dletch2, I'm trying to describe what I hear, while you're saying I have to be mistaken because something like that does not exist. That is my whole point - you're starting from the wrong side, trying to disprove what can easily be heard. You also imply, that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference in blind test. Are you a cable naysayer who tries to fortify it with measurements? Let me suggest, that placebo effect exist both ways - if you strongly believe that you cannot hear the difference you won't. Also, there are people with less then perfect hearing apparatus (I'm not suggesting it applies to you) who get very defensive about it making crusade against cables on cable forum. I'm sure my hearing, even at my younger age, wasn't as good as hearing of many other people and I would never dare to tell them what they can or cannot hear.
Math + Logic + Science = something completely mad...
So, I've done a metric fuckton of research, notwithstanding the clear bias the man who designed and built my Belles has against esoteric cabling. And here's the conclusion to which I arrived.
My monoblocks are sitting on top of the speakers. The distance from the amp to the speaker is barely a foot, which is exactly how long a run of wire I intend to use. Goal is to minimize the effect the wire has on the sound.
According to the calculations I've seen and done, the skin effect depth on copper wire at 20Khz is 461 micrometers. Meaning a 19-gauge copper wire (911 mics diameter) would reduce skin effect to zero. As in no impact whatsoever on the signal.
Of course, it's actually very difficult to find 19-gauge wire. 18-gauge (1024 mics) is much easier, and the skin effect is near zero, but not quite zero. Seems to be an acceptable compromise. Could go down to 20-gauge and eliminate skin effect entirely. If I could find insulated aluminum wire, 18-gauge would eliminate skin effect entirely, because skin effect depth on aluminum at 20khz is 580 mics.
12 inches of 18-gauge wire produces 0.006 ohms of additional resistance. 20-gauge = 0.01 ohms.
Frankly, I don't see the value in spending big bucks on esoteric, heavy-gauge wire for this application. I'd rather make the bigger investment in the 2m runs from the preamp to the blocks, because that's where the wire's going to have a hell of a lot more of an effect on the sound.
Stepping back to allow you all the opportunity to punch holes in my thought process here.
My monoblocks are sitting on top of the speakers. The distance from the amp to the speaker is barely a foot, which is exactly how long a run of wire I intend to use. Goal is to minimize the effect the wire has on the sound.
According to the calculations I've seen and done, the skin effect depth on copper wire at 20Khz is 461 micrometers. Meaning a 19-gauge copper wire (911 mics diameter) would reduce skin effect to zero. As in no impact whatsoever on the signal.
Of course, it's actually very difficult to find 19-gauge wire. 18-gauge (1024 mics) is much easier, and the skin effect is near zero, but not quite zero. Seems to be an acceptable compromise. Could go down to 20-gauge and eliminate skin effect entirely. If I could find insulated aluminum wire, 18-gauge would eliminate skin effect entirely, because skin effect depth on aluminum at 20khz is 580 mics.
12 inches of 18-gauge wire produces 0.006 ohms of additional resistance. 20-gauge = 0.01 ohms.
Frankly, I don't see the value in spending big bucks on esoteric, heavy-gauge wire for this application. I'd rather make the bigger investment in the 2m runs from the preamp to the blocks, because that's where the wire's going to have a hell of a lot more of an effect on the sound.
Stepping back to allow you all the opportunity to punch holes in my thought process here.
- ...
- 62 posts total
| Post removed |
Use mogami balanced. While I'd love to go XLR for that application, it's simply not an option, because the pre only has unbalanced out, and the amp only has unbalanced in. So it is what it is. Unless Mogami has some fancy way to get the cancellation out of the XLR and still convert to RCA on both sides, then we gotta find a different solution. |
dletch2 Let me get to some technical points first. I brought example of amplifiers in 70s to show that there is always possibility of something we don't know yet. Designers then believed that NFB is a panacea for everything since it reduces THD and IMD, increases bandwidth and lowers output impedance. Some transistor amplifiers had extremely low THD and IMD (few zeros after decimal point) but sounded bad. This deep NFB not only brings TIM but also make amplifier sensitive to external electrical noise, since cable is an antena for RFI. Amplifier's output has low impedance only for low frequencies and it is an input to NFB at the same time. Yes, most likely there is a Zobel network there, but no filter is perfect. We are talking about additional about 40dB of gain in addition to existing about 26dB of amplifier's gain (amp has 66dB of gain before feedback is applied) plus what level down we're able to hear - at least 60dB. Twisting wires makes cable extremely immune to interference by exposing both wires evenly to external magnetic and electric field (as long as twist pitch is much smaller than wavelength of interfering signal). As for blind test - No, I did not perform such test. It happened by chance when after comparing cables I left old one plugged in and next day was able to hear that it didn't sound the way I remember it should. Also, changes in sound (like fuller lower midrange) were unexpected - reviews never mentioned it. I agree with you that we have to be objective, but at the same time I believe that we should be humble and accept that what we hear often cannot be explained (or at least easily explained). |
Keep going back to blind testing.. The whole point is not to blind test.. Just like not having an idea on earth about the Helix but makes a comment like this. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> williewonka2,376 posts04-29-2021 6:08pm@dietch2 - well I’ve just spent the better part of the last 4 years ACTUALLY TRYING all of the things I have mentioned and in that time I have found that EVERY one of the things I mentioned does actually make for a vastly superior cable - regardless of length. You mean with your eyes. Sorry that you wasted 4 years. A book on electrical properties of materials and how to calculate L and C for round and parallel conductors would have saved you a lot of time. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please move on NO ONE want to hear what you haven’t learned. I’ve followed this project and personally tried a few of the cables.. STUNNING.. You show your absolute ignorance when it comes to education, and APPLICATION. willies (Steve's) cable WORK. NO ONE wasted anything. As far a proof pay for your own... No one here need to validate your lack of experience.. Your just a Johnny come lately, with NOTHING but 1940s text book spew.. If you weren’t washed up, your sure showing you aught to be.. DENCE...MFer.. Your just a DUMMY.. Sit in the corner and learn something or take your spew and boogie.. Pretty simple for me.. Off the med on the meds off the med on the meds.. Mr/Mrs Yo Yo.. I really wish we worked together.. You’d last a 1/2 a day after telling people what they can or can’t understand or hear.. make that before first brake. IF they didn’t lock you in the shitter, load you on a truck and go over a couple state lines.. Teach you some friggin manners...QUICKLY.. Learn or leave.... You don’t know what your talking about.. WE ARE NOT wiring toaster OR ARK welders.. MY stereo gear NOT YOURS, you keep mixing that part up.. From watching your post, I question if you have a system I would KEEP Listening too after a few minutes.. Really makes me wonder how good a stereo can sound in a PADDED CELL? Oh and BTW it is time to feed the SMART chickens.. |
- 62 posts total