Sakura Systems OTA Cable Kit

Greg, thanks for getting involved.

These additives that I saw were all low boiling(fast evaporating) solvents, other than the phtalate which was listed(would serve as the plasticizer).

The ingredients I recall(other than the nitrocellulose and plascticizer) were things like toluene, xylene, MIBK(methyl isobutyl ketone, etc. Most of these would all probably not be around more than a day, two at the most(assuming room temperature or above). I can look up the boiling point of MIBK to see how long it should persist, but I don't think it's very long.

I think that long term the only thing that chemically would be altered is the evaporation of the plasticizer, which could be deterred by coating the lacquer with something else. But, this evaporation could theoretically alter properties over the coming years. The evaporation would be along the lines of what we witness in speaker cones or surrounds drying out. It's the same thing; plasticizer evaporation.

I would advise dipping rather than brushing. Especially, in light of this product dealing with interconnects. Dipping is so easy, and the film formed would be much more homogeneous, pinhole free, and sonically consistent from cable to cable.

Brushing is inconsistent, especially layer to layer. I don't believe one could ever have two layers that were more or less the same. Much less, one part of the wire as opposed to the other.

Simply dip the wire in the gallon can. Remove it, and hang to dry. That's it. Following the manufacturer's advice on dry time, you can then dip the wire for the next coat.

If you have access to a magnifying glass or microscope, you can look at the film with a more crital eye. An ohmeter is the way to make sure that you have gotten to where you need to be, but it's difficult with wire. Basically, your goal is to keep applying layers until the resistance goes to open. Conversely, a low resistance indicates the flow of electrons is still occurring, and that we are still working with a resistor. A good capacitor has not been created. A capacitor is what we are trying to build here.

As I said, it is tough to do with a thin gauge wire...

My opinion is that after three coats, we should have a capacitor. In other words, a pinhole free film. One in which no electron flow can take place.

Thanks to all for making this an interesting conversation.

I too, have wondered a lot about interconnects and dielectric. Often, the "truths" are passed on to us, and we have not much opportunity to let our ears decide. Unlike other classic arguments in our hobby, it is harder to really ferret out what is going on here. Look at our own site. Here we debate things like tubes, transistor, digital, analog, copper, silver, floorstander, and monitor. But, what about lac, nitrocellulose, acrylic, urethane, polyester, polypropylene, vinyl, PVC, PVDF, and teflon?

Harder to get a handle on. Even harder to find people who have can offer much in the way of substantive information. I profess my own lack of understanding when it comes to whether a K dielectric is preferable to a low K. And, does each lend a certain sonic signature? I would love to know. A low disapation factor is a good thing, but that is a truth for most conversations regarding capacitance.

I agree that the BS detectors must be on high alert, as perpetually exists any number of people who claim to have the truth, and offer it for a price. Often, in actuality they know little more than us. Selling a completely contradictory thing the next time we look.

As far as the chemical side goes, if I can offer anything of value, I would be honored. Being a coatings chemist was a wonderful job, and gave me accidental exposure to so many things I never foresaw.

One comment about additives, I would not consider them significant in terms of dielectric performance. Most of what would be included in a formulation will not be around very long, due to the fact that they are driven off via evaporation. For a coating of this type, it's basically the polymer, the flatting agent I previously mentioned, and any plasticizers(which also eventually evaporate) the formulator would include.

We have already discussed the polymers.

The flatting agent was also mentioned. It would normally be silica, in the neighborhood of 0.25% - 1.0%, so I would say we can declare it insignificant. Anyway, my feeling is that in this application, there would not be any flatting agent in the recipe in the first place.

A plasticizer is simply a very, very high boiling solvent which makes a resin softer than it normally is. Many plastics(the resin, or polymer as I keep calling it) are hard and brittle. But, their use in the field is required, and the need is for them to be soft and/or flexible. Hence the plasticizer. These chemicals are normally of the pthalate family. I would need to open a book to see their chemical structure to determine whether they would increase or decrease capacitance. However, they too, would be of a low concentration.

A word on lacquers before the topic goes away. I was in The Home Depot last night, picking up a few quarts of Minwax acrylic, when I noticed that there is a very reasonably priced(downright cheap) nitrocellulose based lacquer that they carry. Something like $30 for a gallon. In checking out the label, I noticed that the entire formulation was printed on the back(the information age point of my prior submission). It made me think of this thread, and that if anyone was interested in trying this lacquer technique, this product seemed ideal. My memory of what I read showed me nothing that would preclude it from being used in the manner described above. If anyone was interested, I could revisit the store with a more thorough eye, and read the ingredient list again.

The cable could simply dipped in the can, removed, and allowed to air dry. A bit of heat would speed drying, although more pinholes might be possible. Lacquers tend to be some of the fastest drying coatings anyway(due to their low boiling solvents - which this product contains), so the suggestion might be moot.

From what I have always read about Kondo-san, he may well be using the lac based variety of lacquer. It is a traditional Japanese treasure, and he has always seemed to fit that mold. Doing things meticulously. An artist as much as an engineer. Concerned about things most others do not even consider. Using materials of a more "organic" type and feel.

Some of the "rules" for applying this lacquer may be good, some may just be ritual. One that comes to mind is that if seven layers is good, why not use eight? Does it not sound as good, have we reached the point of diminishing returns, or is seven just good? I can offer that a pinhole free(microscopically, hence electrically) film is probably not reached until perhaps the third coat. It's just the nature of most coatings.

I can also say that in working with lacquer(in my home remodel), more layers are better. From my own experiences with furniture, going past 7 or 8 starts to get me where I wanted to be. Conventionally, products tell us to use about 3 coats. I didn't get the look I wanted. But, I accidentally ran into someone who knows about furniture, and she told me that 20 coats is often what is needed. So, I experimented with more and more layers, up to 20. I can honestly say that things get better, but you reach a point of the ridiculous. Diminishing returns, big time. As I said, I just did this for experimentation. Sure, I would love for the furniture I am currently working on to look like it did with 20 coats of lacquer, but there is no way I would ever be able to apply that many to all the pieces I am currently working on.

And, incidentally, because of the increased resistance to the day to day, I opted for polyurethane or acrylic over lacquer. And, because I am working with maple and value the pristine color, I ended up going for acrylic. It forms a water white(crystal clear) film. Polyurethane usually adds a honey hue, which I sometimes like on oak. My only regret is that I now have to buy this stuff, whereas I used to make it.

Not a dumb question at all, Greg.

Yes, if the wires are presently coated, if you wanted to evaluate the sound of using lacquer insulation(and ONLY lacquer), the currently polymer coating would need to be removed.

I would attempt to clean the bare wire in either lacquer thinner, MEK(methyl ethyl ketone), or acetone(dimethyl ketone, or methyl methyl ketone). Actually, all three are fairly close to each other. Acetone and MEK are both ketones, and close in size, so their functionality and use is almost identical. Acetone has a lower boiling point(so it will evaporate a bit faster), due to it being a bit smaller. And, acetone is a good bit less toxic. Lacquer thinner is something along the lines of a mix of the two(maybe other ketones - like MIBK - ketones will all work more or less the same), with the addition of aliphatic and/or aromatic hydrocarbons(maybe toluene, xylene, stoddard solvent, etc. - I apologize for not know the formulation right off the top of my head...).

I don't think a hydrocarbon buys you anything in this situation, so you are probably better off just going with acetone in the first place. Hydrocarbons will not do anything to things like PVC, polypropylene, polyurethane, teflon, polyethyelene, or polyester(PET[PETE] or PBT). A hydrocarbon would simply be a latent(nonfunctional) solvent in this case.

After stripping and cleaning in solvent, if you notice that whatever residue(if there was any in the first place) from the wire is getting removed or becomes gummy, you are on the right track. Contrary to a bad thing, the residue becoming gummy means you have hit the nail on the head. You have found a solvent capable of attacking the polymer you want to remove. You could then leave the wire in that solvent for as long as it takes to remove everything. Going back every so often to manually remove that residue.

Let's hope that just stripping does the trick, and no residue remains.

Since we are hot on the trail of the meticulous Kondo - san, we might as well discuss things to a very minute point. After stripping the wire, it will need to be prepared. I would recommend going over the bare wire with 0000 steel wool. I believe he was the first to dicuss a wire's surface, and its effect on sonics. The better the surface, the better the sound(it's actually the main focus of the new AudioQuest line). As there is oil in the steel wool, cleaning off with the acetone, MEK, lacquer thinner previously discussed.

You are now ready for the lacquer coating. Although I know the importance of sanding between coats(from my furniture finishing), I would suggest trying this(at least on a test wire, before you do the whole project) without any between coat sanding. Sanding with a paper from 220 to 600 grit or even 0000 steel wool is meant to abrade the coating; providing more surface area for the next coat to adhere to(thus making the bond stronger).

However, that abrasion may well serve as your enemy in this case. Sanding always leaves a fair amount of the bare material exposed. Exactly what we are trying to avoid here. We are trying to form an insulation on the wire. I am not so sure that we want to remove a lot of the insulation each time we apply a coat of lacquer.

Conversely, this may be the method employed by Audio Note. And the explanation of the adherence to using 7 coats of lacquer. As I stated before, my guess(from prior experience) is that three coats would begin to provide an insulation with no holes.

If you wanted to test with a multimeter or ohmeter, set for resistance measurement. Then, you could simply attach one lead to one the bare ends of the wire. Test the wire at various points along the insulation. If the reading stays open, you have an insulator. If you are able to measure something, current is able to flow from the wire through your lacquer coating. In this situation, I would always add two to three additional coats of lacquer. The lower the resistivity reading, the worse the insulation.

A note of caution, make sure that as the number of layers are built up, the coating is not stiff enough to crack. This would mean that the insulation becomes useless. But, as we have already established that people are using lacquer to coat wires, it should not be a problem.

By the way, if you(or anyone for that matter - first come, first served) are really interested in pursuing this, I have a quart of Deft Clear Wood Finish that I would be happy to give to anyone who wants it. This is a great product, a brushable nitrocellulose lacquer. Being brushable means that it has higher solids than a sprayable lacquer; hence each coat would be thicker. Solids content is 25% +/- 1%.

Solids content is related to your dried coating thickness. A coating with 25% solids would yield a dried film twice as thick as one with 12.5% solids. Thus, half as many layers would need to achieve the same final film.

I used a bit in testing on wood(very nice indeed), but decided to go with acrylic for my application. So, if anyone wants it... Others may pick this up a KMart or Lowe's. I believe it was around $10 for a quart.

GOOD LUCK!

In the years following WWII, a lot of the mysteries of the world have lost some of their secret status. Coatings being one.

In a previous company, where I learned the craft, the sacredness of a formulation was an important thing. To the point where a many a recipe consisted of tens, if not hundreds, of ingredients.

Questions concerning these ingredients(along the lines of "eye of newt") would often be answered by something being a "masking agent". In other words, something that would throw off anyone who tried to copy it. These were often things like peppermint, rosemary, lavender oil, etc. It was also suggested that some things were added to make the smell of the product more agreeable.

All in all, a lot of my work was spent on revising the formulations. Stripping all of the unnecessary elements out, in order to leave only what was essential. In every case I can think of, the products were only improved. In the information age, it was not such a priority to hide a formulation, as a base recipe(which would work well) could be acquired with tremendous ease. Marketing and the company itself became more important than what went into the can.

In a general sense, lacquer is lacquer. One of two more "traditional" ingredients which would be included in a lacquer.

Lac, the resin from the plant native to Asia is the classic base of lacquer. Hence the name. And, the reason that lacquer was a product of cultures such as Japan, China, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, and India.

The other is the more modern nitrocellulose. The ingredient found in most of the "real" lacquers of today.

One of these polymers would be dissolved in a solvent(often a hydrocarbon from the less environmentally conscious days such as toluene, xylene, etc.) to make the coating we refer to as lacquer. These formulations are very, very simple. In addition to the polymer and solvent, a leveling agent(various) might be added to promote a smooth finish(as opposed to orange peel), and perhaps also a flatting(silica powder) agent to reduce gloss if a satin finish is desired.

Products would differ from company to company in the ratio of polymer to solvent, as well as things like leveling agents employed.

Also, there are brushable and sprayable lacquers. Brushable laquers have a higher polymer to solvent ratio. On the order of 24 - 27% solids(polymer). Whereas sprayable lacquers would contain a higher percentage of solvent, in order to ease sprayability, vis a vis lower viscosity.

More recently, the word lacquer has been bastardized to include polyurethane, acrylic, etc. formulations; just a name given to a clear topcoat used for these purposes to convey a sense of high quality of the product.

Presuming that two products consisted of the same polymer(be it lac or nitrocellulose), were both targeting the same application(brushable or sprayable) process, and were of high enough quality to ensure a smooth, pinhole free coating, not much difference should ever exist between them.