I wanted to chime in here because in my very minor audiophile pursuit I have read, then tried the twisted pair solution.
While I fully understand for myself that this is subjective perception, I believe it has helped - generally. The music seems cleaner, and the responses quicker. This cleaner response seems (to me) to also impart a "brighter" effect; not always something I appreciate already owning the L100t, which needs no help with this. Again, I understand that this is subjective, my friends see it differently, and I can see why, their systems sound great, and they use regular lamp cable, and they could afford- whatever. I have never gotten to play with their gear though.
I can perceive (not hear) a small change with it though in my system that I get to play with, and I can't really put it into words. But just because I lack words to express what I perceive, does not mean there is nothing to the perception...
Having explained that, I keep hearing that it's just electricity, and that take confuses me somewhat. I see it as a signal that must be kept clean. Twisted pair was made for clean signal (to be simplistic), and my understanding is that without it noise would enter the wire and garble data (in data applications). Given that we are talking about a positive and negative signal running together, it makes sense to me that this close two way traffic could effect the signal, as well as other outside effects such as static electricity from the carpet. Again, I just don't understand why some sum it all up as just an electrical signal, to me it is an electrical-data signal. I remember that years ago they talked about putting data signal through the wires in your home but they couldn't do it, too much noise they said. I am sure that it's obvious to some that I am not well educated in the electrical sciences, but according to what I do understand this just seems like common sense, that it's not the electricity that I am trying to keep clean, but the musical data riding in that signal, and that is more difficult to quantify because we can't also see or smell the perfection of it. But, we may still be able to perceive it, and that is not easy to explain either!
I just have two examples i want to give about this perception to make my point better understood. Sometimes when I listen to AM radio a song will come on, a song I have heard many time before. But suddenly I am taken back to a memory of when I was a kid and my older siblings would listen to music, the song sounds as I remember it, enough to instigate a memory. It doesn't happen to me when I hear that song on XM radio though, why? There is just something about the way music sounds on AM, can't really explain it, but we all know that music does sound different on AM.
Second, some of you may have gotten that email that explains that if you jumble up letters in a word, but keep the first and last letter in the same place, you can still read it!
Do you know what I am syaing?
Your brain is so capable, it can still make sense of a slightly garbled word. So if you can still read it, does it then really matter if it's misspelled? Is it possible that even if your audio signal is a little garbled, your brain is still able to interpret/fill in the missing information to an extent that you are not completely aware of it? Some might call this pointless if your brain can still read it, others would claim that it matters if it's misspelled. I think this is really at the crux of the argument here today, that your brain, not your ears can compensate for an unclean signal to the extent that what your ears hear become irrelevant.
So is (multi) twisted pair better? I don't know. But when I use it, I know that theory behind it should contribute to it for the better (as I listen to my mp3's also knowing full well that it's less than perfect). My point is simply that just because your brain is so capable that it can make sense of music filled with noise (instantly), is no reason to not try to eliminate the noise/imperfection, and have the best sound possible. This effort will vary by the individual, but I think we could all agree that it's a worthy effort! Perhaps cables is not the best use of the effort, but not an unreasonable one either.
Many out there in the world cannot understand the money we spend on this equipment, or any system over a hundred dollars for that matter. I have offered my lower end speakers to family members, and they want them, but they won't spend a hundred bucks for a receiver, go figure? They have the same opinion as some that say there is no difference in speaker cable, only their measurement device is not an ohm meter, it's a dollar sign, and for them, the change in sound in slight, if they can even hear it while they are dancing around the house listening to a cheap JVC bookshelf. So who is right? I have no idea. I remember being a kid and listening to the new song on a cheap car radio, and being happy. Music is not all this equipment, this equipment just aims to serve it better, and whatever the effort, we always seem to fall short of the perfect execution, but for us, at least it's not a matter of not trying. I admire that.
Except for $1k cables, that's just silly!
That line in the manual is way more likely than not simply a marketing aid to help dealers push what is by far their highest-margin product, boutique wires. And to make potential dealers think that JBL is on their side. After all, JBL wants their dealers to thrive, and no dealer wants to carry a product with a manual that advises customers to stay away from the highest-margin parts in their store.Originally Posted by tom1040
And those higher margins are why boutique wires have such violent defenders on the internet and elsewhere. People generally don't like others talking badly about their cash cows, even when "talking badly" is merely "making accurate statements."
You've got it: the boutique wires and such are simply tribal jewelry. They are visual signifiers to let others know one is in the "audiophile" (one may say "audiophool") tribe. Nothing more, nothing less.
Interesting how widely aesthetic preferences vary. Audio equipment is more often than not an eyesore to me, and actually distracting from the music. So I hide my gear to the extent possible, and want all visible wires to be as thin and flexible as possible. I also sought out "interconnects" made out of mini-coax, and speaker wire with mil-spec PTFE (the thinnest available) insulation in only the gauge needed given the length of the run and impedance minima of the loudspeakers. And then I cover the speaker wires in the Techflex variety that best matches the surface they're on, so as to maximally blend them into their surroundings.
But, bleating to the contrary, from an end user perspective, with a very few exceptions (bad practices, basically, such as using 20' of 30AWG thin magnet wire on speakers with 2Ω impedance minima) the only variables on which audio wires differ are things like aesthetics, flexibility, durability (good strain relief, etc), and very rarely connector quality. Sonics is simply not part of it.
If you're talking about loudspeakers, from a technical standpoint all of the boutique junk you mention is massively inferior to a $5 SpeakOn. The boutique junk is not inherently insulated, has no inherent strain relief, does not positively lock in place or offer a quick-disconnect, and can only carry 1/2 a channel per connection (which can easily lead to mis-wired connections, for example if someone disconnects a speaker to vacuum around it. The boutique spades or bananas probably have higher resistance, too. The boutique stuff is just plain primitive, really.
So if one really cares about termination quality on loudspeakers, get rid of the binding posts entirely and use SpeakOns.
As for RCA connectors, there is basically no variance as long as they fit snug and were solders/crimped/screwed properly to the wire. That said, some may prefer "locking" RCA connectors. When I was young and ignorant I bought a pair of Esoteric Audio Artus 2m "interconnect" wires - for twelve hundred bucks! - and one could pick up a very heavy amp from the RCA cord because the barrel of the RCA twists to lock the thing down tight, while still making it easy to remove the wire. (Twist to unlock, pull off.)
Amen to that!
My avatar: 4520 loaded with 2225H on E140 frames,
1x 2202H on custom front loaded horn, 2x 2426 on 2370.
I was careful not to state any opinions in my posts, 25 and 26. But it does seem that most people enjoy sharing their opinions rather than actually thinking about the issues, but what the heck...
Thank you for those, I read all of them and agree in principle with each... the solid conductor finding in long theater runs was particularly interesting, however I believe the questions I posed in post #26 are not considered as seriously as they should be... short of some people simply being deaf to certain audio anomalies, I can't think of another answer to the question of how two equally sincere and dedicated listeners can come up with polar opposite responses. It potentially answers how the Gordon Gow listening tests could be ignored as well as why people may buy into other seemingly illogical solutions.
I absolutely know what you are saying... it is something that Bose also understands and has profited from brilliantly. Seriously, they have studied this phenomenon and design their speakers to sound "good" to most people without crossing the cost threshold necessary to bring the performance (needlessly in their opinion) up to "our standards".
In the podcast that I linked above, John Atkinson mentions how classical music conductors don't have high quality stereos and they don't need them... they can "hear" the music by simply reading the score.
For years I have noticed that if I listen long enough to a new creation of mine, I can't be objective... my on-board filter set kicks in and EQs the sound... when I design a new system I listen for a few minutes and then try to leave for an extended period and then listen again... if upon initial listening I hear an anomaly I know I must rework the system. If I keep listening, the sound evens out and it sounds perfect, or closer to perfect... this is probably related to the "burn in" effect that many audiophile experience, but I am only speculating.
Widget
I agree... being "in the industry" I have had candid conversations with several leading loudspeaker designers from many brands including some of Harman's... all agree that "normal wire" of adequate gauge is all that is required. Moreover if the wire changes the sound, use a different wire. Several do suggest twisted pair for it's slight theoretical superiority though likely inaudible in a typical system.
Widget
Please believe me when I say no dissrespect intended, but, I cannot even begin to wrap my brain around that.
I have heard and seen that stated many times by many people. I believe I understand the atomic face structure of the solidified element and can visualize the four shells with the outer having a lonely electron available for travel making copper by nature a good conductor. What I cannot grasp is how the free electron travel efficiency improves in any way over time and is disturbed by the handling and or moving of the conductor. No one has been able to explain this to me to my undrerstanding and or satisfaction. It must be my failing.
Rob, your Clio measurement of that cable is most disturbing, see that wiggle at the end? That hurts my ears just looking at it AND why have you smoothed the phase response to such an extreme?!? Your supposed to be looking at that not in full degree's but in seconds! Jeeze.
If we knew what the hell we were doing, we wouldn't call it research would we.
yup, the bonds of the electron to the nucleus will not change no matter what "normal " things you do to the cable. Or maybe i missed something, does the copper change into some other magical metal after a few hours of use?
Not quite. Magnet wire insulation, even double coated, would be thinner by one or more orders of magnitude. It makes great speaker wire as long as it does not need to be flexible.
Information is not Knowledge; Knowledge is not Wisdom
Too many audiophiles listen with their eyes instead of their ears
In the case of almost all consumer audio amplifiers binding posts are standard and enable the use of a wide range of cables. Speakon is NOT.So if one really cares about termination quality on loudspeakers, get rid of the binding posts entirely and use SpeakOns.
Most now adhere to EC standards. Most consumers twist the stranded cable and then attempt to tighten the binding post down on the strands. It comes loose and the contact quickly oxidizes.
This is not satisfactory and I refer to the link below.
This type of termination is not dissimilar to a car battery termination. The principle is the same. Large contact area, a good conductor and pressure.
The speakon is a Pro audio twist on / off connector .
http://www.cheshireaudio.co.uk/acata...onnectors.html
IMO the type of insulation on Speaker cables and interconnects, is not really worth worrying about. Good conductor size and good connectors are they key. Use inferior cables at RF frequencies and you will run into problems. Get cables out of Asia on Ebay. Some look very "high end" and no one will know but you. They perform perfectly fine and only cost a few dollars.
Allan.
"Originaly posted by SEAWOLF97;324441".... was Edited by herki to retain only the comments "on speaker thin wires." Mr. Bruce Brissen, CEO of MIT Inc., explains in his patents " how the audio signal magnetic field shrinks and crowds towards the center of the conductor as the signal frequency decreases from 20,000 Hz to the sub bass.
This by definition is an inductor shunting the cable which deteriorates performance as the audio frequency decreases towards the sub bass, so a very thin wire or thin film strip conductor does not pressent much of a core for magnetic field to crowd into. There is reason to beleive these very thin wires and film conductors do work to some extent. Please see my post #60, this thread page for more info.herki[quote/]
It may be useful to understand that we are not dealing with constant frequency or FM modulation voltage source.
In most but not all the source impediance of the amplifier increases with frequency. This is a result of a fall in feedback as frequency increase and open loop gain.
The speaker load and the cable form part of that feedback loop. As most people are away the speaker load is not a constant impediance with frequency and nor is the cable.
Most but not all amplifiers have a L inductor in series and or an RC network shunted on the output for stability.
Some cables have boxes at either end with additional networks
What does this mean? Dependng on the ampifier and the speaker load the introduction of the speaker cable as part of that load characteristic may impart some changes to the function of the feedback network. Feedback is essentially and error correction mechanism that compares a small amount of the output with the input of the amplifier and is used to contract gain, flatten frequency reponse and reduce certain types of distortion.
Can you hear the effect of the cable ? In a well designed amplifier its unlikely but you cannot discount the possibility entirely.
One of the types of distortion we are interested in minmising is intermodulation distortion. This has the effect of blurring the sound.
Some people hold a theory that a single cable from the ampifier to the louspeaker can introduce intermodulation distortion.
Because the feedback point is taken before the end of the cable at the speaker end the feedback is unable to detect any differences in the signal intermodulation distortion or the load characteristic.
This is quite an interesting point because the physical point that feeback is taken inside the amplifier is critical to optimal performance of the amplifier.
JBL talk about this in their manuals but dont get too excited.
Therefore separate cables for connection directly to the woofer and mid + high frequency drivers may offer an advantage.
The moral of the story is keep your cables as short as possible.
Speaker wire, inter connectors, and upgraded power cords....Ca Sufi Com Ca, maintenant
I would like to see a new Thread on the subject of"How we Hear, hearingTrauma & Impairment.
These items concerns our returning Military Personnel exposed to Explosives, and Careless
use of Fire Arms, Old Age Atrophy & Loud Junk Listening Exposures. It is awesome how we do not experience any warning pain or bleeding like when we have a cut finger etc, but only sometimes, immediate loud ringing which usually goes away.
One Parting Shot On Cables
I am not pushing cables!! You can't afford them anyway. Cables may be ok in professional applications like film production studios where the speaker system design can be cordinated by professional application engineers and the speaker manufacturer and the cable designer.... More on this point at the end of this post.
I really doubt they should be used in our home applications unless the speaker manufacturer can recomend them. You should use only what ever the speaker design engineer used to voice his speaker configuration.
The history of cables
According to MIT Inc., patents.... a thin copper pipe 3l8 inch dia works well only because there is no core in the pipe for the signal current to present the important parent audio- signal current magnetic field internally.
Both Mr.Polk and Mr. Brisson recognized this fact. Polk did produce a good speaker cable featuring a very flexible thin-wall 3/8 inch plastic pipe with a twin cross hatch woven +/- polarity jacket of insulated conductors for two channel stereo. The only problem was excessive shunt capacitor acting within the cable causing feedback amplifier instability; the solution was the Zo-Bel RC shunt on the amplifier output terminals, only if the amplifier was equiped with extended high frequency phase compensation.
Mr. Brisson's solution, while originally at Monster Cable, was to take a very small rope of nylon (?) and together with his son, wrap many side by side turns around this long rope, slowly stepping out of the door into the street. This became Monster cable.
Mr. Brisson walked across the street to HP Instruments & found a Spectrum Analyzer capable of measuring phase and amplitude from 10 Hz to 1000 mg Hz including the Audio Band. With this, Mr. Brissen could do every thing to fine tune any cable; we had these all over RCA Camden.
Mr. Brisson's next step was to wrap a spiral lay of many strands of #30 wire over the nylon rope to inductively slow down the upper frequency spectrum to at least 500 Hz. A second spiral overlay of 15 strands of #21 wire completed the cable from 500 Hz to maybe 50 Hz, and it did sound great..This was one of the first MIT patents.
I recommend studying Bruce Brisson's patents to see how MIT Inc., And Transparent Audio Inc, a fierce competitor of MIT Inc., became extremely successful essentially with similar cable technology.
How can a very expensive product that has grown since 1970 be considered a sham by so many intelligent brilliant audio engineers & the (unwashed)... just kiding... enjoy a good laugh.
Avatar sound was recorded with unobtanium speaker cables from "MIT Interface Technologies Inc."
The SkyWalker Lucas post production sound venue is 100% equipped with MIT cables which cost $20,000 each. The SkyWalker Lucas theater at SkyWalker Ranch in Calafornia is also equipped with aQty' of (40) power amplifiers back stage feeding a Qty' of (40) JBL Speaker Drivers via 40 foot long MIT cables of the same unobtanium type.
Not to worry__ the Skywalker Lucas instalation is a "cost no object,"professional business venture. In the following "MIT at the Movies" presentation : "Link," you can view the awsome engineering history of Avatar's making.....Highly recommended.
Sky Walker has more than 10 Acadamy Award Winning Films with "MIT-Interface" If you enjoyed the Magnificient Skywalker Sound, you must see how they did it in:
MITat theMOVIES @http://www.mitcables.co.nz/pdf/mit_movies.pdf
To see the MIT Inc., Engineering and Products used in the fantastic SKYWALKER" AVATAR" film production.
please click this link:http://www.mitcables.co.nz/pdf/mit_movies.pdf and Please scrole down through13 pages in this awesome clip to see the MIT Inc., story. Enjoy this clip
mit_movies.pdf herki[quote/]
I've watched them build their cables at their factory here in Northern California... and I have had them in my system. I agree that these folks put a lot of effort and expense into building their cables, but as I said in post#25... these act as networks that may or may not actually "sound better", but regardless, as I mentioned, according to the speaker designers I've talked to, you are just messing around with their designs.
Did you read the links that Odd posted in #46? Check out the John F. Allen link.
I guess you didn't listen to the podcast that I linked earlier... "hearing" an improvement may not be enough either.
Widget
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
