Why Do Cables Matter?


To me, all you need is low L, C, and R. I run Mogami W3104 bi-wire from my McIntosh MAC7200 to my Martin Logan Theos. We all know that a chain is only as strong as its' weakest link - so I am honestly confused by all this cable discussion. 

What kind of wiring goes from the transistor or tube to the amplifier speaker binding post inside the amplifier? It is usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper. Then we are supposed to install 5 - 10' or so of wallet-emptying, pipe-sized pure CU or AG with "special configurations" to the speaker terminals?

What kind of wiring is inside the speaker from the terminals to the crossover, and from the crossover to the drivers? Usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper.

So you have "weak links" inside the amplifier, and inside the speaker, so why bother with mega expensive cabling between the two? It doesn't make logical sense to me. It makes more sense to match the quality of your speaker wires with the existing wires in the signal path [inside the amplifier and inside the speaker].

 

 

kinarow1
rodman99999

5,765 posts

 

@hilde45 -

     Back in March a thread about power cords and break/burn-in was started.

     I hate to type, so: I'm going to copy/paste some of my speculations.

     That a highly complex musical signal, MIGHT affect Poynting vectors and signal speeds, in interconnects, in a much more profound manner than a simple AC (ie: a fixed 60/50 Hz) signal, in a PC, seems likely (at least) to me.

     Further: all of the above and what I'll c/p (seems to me) lends credence to how the application of a stronger, DC voltage/field, outside a dielectric (ala Synergistic MPC and Audioquest DBS systems), might stabilize those vectors and signal speeds, PERHAPS eliminating some time smear and, "burn-in". 

rodman99999

5,456 posts

 

 

@holmz-

      Bear with me a minute, in my folly, far as a possibility on why a power cord might make a difference.

      Based on some of the theories on how electricity works, simplified:

      The conductor acts as a waveguide for the signal/voltage.

      Within the conductor: when excited by an AC current, electrons oscillate, generating photons/electromagnetic waves that travel, always from the source, to the load.

       Keep in mind: all signals (ie: music, AC) are sinusoidal  waves

       Those photons/electromagnetic waves travel through and outside the dielectric, which (according to it's permittivity/Poynting vectors) will have various effects on those waves.    One of the most obvious, is the dielectric's effect on the speed of the signal.

      The better designers of printed circuit boards, even take the above into account, when choosing materials for their products.

       I posted a link on the first page, that included data on the manufacture of semiconductor chips and what was observed when materials were cryo'd, during process.     Short version: better contact/lowered resistance between layers.

          Under the scanning microscope: much smoother surfaces observed.

       I would hope, by now, it's a given that various cable constructions, twists, braids, etc, can make for a cleaner transmission of signals (ie: Litz, etc).            

        Just seems to me (a hypothesis): given the above (some theories and some things established/measured/proven), it's not a big stretch to believe a power cord, built of the best conductor (Ohno CC silver), wrapped in a very low dielectric coefficient dielectric (ie: Teflon), cryo'd for the smoothest transfer of those photons/magnetic waves and twisted in some crazy way, might not smooth out some of preturbations/noise, from the crap an AC waveform had to go through, back to it's generator.  (run-on, much?)

       I haven't tested this, actually comparing two circuits, but: it wouldn't surprise me, if a power supply that used a choke, would be less affected by a better power cord, as the former can eliminate a lot of the high freq garbage, etc, that's either created by, or makes it through all the big converting/filtering stuff, before.

       Never thought about PCs before the good stuff hit the market, but: the Physics/QED made sense.

            I tried 'em, I like 'em and the science makes my head feel better.

                              Don't care WHAT it does to anyone else's!

 

rodman99999

5,456 posts

 

 

     OH, and: it takes some time for the dielectric to form, take a charge, polarize, or however one chooses to define the process, when a dielectric is subjected to electromagnetic waves, which affects the Poynting vectors, measurably/predictably.

              The lower the material’s dielectric constant: the longer that takes.

                                               PC burn-in?    Maybe?

                                                    Happy listening! 

 

      

 Report this

rodman99999

5,765 posts

 

                                         Make that: perturbations (oops),

                                           AS IF that'll be the objection!

Let's cut the nonsense here folks, and get to a simple fact.

What @donavabdear is doing is known as "sealioning."

here's Mirriam-Webster:

'Sealioning' is a form of trolling meant to exhaust the other debate participant with no intention of real discourse.

Sealioning refers to the disingenuous action by a commenter of making an ostensible effort to engage in sincere and serious civil debate, usually by asking persistent questions of the other commenter. These questions are phrased in a way that may come off as an effort to learn and engage with the subject at hand, but are really intended to erode the goodwill of the person to whom they are replying, to get them to appear impatient or to lash out, and therefore come off as unreasonable.

So many on this forum have such knee-jerk reactions to anyone not bowing down to the cable religion, I never said cables don't make a difference, I never said I haven't tried different cables (only a few I'd have to say) I've spent 10s of thousands on cables, I never said my mind is made up and I won't demo cables, I'm just pointing out logical problems with the audiophile community as a whole. It is very poor thinking to point out some friend or a studio that is an exception to a general statement about a large group.

Why doesn't the worlds most complex and exact machines use special AC Cables and interconnects?

Why don't audio test equipment makers like Audio Precision send their equipment out with boutique cables?

Why does the audiophile community constantly throw up straw man arguments by saying something like " well if you wan't to use cheep (leaky) cables then you obviously want to stay in your state of willful ignorance"

Why does the audiophile community think that cables bring out the design of the components. 

Why don't engineers design components with particular cables in mind if they are such an important part of the systems fidelity?

Why doesn't the audiophile community understand that nearly every channel has DSP on it when mixed. Limiting dynamics, EQ, reverb, phasing, imaging, airiness, and all the other toys used all the time. 

Why do audiophiles think the electronic signal goes down the strands of the medium (the signal moves in a field on the outside of the conductors). 

Why do audiophiles think that inserting a very high quality AC cable between the romex and the Amp fuse makes the audio signal change (there is no audio until after the transformer where the power is changed to DC). (Also I've spent 100 of thousands on Power conditioning personally).

Blind tests vs. ABX tests vs. visual confirmation cable tests. As you all well know the visual test with the very expensive cable always sounds better. 

Why is it that audiophiles generally can't accept the idea that an amplifier designed for a specific speaker driver is the best practice for more accurate sound. (I watch a guy on YouTube who has gone through 300 exceptionally expensive power amps). 

Why is it that the "break in period" is not testable, I understand cables aren't always quantifiable but break in changes should be, and they are not.

Why is it that sample rate information has so much BS, the AES did a large study on this years ago and showed experienced listeners were not able to hear any differences between CD, SACD and 96/24 (I spent $8k on my SACD player).

Why is it that audiophiles think that resolution (sample rate) is the same as resolution in pixel rate in vision, it is not. (this myth still hasn't gone away).

-little harder question-
If boutique cables are so important to the sound than why is it that cables with similar resistance, capacitance and inductance sound the same, you immediately say "they don't" but if there is a problem one of these characteristics is damaged).

And again why is it that audiophiles think they can add any information to the sound with expensive equipment and cables (yes, some people have delt with this question but I think they were all recording engineer who understand this concept.) 

 

@cleeds A most excellent observation and post about this creature @donavabdear he is definitely not endearing to me for sure. Sealioning, I like it. 

Hmm, @donavabdear & his character ....

The one & only man in my 35 years of purchasing gear either retail or used whom truly understands the word "trust." Trust in my word, and I’ll put trust in yours. 

Sorry, different topic ....