New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

about cables - Page 3  

post #31 of 81
From my own experience, cables do make a slight difference, but nothing signifigant at all. If I had a 2000$ system, I would spend less than 300$ on cables. The extra money spent on cables is MUCH better spent on a nicer source to begin with. I just use the lower-end kimbers in my system. Another good idea is to spend equal amounts on your interconnects, speaker, and power cables. (when spening more, spend in that order) The only signifigant change that I have ever heard was when I was auditioning Continous cast cables, which sounded more smooth than OHFC. There are more scams out there than bargains, just buy what seems reasonable.
post #32 of 81
FYI, here is an article from Absolute Sound regarding OCC (continuous cast copper) cable.

This might be of interest to you Ricky. FYI also, the Outlaw PCA cables are OCC copper.

http://www.everestaudio.com/harmonictech.pdf

Excerpts:
...I perceived gross profit margins and I came to believe that most reviewers were assigning undue importance to a component that does not exhibit the same range of variances as loudspeakers or amplifiers. I also believed that the cable industry had taken a fundamentally wrong turn in rejecting the one technology that might conceivably have yielded a quantifiably different behavior in a cable – single-crystal conductors, also called “continuously cast conductors.”

...Noel Lee of Monster Cable once told me that there are really only two aspects of making an audio cable – geometry and materials – that is, how you arrange and space the conductors, and what materials you use in the construction of the conductors and dielectric. (If this were the case, then a cable following some common geometry and employing conventional materials throughout should be entirely ordinary in performance, but that’s another discussion.) Lee further commented that most American cable manufacturers stress geometry rather than materials, and that he was of that school himself. He made these remarks in conjunction with Hitachi’s much-heralded introduction of single-crystal cables in 1984.

...working under technical director Richard Bell. Bell had designed particle accelerators for the Atomic Energy Commission and written several seminal papers on the distortion mechanisms of transistors while he was a research scientist at ITT. He was one of the most impressive people I’d ever met in the audio field, and, as it happened, he was an authority on single-crystal copper, having been hired at one time by Signet to research it. Bell wouldn’t talk much about the project, he’d signed a nondisclosure agreement, but he stated emphatically that it supported the audible and measurable superiority of single crystal.

... an old MIT publication on vacuum-tube design that single crystal was nothing new, and had been used in certain design applications for over 30 years.

...Ordinary conductive metals exhibit a crystalline internal structure with individual crystals of irregular size. The crystalline boundaries exhibit elastic effects in regard to electron motion, and electron collisions at these boundaries set up low audio-frequency resonances known as phonons, also referred to as “quantum noise,” though they are not noise in the sense of being random in nature. The intensity of phononic resonances is extremely low, but the argument is that it is sufficient to obscure low-level information in a recording or a transmission. Simply put, the fewer the number of crystalline boundaries to be traversed, the less noise; and single-crystal copper, with boundaries only at the surface of the wire, should produce less quantum noise than garden-variety high-purity copper or silver.

...appeared to provide significant audible benefits.

...the differences were particularly striking. With the Harmonics cables, the recording fairly sang. Instrumental forces were meticulously delineated, and at the same time, an unfailing sweetness and musicality was evident, plus a sense of reverberant tail-offs sauntering away into a diffuse performance space. Plug in the other wire, and the reproduction became remarkably sour and astringent, and I had a definite impression that the performance space itself puckered up, almost as if in response to the sourness.

...This is a wildly impressionistic account, but the usual High End vocabulary having to do with frequency balance, focus, dynamics, and what have you, simply doesn’t seem adequate.

...High-pitched instruments like bells and soprano recorders sounded much more extended, transients such as drum beats, seemed to have more impact even at lower volumes, let alone with levelmatched, and the timbres of the instruments are far less inclined to bleed into one another. And, yes, the soundstage was wider. It was almost like comparing a mediocre box speaker with lots of cabinet talk and average quality cones with a electrostat like the big Sound Lab.

...an extreme system capable of impressive performance with the cheapest cabling, but with the Harmonics in place, there was an almost surreal sense of palpability to good recordings – audience comments overheard on live sessions, leading edges of transients leaping out like leashed Dobermans, and highly realistic proportions to instruments.

...Each individual conductor is insulated with foamed polyethylene (PE) to reduce strand interaction, which greatly increases signal-to noise ratio and dynamic range. The dielectric constant of foamed PE is better than normal PE (2.3) because it has many man-made air pockets. This kind of dielectric is better than commonly used Teflon. Also, Teflon dielectric requires extraordinarily high temperatures during the cable-manufacturing process, which can destroy single-crystal cable.
post #33 of 81
Hi Kevin,

You probably want to delete that review before MacDEF does. I was told that it can cause legal problems for the Head-Fi site. All you can do is post a link.

MacDEF says:

"RickG:

Sorry, but I had to delete that review -- it's a copyright violation to paste the entire review here, and we don't want to cause any trouble for Head-Fi. If you'd like to edit your post by including the link to the review, that would be great!"

Check out this thread:
http://head-fi.com/forums/showthread...n&pagenumber=1

post #34 of 81
LOL, nice catch, Rick

Yeah, Kev, prolly not a good idea. Since you're a fellow mod, I'll let you do the honors -- can you post a link instead? If it's only available offline, a few key excerpts, maybe?
post #35 of 81
post #36 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by MacDEF
LOL, nice catch, Rick

Yeah, Kev, prolly not a good idea. Since you're a fellow mod, I'll let you do the honors -- can you post a link instead? If it's only available offline, a few key excerpts, maybe?
Thanks guys. All better now?
Cheers!
post #37 of 81
waffle deleted

Setmenu
post #38 of 81

We don't need no steenkin' DBT

I got a pair of cheap Monsters and mid-priced (by cable standards) silver cables, and I guarantee you, you don't need no DBT to hear the difference.

OTOH, if you can't hear the difference, more power to you, this hobby just got a whole lot less expensive for you.

(Sorry, I realize this is an old thread by head-fi standards, but I haven't been here for a couple weeks, and missed all the excitement -- 35 pages to go through! You guys sure are loquacious...)
post #39 of 81

Re: We don't need no steenkin' DBT

Quote:
Originally posted by Dusty Chalk
You...sure are loquacious...
Yeah, well....I've been working out and stuff.
post #40 of 81
Thread Starter 
As some poster said at one of the rec.audio newsgroups:

"No science please...we're audiophiles."
post #41 of 81
Perhaps, 'no pseudo-science please', is what I am really after. Like I said in another post, a guy with a function generator and a scope in his basement is not taking any worthwhile measurements for the discussion of scientific differences between cables. People are quick to boast about their testing abilities, but usually one finds that their testing was so full of holes that its practically unusable.

Its like all those government sponsored 'tests' in the 70's that 'proved' that marijuana caused brain damage, despite the fact that 70% of the marijuana test group had experienced severe head trauma sometime in their life. Not particularly scientific. All the stats and numbers in the world don't mean anything unless the science was good to begin with.

Peace,
phidauex
post #42 of 81
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by phidauex
Perhaps, 'no pseudo-science please', is what I am really after.
Agreed. The problem is that all those supposedly scientific explanations I've read in this thread and in George Cardas's interview about cables, are just that, pseudo-science.

Quote:
Like I said in another post, a guy with a function generator and a scope in his basement is not taking any worthwhile measurements for the discussion of scientific differences between cables. People are quick to boast about their testing abilities, but usually one finds that their testing was so full of holes that its practically unusable.
It is not so difficult to make good measurements if you know how. You just need a good 24/96 sound card, an audio editor, a software FFT analyzer, and to know what you want to measure.

See lots of these type of measurements at www.pcavtech.com.
post #43 of 81
Ricky, the problem here is that you're assuming that if cables don't measure differently, they cannot sound different. That's a flawed assumption. There are lots of things science simply cannot yet explain. If human beings still do not totally understand how human hearing works, or fully understand electrical currents, how can anyone claim that they fully understand how cables work and that audible differences will always be "measurable?"
post #44 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
It is not so difficult to make good measurements if you know how. You just need a good 24/96 sound card, an audio editor, a software FFT analyzer, and to know what you want to measure.
(Boldification mine.) Ah, there's the rub.
post #45 of 81
Ricky, let me ask you this. Why did you post that? Not trying to be hostile here, but why the hell did you even sign up for Head-Fi? Just to slam jude's review?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
This thread is locked