Canuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio ForumCanuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio Forum
It is currently Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:55 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Forum rules


The Cables forum is intended for those who believe cables make a difference in how their systems sound. If you do not believe in cables please do not post in any threads that are discussing specific cables or asking for help with cables, and limit your participation to threads where the OP intends to debate about cables. Posts which are argumentative, offensive, or break our rules may be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned from posting in this forum.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: cable theory question
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 8:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:58 am
Posts: 80
Location: mississauga, ON, CA
Hi
I have a question about cables.
I see that high priced ones for speakers have a trade off....high capacitance for low inductance.
Capacitance that is 10 times or more what it is for zip cord.
Question: If the frequency dependence of cables is important, would it not be a good idea to increase the resistive component and thereby reduce the relative amount of frequency effect (reactance)...so the total impedance goes up requiring a little more power ...but the ratio of linear to non linear also goes up.
... would someone like to explain if and where my reasoning is wrong ??


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:04 pm
Posts: 772
Location: London, ON, CA
I enjoy focusing on the "how and why" aspects of measured electrical parameters like inductance, resistance and capacitance plus whether any or all of them can be considered to be lumped together or are distributed along the length of the cable, but that focus is fruitless (IMO).

To use the terminology of many experienced cable owners on CAM, a particular speaker cable improves the "synergy" of a particular combination of electronics and speakers.

I do consider this to be valuable personal opinion on what combinations are better, or improved over others.

Particularly interesting to me that using that same cable with a different combination of electronics and speakers is then considered to be neutral or to even produce negative effects on sound quality :?:

Why?

A hint from a recent comment from a technical CAM member, regarding a high end (my opinion) amplifier design.
He mentioned that this amplifier had a feature that allowed the owner to select the amount of internal feedback from the output section and that adjusting the amount of feedback then altered the influence of speaker cables.
Some owners liked the result of that influence while others did not :idea:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:02 am
Posts: 1192
Location: Brandon, MB, CA
I believe Richard Feynman said it best:
"Anyone who insists he knows how electricity or quantum mechanics works probably doesn’t."

_________________
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." (Aristotle, 384-322 BCE)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:18 pm
Posts: 610
Location: Sooke, BC, CA
plguy wrote:
Hi
I have a question about cables.
I see that high priced ones for speakers have a trade off....high capacitance for low inductance.
Capacitance that is 10 times or more what it is for zip cord.
Question: If the frequency dependence of cables is important, would it not be a good idea to increase the resistive component and thereby reduce the relative amount of frequency effect (reactance)...so the total impedance goes up requiring a little more power ...but the ratio of linear to non linear also goes up.
... would someone like to explain if and where my reasoning is wrong ??


Simply put the lower the resistance the lower the effects of capacitance and inductance. But please don't be misled, Resistance, Inductance, and Capacitance (otherwise know as RLC) are no longer issues in speaker wire design and haven't been in at least 80 years. Note that hifi marketers frequently claim otherwise, even to the extent of claiming to have harnessed the the properties of quantum physics for their line of products!

_________________
Use Linux, Be Cool and Be Smart


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:41 am 
Offline
Dealer/Sponsor

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:33 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Kingston, ON, CA
NordicNorm wrote:
I believe Richard Feynman said it best:
"Anyone who insists he knows how electricity or quantum mechanics works probably doesn’t."



It can be important to understand that we are measuring after effects, resultant aftereffects, not anything close to a fundamental consideration..when we measure LCR. Inductance, capacitance and resistance are after effects, they are residuals, echos, ghost shadows on walls.. of the quantum level interactions. So we've found a way to quantify these interactions and given the measurements names and values.

People think they are the central aspect of electrical function, as the real aspects (not commonly discussed, even at the engineering/design levels) are not understood. At all. Those real things are not fleshed out and not understood, just generally labelled ...and exist under intense ever changing results and scientific investigation. Thus, LCR and all attached to it is THEORY, not fact. And will never be fact, as it is based on things we don't understand.

LCR is a fallout residual shitshow. A shitshow as it becomes entrenched in the general human understanding and factualized, robotized, deified, made into religion. Where punishments are handed out to people who experiment in these areas. So dark ages. So weak minded. commonality and history has zero capacity to make things 'real', as we don't even know what real is. All we have is a generalized consensus, and that's all we'll ever have.

But in reality... it's a shitshow/sideshow residual of things we don't understand.

I'm not against measure, meter and collate, name, sort, etc. As we have to get handle on things -- or at least seem to think we do, in the animal side of our existence equation.

And therein lies the rub. the animal body rose colored filter glasses of human rumination, altering logic so it fits the social/cultural animal side of the unconscious intrusion into logic formation. In the end, people like Planck, Einstein, etc, all became Buddhist(ish) existentialists, as they realized that the whole thing was not real and this reality (as commonly considered and negotiated) has fundamental issues.

ie, how can you have LCR as being right or correct, when the underlying aspects are totally up for grabs?

Which is why, in the final analysis... you end up with people like Elon Musk telling you that there is a billions to one odds against this being a fundamental reality and is actually a simulacrum of some sort. We cannot escape subjectivity, and objectivity is a subset mental state of our permanence in subjective reality. that the only fact that exists, is that there are no facts. Paradox, like our essential quantum reality.

and that's my rant for today. :)

Generally speaking, LCR can serve to illustrate what might happen with a speaker and cable interaction, but we have other issues. Like we don't really correlate that to how the ear hears and almost none of the audio designers have ever looked at how the ear works. It's like having half the data required to understand the equation missing and never looked at. They're not stepping up to the plate and looking at the whole question and answer set. Perhaps it is out of the grasp or reach of some who are in the field.

Thus the answers and products proposed and utilized/sold... go circular and limited. We're getting better at it, but it is really slow going. intelligent individuals can go faster than the bulk of humanity but sometimes those individuals get attacked by the animal side of the human equation.

And that pretty well sums up most forums on the internet that deal with engineered electrically based solutions/devices/etc. Or humans, in general. I make posts like this, fully understanding that some will tilt at it like a spinning windmill and charge at it. Their inner barking monkey will take over and try to take me to task (not understanding that their subset of reality [body/ego] have taken over their view/window) (it happens to all of us, I'm not exempted). Their attacks slide right off, as they should. that's ok. It's expected. I did not make the post for them. I made it for the notably larger number of silent readers... who read it and got something useful out of it.

_________________
(Ken Hotte, of) Teo Audio


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:18 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 5:08 am
Posts: 701
Location: Montréal, QC, CA
I completely disagree with you Ken.

We understand most of the physic phenomenons regarding electricity in a wire or a silicon substrat doped or not.
We are good, very good with electricity. What we don't completely get, is what's happening at the atomic level.
But we don't need to know that. At least, not for designing an amp or a wire. Even if we don't know how atoms
react to do some inductance, we know that some matter will make more inductance than others. We can choose
measure and quantify inductance (or C or R) at will.

LCR is perfectly understood. We can make almost any values for L, C and R.
We have laws that confirm what we can measure. It's not a mystery.

LCR also happen in real time. They are not only "after effects" at all.

plguy wrote:
Hi
I have a question about cables.
I see that high priced ones for speakers have a trade off....high capacitance for low inductance.
Capacitance that is 10 times or more what it is for zip cord.
Question: If the frequency dependence of cables is important, would it not be a good idea to increase the resistive component and thereby reduce the relative amount of frequency effect (reactance)...so the total impedance goes up requiring a little more power ...but the ratio of linear to non linear also goes up.
... would someone like to explain if and where my reasoning is wrong ??
This is a good topic Plguy.
To better understand, let's roughly define the terms.
Capacitance opposes to fast voltage change.
Inductance opposes to fast current change.
Resistance opposes to current flow.
Also both L and C 'store' current in one way or another.

We all know that any wires have LCR. Then, we must see a cable as an electronic passive device between amp and speakers.
As example, some designers put a cap at the output. That cap is then between amp and speakers. In general, the designer
will choose a cap value in function of some parameters, generally frequency bandwidth. Changing this cap value will then
influence the amp's SQ. So does any cable. Anything with LCR, will influence SQ at some degree.
(the cap was an example, it could be a choke, a transformer, whatever)

Then, some cables will sound different on different amps. Synergy is the word here.
Synergy between your preferences, your amp(s) and speakers.

For your question, there's no ideal answer. Lowering/highering something, will affect other things.
We have some references though; lowest resistivity is better, such impedance level is better with such capacitance level etc...
But trying to answer, yes higher impedance will need more power and then this could affect amp's linearity. And many other things.
A cable should be the shortest as possible, at least for audio.

We can make a cheap cable with the same LCR measure than a high priced one.
Then why some cables are highly priced ?
It's because stability, quality of construction, method used, purity of part, insulation used, temp control etc... etc...
All of this to maintain at best the LCR parameters at a desired level.

_________________
Keep things simple and even simpler
Nakamichi BX-300/Balance BW-1010 DAC, Balance MR-50R, Infinity RS 8 Kappa
Nakamichi Dragon/Onix Dac25b, Audio Research SP-9, Spectral DMA-100s/Nakamichi PA-7II, Martin-Logan CLSII/Balance Helicia


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:55 am
Posts: 63
Location: Saskatoon, SK, CA
The signal levels involved with loudspeaker cables make capacitance the least significant factor. You want to minimize inductance. Amplifiers have generally far less difficulty driving a capacitive load (within reason) than an inductive one.

Although resistance at first seems to also be a critical factor with loudspeaker cables, when you look at the circuit* you will see that it's less important as well, plus unless you're using some unusually poor conductors **, it will be low in any case.

You have L, C and R to work with. Changing one changes the others. Take your pick and go with the best option; for interconnects (low currents) you want to minimize C as it potentially can roll off high frequencies that might (depending) be audible with those currents. For loudspeaker connections the devil is in the inductance (L).

* The circuit is:
amplifier positive output > loudspeaker positive cable > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > loudspeaker negative cable > amplifier negative output.
Add up those resistances and compare with the same circuit below:
amplifier positive output > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > amplifier negative circuit.
When you do so, it's obvious that resistance of even 0.10 ohm in your loudspeaker cable isn't significant, and for any reasonable cable length, it's going to be orders of magnitude lower than that.

Similarly, even a few hundred picofarads of capacitance isn't going to be significant when your crossover elements are probably in the microfarad range.

Consider: a very high capacitance audio cable, let's say 1,000 picofarads (pF) is 0.001 microfarad (uF), a typical capacitive element in a crossover is in the order of a couple of uF, as is the typical output capacitor in a power amp. There are such things as DC power amps (zero output capacitance) but even those will have a switch to add some capacitance to prevent DC from biasing the loudspeaker voice coil should the DC offset be excessive.

** Speaking of unusually poor conductors, low cost zip cord and even some relatively high cost zip cord, generally out of China, has been found to be Copper Clad Aluminum (CCA). The rule of thumb is CCA is 4 gauges less conductive than ordinary copper (not premium coppers like OHNO). So your "12 Gauge" speaker cable is really 16 gauge equivalent 100 IACS grade copper. I'm looking at you, Monoprice. But even then, it's not so bad that the resistance would be significant, the entire circuit taken into account, over typical loudspeaker cable lengths.

As always, horses for courses.

For an excellent overview of the factors needed for a loudspeaker cable, go to PS Audio's website and read Issues 55 and 56 of Copper magazine (free download) where Galen Gareis of Belden covers all the relevant aspects of loudspeaker cable design ("Cables: Speaker Cable Design, Part 1" and "~Part 2"). Belden is, not surprisingly, talking about their upcoming cable design, but the principles covered are appropriate for any loudspeaker cable from any vendor, or DIY for that matter.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:04 pm
Posts: 772
Location: London, ON, CA
Johnny2Bad wrote:
The signal levels involved with loudspeaker cables make capacitance the least significant factor. You want to minimize inductance. Amplifiers have generally far less difficulty driving a capacitive load (within reason) than an inductive one.

Although resistance at first seems to also be a critical factor with loudspeaker cables, when you look at the circuit* you will see that it's less important as well, plus unless you're using some unusually poor conductors **, it will be low in any case.

You have L, C and R to work with. Changing one changes the others. Take your pick and go with the best option; for interconnects (low currents) you want to minimize C as it potentially can roll off high frequencies that might (depending) be audible with those currents. For loudspeaker connections the devil is in the inductance (L).

* The circuit is:
amplifier positive output > loudspeaker positive cable > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > loudspeaker negative cable > amplifier negative output.
Add up those resistances and compare with the same circuit below:
amplifier positive output > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > amplifier negative circuit.
When you do so, it's obvious that resistance of even 0.10 ohm in your loudspeaker cable isn't significant, and for any reasonable cable length, it's going to be orders of magnitude lower than that.

Similarly, even a few hundred picofarads of capacitance isn't going to be significant when your crossover elements are probably in the microfarad range.

Consider: a very high capacitance audio cable, let's say 1,000 picofarads (pF) is 0.001 microfarad (uF), a typical capacitive element in a crossover is in the order of a couple of uF, as is the typical output capacitor in a power amp. There are such things as DC power amps (zero output capacitance) but even those will have a switch to add some capacitance to prevent DC from biasing the loudspeaker voice coil should the DC offset be excessive.

** Speaking of unusually poor conductors, low cost zip cord and even some relatively high cost zip cord, generally out of China, has been found to be Copper Clad Aluminum (CCA). The rule of thumb is CCA is 4 gauges less conductive than ordinary copper (not premium coppers like OHNO). So your "12 Gauge" speaker cable is really 16 gauge equivalent 100 IACS grade copper. I'm looking at you, Monoprice. But even then, it's not so bad that the resistance would be significant, the entire circuit taken into account, over typical loudspeaker cable lengths.

As always, horses for courses.

For an excellent overview of the factors needed for a loudspeaker cable, go to PS Audio's website and read Issues 55 and 56 of Copper magazine (free download) where Galen Gareis of Belden covers all the relevant aspects of loudspeaker cable design ("Cables: Speaker Cable Design, Part 1" and "~Part 2"). Belden is, not surprisingly, talking about their upcoming cable design, but the principles covered are appropriate for any loudspeaker cable from any vendor, or DIY for that matter.


Maintaining amplifier Damping Factor to produce powerful bass from accurate woofer control requires a low resistance connection between amp and speaker.
Low resistance is directly related to the diameter of the wire(s). Go big :!:
Not just for high power amplifiers :idea:


Attachments:
CROWN Power Ampilifier Reference Manual Wire Size Nomograph..jpg
CROWN Power Ampilifier Reference Manual Wire Size Nomograph..jpg [ 64.44 KiB | Viewed 2108 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:55 am
Posts: 63
Location: Saskatoon, SK, CA
" ... Maintaining amplifier Damping Factor to produce powerful bass from accurate woofer control requires a low resistance connection between amp and speaker.
Low resistance is directly related to the diameter of the wire(s). Go big :!:
Not just for high power amplifiers ..."

I suggest you do the math (add up the resistance of the positive speaker cable, the crossover elements, the voice coil, the negative speaker cable) and divide that by the output impedance of the power amplifier, because that *is* the Damping Factor, not the output impedance of the amp by itself, and tell me what a speaker cable's sub 0.02 ohm resistance adds or removes from the DF. We won't bother to mention that many manufacturers measure DF at 1 KHz, where it's useless, not at 20 Hz, where it performs it's purported magic, and DF generally falls as frequency falls.

Well, Okay, I guess we will mention it. ;-)

20 feet of solid copper 8 GA (10 feet each way) 105 IACS copper is 0.013 ohms.

"Damping Factor" as a relevant specification was an invention of the manufacturers of Solid State amplifiers in the 1960's to attempt to show an advantage over transformer-coupled amplifiers, typically vacuum state (although McIntosh made Solid State transformer-coupled amps and had a patent on it). The reality is any DF above 20 at 50 Hz is adequate.

It re-rose with the advent of high power car audio in the 1980's and 1990's and for the same nebulous reasons. The truth is they used large amounts of Global Negative Feedback (some modern car amps have gone away from that) and if you want a lower output impedance, just crank up the GNF and there you go.

Too bad it sounds bad when you do (massively increases High Order Odd Harmonic Distortion, which the human ear is extremely sensitive to) but it does make for good THD specs since high order HD is lower than 2HD and 3HD by nature, and it's a common trick of cheap topologies. There are other ways to get a low output impedance, so it's not a deal-breaker to see DF specs above 500, but it is a Red Flag that tells you to take a closer look at the circuit.

It's not the fault of the consumer to be bewitched by Damping Factor as a measure of quality, because that is what some manufacturers are telling them. But once you figure a few things out, you soon learn that it's a misleading approach designed to part you and your money.

The reality is the amplifier's ability to swing current (and yes, that sometimes means more power*) is the predominant factor in low frequency performance.

* Or a Class A topology, for example. Take a look at some PASS Class A amps, 25 watts RMS with steady state sine waves, and 100+ watts with brief transient state signals. Similarly, although done completely differently, most vacuum state amps can output clean transient power 3 or more times the steady state rating, while typical transistor class AB amps have difficulty doubling power with those same signals. And that's with a high output impedance due to transformer coupling. Current, baby.

It's not my intent to sound harsh, everybody is learning in this hobby, I hope you don't take my comments personally (and it's why I didn't quote your username). I just prefer to save some people time because if you stay in this long enough, you eventually figure some stuff you once believed isn't the case.

Even if you follow the philosophy that these things are inaudible, or even if they actually are inaudible to you, anyone who spends money and effort in HiFi is pleased when someone with "golden ears" comes over and hears your system and goes, "yeah, now THAT that sounds good".


Last edited by Johnny2Bad on Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:21 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 5:08 am
Posts: 701
Location: Montréal, QC, CA
Johnny2Bad wrote:
The signal levels involved with loudspeaker cables make capacitance the least significant factor.
When I was trying to build a liquide cable, I studied the most parameters and features regarding 'electricity in a wire'.

What I can tell from my experiments is that the level of capacitance is not significant as you said.
However, the quality of that capacitance is what's important. Capacitance in a wire means
that a voltage is somehow 'stocked' somewhere at atomic level. Impurities and shield/insulation
are the only possible locations to 'store' that energy.

Now according to the frequency, the temp and the power passing through a wire, the capacitance
will not be stable. It 'evolves' randomly all along the wire length. That blurs details.
It's why hi-end cables are really better than normal ones. LCR have been studied carefully.

Building a hi-end cable is not for kids.
But there's no mystery at all. It's just to find all the
possible flaws of all materials involved, to after deal with
to build something that will please to our ears.

_________________
Keep things simple and even simpler
Nakamichi BX-300/Balance BW-1010 DAC, Balance MR-50R, Infinity RS 8 Kappa
Nakamichi Dragon/Onix Dac25b, Audio Research SP-9, Spectral DMA-100s/Nakamichi PA-7II, Martin-Logan CLSII/Balance Helicia


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:14 am
Posts: 217
Location: Windsor, ON, CA
Johnny2Bad wrote:
The signal levels involved with loudspeaker cables make capacitance the least significant factor. You want to minimize inductance. Amplifiers have generally far less difficulty driving a capacitive load (within reason) than an inductive one.

Although resistance at first seems to also be a critical factor with loudspeaker cables, when you look at the circuit* you will see that it's less important as well, plus unless you're using some unusually poor conductors **, it will be low in any case.

You have L, C and R to work with. Changing one changes the others. Take your pick and go with the best option; for interconnects (low currents) you want to minimize C as it potentially can roll off high frequencies that might (depending) be audible with those currents. For loudspeaker connections the devil is in the inductance (L).

* The circuit is:
amplifier positive output > loudspeaker positive cable > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > loudspeaker negative cable > amplifier negative output.
Add up those resistances and compare with the same circuit below:
amplifier positive output > crossover elements > loudspeaker voice coil > amplifier negative circuit.
When you do so, it's obvious that resistance of even 0.10 ohm in your loudspeaker cable isn't significant, and for any reasonable cable length, it's going to be orders of magnitude lower than that.

Similarly, even a few hundred picofarads of capacitance isn't going to be significant when your crossover elements are probably in the microfarad range.

Consider: a very high capacitance audio cable, let's say 1,000 picofarads (pF) is 0.001 microfarad (uF), a typical capacitive element in a crossover is in the order of a couple of uF, as is the typical output capacitor in a power amp. There are such things as DC power amps (zero output capacitance) but even those will have a switch to add some capacitance to prevent DC from biasing the loudspeaker voice coil should the DC offset be excessive...

WOW!

DING DING DING... We Have a Winner!
--
For a moment there, I almost thought that I had just logged onto the diyAudio Forum... And not Canuck Audio Mart. :shock:
It was a real pleasure... To read such a clear, concise and accurate treatise on Loudspeaker Cable Theory and Design.
--
There were some real 'Gems' in the above cited statement. If I were a Moderator...
I would definitely make the above cited post by Johnny2Bad a 'Stickie'.

Nothing much further really need be said.
In Tennis 'parlance'... That would most definitely be: "Game, Set and Match!"

BIG :D


Last edited by Takira71A on Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:55 am
Posts: 63
Location: Saskatoon, SK, CA
Nakamichel wrote:
Johnny2Bad wrote:
The signal levels involved with loudspeaker cables make capacitance the least significant factor.
When I was trying to build a liquide cable, I studied the most parameters and features regarding 'electricity in a wire'.

What I can tell from my experiments is that the level of capacitance is not significant as you said.
However, the quality of that capacitance is what's important. Capacitance in a wire means
that a voltage is somehow 'stocked' somewhere at atomic level. Impurities and shield/insulation
are the only possible locations to 'store' that energy.

Now according to the frequency, the temp and the power passing through a wire, the capacitance
will not be stable. It 'evolves' randomly all along the wire length. That blurs details.
It's why hi-end cables are really better than normal ones. LCR have been studied carefully.

Building a hi-end cable is not for kids.
But there's no mystery at all. It's just to find all the
possible flaws of all materials involved, to after deal with
to build something that will please to our ears.


The articles I cited at PS Audio in an earlier post address issues with stored capacitive energy, (take a little time to read it, it's worthwhile, and does a better job of explaining things to the layman than most I've studied, which is why I recommend it) most specifically when multiple wires are not identical capacitance due to variances in rope lay and exact length in a loudspeaker cable. But that value won't be revealed with an (overall) capacitance measurement or specification, so the specification has little value to the consumer.

Perhaps you could open another thread and provide more information about your experiments (unless it's proprietary information you don't want to divulge). I am not an advocate of exotic uber-expensive cable, but I understand those who are, as we are at a point where many issues have been resolved, leaving cables as the "tenth tenth" where extracting the most subtle factors are all you really have left to figure out.

Most people in this hobby don't have systems where that level of resolution has been achieved yet, so there is room for many to improve by simply replacing what components they have with something yet better. If they even want to go there; sometimes "good enough" is actually good enough. That doesn't mean good cable isn't desirable, but given a choice between a 10K speaker and a 10K cable, there is a sensible option there somewhere.

Nor do I bemoan the mere existence of truly expensive cable ... I know what it takes to bring an engineered cable to market, and it's not trivial. No cable fab will even talk to you if you want a specific topology and materials wound for less than a 10,000 yard run*, so a complex product can easily run into six figures for just one product. And what if it sounds bad, or more likely, not "better enough"? Then you start over.

And it takes a ton of marketing money to move ten thousand yards of product when your buyers are taking them in two 3-meter pieces, and let's not forget you are only taking in the wholesale cost. And then people don't work for nothing, so there's wages to consider. I can see easily why a cable might need to sell for a wheelbarrow of cash. The question is not whether they are "worth it" ... things cost what they cost. The question is what is appropriate for someone trying to wade their way through this hobby without getting divorced, or perhaps worse, never getting married in the first place.

Even taking all that into consideration, it's still relatively easy to throw money at a problem, assuming you have the money. The real magic happens when you can do it for a low cost, and that's what I am most interested in.

* Well, they actually will talk to you, and they will make it in smaller runs. But once you get the bill for the setup charge, you will wish you had bought 10,000 yards instead.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 3:02 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 5:08 am
Posts: 701
Location: Montréal, QC, CA
Johnny2Bad wrote:
The articles I cited at PS Audio in an earlier post address issues with stored capacitive energy, (take a little time to read it, it's worthwhile) most specifically when multiple wires are not identical capacitance due to variances in rope lay and exact length in a loudspeaker cable. But that value won't be revealed with an (overall) capacitance measurement or specification, so the specification has little value to the consumer.
I agree with you but the topic is 'cable theory question'. Then it's for designers or EE not consumers.

And, it's why I shared some of my results, because normal capacitance tests won't reveal all the flaws.
Nevertheless, capacitance attenuates hi-freq. But it's not a soft and pure logarythmic attenuation.

The degree of attenuation can be dealt with, after the cable. But the quality of this attenuation must
be done in the cable at the building stage. Not possible to deal with after the cable since it is random.
I won't share all my wire R&D but there are so many other factors that enter the game.

_________________
Keep things simple and even simpler
Nakamichi BX-300/Balance BW-1010 DAC, Balance MR-50R, Infinity RS 8 Kappa
Nakamichi Dragon/Onix Dac25b, Audio Research SP-9, Spectral DMA-100s/Nakamichi PA-7II, Martin-Logan CLSII/Balance Helicia


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 6:55 am
Posts: 63
Location: Saskatoon, SK, CA
rednecknber wrote:
hard to justify speading big money on speaker cables if you have a 22 guage inside your speaker cabinet is that not a weak link


Although on the surface it seems strange, it's important to remember that the current carrying capacity of a given gauge of wire is dependent on both the cross section (aka AWG or mm) AND the length (and the dielectric, and if it's in free air (which it is, in a speaker) and so on There are more factors to consider, but those are enough to get the idea.

Your example is extreme ... I don't see 22 gauge wire in quality loudspeakers, but certainly 12GA isn't common. But as a given wire gets shorter, it's current carrying capacity increases. That's why a fuse that will take 3Amps of 120V power all day long is a thin thread that looks like it will explode if you look at it funny.

But it doesn't explode, until the current goes above 3A, and not just for a moment, but for many seconds. Maybe as much as two minutes if the current isn't enough higher than 3A to smoke it instantly. Maybe it takes 4A for many seconds and doesn't blow at all.

That's also why some auto manufacturers use "fusible links" instead of fuses. What's a fusible link? It's a short section of small gauge wire ... perhaps 12" long ... that will carry large currents but will melt if those currents are exceeded. A 12 car battery can store 400Amps, many fusible links are used in 60A circuits like the radiator fan, that the main run will be 12GA or perhaps larger gauge.

The math to figure out the actual capacity is complex ... trust me, everyone's eyes will glaze over if we reproduce it here, but there's no need. Grab the concept and you know what you need to know. Internal wiring in a speaker (or amp, for that matter) doesn't have to be as robust as a longer run of speaker cable to carry the same currents.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2018 5:16 am 
Offline
Premium User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:16 pm
Posts: 1413
Location: Kelowna, BC, CA
rustee wrote:
Cables are not a garden hose, like they go from the tap to the nozzle and thare you go, they should have no influence on the signals or they become part of the circuit, in which case all other parameters of your equipment become meaningless. If a cable makes your system sound better, your system is at best mismatched, at the worst crap.


Not an expert on cables by any means but I just replaced a pair of monster Z series 2 bi wire cables with Audio Sensibility Testament single run and the improvement is substantial. System is below. I think the Zs were messing up the signal as that was the only change. Similar to moving the tuner dial just a fraction and everything snaps into place.

_________________
"Im...a rather simple person with a limited talent and perhaps a limited perspective" - Bill Evans

Ariston RD11 Superieur, RB250 & Tecnoweight, DV20X2H, LCR MkIII, Dacmagic100, Exposure 2010S2, AS Statement SEs, AS Testaments, PSB GT1s


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group