cables are placebo
Jun 13, 2015 at 2:01 AM Post #181 of 519
  Just came across this crock of **** from C***as;
 
"There are many factors that make cable break-in necessary and many reasons why the results vary. If you measure a new cable with a voltmeter you will see a standing voltage because good dielectrics make poor conductors. They hold a charge much like a rubbed cat’s fur on a dry day. It takes a while for this charge to equalize in the cable. Better cables often take longer to break-in. The best "air dielectric" techniques, such as PFA tube construction, have large non-conductive surfaces to hold charge, much like the cat on a dry day.
 
Cables that do not have time to settle, such as musical instrument and microphone cables, often use conductive dielectrics like rubber or carbonized cotton to get around the problem. This dramatically reduces microphonics and settling time, but the other dielectric characteristics of these insulators are poor and they do not qualify sonically for high-end cables. Developing non-destructive techniques for reducing and equalizing the charge in excellent dielectric is a challenge in high end cables.
 
The high input impedance necessary in audio equipment makes uneven dielectric charge a factor. One reason settling time takes so long is we are linking the charge with mechanical stress/strain relationships. The physical make up of a cable is changed slightly by the charge and visa versa. It is like electrically charging the cat. The physical make up of the cat is changed by the charge. It is "frizzed" and the charge makes it's hair stand on end. "PFA Cats", cables and their dielectric, take longer to loose this charge and reach physical homeostasis.
 
The better the dielectric's insulation, the longer it takes to settle. A charge can come from simply moving the cable (Piezoelectric effect and simple friction), high voltage testing during manufacture, etc.  Cable that has a standing charge is measurably more microphonic and an uneven distribution of the charge causes something akin to structural return loss in a rising impedance system. When I took steps to eliminate these problems, break-in time was reduced and the cable sounded generally better. I know Bill Low at Audioquest has also taken steps to minimize this problem.
Mechanical stress is the root of a lot of the break-in phenomenon and it is not just a factor with cables. As a rule, companies set up audition rooms at high end audio shows a couple of days ahead of time to let them break in. The first day the sound is usually bad and it is very stressful. The last day sounds great. Mechanical stress in speaker cables, speaker cabinets, even the walls of the room, must be relaxed in order for the system to sound its best. This is the same phenomenon we experience in musical instruments. They sound much better after they have been played. Many musicians leave their instruments in front of a stereo that is playing to get them to warm up. This is very effective with a new guitar. Pianos are a stress and strain nightmare. Any change, even in temperature or humidity, will degrade their sound. A precisely tuned stereo system is similar.
You never really get all the way there, you sort of keep halving the distance to zero. Some charge is always retained. It is generally in the MV range in a well settled cable. Triboelectric noise in a cable is a function of stress and retained charge, which a good cable will release with both time and use. How much time and use is dependent on the design of the cable, materials used, treatment of the conductors during manufacture, etc.
 
There are many small tricks and ways of dealing with the problem. Years ago, I began using PFA tube "air dielectric" construction and the charge on the surface of the tubes became a real issue. I developed a fluid that adds a very slight conductivity to the surface of the dielectric. Treated cables actually have a  better measured dissipation factor and the sound of the cables improved substantially. It had been observed in mid eighties that many cables could be improved by wiping them with a anti-static cloth. Getting something to stick to PFA was the real challenge. We now use an anti-static fluid in all our cables and anti-static additives in the final jacketing material. This attention to charge has reduced break-in time and in general made the cable sound substantially better. This is due to the reduction of overall charge in the cable and the equalization of the distributed charge on the surface of conductor jacket.
 
It seems there are many infinitesimal factors that add up. Overtime you find one leads down a path to another. In short, if a dielectric surface in a cable has a high or uneven charge which dissipates with time or use, triboelectric and other noise in the cable will also reduce with time and use. This is the essence of break-in
 
A note of caution. Moving a cable will, to some degree, traumatize it. The amount of disturbance is relative to the materials used, the cable's design and the amount of disturbance. Keeping a very low level signal in the cable at all times helps. At a show, where time is short, you never turn the system off. I also believe the use of degaussing sweeps, such as on the Cardas Frequency Sweep and Burn-In Record (side 1, cut 2a) helps.
A small amount of energy is retained in the stored mechanical stress of the cable. As the cable relaxes, a certain amount of the charge is released, like in an electroscope. This is the electromechanical connection.
Many factors relating to a cable's break-in are found in the sonic character or signature of a cable. If we look closely at dielectrics we find a similar situation. The dielectric actually changes slightly as it charges and its dissipation factor is linked to its hardness. In part these changes are evidenced in the standing charge of the cable. A new cable, out of the bag, will have a standing charge when uncoiled. It can have as much as several hundred millivolts. If the cable is left at rest it will soon drop to under one hundred, but it will takes days of use in the system to fall to the teens and it never quite reaches zero. These standing charges appear particularly significant in low level interconnects to preamps with high impedance inputs.
 
The interaction of mechanical and electrical stress/strain variables in a cable are integral with the break-in, as well as the resonance of the cable. Many of the variables are lumped into a general category called triboelectric noise. Noise is generated in a cable as a function of the variations between the components of the cable. If a cable is flexed, moved, charged, or changed in any way, it will be a while before it is relaxed again. The symmetry of the cable's construction is a big factor here. Very careful design and execution by the manufacturer helps a lot. Very straight forward designs can be greatly improved with the careful choice of materials and symmetrical construction. Audioquest has built a large and successful high-end cable company around these principals.
 
The basic rules for the interaction of mechanical and electrical stress/strain variables holds true, regardless of scale or medium. Cables, cats, pianos and rooms all need to relax in order to be at their best. Constant attention to physical and environmental conditions, frequent use and the degaussing of a system help it achieve and maintain a relaxed state.
 
A note on breaking in box speakers, a process which seems to take forever. When I want to speed up the break-in process, I place the speakers face to face, with one speaker wired out of phase and play a surf CD through them. After about a week, I place them in their normal listening position and continue the process for three more days. After that, I play a degaussing sweep a few times. Then it is just a matter of playing music and giving them time."
 
Moving your cable will traumatize it!!
 
 
Seriously .......

 
Maybe giving the cable a saucer of milk (or a rub down with some snake oil) will help alleviate this 'stress'?!? 
biggrin.gif
 
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 5:04 AM Post #183 of 519
  A nit to pick.
 
'castleofargh' wrote:
 
all in all, cables have optimal parameters determined depending on what they are conducting, a coax cable is best in the 60/75ohm zone I think to go with matched impedance of the input and output devices using coax. a headphone cable of 75ohm would be plain stupid in general.
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That 75 Ohm coax cable business is the Radio Frequency Characteristic Impedance of the cable.  It has nothing to do with analog interconnect, speaker or headphone cables of reasonable length.  If your cables approach the 1 mile length, then we can talk more.

 
Actually, a cable's characteristic impedance is its characteristic impedance at all frequencies, AF, RF, microwaves, whatever. Good cables have fairly consistent performance in this regard.
 
Characteristic impedance doesn't matter unless the cable is at least a fraction of a wavelength long at the frequency of interest. 
 
Characteristic Impedance was first discovered in telephone and telegraph circuits which are basically running at audio frequencies (telephone)  or DC pulses (telegraphs). These were the first cables to naturally become long enough for Characteristic Impedance to matter. 
 
Audio cables in home audio systems are pathetically short for characteristic impedance to matter. Just take the speed of light (186,000 miles per second) and divide it by 20,000 Hz per second to obtain the wavelength of the highest normal audio frequency as an electrical signal, in miles!
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 6:31 AM Post #184 of 519
I don't think I can afford to sleeve my cables at the moment. Hence I'm using this . This is an adaptor for the ex1000 to accept westone pin cables. This way, I won't be able to feel the cable over my ear. And it's a dynamic, so it'll negate any problems caused by multi driver iems somebody here was talking about.


That adaptor seems to be just perfect for the job.

And btw I'm pretty sure anyone could afford the kind of temp 'sleeve' needed for such a test ... e.g. 10cm of duct tape :)
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 10:45 AM Post #188 of 519
That adaptor seems to be just perfect for the job.

And btw I'm pretty sure anyone could afford the kind of temp 'sleeve' needed for such a test ... e.g. 10cm of duct tape :)



Erm... I cherish my cables. I'm not gonna cover them in duct tape.



Which leads to the details of the test.


Instead of using my cables, one of my friends provided 4 different similar braided and weighted cables but all of different materials.
This was the order of cables he let me try.
Edit: HE changed all the cables for me. All I had to do was put in my iems ( touching only the adaptor ) and play the music. I did not change my reference track nor change volume.
1) Plussound SGv1
2) Plussound Copper Silver-gold hybrid
3) Plussound Copper type 6 Litz v2
4) DHC Fusion v1
5) Edit : Plussound Copper type 6 Litz v2
6) Edit : Plussound SGv1

There was 6 steps as the first was a baseline. I wasn't familiar with these cables so what I did was determine whether a cable was different from the previous one.




I listened and did the test. Out of 5 tries to determine differences, I got 5 correct. I thought the 6th listen was similar to the 5th but knew it was slightly different. So I told him I thought it was similar. I count that as 5/5.

Meet people were rather skeptical any of you would believe these results.


My listening gear was X5 > Plussound Type 6 copper Litz IC > Alo audio continental v2 > cable > ex1000.




Are you waiting for a special invitation or what !? :)
Just spill out the results & some test details like gear, cables, how did it go, oppinions from meet people, etc...



Well... not all people would be receptive to such results. I asked the people on this thread to gauge who actually cares about the result and wants to learn and who just wants to be stuck in their ways and be stubborn.
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:05 AM Post #189 of 519
Erm... I cherish my cables. I'm not gonna cover them in duct tape.



Which leads to the details of the test.


Instead of using my cables, one of my friends provided 4 different similar braided and weighted cables but all of different materials.
This was the order of cables he let me try.

1) Plussound SGv1
2) Plussound Copper Silver-gold hybrid
3) Plussound Copper type 6 Litz v2
4) DHC Fusion v1
5) Copper+SG
6) SGv1

There was 6 steps as the first was a baseline. I wasn't familiar with these cables so what I did was determine whether a cable was different from the previous one.




I listened and did the test. Out of 5 tries to determine differences, I got 5 correct. I thought the 6th listen was similar to the 5th but knew it was slightly different. So I told him I thought it was similar. I count that as 5/5.

Meet people were rather skeptical any of you would believe these results.


My listening gear was X5 > Plussound Type 6 copper Litz IC > Alo audio continental v2 > cable > ex1000.
Well... not all people would be receptive to such results. I asked the people on this thread to gauge who actually cares about the result and wants to learn and who just wants to be stuck in their ways and be stubborn.


Thx for the effort, guess it was worth a try.

AFAIU, you just changed 5 cables and thought they were different. That has nothing to do with the test protocol I posted and unfortunately you did not actually test anything. So there is absolutely *nothing* to 'believe' or think about here.

Anyway, it's normal to make such mistakes the first time, those kinds of tests are very hard to get right ... much harder that they seem to be. If you wanna try again and do a real and useful test, I'll be happy to assist you further.
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:10 AM Post #190 of 519
Thx for the effort, guess it was worth a try.

AFAIU, you just changed 5 cables and thought they were different. That has nothing to do with the test protocol I posted and unfortunately you did not actually test anything.

So there is absolutely *nothing* to 'believe' or think about here.
If you wanna try again and do a real and useful test, I'll be happy to assist you further.



I covered my eyes. Blind Test. Yes I changed 5 cables and determine each cable sounded different from the previous one. I'm sorry it wasn't exactly to your protocols but if you'd buy me 2 identically sleeved cables I would do it again. AND tell you which is which.



I really hope you're not one of those people that's presented with results but too egoistic to admit it's true. I proved that those 5 cables sounded different. I did not touch them in any way. My friend changed the cables for me and I played the same song each time at the same volume.


AND, if I were to say, my friends told me it was "useless to convince you morons" and that you'd just find any way to refute the results of the experiment... sounds like that's something that will/ has happen(ed)
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM Post #191 of 519
I covered my eyes. Blind Test. Yes I changed 5 cables and determine each cable sounded different from the previous one. I'm sorry it wasn't exactly to your protocols but if you'd buy me 2 identically sleeved cables I would do it again. AND tell you which is which.

 
I double=checked Prot's post which is at http://www.head-fi.org/t/770874/cables-are-placebo/120#post_11680146
 
He said there:
 
"You also need a friend to handle things for you ... preferably take the guy you know the least in that group of meet-people ... or maybe better, you just do not know who does all the friend-work (you'll be blindfolded)."
 
Seeing no such thing in your account of your test, what you did must not have been the test that he recommended.
 
That fits with the results that you provided.
 
Too bad about those people who can't follow simple written instructions...
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:32 AM Post #193 of 519
I covered my eyes. Blind Test. Yes I changed 5 cables and determine each cable sounded different from the previous one. I'm sorry it wasn't exactly to your protocols but if you'd buy me 2 identically sleeved cables I would do it again. AND tell you which is which.



I really hope you're not one of those people that's presented with results but too egoistic to admit it's true. I proved that those 5 cables sounded different. I did not touch them in any way. My friend changed the cables for me and I played the same song each time at the same volume.


AND, if I were to say, my friends told me it was "useless to convince you morons" and that you'd just find any way to refute the results of the experiment... sounds like that's something that will/ has happen(ed)

 
Here's my question, did you change your own cable or your friend changed the cable? Knowing which cable is which isn't all that hard since you can feel the interconnects.
 
Blind test means someone else is doing the switch, without you knowing what cable was used or if the cable was changed at all from the previous attempt. Double blind test means even the person who's swapping the cable doesnt know which one is which.
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:34 AM Post #194 of 519
I covered my eyes. Blind Test. Yes I changed 5 cables and determine each cable sounded different from the previous one. I'm sorry it wasn't exactly to your protocols but if you'd buy me 2 identically sleeved cables I would do it again. AND tell you which is which.



I really hope you're not one of those people that's presented with results but too egoistic to admit it's true. I proved that those 5 cables sounded different. I did not touch them in any way. My friend changed the cables for me and I played the same song each time at the same volume.


AND, if I were to say, my friends told me it was "useless to convince you morons" and that you'd just find any way to refute the results of the experiment... sounds like that's something that will/ has happen(ed)


Understandable that you are upset, noone likes to waste time. Thx for the time & effort again but as said, you did not test anything. Those test protocols are not something one can change as he wishes. If you do not follow them precisely it is a wasted chance.

Sounds like you did many things right but if you want to do science and have your results accepted, you gotta do it 100% right. Sorry but that's how it works. And it's not easy!

Also, a first test proves nothing even if it was 100% succesful .. as mentioned before it is only a sign that there may be something in there that is worth pursuing further. Hard and kinda screwed I know but this is how science works .. you gotta do the time .. a LOT of time.

So. If you wanna try again. Two cables and 5 tries .. 10 rounds much better. Three cables may be ok too, especially if you do 10 rounds. Not more, not less. Also good if a few of you do it, not only you. Also great if you put the results in a simple table like:
Round 1, cable 1 ... ok
Round 2, cable 2 ... ok
Round 3, cable 2 ... miss
... etc ...

Also be prepared to have your results and metodology scrutinized to the bone, ridiculed, undeservedly dismissed, etc. Science is not for the faint of heart or people who give up or get upset easily. You gotta be tough, sturdy, rigurous and precise to almost ridiculous levels .. for better or worst that's the only way to do it. Also the reason most people cannot do it or just give up.

Good luck next time.
 
Jun 13, 2015 at 11:34 AM Post #195 of 519
at least I have eyes to read my post that's before yours telling you someone else did all the changing for me. Tbh I don't even know if he changed it for me throughout the entire test.

 
I took your last of the series of changing stories  to be the best account. That is what I quoted.
 
When the story keeps changing like this, my skeptic's bone starts to ache.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top