Speaker cables.

[Foxman50]

Cables with ‘normal’ electrical parameters will be audibly transparent over the lengths used in domestic audio.
Keith

What does that even mean "normal electrical parameters", whats normal. There can be no denying that a cables make up can change resistance, capacitance, etc. I have a number of cables here that i could measure and i guarantee they will all measure differently.

But isnt this exactly what cable manufacturers do to get them to sound different.

Cables can only degrade the signal, right. But then surely so do amplifiers, pre amplifiers. The only real signal is at source, everything else in line manipulates the signal to some degree. Again this is what system matching is about, why cannot cables be part of this process.

I buy a set of £20k speakers, they are perfect in every way apart from a slight brightness, why is it frowned upon to buy speaker cables that attenuate the top end. Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Foxman50]

Also my opinion Keith.
As ever, I post that it is however possible to alter a cable signal by engineering in things that detract from the purity of the signal. This tunes the cable's sound. It's now NOT putting out what went in. Apparently one can charge huge amounts for this detraction and people flock to buy it. At some point in cable threads, someone proposes the car analogy. You wouldn't put retreads on a Porsche. Well DUH. That's exactly what tampered cable does. Simple OFC is Michelin's finest. Look no further.

Is this not every component from source. The purity of signal is lost the moment it comes from source. First thing the signal hits is a cable, first attenuation. Amplifier, well by definition what goes in doesnt come out. More cables before speakers. Speakers, come on probably the most signal altering device in the chain.

 

[Purité Audio]

Why would cable manufacturers alter the electrical parameters so hugely, only so that their cable ‘may’ sound different in a comparison .
Cables with normal parameters will be audibly transparent over domestic distances no ‘degredation’.
Modern loudspeakers/DACs and playback software have sophisticated tone and EQ controls built in , a far more exact method of adjusting your playback.
Keith

 

[notevenclose]

An odd, but true tale. I approached a dealer that I had used a couple of times with regards to changing my loudspeaker cable. The dealer is well known and is held in high regard.

" You need to find a dealer who will lend you the loudspeaker cable, so that you can asses it for yourself at home."

Good advice, you might say.

"Sound good to me; can I borrow some then?"

"No, sorry, we don't loan cables."

You need to find a better dealer then. The last 3 times I've spoken to three different dealers about cables, a loan set was offered; once in response to a specific request, once as a result of asking a dealer to recommend something to get the best out of a home demo pair of speakers and on the third occasion to back up something they were recommending.

 

[Foxman50]

Why would cable manufacturers alter the electrical parameters so hugely, only so that their cable ‘may’ sound different in a comparison .

Because people have different requirements. Some want more bass, some more treble, etc. If every cable sounded identical well we would all be using T&E

Cables with normal parameters will be audibly transparent over domestic distances no ‘degredation’.

I still have no idea what normal is, please detail in terms of res, cap, induct, etc.

Modern loudspeakers/DACs and playback software have sophisticated tone and EQ controls built in , a far more exact method of adjusting your playback.
Keith

I would agree but hardly keeping the source signal intact is it. But does that really matter. Surely all we do, well me, is build a system i enjoy. Do i really care its not as the musician intended. Can't say i do.

 

[notevenclose]

Modern loudspeakers/DACs and playback software have sophisticated tone and EQ controls built in , a far more exact method of adjusting your playback.
Keith

Uh-huh. But why is the assumption so often made that cables are basically ersatz tone controls?

To be honest IME the major differences between different sets of cables are rarely anything to do with bass or treble. If anything, if I were to note any tonal difference, then it's the type of thing which tends to show up in quick A/B comparisons - which are rarely of any musical significance in the long term.

 

[Darth Vader]

I'm beginning to see why Jez is pulling his own teeth out! Its unfortunate that none of you have any clue about what you are talking about and I don't mean that unkindly. Even if you did the maths would be beyond most of you. If someone wants to buy a swanky cable because it looks nice and goes well with their equipment then that is fine. Its like someone buying a £60K Rolex but it has a standard movement and the extra cost goes into the gold/platinum case and associated diamonds etc but it still performs exactly the same as a £5k model but its nice and swanky and shows that you are rich.

A cable can make a change in sound but for none of the reasons you guys have been discussing. Did you know for example that the output stage in a typical SS power amplifier is an emitter follower and for some reason not yet understood this is unstable and tends to want to oscillate in the HF. A well designed = expensive amp will be unconditionally stable into any load but the majority of the stuff that Joe Public buys is built down to a price. These may with incorrect inductance/capacitance loading oscillate in the HF giving rise to over heating and distortion. The old Naim amps like the 250 and 135 would run at around 30-40 degrees hotter with other than the min 3.5m of NAC-A4/5 caused by oscillation. In Naims case it wasn't due to poor design though as the NAC-A4/5 cable provided the necessary inductance. It was a clever idea because it meant that the length of cable connecting the speaker 'disappeared' as it was now itself part of the output stage of these amplifiers. Or so the theory went.

Cheers,

DV

 

[Alex S]

I know a good dentist.

 

[Joe P]

Joe

 

[mattgbell]

You've maybe missed that no cable designer could prove that their cable altered the sound in any electrically verifiable way, and therefore, can't make the claim.

Unless that was an attempt at irony that I don't understand, I think you've missed my point.

Of course, cable sellers make all sorts of unjustified and unjustifiable claims. Any fule no that. My point was that some advocates of cable differences do so on the basis that cables act as tone controls, and yet no cables sellers (to my knowledge) make that claim. So these cable advocates who talk about cables as tone controls -- WTF are they talking about?

 

[Mescalito]

Unless that was an attempt at irony that I don't understand, I think you've missed my point.

Of course, cable sellers make all sorts of unjustified and unjustifiable claims. Any fule no that. My point was that some advocates of cable differences do so on the basis that cables act as tone controls, and yet no cables sellers (to my knowledge) make that claim. So these cable advocates who talk about cables as tone controls -- WTF are they talking about?

Could it possibly be because that's the only possible difference a cable could make?

Chris

 

[Craig B]

Any cable. They all sound the same so long as they are thick enough. Some twin and earth 2.5mm will work well and be very cheap as will any number of cheap no brand speaker cables from car audio places etc.

I disagree with this. If this theory was right would we not still be using bell wire to wire up?

Assuming 22guage, anything up to 12ft would be fine into an 8Ohm load; shorter maximum lengths for 4Ohm loads (6ft IIRC).

Don't take my word for it though, put a shout out to amplifier designer extaordinaire Lee De Forest on here.

 

[Foxman50]

anything up to 12ft would be fine

22 gauge, thats 0.326mmsq, that must be less than bell wire. Yes it will carry a signal, but ive yet to hear any decent sounding cable this thin, but hey who knows.

 

[venton]

NacA5 has a piece of plastic separating the two wires by a certain distance. This makes it bloody awkward and stiff, and hard to go round corners. Just a little time thinking should lead to the conclusion that this was done for a reason, and that reason is that it sounded better than other types tried at the time. I can't see any reason why a manufacturer would choose such an obviously compromised solution when choosing a speaker wire. And it's still being sold 25 odd years later. Even the most cynical might like to ponder why.

 

[John Phillips]

What does that even mean "normal electrical parameters", whats normal. There can be no denying that a cables make up can change resistance, capacitance, etc. I have a number of cables here that i could measure and i guarantee they will all measure differently.

Different loudspeaker cables do, indeed, have measurably different resistance, capacitance and inductance. I am sure that's not in dispute.

The cable's electrical characteristics, in combination with the output impedance of the amplifier and the impedance of the loudspeaker will cause a non-flat frequency response. I am sure that's not in dispute.

The question seems to be whether this is useful, desirable or even audible.

In the July 1993 issue of Audio, Fred Davis, the author of a published AES paper on loudspeaker cables reproduces the frequency responses from his AES paper for various amplifier / cable / loudspeaker combinations. The article is here (2 Mbyte PDF). See fig. 8 onwards. You will find "normal electrical parameters" in this article for a range of cables.

The impairments are undoubtedly small. The author writes in the Conclusions "for average systems and short cables, these differences are at the threshold of audibility". In the July 1994 issue, Edgar Villchur of Audio Research disputes this. The article is here (1 Mbyte PDF). Villchur quotes measured just noticeable differences that are higher than the differences Davis reveals.

It seems that we are at a disputable point on the "audible or not?" question. And moving loudspeakers around in a real room will certainly make a bigger difference than changing cables.

I buy a set of £20k speakers, they are perfect in every way apart from a slight brightness, why is it frowned upon to buy speaker cables that attenuate the top end. Makes perfect sense to me.

Given the small magnitude of the changes a cable might make and the uncertainty over whether any particular cable will do what you want or not, it might be much more sensible to adjust the loudspeakers' toe-in to achieve this.

 

[Lee T]

What does that even mean "normal electrical parameters", whats normal.

You will be very lucky to receive an answer, I have asked Keith numerous times on cable threads, what is this perfect cable that adds nothing, removes nothing & will have zero affect on any piece of equipment, ie, the standard model, normal.
He will wait a few pages then send you a link to mogami cables.
When asked why, another few pages go by, then, answer, they are fit for purpose, no explanation as to what this means or a scientific explanation, it's sort of how cable threads go.
I asked why he uses microphone cable for analogue duties, again, fit for purpose, what can you do?

I suppose the strange part of this whole cable conundrum is, if all cables have no audible effect on a piece of equipment, why is it, when tested blind, differences are heard.

 

[Yomanze]

Some forums go too far down the subjective route, this one often goes too far down the objective route. No need to pooh-pooh alternative views and experiences so vociferously - take a chill pill and enjoy the tunes folks.

 

[Marky-Mark]

I suppose the strange part of this whole cable conundrum is, if all cables have no audible effect on a piece of equipment, why is it, when tested blind, differences are heard.

The same reason for when such testing is done, and differences are heard, and it turns out there was only one cable used.

 

[Darth Vader]

NacA5 has a piece of plastic separating the two wires by a certain distance. This makes it bloody awkward and stiff, and hard to go round corners. Just a little time thinking should lead to the conclusion that this was done for a reason, and that reason is that it sounded better than other types tried at the time. I can't see any reason why a manufacturer would choose such an obviously compromised solution when choosing a speaker wire. And it's still being sold 25 odd years later. Even the most cynical might like to ponder why.

Before Naim sold NAC-A4 Naim used to advise something like RS components 79 strand wire loosely twisted (3 turns per meter). This gave the necessary inductance of (I think) 1uH per meter so at 3.5m thats 3.5uH and sufficient to prevent ultrasonic oscillation in their legacy amps. As I have previously posted I think Naim just selected from 300-600 Ohm flat twin cable used for transmitters that had suitably high inductance.

Those of you with legacy Naim amps who would like a more flexible cable could try the RS cable with twists as above.

Cheers,

DV

 

[Purité Audio]

Different loudspeaker cables do, indeed, have measurably different resistance, capacitance and inductance. I am sure that's not in dispute.

The cable's electrical characteristics, in combination with the output impedance of the amplifier and the impedance of the loudspeaker will cause a non-flat frequency response. I am sure that's not in dispute.

The question seems to be whether this is useful, desirable or even audible.

In the July 1993 issue of Audio, Fred Davis, the author of a published AES paper on loudspeaker cables reproduces the frequency responses from his AES paper for various amplifier / cable / loudspeaker combinations. The article is here (2 Mbyte PDF). See fig. 8 onwards. You will find "normal electrical parameters" in this article for a range of cables.

The impairments are undoubtedly small. The author writes in the Conclusions "for average systems and short cables, these differences are at the threshold of audibility". In the July 1994 issue, Edgar Villchur of Audio Research disputes this. The article is here (1 Mbyte PDF). Villchur quotes measured just noticeable differences that are higher than the differences Davis reveals.

It seems that we are at a disputable point on the "audible or not?" question. And moving loudspeakers around in a real room will certainly make a bigger difference than changing cables.

Given the small magnitude of the changes a cable might make and the uncertainty over whether any particular cable will do what you want or not, it might be much more sensible to adjust the loudspeakers' toe-in to achieve this.

Extremely interesting, thanks for posting,
Keith