LCD-2 and LCD-3 Owners - which aftermarket cable do you use?
Apr 13, 2012 at 5:26 PM Post #2,296 of 2,398


Quote:
Semi sorta on topic.  Its drives me bananas that most cable resellers don't provide basic measurements or data.  At a minimum, gauge would be nice to know.  Ideally capacitance, inductance and resistance per foot.  Guessing they all have access to a multimetre :wink:


Ok.
 
But may I ask you something? What exactly would you (or anyone else for that matter) do with those numbers if you had them? Would they impart any truly meaningful information? Or would they just end up being more fodder for "numbers game" marketing?
 
se
 
 
 
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 6:25 PM Post #2,298 of 2,398
OK, guys, have actually had almost a week that has not been full on busy and this weekend I will listen more in depth to Franks new version of the silver poison but will post initial thoughts now. Firstly Frank Charged me 142 pounds stirling plus 12 pounds stirling shipping (sorry, can't find the pound key on my US keyboard!) for a six foot length terminated with a Balanced connector suitable for my Blackbird.

First things first is the appearance. The cable is costing Frank a great deal more to purchase,He tells me it is 30% more in fact!

The cable has much finer strands and the sheathing used gives zero microphonics in my experience. I much prefer the naked look to this new one over the sheathed look of my old cable, the advantage is very flexible and much lighter and I must say I much prefer the shrink wrap at the split than the large heavy lump that was in the old cable. Build, as with all Franks cables is top notch and from my experience up there with the crystal cables piccolino. It just looks like really high end, and high expense cable!

The cable has a refined and detailed look about it and that sums up so far the listening experience that i have heard so far. It's like it takes off from where the 1st generation one left off. Sound has a deal more refinement I am finding, PRaT is excellent. I think at this stage I would say the sound has a sophistication and refinement greater than the already wonderful Original silver poison.

What I am very relieved about is that Frank has managed to retain the detail of pure silver cable but at the same time the smoother presentation that I have found comes with copper. Detail in fact I am finding is quite a bit greater than the original cable and bass tighter and greater texture, something I find hard to come to terms with as I thought the old one was as good as it could get but the new one just proves the value of not resting on your laurels and continuing refining and developing.

I think that is something as well that I want to say about this company. It feels like your part of something cutting edge and something that is looking forward rather than just finding something and staying with it just because it works.

Is it worth getting if you have the original? Well. If you never hear the new one then stick with the old. If you do hear the new version though prepare to send Frank a payment!

Here are some quick pictures, The first one I think shows the best the more refined look of the new cable over the old, new is on top, old on the bottom of the picture!


New and old together.








Here is an ultra close up!
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM Post #2,299 of 2,398


Quote:
(sorry, can't find the pound key on my US keyboard!)

 
It's right there above the "3."
biggrin.gif

 
se
 
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 6:53 PM Post #2,300 of 2,398
Right above the 3, why y oughta! :D

Forgot to mention, this new cable is in all Franks silver cables now. The old one has been phased out.
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 7:07 PM Post #2,302 of 2,398
 
Quote:
But may I ask you something? What exactly would you (or anyone else for that matter) do with those numbers if you had them?
 


 
In the strictest sense I could use them to populate the RLC formula and model the system.  For most people it could simply be to pass the sniff test.  If the cable is good, it will measure well.  If it doesn't measure well, then why is it, extreme example, $100 a foot?  Headphones in particular are an interesting case because unlike a speaker they have a pretty large range of impedance.  A cable that performs well on the LCD-2 could be a wreck on a T1 and vice versa.
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 7:38 PM Post #2,303 of 2,398


Quote:
In the strictest sense I could use them to populate the RLC formula and model the system.

 
You have the electrical model for your LCD-2's?
 
Quote:
For most people it could simply be to pass the sniff test.  If the cable is good, it will measure well.  If it doesn't measure well, then why is it, extreme example, $100 a foot?

 
Ok, but now you have to define "measures well" in some meaningful sense. Or is it simply whatever cable has the "better" numbers is considered to inherently be the "better" cable and we just continue waltzing down the marketing-driven "numbers game" path?
 
Quote:
Headphones in particular are an interesting case because unlike a speaker they have a pretty large range of impedance.  A cable that performs well on the LCD-2 could be a wreck on a T1 and vice versa.

 
Or not.
 
And until you can come up with some meaningful criteria, I don't see that the publishing of such measurements would be terribly meaningful to anyone.
 
se
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 9:47 PM Post #2,306 of 2,398

 
Quote:
And until you can come up with some meaningful criteria, I don't see that the publishing of such measurements would be terribly meaningful to anyone.
 

 
I guess we'll just agree to disagree.  I really don't see it as any different than when an amp manufacturer doesn't publish thd or channel separation or my favourite... power output /facepalm.
 
Apr 13, 2012 at 10:23 PM Post #2,308 of 2,398


Quote:
 
I guess we'll just agree to disagree.  I really don't see it as any different than when an amp manufacturer doesn't publish thd or channel separation or my favourite... power output /facepalm.


And again, until you can come up with some sort of meaningful criteria, I don't see that the publishing of such measurements would be terribly meaningful to anyone, save perhaps for power output.
 
Otherwise, all you're left with are some numbers.
 
Let's say you have amplifier A, with a THD of 0.05%, and amplifier B with a THD of 0.002%. What exactly would that tell you about the two amplifiers in any sort of meaningful comparative context?
 
se
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top