cable dielectric cause of artificial sound


Hi folks, I would like to know what your opinion is about the following issue. About 90% of high-end cable manufacturers use PTFE as dielectric. Many of their cables sound much alike and they have a few of these characteristics in common: clean, relaxed and laid back sound but at the same time very dynamic (though a bit artificially), very quiet ("black background"), very good (also artificially) left/right separation. But I think albeit these traits, they tend to sound "technicolored", "sterile" and unengaging (lacking PRaT also). Some cable manufacturers are using bleached cotton as dielectric. These cables sound different: they have more natural dynamics, a mellower sound, more intimate soundstage, more tonal colors and so on. Are these differences mainly due to the dielectric material used? Why is for so many manufacturers PTFE still the ultimate dielectric for the use in audio cables?

Chris
dazzdax
Hi ET,

I wanted to post these comments, but please understand my motive is to educate, not criticize. Your “magnet wire” setup is simple in design and no doubt sounds cleaner without the shielding in most cable designs. It is not however because you have no dielectric, in fact the enamel coating on the wire you are using has a relatively high dielectric constant of 5.1. A bare wire in a vacuum would be a 1.0 and bare wire in air would be slightly higher. Cotton and dry paper have fairly low dielectric constants of 1.3 and 2.0 respectively.

The problem with copper wire in air, cotton or paper is corrosion and oxidation. Cotton and paper will both retain moisture in a humid climate and actually speed up the oxidation process. This is where poly___ something and Teflon become so useful, but as discussed here, they carry a sonic signature with them. The solution of enamel coated copper wire seems so logical, but in fact it is not a great dielectric at all.

Dielectric constant is a measure of the charge retention capacity of a medium. In general, low dielectric constants (i.e., cotton @ 1.3-1.4) result in a "fast" substrate while large dielectric constants (i.e., Alumina @ 10.0) result in a "slow" substrate. What this has to do with our audio industry is obvious. The lower the dielectric the less energy retention and the easier the signal is carried.

For this reason copper in inherently limiting if we want to use low dielectric materials to isolate wires. In this respect a super thin poly__ something would actually be a better choice than enamel. The issue then becomes finding a super thin covering on copper wire. This is not as easy as one might think, but there are thin tubing that can be shrink wrapped to a bare wire that may prove to be an excellent choice over enamel.

So I suspect the real reason you are happy with the sound of your system is two fold, first the fact that the wires are allowed to be free of added materials like shielding fillers and sleeving leaves a cleaner signal. The high dielectric constant you have may actually have some benefit by being “slowed” making the treble less aggressive, thus less bright.

jd
I don't know but they are brighter and "righter" if you will. I had other high dollar cables from Nordost,Kimber(KCTG),AQ Jag,MIT and Cardas. The HF on the Antis in my setup was more present,extended and the cleanest I tried. They livened up my warm sound to here it is more balanced. The connectors on them are modest at best as well compared to nice WBT's. I don't know that the dielectric is that high but if you say so. I'd like to try Mapleshade ribbon in plastic. Thanks for the post.

ET
I saw the chart online that shows values of various materials verifying 5.1 for enamel. I wonder why they work so well for me and make the HF so much better. As I said HF is not only better but there is more of it which helped my overly warm system. Again thanks for the info.

ET
Hi ET,

I think what you are experiencing is how most interconnects made actually suppress the signal. In most cables they have the conductors very close together and wound in some fashion. The industry has gone deep into this philosophy deciding certain wire twists or weaves or braids reduce the RFI, EMI interference. Beyond this most cables have elaborate shielding for the same purpose.

Sometimes I wonder if these guys listen to their cables as they seem to get darker, thicker and slower with each twist. Over a year long period I researched and built almost 200 mock ups based on every design I could find. I then posted those findings on a review thread "DIY Interconnect Review". I discovered a lot of surprising things. In that thread I lay out a formula that you may want to try following to build your own cables. I assure you the interconnects your so happy with will be gone from your system for ever, at least that was true in the two friends who replaced magnet wire cables.

At any rate, it is a fascinating issue, and I believe if we all continue discussing what we are finding, we all will evolve in our knowledge and ultimately enjoyment of music!

jd
my audio junky friends & i have found that dielectrics, teflon included, invariably screw things up.

downside is the availability of cotton-dielectric (the VHAudio wire is a good gauge, but poor quality), and the difficulties of construction / durability of bare wires. cleaning terminals w/ progold is all the confirmation i need of the negative impacts of oxidation.

the ideal strikes me as high purity wire in a vacuum. tough to come by though..
rhyno