Sakura Systems OTA Cable Kit

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.

I just wish I'd kept up the Japanese my neighbour used to teach me! Anyone know of a Japanese-English translator on the web?

Telephone wire, huh? Hmmmmm.

Justin

Wow, Trelja, that's great stuff. For future reference, gentlemen, THAT'S substantitive. Thank you, I learned something I didn't know.

Trelja,

I feel the need to thank you for participating in the discussion on lacquers. I think it is a valuable contribution.

Listening to you speaking is almost like listening to my lacquer specialist and I mean it in a very positive way as this guy is an old and very experienced "wolf".

On the negative side, I feel the same professional “one applies to all” approach, disregard to audio being a rather peculiar and specific application. At least that was the problem that I had with my people until I managed to sat them down and offer them to actually hear (and not just see, what was their professional focus throughout their complete careers) the differences in variances of their own work.

Of course there is a lot of marketing rubbish (like in every other aspect of life) but the fact remains, at least in my personal experience, that lacquer has a strong importance on sonic behaviour of a product (in this particular case, loudspeaker). I am not an expert on lacquers and my findings are strictly limited to the empirical auditive conclusions that were drawn from different samples prepared by those knowledgeable on the subject on my request for specific samples.

It is interesting that (and I guess that corresponds to your statement) certain additives in recipes affect the visual appeal more than sonics yet the technique applied and number of layers (viscosity of each; thickness; application; drying method and some other) do have a strong impact on the mechanical (thus auditive as a logical consequence to the resonant) characteristics of the "coating".

Some additives can affect the dielectric characteristics of a lacquer but there I really don't have sufficient experience to discuss on the subject.

In any case, we are talking nuances here (rubbish speakers remain rubbish, regardless) but nuances make the accountable difference. Not to be mistaken - some nuances human ear and brain can perceive with more precision than the most sophisticated measuring equipment.

Best,
Sead

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.