (so far)
SOVD
-------------------------
3 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
7.) Rod The situation with cables is no different - you may choose to pay
outlandish prices to get something that looks amazing, and demonstrates to everyone how much money you have, but it will not make
a magical difference to the sound, there will be few (if any) real differences in the electrical characteristics, and it will sound much the same as "lesser" cables, selling at perhaps 100th of the price.
---------------------

7.) CL: It is true; when any little thing is 'discovered' or is
supposedly different and good; the audio-manufactures go to
extreme ends to push their new found idea(s).
And for what I have seen, do very little back-up systematic-tests to verify
or to correlate.
Yet again, there are some exciting changes made that
are very unique and do make an correct audible difference...
SOVD
----------------------------------------

8.) Rod: Despite what you may read in various forum pages, this entire
series of articles is not intended as a "beat up the subjectivists"
tale, but rather a discourse based on research that I, and a great
many others before me, have done.
The idea is not to ruin anyone's enjoyment of audio, but to make sure that the facts are available, without the hype and BS so commonly associated with high fidelity.
-----------------------------------------

8.) CL:
Facts: your diatribe is based on mis-information of the audio-problems at hand and are poorly sustained technically. The discussion is being smothered in academic 'realities', which continues to blind much of the academic engineering-world to demonstrable measurements of those things you so flippantly deride.
SOVD
---------------------------
9.) Rod: The major (and well respected) audio companies did not develop
their equipment using only their ears as a guide. Without exception, all the big (and very expensive in many cases) brands have been measured, probed, simulated, then measured some more - before anyone actually gets to hear one.
How much of this pure research has gone into most of the overpriced cables and "accessories" currently available?
I don't think I need to answer that, as we all have a pretty good idea.
---------------------------------

9.) CL: But, I will answer that... and

Thanks for a little credit in our efforts to do it right...

You and all in general, do not know how much testing and measuring has gone into some 'exotic' 'cables'.
Many listening tests performed, with listening charts, to correlate what was measured to audible differences, took several months. We use internal listeners and external listeners; using our derived 'listening chart'.
[chart details were sent to Gene & company]
SOVD
--------------------------
a paragraph left out (...)
4 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
10.) Rod:
A quick summary of the topics to follow (in the cable discussion, at least) would be ...
Power leads will rarely (if ever) have any effect on the sound, provided they are of reasonable construction and are not inducing noise into (unshielded) interconnects.
---------------------------
10.) CL: Again we meet at an academic-junction of:
'that can not work' or 'that's not possible...'

There are unique power cord designs that do make a substantial
difference and were made, refined and measured by using known
electrical properties.
Understanding of transmission lines and their subsequent characteristics
have been over-looked and or ignored. But, by proper testing
of these various characteristics new vistas of information
are made available to the audio world.
SOVD
-------------------------------------------------------------

11.) Rod Beware! If there is any suggestion that the cable needs to
be 'broken in' before you hear the difference, the salesperson is lying! At this point, you should immediately let them know that you know that they are lying, and leave the shop.
Cable 'break-in' is a myth, and is perpetuated by those with something to hide - no-one has ever been able to show that there is any scientific justification to the claim, nor shown that the performance has changed in any way whatsoever.
Cable break-in is real, and occurs between the ears of the listener
- nowhere else (most certainly not in the cable).
--------------------------------

12.) CL: Again we meet at another traditional academic-junction
'esotric'-knowledge:
Ignorance of the phenomenon of 'cable break-in' by the
academicians as usual, has caused a great deal of confusion.
Break-in is: susceptible to scientific description and explanation !
Understanding of the E-filed and its affects on the complex
audio wave-form has been ignored for so long and has been
relegated to the back-seat as insignificant or is in-correctly
considered in many electronic designs.
SOVD
-------------------------------

Preamble Part 2 The Truth About Interconnects and Cables

13.) "these imperfections are not significant at audio frequencies...by the lunatic fringe"

14.) "I have challenged anyone who claims that the imperfections are audible
to please do so..."
"So far, there has not been one shred of evidence that indicates that
TeflonTM (wonderful stuff that may well be) is audibly superior to PVC
in a properly controlled double-blind (or ABX) test."
(...)
Differences are measurable (with the right equipment) but are not relevant to the audio range unless the "facts" or cable topology are manipulated to influence the test.

15.) I have asked every person and/or company named in the Mad As Hell articles for any information they have that substantiates their outrageous claims, and not one, not a single one, has supplied anything more than some useless promotional material or "satisfied customer" e-mails.

16.) Of course I am, these people are liars, charlatans and thieves, either by accident
(they may actually think they are realistic because of mental illness
[such as delusion or psychosis] or some other mitigating circumstance)
or by design - they simply have one goal ... to separate people from their money.
The actual "mechanism" is unimportant - the fact that they are wrong does not enter into their equation of life, so whether their claims are due to mental illness or greed makes no difference to the consumer, who is being ripped off and lied to either way.
------------------------------
5 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
13.) CL: many measurable 'imperfection' are audible; just what level of
listener is listening. The test group for listening needs to be younger
and have some knowledge in listening; hopefully no lunatics
are in the crowd... :))

14.) CL: Actually low dielectrics are poorer sonically and measurements
and listening tests can demonstrate this FACT.

15.) CL: Measuring, as you point out later on, and listening tests
sometimes do not correlate; but by analyzing the odd 'affects'
one can relate an audible change to a measurement.
Using the right equipment: high-end-parameters and such; takes
time to isolate the changes, but they are noticeable.
Whether we can or ever will be able to apply an 'unit' to some
measurable audio difference or 'quality' , we will leave up to you all.
But that does not mean that repeatable measurements can not be made.

16.) CL: what make you so 'sane' ? ;
not everyone is liar .... cheat etc, just because you can not
or have not learned how to measure or analyze an unique
audio concern or problem.
Making money is one thing, doing it right is another; and there
are a few of us who endeavor to find the TRUE-FACTS.
SOVD
-----------------------------------------------
17.) This is exactly why we must use ABX or similar double blind tests
- anything else will fail to properly eliminate feedback cues, and these will be used (albeit subconsciously) to determine whether the "standard" or "test" item is currently in circuit.
Any test where there is any possibility of identifying the components under test is completely invalid.

17.) CL [ agree ] SOVD
-------------------------
(…)

18.) My (almost) final e-mail pointed out that no metallic conductor
introduces distortion.
Now, I must admit that I did not qualify this, but when I speak of distortion I refer almost invariably to non-linear distortion:
i.e. the type introduced by all active components, that generates harmonics
and inter modulation products not present in the original signal).
(...)

I said that they don't generate (non-linear) distortion.
The fact of the matter is that no metallic conductor causes (non-linear) distortion.
There are various resistances depending on the metal, but it's basic conductivity is
completely linear.

Check things like thermal coefficient of resistance for any metal - it is linear.
There are no curves or "fudge factors" to be taken into account.
------------------------------------
18.) CL: resistance of a metal is: Rt = Ro(1+aT+bT^2)
As you can see there is a power of bT; which make it non-linear.
Mostly linear over 'room-temperature' range...
Blame the Rdc, Xl, Xc or whatever of aluminum, but aluminum has more
impedance loss than copper and its sound is different.

and that's no fudge...
SOVD
------------------------------------------
6 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
19.) None of this has anything to do with skin effect,
velocity factor or any of the other seemingly strange behaviours of
all conductors at high frequencies (none of which are non-linear distortions), we are interested in the simple ability to conduct current from point A to point B without any form of rectification or other non-linear effect.
All metallic conductors in common use will do this perfectly well, and will not
add harmonics or change the wave-shape in any non-linear way.
Harmonics can of course be removed - this is a filter effect
(a completely passive linear function), and is caused by capacitance and inductance.
All cables have these parameters as a fact of life - a silver wire and an aluminium wire of the same length and diameter have different resistance, but inductance and capacitance are the same.
--------------------------------------------

19.) CL: AHa finally; the old academic Skin-Effect road block...

Freq. S.D. inches eqv. AWG (diameter)
1 MHz .066 mm .0026 < 40
100 kHz .209 mm .0082 32
10 kHz .66 mm .026 22
1 kHz 2.09 mm .0823 > 12

S.D. skin depth; equivalent AWG in copper wire;

Now to start:
Dr. Howard Johnson stated in an article about 'skin-effect'
Interview with Dr. Howard Johnson Date: 03/07/03
in part stating:
... "at frequencies sufficiently high that the skin depth approaches
the diameter of the strands: approximately 250 KHz for AWG 30
stranding.
I seriously doubt that has any effect at audio frequencies,..."

At 100 kHz: S.D. is .209mm and the equivalent gauge is 32 AWG.
This means that this single frequency of 100 kHz will penetrate or be in a
region of copper mass of about .0082 inches.
In a 32 AWG wire that means the 100 kHz energy will be every where, from the outside surface all the way down to the center core of the wire.
A 1 MHz signal S.D. is .066mm or .0026 inches, which is 1/3 of the distance
into a 32 AWG wire.

Ok then, higher frequencies will confine their energy, in the copper mass, towards the outer 'surface'; higher frequencies penetrate less and less; whereas lower frequencies penetration is deeper and deeper.

Now we face the FACT that the lower frequencies will be able to cover even more copper mass or region.

1 kHz signal can penetrate 2.09 mm or .0823 inches.; where will this low frequency energy travel ? - in the copper-wire's mass; all of it.

So using a 32 AWG wire there will be many frequencies, below 100 kHz, trying to use the same regions of the coppers mass.
To use a wire that is bigger than the S.D. of 10 kHz signal we would need to use a wire of 22 AWG, for 1kHz a wire of 12 AWG.; and 08 AWG for boom boxes (oh we do) and not just for Rdc; for other fidelity reasons.
As the low frequencies of 20 kHz and below compete for 'free-electrons' in the copper mass; impedance (Z) becomes a dominate factor.
This Z-factor is not linear either, for -resonances- are determined by the
SQR of L/C.
In relation to wire size, as the diameter becomes smaller the inherent impedance increases. Using a 08 AWG is impractical for interconnects and most speaker wires; so us SOVDs have many trade offs to make.

Aluminum wire has different inductance and capacitance characteristics than
a copper wire.
i.e. ) Measure the "Q" of a aluminum 'coil' v/s the "Q" of a copper coil.
SOVD
------------------------------------
7 of 8
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Cables SOV-Ds...

:)
20.) The issues at stake here are the crux of the on-going debate between
the two "camps".
While I will admit that not all designers will take any subjective opinion seriously, I do know from my own testing and from a huge amount of reader feedback that some of my designs sound better with different transistors or power supply configurations (for example).

(…) skip to power cords… CL

The Truth About Interconnects and Cables Tuesday, November 16 2004

Power Leads

The power lead (cord or cable if you prefer) is how mains power at 220V, 240V, 110V at 50 or 60Hz gets to your system. The specifics of the voltage and frequency are determined by where you live, and the available household mains provided by your electricity company.

There are mains cables (power cords) available that defy belief. Would you spend US $3000
for a 2 metre mains lead?
You can buy a very nice amplifier indeed for this sort of money, but they are there,
and someone must be buying the stupid things.

--------------------------------
20.) CL

a.) Sounds better by using a different transistor… ok then why can't a
power cord make things sound different ?

b.) many people are buying the " 'stupid' things" …
can so many people be bluffed and fooled as you seem to suggest ?
or is there some true 'differences' they hear and are pleased with it
SOVD
---------------------------------

21.) What possible effect 2 metres of flexible cable can have to
counteract the kilometres of power company's wiring is a simple
question to answer.
None. Or, to more precise, none whatsoever. I am not referring to cables with inbuilt filters or other esoterica here, just perfectly ordinary mains leads.

(…)
(…)

Bottom Line on Power Cables

I am still waiting for a "high-end" power lead manufacturer to
- supply me with some scientific proof of the advantages of their cable,
- and how they improve the sound.

I have asked, and have not received the information.
Nor do I expect to, since they cannot provide any sort of proof because they don't have any.

Conclusion
(…)
Compare this to the snake oil vendors.
As an example, they buy perfectly ordinary cable from an established manufacturer, clad it in some fancy heat shrink tubing, write their sales pitch, and sell it.

They might actually bother to listen to it as well, but there isn't much point, since it is the same wire as used by others anyway. Do you see specifications, measurements, or other factual data?
(…)
Claims that power leads and interconnects will magically transform the sound of your system are false and misleading in the extreme.

The various system components may be influenced by some combinations, but a well designed system should not care.
---------------------------------------

21.) CL Final comments

- No matter how long the power connection is before the power
input of a piece of equipment; the last , the very last portion or end of
the 'line' determines the characteristics of the signal.

Simple 'mains' have no way to substantially correct the end-results.

But by understanding termination principles and simple cable corrections, the 'mains'
will be able to 'correct' the improper characteristics of the terminated signal.

- Until the audio-world is able to understand high-end measurements and
some accepted 'units', by academia, of 'fidelity': that is some sort of
metrics for the various parameters associated with good-sound; the
publication of high-end parameters will be of little use.

Thanks; Curtis Larson

last: 8 of 8
 
Rip Van Woofer

Rip Van Woofer

Audioholic General
So...ummm...let's see...the "esoteric" cable vendors and other high-enders are in possession of data, measurement protocols and other Higher Truths that are being suppressed by the academic/engineering establishment? They can't even present a paper for peer review without some troll-like guardian shredding it before it sees the light of day at a conference?

Or is the normal skepticism of science and the necessity to defend a hypothesis and submit to peer review and testing simply too much for the poor dears to bear? Funny thing about science: good ideas eventually do win out. Sure, sometimes it takes years but that's life. That's how we got antibiotics, plate tectonics, general relativity, quantum mechanics...and transistors. So if wire really makes a difference, proponents have the means to prove it if they have any balls. We're all ears!

And God is on their side, too? At least if they are bible-believing Christians? Are Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, liberal Episcopalians, and agnostics deaf to the improvements to be imparted by a $5k interconnect? Or less capable of arriving at the Truth as far as wire goes? Well, a good friend of mine is a secular Jew and though an intelligent person otherwise she swears by her Analysis Plus wire so maybe not....maybe wishful thinking and all the rest do not discriminate by creed.

Oy veh! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
L

Leprkon

Audioholic General
Rip Van Woofer said:
So...ummm...let's see...the "esoteric" cable vendors and other high-enders are in possession of data, measurement protocols and other Higher Truths that are being suppressed by the academic/engineering establishment? They can't even present a paper for peer review without some troll-like guardian shredding it before it sees the light of day at a conference?

Oy veh! :rolleyes:
Maybe their management, untrusting of the words "international patent rights", refuses to permit the release of such information because it might

a. give an unfair advantage to the competition
b. show that they themselves have violated someone else's existing patent
c. be unpatentable because it cannot be proven by science or testing
d. show schematic diagrams of non-functional components added for merely cosmetic purposes
e. demonstrate that they do only have about $ .14 per foot invested in their $ 300 per foot cable
f. force them to divulge in the patent that the cable made in China cannot be re-labelled "US Product"
g. send the masses laughing because their reasoning is too stupid to be believed
h. all of the above but "A" :eek:

_________________________
if cats can;t do math, how can they always find the geometric center of a bed ?
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Rip-

Rip Van Woofer said:
So...ummm...let's see...the "esoteric" cable vendors and other high-enders are in possession of data, measurement protocols and other Higher Truths that are being suppressed by the academic/engineering establishment?
They can't even present a paper for peer review without some troll-like guardian shredding it before it sees the light of day at a conference?

Or is the normal skepticism of science and the necessity to defend a hypothesis and submit to peer review and testing simply too much for the poor dears to bear?

Funny thing about science: good ideas eventually do win out. Sure, sometimes it takes years but that's life. That's how we got antibiotics, plate tectonics, general relativity, quantum mechanics...and transistors. So if wire really makes a difference, proponents have the means to prove it if they have any balls. We're all ears!

And God is on their side, too? At least if they are bible-believing Christians? Are Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, liberal Episcopalians, and agnostics deaf to the improvements to be imparted by a $5k interconnect?

Or less capable of arriving at the Truth as far as wire goes? Well, a good friend of mine is a secular Jew and though an intelligent person otherwise she swears by her Analysis Plus wire so maybe not....maybe wishful thinking and all the rest do not discriminate by creed.

Oy veh! :rolleyes:

Academia step to the plate, ay, sent you all an opportunity to see
our process... no response from you;
So a mutual contact, Rod Elliot stepped up and signed a Non-disclosure...
Sent him our data for review, and will send him a prototype(s).

Ay; not bad for a SOVD, Navy-Vet. ?

Had to wait until our obligations were finished...
Now to proceed; will proceed to write up a technical paper
and finish preparing several patent pendings...

If you are all ears how about some help ?

Culture does have some affect on what we hear; for instnce:
Californians heaar differntly than Britons as per the rsearch
Tritone Paradox ;http//www.sciam.com/1296issue/1296amsci.html

15% of Californians heard tone pairs B-F, C-F, C#-G as
descending
26% heard D-G# as descending; whereas:
20% Britons heard F#-C descednding
28% heard G-C# "
17% heard G#-D "


"RESULTS OF THE TRITONE PARADOX suggest that people form a fixed
mental template that places ambiguous musical tones (those without any
octave information) in a circle."
"For Californians, ambiguous tones constructed from B, C, C#, D, D# tend
to fall in the upper half of the circle, so that tone pairs B-F, C-F#, C#-G,
D-G# and D#-A are heard as descending.
For Britons, the opposite tends to be true. "
Credit: Johnny Johnson

and also of interest is that right handers hear differently than
left-handers; also see
http://www.sciam.com/1296issue/1296amsci.html

Point being, our culture has an affect on how/what we hear.


Curtis L
 
C

Curtis L

Enthusiast
Leprkon said:
Maybe their management, untrusting of the words "international patent rights", refuses to permit the release of such information because it might

a. give an unfair advantage to the competition
b. show that they themselves have violated someone else's existing patent
c. be unpatentable because it cannot be proven by science or testing
d. show schematic diagrams of non-functional components added for merely cosmetic purposes
e. demonstrate that they do only have about $ .14 per foot invested in their $ 300 per foot cable
f. force them to divulge in the patent that the cable made in China cannot be re-labelled "US Product"
g. send the masses laughing because their reasoning is too stupid to be believed
h. all of the above but "A" :eek:
...
:)

CL "international patent rights" are very a weak protection;
and you want to play it out in an international court, good luck.
a.) CL keeping in-house trade secrets is a good pratice, for once
a principle is understood everyone will be able to produce
a 'widgit', even after a patent is given any useful variation
can be patented despite the previous patent.
b.) CL again you try to insult SOVDs by implying they are thieves
and can not stand the light of day...
c.) CL we have patents pending and are based on academic-prosesses
d.) CL all parts are needed, we are not into deception
e.) CL the cables used are of higher quality, compare and see
f.) CL we do not deal with over sea manufacures to make our product
g.) CL As I see it, the masses have been lead by many audio academics
to accept many false notions, like 'crossovers', mechanical
time-alignment, convex speakers, round ports, zip-cords for
audio connections, coax for speaker wires, anti cable burn-in
statements; based on what ?
Experience, testing and pratical knowledge; :rolleyes:
NOO, academic traditions !

H.) You want to help? Sign up ! (non-disclosure)
This is my second offer... my gloves are still off...
 
Mudcat

Mudcat

Senior Audioholic
Curtis L said:
CL "international patent rights" are very a weak protection;
and you want to play it out in an international court, good luck.
a.) CL keeping in-house trade secrets is a good pratice, for once
a principle is understood everyone will be able to produce
a 'widgit', even after a patent is given any useful variation
can be patented despite the previous patent.
Good Point, maybe your only one.

Curtis L said:
b.) CL again you try to insult SOVDs by implying they are thieves
and can not stand the light of day...
On another thread a couple of months ago, I got into a rather heavy argument with Steve Nugent of Empiracle Audio cables. Never called him a thief, but continually asked him to defend his costs and break them down for a $1760 - 3 meter speaker cable, he couldn't or wouldn't. Doesn't matter. BTW, what is you affiliation?

Curtis L said:
c.) CL we have patents pending and are based on academic-prosesses
This is BS.
I can apply for a patent for a perpetual motion machine. It will not be approved (I hope), but while waiting for the rejection notice I can advertise "Patent Pending".

Curtis L said:
d.) CL all parts are needed, we are not into deception
Defend This

http://cable.tcnerd.com/whymit.asp


Curtis L said:
e.) CL the cables used are of higher quality, compare and see
More BS. OFC copper or six nines or whatever will not measure or "sound" better than regular copper. So what's there to compare? The Price?

That said, I can relate to a point. Making my own cables I know how costs add up and wire that cost $0.23 / foot wholesale can easily warp into a cable that needs to cost $200/10 ft in order to make any profit. BTW, whose your affiliation?


Curtis L said:
g.) CL As I see it, the masses have been lead by many audio academics
to accept many false notions, like
1)'crossovers',
2)mechanical time-alignment
3)convex speakers
4)round ports
5)zip-cords for audio connections
6)coax for speaker wires
7)anti cable burn-in statements;

based on what ? Experience, testing and pratical knowledge; :rolleyes:
NOO, academic traditions !
Slightly edited by Mudcat for alignment purposes[/I


1) What are you saying, full range drivers all around, or what
2) Only if you buy into Monster's BS
3) You probably enjoy two bifurcated cones connected by an ASTM F-1648-95 spec cable*
4) Most realize it's the size that counts
5) -7) Your beginning to sound like Jon Reisch
7) Science would say "Since there is no proof that is works, don't do it." But you are saying "So what, just because there is no proof that is works, you should do it anyway."



* Note - Two Dixie Cups on a string
 
Last edited:
J

jneutron

Senior Audioholic
Curtis L said:
:)
19.) None of this has anything to do with skin effect,
velocity factor or any of the other seemingly strange behaviours of
all conductors at high frequencies (none of which are non-linear distortions), we are interested in the simple ability to conduct current from point A to point B without any form of rectification or other non-linear effect.
All metallic conductors in common use will do this perfectly well, and will not
add harmonics or change the wave-shape in any non-linear way.
Harmonics can of course be removed - this is a filter effect
(a completely passive linear function), and is caused by capacitance and inductance.
All cables have these parameters as a fact of life - a silver wire and an aluminium wire of the same length and diameter have different resistance, but inductance and capacitance are the same.
--------------------------------------------

19.) CL: AHa finally; the old academic Skin-Effect road block...

Freq. S.D. inches eqv. AWG (diameter)
1 MHz .066 mm .0026 < 40
100 kHz .209 mm .0082 32
10 kHz .66 mm .026 22
1 kHz 2.09 mm .0823 > 12

S.D. skin depth; equivalent AWG in copper wire;

Now to start:
Dr. Howard Johnson stated in an article about 'skin-effect'
Interview with Dr. Howard Johnson Date: 03/07/03
in part stating:
... "at frequencies sufficiently high that the skin depth approaches
the diameter of the strands: approximately 250 KHz for AWG 30
stranding.
I seriously doubt that has any effect at audio frequencies,..."

At 100 kHz: S.D. is .209mm and the equivalent gauge is 32 AWG.
This means that this single frequency of 100 kHz will penetrate or be in a
region of copper mass of about .0082 inches.
In a 32 AWG wire that means the 100 kHz energy will be every where, from the outside surface all the way down to the center core of the wire.
A 1 MHz signal S.D. is .066mm or .0026 inches, which is 1/3 of the distance
into a 32 AWG wire.

Ok then, higher frequencies will confine their energy, in the copper mass, towards the outer 'surface'; higher frequencies penetrate less and less; whereas lower frequencies penetration is deeper and deeper.

Now we face the FACT that the lower frequencies will be able to cover even more copper mass or region.

1 kHz signal can penetrate 2.09 mm or .0823 inches.; where will this low frequency energy travel ? - in the copper-wire's mass; all of it.

So using a 32 AWG wire there will be many frequencies, below 100 kHz, trying to use the same regions of the coppers mass.
To use a wire that is bigger than the S.D. of 10 kHz signal we would need to use a wire of 22 AWG, for 1kHz a wire of 12 AWG.; and 08 AWG for boom boxes (oh we do) and not just for Rdc; for other fidelity reasons.
As the low frequencies of 20 kHz and below compete for 'free-electrons' in the copper mass; impedance (Z) becomes a dominate factor.
This Z-factor is not linear either, for -resonances- are determined by the
SQR of L/C.
In relation to wire size, as the diameter becomes smaller the inherent impedance increases. Using a 08 AWG is impractical for interconnects and most speaker wires; so us SOVDs have many trade offs to make.

Aluminum wire has different inductance and capacitance characteristics than
a copper wire.
i.e. ) Measure the "Q" of a aluminum 'coil' v/s the "Q" of a copper coil.
SOVD
------------------------------------
7 of 8
Um, Curtis??

Not being that well versed in these topics, I was having trouble following you. Would you please, um, explain this a little clearer? I couldn't tell who was saying what.

1. What exactly are you saying about skin effect?

2. How does the variation of conductivity of metals vs temperature play into the wires?

3. I couldn't follow any of the transmission line stuff you were saying.

4. Nor, the power cord stuff..

I must also confess, I didn't read the Rod stuff..

But, please...your technical understanding of these without quoting anyone else would help..

Thanks, John
 
J

jneutron

Senior Audioholic
curtis said:
Aluminum wire has different inductance and capacitance characteristics than
a copper wire.
i.e. ) Measure the "Q" of a aluminum 'coil' v/s the "Q" of a copper coil.
The inductance of a wire, all by itself, is meaningless. Inductance is the measure of the storage via magnetic flux, of energy within the construct which is carrying current.

The capacitance of a metal is also meaningless. It has no bearing whatsoever on the conductivity of the metal, but is simply related to the storage of energy via the electric field caused by a gradient within an insulating media.

The measurement of the Q of a coil of material as you have used as an example, does not support your argument..

The "Q" of a construct is a measure of the resonant frequency of the construct divided by the width of the resonance of the construct, typically measured at the 3 dB down points..for example, the ultrasonic resonant stacks I use for plastic welding, has a center frequency of 24 Khz, and it's response is down 3 dB at about 1 to 2 hz away from that frequency. The stack "Q" , <i>in this case mechanical</i>, is somewhere between 6,000 and 12,000.

Your example requires inclusion of the resistivity of the material, the dielectric coefficient of the insulation between the conductors, the geometry based inductance of the coil construct and any external field enhancement (magnetic material in proximity), and any losses to be found within the insulation..as a measure of either the inductance, or the "capacitance" of the conductor, your example is meaningless.

curtis said:
As the low frequencies of 20 kHz and below compete for 'free-electrons' in the copper mass;
Where did this come from? Are you suggesting that the conductors become <i>crowded</i> and have to compete for electrons at the currrent densities room temperature metals are capable of sustaining? I've not seen that...although my experience in that regard is somewhat "limited". :rolleyes:

If you find any reference that shows that, I would be interested in reading it..

These are the only parts I could figure out in your posts...the others, please elaborate..

Cheers, John
 
Last edited by a moderator:
L

Leprkon

Audioholic General
Curtis L said:
H.) You want to help? Sign up ! (non-disclosure)
This is my second offer... my gloves are still off...
Curtis,

My little checklist does nothing more than catalog a number of sins perpetrated by various cable manufacturers, but I'm willing to stand up and let you show me that you are different.

Please post a list of the properties you would like to see tested. I can temporarily get access to some fairly sophisticated measuring equipment. Two of the guys working it are in ther final year of EE at the University of Oklahoma and would probably love to have a senior project to write a paper on.

Let me know what to test, and I will make sure I have those capabilities. At that point, I will be happy to sign an NDA and will get one from anyone involved in the testing.

You can then send me a sample of your products and a competitor(s) marked simply A and B. Obscure the source any way you want and terminate both wires in the same manner.

I would just ask that you pm Mudcat and Gene as to which sample is which prior to us posting any data so we can document the sources independantly.

Gloves off....

_____________________________________________
if cats can't do math, how can they always find the geometric center of a bed ?
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Curtis L said:
:)
20.) The issues at stake here are the crux of the on-going debate between
the two "camps".
While I will admit that not all designers will take any subjective opinion seriously, I do know from my own testing and from a huge amount of reader feedback that some of my designs sound better with different transistors or power supply configurations (for example).
Curtis L said:
By chance your testing involves DBT listening? Reader feedback based on DBT listening or biased speculations?





20.) CL

a.) Sounds better by using a different transistor… ok then why can't a
power cord make things sound different ?


No evidence exists from bias controlled listening, unless you have spome recent citations to same?



b.) many people are buying the " 'stupid' things" …
can so many people be bluffed and fooled as you seem to suggest ?
or is there some true 'differences' they hear and are pleased with it
SOVD


How could all those people be fooled? Herd mentality is just a myth too, After all, most of the worlds population believe in a supreme being, right, so it must be so, not imagined.

Of course you have credible evidence from bias controlled listening to support any of your claims for audible differences, right?






21.) CL Final comments

- No matter how long the power connection is before the power
input of a piece of equipment; the last , the very last portion or end of
the 'line' determines the characteristics of the signal.


I suppose component filtering is for not then?

Simple 'mains' have no way to substantially correct the end-results.

But by understanding termination principles and simple cable corrections, the 'mains'
will be able to 'correct' the improper characteristics of the terminated signal.


What are these characteristics that cannot be corrected by the components?

- Until the audio-world is able to understand high-end measurements and
some accepted 'units', by academia, of 'fidelity': that is some sort of
metrics for the various parameters associated with good-sound; the
publication of high-end parameters will be of little use.


Hi end measurements? Such as? Please help us out here, what may these be?

Perhaps if the hi end published maybe things could change but they have nothing to publish or they would have already.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top