I hope I haven't overstepped the mark and offended you Cno.
The fact you posted that shows your intention, so no, you haven't.
I also believe you are not a totally lost cause, because under all those layers of skepticism, there is an inquiring mind.
The answer to your questions won't come from me, or the AVI forum (or any forum for that matter).......but from actually going out and discovering for yourself, by experimentation. i will then be here to discuss your findings.....whatever they may be.
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." André Gide
This is incorrect. A cable is generally modelled as a series inductance and resistance, and parallel capacitance and conductance across the pair.
As such a high capacitance will attenuate the high frequencies - hence bass is less affected than high frequencies.
Why are speaker cables modelled as parallel capacitance and not series capacitance?
Just thinking out loud here: surely what you have is the capacitance of the positive conductor of the cable in series with the positive terminals of the amp and speakers and the capacitance of the negative conductor of the cable in series with the negative terminals of the amp and speakers? So all you need to do is measure the series capacitance of one conductor and double it for the total in series capacitance effect?
I suppose this is something that anyone could test by simply buying 2 fairly large (or 4 for a stereo pair) capacitors and placing them in series between their speaker cables and either amp or speaker terminals, and then playing some music to see what effect this has had.
The capacitance is across the pair of conductors, hence between the positive terminal and negative terminal of the amplifier.
As you proceed along the cable, you have series resistance and series inductance, but parallel capacitance and parallel conductance.
They are not lumped - they are distributive elements - and the usual method of specifying them is in per metre lengths to quantify them in meaningful terms.
I'm sorry but I still don't understand.
Drawing a circuit diagram of the amp to the speaker we have the positive and the negative conductors in the cable. They never touch - or we would have a short circuit. So how can the capacitance in each conductor of the speaker cable be in parallel with the speaker crossover (in a passive speaker)? As I said before, surely we have 2 very low value capacitors in series with the crossover? 1 in series with the positive terminal and 1 in series with the negative terminal?
Maybe you can draw a circuit diagram to explain why the capacitance in speaker cables should be considered as in parallel with the speaker crossover?
Glad to hear it.
While I may have some strong views it's also worth mentioning that they aren't set in stone. I've never been the type of person to shoehorn data to fit in with a theory and am happy to admit when I'm wrong. I'm always willing to change any of my views to fit in with any new data that comes to light provided that the data is accurate and scientifically valid.
While I agree with you to a degree here it not quite as black an white as you make it sound. IMO it's beneficial to use knowledge gained from education to backup any experimentation that you do for yourself. It's also worth bearing in mind that any experimentation that doesn't use good scientific method (such as a sighted speaker cable comparison) is likely to lead to inaccurate data.
...and talking of experimentation I compared a few amplifiers this afternoon with regards to seeing if it's possible to pass the 'Harbeth challenge'...
PC > AVI Neutron Five 2.1
Sony NWZ-A847 64GB Walkman > Westone UM3x
Talking of which I compared a few amplifiers this afternoon with regards to seeing if it's possible to pass the 'Harbeth challenge'...
I suspect you would prefer Cardas Clear / Clear Beyond.
I would look at the following link :
The Telegraphers Equation section has the basic diagram.
Capacitance is formed using two conductors with a dielectric between them - this is the cable conductors and the insulation separating them.
It's late, I'm tired but I'll try: the capacitance of a cable is indeed parallel & is specified in Farads per unit of length. Double the length of cable will double its C so there's a linear relationship between the two. If we connect a cap between two points of a certain value then add a second of the same value then measure the total - it will have doubled, add a third, it triples etc. do the same with resistors & we get half then a third of the resistance. The more resistors we add between these hypothetical two points - the greater the current that can flow. Connect two caps of the same value in series with each other & the capacitance halves as measured across those two points. One way to visualise capacitance is to equate it with area. The larger the area, the greater the capacitance so longer the cable is, the greater the area & it's capacitance. That defines the C of the cable: increase the area (length), increases its C. A cable may indeed be connected to a circuit that has series capacitance such as in a X'over. One important difference would be that the cable's C is generally unwanted & increases with length whereas the series C is calculated to have desired effect such as passing frequencies above a certain value in a defined way. The amp will effectively "see" capacitance that's both desired & incidental. How the total C effects what we hear or can measure will also depend on other factors such as the amp's output impedance, the cable's loop resistance & inductance. Resistance in itself isn't frequency dependant but both caps & inductors are.
What expensive cables have over their cheaper counterparts is better faerie dust that cannot be easily measured by conventional means as we all know >)
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds - the pessimist fears this is true."
James Branch Cabell
MAIN: Apple TV2, Mac Mini & iTunes Match, CA Azur 751BD or Panasonic P42V20B into audiolab M-DAC, feeding a Primare A34.2 via XLRs, 2x 5m of Atlas Ascent 2 firing up Totem Arros.
ON THE HOOF: iPhone 5S/Sennheiser MM450.
How was everyone's weekend? I had a great time.. Ah cables.. Those ruddy bloody cables eh..
Electrocompaniet PI 2 | Naim ND5 XS | Chord Epic | ProAc Studio 115
I agree with CnoEvil. I tried Chord v TQ and they did sound different. Don't be swayed by price as well. Some of the cheaper cables sonded better (to me) than the more expensive ones - even within the same manufacturer!!
When you heard them both how would you describe each sound? I think detail is obviously important but i'm more interested in getting an even honest frequeny range from the amp.. Cheers
...You asked for reasoning behind cable break-in, and I gave you some:
- "If you measure a new cable with a Voltmeter, you will see a standing voltage, because good dielectrics make poor conductors"...
I've just measured a 60 metre reel of new, unused speaker cable with my voltmeter on its most sensitive settings.
Guess what my reading was?
Of course it was. What fr0g said at the bottom of page 12 is correct. If there's any slight charge in the cable it'll immediately get discharged as soon as you touch it.
What Cardas says about a cable holding a bit of residual charge and it needing to take several days for this charge to dissipate is complete and utter rubbish.
I am not saying that you have no clue, but that you don't have the scientific background to fully evaluate the effect of the likes of VOP, Matched Propagation, Resonance in the strands of a Conductor, and the way different types of dielectric effects the sound...to name but a few.
I have read a lot of reports, from many reviewers across different mags / review sites, where the sonic character of certain cable changed with use.....in some cases, to such degree that the reviewer recommended not even listening to it for 100 hours or so before assessment
This isn't proof of any kind, but it happens often enough to at least take the possibility of break-in seriously.
George Cardas claims dielectrics produce an electrical effect that interferes with the audio signal......they accumulate and release an electrical charge in response to the current flow in the conductor (much like the charging and discharging of a capacitor). The problem is the electrical discharge from the dielectric is out of sync with the electrical signal in the conductor, which causes a smearing of low level information.
You asked for reasoning behind cable break-in, and I gave you some:
- "If you measure a new cable with a Voltmeter, you will see a standing voltage, because good dielectrics make poor conductors".
- "Cable that has a charge is measurably more micro-phonic and an uneven distribution of the charge causes something akin to structural return loss, in a rising impedance system".
- "A new cable, out of the bag, will have a standing charge when uncoiled. It can have as much as several hundred millivolts. If the cable is left at rest, it will soon drop to under a hundred, but will take days of use in the system to fall into the teens.".
Your heavy skepticism biases the way you read something like this, and so latch onto anything that might prove your POV....this is not a criticism per se, as we all do it, but if is very difficult to keep a truly open mind. The whole article was trying to explain why / how the standing charge gets there in the first place, and then dissipates with use, until it gets down to a few MV (but never zero)....in fact keeping a very low level signal in the cable at all time helps.
Are you really knowledgeable enough to dismiss this explanation out of hand as mumbo jumbo?
Just picked up this aspect after reading the thread and another forum member commenting that there is no voltage on a cable.
Of note is the following :
All electrical phenomena are known with regards to cables - what Cardas is describing is a capacitance, yet somehow this is different in some way for Cardas to infer that it causes low level smearing.
Does Cardas state that his cables do not implement this effect or that he has reduced the effect in his cables ?
I read some of the insights - but could not find this aspect.
As the other forum commentator stated - zero volts on his cable - but Cardas seems to indicate these are prevalent, uses words such as triboelectric effect - static caused through friction - but i cannot see how these would effect a cable such that a period of weeks burn in is required.
I recall at school examining electrostatic charges using a gold leaf electroscope - you could instantly discharge the charge on the plate once it was established - with your finger.
Hence, Cardas use of known phenomena would seem to be miss applied to confuse people into believing that expensive cables are more advanced than standard multistranded cables with equivalent electrical characteristics.
i suggest you go to the nordost room at whfi show you will know the difference then i assure you
Hi Fi ,Atc scm 19S,Bel canto cd2,ATC sia2 amp
Home cinema,Pioneer lx 56 amp,pioneer BDP LX52 blue ray,Sky,Apple TV,X box,Q acoustics 2000 surrounds
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing