Hi Sead:
Now that you brought it up, I may experiment with separate entrance and return holes/channels on the outer (neutral) portion of the RCA connectors. These will, of course be DIY "jobs", but the "loop", again haphazard in this application, (as it may or may not occur depending on the position of the wire) is something that does not "jive" with the reduced metal mass philosophy of the overall design, as this would add up to approx. 33% more metal mass to the connector (granted that a "loop" does occur), plus the uncertainty of the effect of the "loop" itself. I have noticed a substantial difference in the sound by how the cable is attached to the speakers/amp in that looping the wire around a binding post does some strange things to the LF response (a smaller contact area, sans loop, is my much preferred method). I now wonder if eliminating the possibility of a loop occurring (in any instance) in the IC's would also have beneficial results?
I do not quite understand your comments on the "outer ring" suggestion as this is by far the greatest stress point on the middle post of the RCA's (both when installing and uninstalling the RCA). The outer ring (plus...sans the second hole in the post) would significantly reinforce this specific area and would only be compromised by the tightness of the fit (on the post) and the single strand of 26 gage "bare" wire which would be forced under and held by the ring. These compromises are in comparison to engineering the concepts into a "one piece" unit. Maybe what I am envisioning is not made very clear by my wording as this is a difficult area for me?
I realize that the people who do not have these materials @ hand do not have a clue as to what we are talking about, so will end this discussion here.
Please feel free to email me directly with further thoughts/info and if we come up with anything that makes sense it can then be added to the thread. Now that you have sparked my interest, I will certainly play around with this as time and energy permits.
Unfortunately I just sold my SET amp, which was my favorite "window into the music" and super for testing gear (now using a push/pull amp in pinch). But fortunately I today purchased a vintage stereo SET console (complete with light weight paper drivers) that I hope to "part out" and have up and running in the next couple of months, granted that I can figure it out with the help of a few "web friends". It was $20 if I can get it out of the shop by tomorrow morning, so it is time to hit the hay right now.
As always, I look forward to further dialog.
Best regards,
David
Now that you brought it up, I may experiment with separate entrance and return holes/channels on the outer (neutral) portion of the RCA connectors. These will, of course be DIY "jobs", but the "loop", again haphazard in this application, (as it may or may not occur depending on the position of the wire) is something that does not "jive" with the reduced metal mass philosophy of the overall design, as this would add up to approx. 33% more metal mass to the connector (granted that a "loop" does occur), plus the uncertainty of the effect of the "loop" itself. I have noticed a substantial difference in the sound by how the cable is attached to the speakers/amp in that looping the wire around a binding post does some strange things to the LF response (a smaller contact area, sans loop, is my much preferred method). I now wonder if eliminating the possibility of a loop occurring (in any instance) in the IC's would also have beneficial results?
I do not quite understand your comments on the "outer ring" suggestion as this is by far the greatest stress point on the middle post of the RCA's (both when installing and uninstalling the RCA). The outer ring (plus...sans the second hole in the post) would significantly reinforce this specific area and would only be compromised by the tightness of the fit (on the post) and the single strand of 26 gage "bare" wire which would be forced under and held by the ring. These compromises are in comparison to engineering the concepts into a "one piece" unit. Maybe what I am envisioning is not made very clear by my wording as this is a difficult area for me?
I realize that the people who do not have these materials @ hand do not have a clue as to what we are talking about, so will end this discussion here.
Please feel free to email me directly with further thoughts/info and if we come up with anything that makes sense it can then be added to the thread. Now that you have sparked my interest, I will certainly play around with this as time and energy permits.
Unfortunately I just sold my SET amp, which was my favorite "window into the music" and super for testing gear (now using a push/pull amp in pinch). But fortunately I today purchased a vintage stereo SET console (complete with light weight paper drivers) that I hope to "part out" and have up and running in the next couple of months, granted that I can figure it out with the help of a few "web friends". It was $20 if I can get it out of the shop by tomorrow morning, so it is time to hit the hay right now.
As always, I look forward to further dialog.
Best regards,
David