Sakura Systems OTA Cable Kit

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.

So, Trelja, would it be that the additives evaporating contribute to instruments becoming better with time -- at least to a minor degree?
I'm thinking of trying lacquer on a pair of I/C -- could it work using a brush rather than dipping?

Cheers

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, Trelja. So the trick is (pls forgive the dumb question) to strip the teflon -- or whatever -- outer & dip the bared wire shielding & conductors into the can & then hang the IC by the terminators. I could lightly sand the dried coating, clean, and re-dip, and once more. My ohmetre is the standard digital type -- but could I try some readings?
Cheers