[emlee]

Looking at the internals of some components, I have a question about interconnects, cables, etc. To oversimplify my question... expensive interconnects like the Virtual Dynamics, etc. are high quality materials and a lot more of them (thicker wires, etc.).

What good are those connections when inside the amp, CD player, etc. there are very thin wires connecting the RCA jacks to the board/components? Doesn't the rule of "weakest link" or "lowest common denominator" apply to the wires inside our amps, preamps, CD players, etc? And for the crazy expensive power cords, what good are they when their connection on the components have small 12 guage or smaller wires connecting it to the innerds?

Please enlighten me.

 

[Budgie]

A closer analogy would be to consider the conducters as pipes in a water system. Some pipes can let polution into the water stream, if the quality is not adequate. And to restrictive a supply pipe can reduce the water pressure in the system.

 

[emlee]

I don't quite follow your analogy, but kinda.

But to elaborate on your analogy, using the water pipe example, if the pipe is small inside the components (24 guage wire inside the CD player to the RCA jack) what good is a fat pipe (Virtual Dynamics type RCA interconnect) when you're being severly limited by the small pipe inside?

 

[massappeal85]

My thoughts based upon very small DIY expierience:

You actually might find these cables in interconnects thinner then you think (at least I did) when you take away the coverings and shielding needed for an interconnect. Basically, internal wiring doesn't usually need to be magnetically shielded, or have some covering like on interconnects (correct me if I'm wrong though). Alot of times something like a belden cable, which is used alot in DIY interconnects, is used in electronics as well. I do know that Wayne of www.boldercables.com uses his "nitro" cable for internal wiring on one of the ART DI/Os hes currently messing around with. I think its a matter of cost for manufacturers, or wether they can fit something like a twisted pair of beldens anywhere in their product.

 

[HD-5000]

emlee-

Sure, the cheap internal wiring inside the CD player may cause signal degradation, but cables are all about causing as little degradation to the signal. The cables in question probably can hurt the sound quality because of the length, while internal wiring is only a few inches in most cases.

 

[emlee]

So does that mean if my preamp is just above my amp and I can accomplish this with a 1' cable, then I don't need a "super high end" cable and a mediocre cable will do? I imagine most serious audio heads have short distances between their components but still use very nice cables for interconnects.

I just don't see why a 3" internal wire can be 24 guage unshielded copper with soldered connections, while an external 1' cable has to be a $200+ interconnect, silver plated, oxygen free, cryrogenic (sp?), etc.

It's not even about understanding why people use these cables, I mean if you can afford it and it makes a difference, then more power to 'em... I'm just wondering why the rule of lowest common denominator or weakest link doesn't apply... more of a mental excercise for better understanding on my part.

 

[JahJahBinks]

An op-amp composes of hundreds of transistors that are too small to be seen by naked eyes, how thin is that!

The bottom line is you cannot judge the sound quality by thickness of internal wires.

 

[DarkWolf]

Even if the internal wiring does hurt the signal a little, the ICs make sure that the signal doesn't get hurt before it reaches the component. Look at it this way, you have a signal at 100% quality comming out of the source's electronics. Then let's say each compnent loses 2% between the jacks and the elctronics. So we have a 98% signal comming out of the source, and a 96% signal with perfect ICs. Outside the components, it has to go much further to get to the next component. I don't know how much is typicaly lost here, but let's say a bad interconnect could lose up to 15%, and a really good one might keep it down to another 2% loss. That means that we are working with a loss between 19% and 6% based on the interconnects. This is quite unscientific, and the numbers are just rough guesses, and you can't really judge the quality of a cable with % numbers anyway. I'm just trying to give you a way to think about it so that you understand what we are saying. I don't think water is a good way to think of it either. People can get them selves pretty darn confused if they try to think about electrical current and signals as flowing water.

 

[darkclouds]

Shorter connections/cable is preferable.

As to your "common denominator", what people are trying to do is minimize signal lost go out of and into their components by using better cables. Although no component is perfect, you're still trying to preserve as much of the original signal as possible, even if the signal is not perfect coming out of a component.

 

[etal]

Actually from an engineering standpoint there is an advantage in thinner IC cables as long as their low resistance is maintained.
Thinner cables have lower capacitance and are therefore easier to drive. Since the amp section on the source is has limited current drive capability, less capacity would lead to better dynamics in the signal.

Another thing to consider in really high end ICs would be impedance matching and wave reflections.

 

[emlee]

Thanks guys for the info, now it's getting way beyond my understanding and unfortunately, my budget!

A pleasure always learning more stuff... I don't think I'll ever progress past my $30-40 interconnects... and I don't see myself buying upgraded power cables... maybe upgraded cables for my Sennheiser HD600s though.

 

[kentamcolin]

I used to feel the same about IC's, and purchased relatively low cost upgrades there. I purchased a new CDP and decided to splurge on a more expensive IC, and did an A-B comparison. The store I bought from has a liberal return policy so I actually purchased three sets to try. I don't understand the physics of it all, but the difference between the stock IC and a $60 upgrade was staggering. The difference from the $60 & $90 was not as great but still noticable. I kept the more expensive one. What it mostly did was open up the sound stage. The music was more fluid and detailed. I would guess the IC to be responsible for 20% of the sound quality in my system, and well worth the cost of a good upgrade. I'm not sure where the law of diminished returns comes into play, and there seems to be some great cables out there for reasonable prices according to what I have read here.