Which cables go with what?????

Sean wrote:
"What is being said here is that a cable can be good even though it doesn't transfer all of the information that was fed into it."

No, what I said was that certain cables do not mate synergistically with certain components, at least without degradation of some sort, such as dynamic compression or HF roll-off. In other words, cables that are said to be synergistic only with a particular component are usually "tone control" cables.

"A better cable will lose even less signal / convey even more information without altering tonal balance."

No argument here.

"Well, guess what ? I think we all agree with that premise in basic theory. What i think that most of us here would like to know is how do we find these cables and know which ones they are ?"

Unfortunately, you have to take the word of either: a reviewer, a trusted friend, or a manufacturer and ultimately try the cables for yourself. However, if you are not a super-sleuth, you may still have an offensive component in your system that you have not identified and thus end-up in the vicious circle of cable swapping etc.. I try to help as many customers in this sleuthing as I can but it is difficult to do this remotely. One thing that I am doing is offering a "reference source system" to try with a refundable deposit down. At least with this source, you KNOW that the source not the problem. Then the only things to consider are the preamp, the amp and the speakers.

"If it is not something that we can measure and / or quantify by some type of physical or electrical characteristics, we are right back to trial and error and ludicrous claims based on marketing hype and / or personal preferences."

I never said that a neutral cable did not have measurable quality metrics. They certainly do and I believe in these metrics, such as capacitance and dielectric absorption for an interconnect cable. Furthermore, I believe that I am nearing the point of diminishing returns for these metrics. Not all quality metrics for cables are easily measurable however. The quality of the silver wire for instance plays a big part in the neutrality and quality of an interconnect cable. I have my theories as to why this is and I know what to do to make the silver sing, but I have no effective way to measure this, at least which makes any sense at audio frequencies.

Audioengr: "No, what I said was that certain cables do not mate synergistically with certain components, at least without degradation of some sort, such as dynamic compression or HF roll-off. In other words, cables that are said to be synergistic only with a particular component are usually "tone control" cables."

The comment that you responded to here was meant as a response to what S23chang said, not what you had said previously. He said that a good cable would work in any system and a better cable would give you more of what the good cable already offered without altering the tonal balance. I simply pointed out that if one cable "bettered" another cable, one of the cables was simply "losing" more info than the other ( all other things being equal ).

Other than that, i think that you are still missing the point that i was trying to make. We are not listening to any single component in a system. We are listening to a conglomerate of equipment that are all loading into and reacting to one another that can be summed up as being equivalent to Thevenin's Theory. System A is no better than System B even if System A uses "neutral" cables / coloured electronics and System B uses "flavourful" cables with "neutral" electronics. We hear the end result. If both systems are deemed to be "accurate" and / or "musical", etc..., then it really doesn't matter HOW we got there. The end result is the same, we just took different paths. The fact that changing a cable CAN alter the sonics / electrical characteristics of a system / component simply means that synergy DOES come into play and IS measurable.

As a side note, try measuring the actual load impedance that a source sees during dynamic use conditions with various cabling. You can even try this with the same cabling of different lengths. Make sure that you vary the amplitude of the signal as you are doing this. Then compare their waveforms using a dynamic passage of music on a storage scope and / or tone bursts at each frequency extreme. Once you get done scratching your head, then swap in a different source or load and do it all over again. Then come back and talk to me about "universal cabling". I think you'll have a slightly different opinion and outlook on things.

To sum it up, what you'll find is that the input VSWR that the source sees changes as the amplitude and frequency are varied. When you find a cable that can "buffer" these variations that the source sees, this cable will tend to present a consistent sonic "flavour" due to the fact that the source sees a consistent load. The cable is NOT "flavoured" so much as you are now hearing the effects of consistent loading characteristics of the source device itself. It is helping to negate the varying levels of reactance of the load component that the source would otherwise have to deal with. In effect, it is acting as an impedance transformer. Whether or not one likes the "flavour" that such a cable provides, power transfer and signal linearity are probably operating at or near peak efficiency. That is, so long as the impedance being presented to the source via the cables "transformer action" is to its' liking. Changing to a different cable will present a different impedance / level of reactance and therefore cause the level of power transfer / signal linearity to be altered. Depending on the load component and cables being used, the sonics could get better, worse or have varying levels of consistency due to the aforementioned variations in input vswr as drive levels / frequency are varied.

Too bad we live so far apart. Between your Digital background and my RF background, i'm sure that we could come up with some real "wonderous" stuff. We might want to kill each other getting there, but it would be fun and i'm sure, quite enlightening : ) Sean
>

I suggest that this thread be deleted due to an overwhelming influence by either the heat, or more likely the economy.

In response to the original post, cable differences go deeper than coloration. Two cables can be equally neutral on chromatic scale, yet differ greatly in macro/micro dynamics, noise floor, speed, clarity, detail resolution versus smoothness, and quality of imaging. Assuming that you can locate neutral cables, there is still a wide variety of performance attributes to consider in system balancing.

Sean, If I understand correctly, the bottom line and simplicity of your question is how do you determine a cable is, in and of itself, neutral enough to have no discernable signature of it's own given the current resolution that can be obtained with electronics. If that's your question, it does need an answer.

The only way I know how to answer that question at this point is to work with my clients on a case-by-case basis and tell them what my experience tells me they should hear with our cabling in their particular system. It's time consuming but, so far, that has worked very well.

What that requires on my part is that I have to have a pretty good scope of how different gear sounds. That has taken me years to learn and is an on-going process. In case you're wondering if I've heard almost every piece of gear there is to be heard, the answer is no but I've had the opportunity to hear a lot. I have enough experience to have a good clue about how different topologies sound, how different capacitors, diodes, resistors, ICs, transistors, tubes, wire, and etc. sound. Given this experience and what I believe makes for a neutral cable, I believe I've acquired enough knowledge and credibility to make the claims that I make about our products. I'm confident enough to risk being fool enough to let others purchase our offerings and welcome they're judgments. So far, we're still here and I trust we'll be around for the long haul.

If this seems like a pretty cumbersome answer, it probably is. I wished I knew a simpler way to answer it but this is the best, however awkward, I know for now. I think I should say thanks for bringing up your question like this because I’ve not really entertained to any real degree your question. I am now entertaining it seriously…if there’s a simpler answer that is still helpful to our clients, it sure would save me a hell of a lot of time!

Kindly and Sincerely,
Robert