cable dielectric cause of artificial sound

I stumbled across a very curious phenomena pertaining to cable dielectric at work the other day. Nobody that i have discussed the matter with can explain what is happening, yet they have seen the very easily measured and duplicated results that i'm obtaining and can't deny them.

I have ideas as to what is causing this curious phenomena, but don't want to speak up about this as of yet. I will say that what i'm seeing tends to make me believe that dielectrics, which aren't supposed to conduct, have a polarity / directionality to them i.e. they conduct better in one direction than in another.

I know that some companies already have cabling on the market that supposedly deals with this subject, but i don't think that they fully understand exactly what is going on here. I just hope that Clark Johnsen doesn't see this. Something about polarity based issues tends to get him in all worked up : ) Sean
>

Dazzdax: I would not doubt that Audioquest's "DBS" system is based on something similar to what i'm experiencing. Without talking to Bill Low, i'm strictly guessing at that though...

Tplavas: I was working with standard "foam" dielectric as found in typical RF based coaxial cables. While the exact dielectric make-up will vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, they are probably pretty close. How much this applies to audio based cabling, with many actually using RF based coaxial designs as their core, is beyond me. Given that my testing was conducted within the AF band, i would have to assume that the basic results would apply to audio cabling to at least some extent. Whether or not i want to fully dig into this area is a decision i'll have to think about. Sean
>

There are many valid points being made here, but i think some of the data is being misinterpreted. Obviously, what i posted above was just my point of view. Since we are sharing our points of view, why stop there ? : )

I've mentioned before that many manufacturers cling to one type of geometry for their entire product line i.e. their interconnects, speaker cables, power cords, etc... all use the same basic or extremely similar geometry and philosophy. That's where most of the problems come from.

Each electrical interphase ( component to component, AC outlet to component, amp to speaker, etc... ) has different electrical characteristics. They therefore require different design criteria for optimum power transfer / minimal signal loss characteristics. Obviously, this requires knowing how to juggle all of the variables involved and making some personal decisions as to what one thinks are the most important aspects of signal conduction.

In some cases, minimal signal loss is NOT what is most desirable, so that can also be designed into the product via juggling conductor geometry, dielectric absorption, etc... Once again, this requires an intimate knowledge of how things work, both alone and in conjuction with other materials, and personal decisions as to what the primary design goals are.

On top of that and / or outside of that, certain cable geometries / dielectric materials contribute to cable rigidity. Increased cable rigidity increases cable microphony i.e. the cables acting as microphones and introducing random distortions into the signal. This microphonic distortion introduces a random low level haze, increasing the noise floor, reducing micro-dynamics, reducing focus, etc...

Bare in mind that these distortions can be generated physically ( cables laying on top of devices that transfer energy into them ) or acoustically ( high spl's vibrating air-suspended cables, etc ).

How cables deal with vibration / microphony is a complex subject that many "audiophile approved" manufacturers have never studied or looked into. Many EE's don't believe that microphony is a problem in anything but an utterly defective cable, but i'm not of that opinion. I've seen and experienced very measurable microphonic differences in what one would normally consider to be "good" cabling.

Outside of OR on top of that, some cable geometries are more / less resistant to RFI / EMI induced interference. This type of interference is typically found to introduce high frequency smearing aka sibilance, hardness or brightness into the system. Depending on the degree of the interference and how susceptable the gear is to RF induced noise, some of the aforementioned problems can be perceived as increased brilliance, increased detail, extended treble response by the uneducated ear.

On the other hand, someone used to listening to this phenomena, and having the RFI / EMI reduced or removed from the system, may think that the system now sounds soft, dull, dark, muted or lacking in treble response. In all actuality, the system is now more linear with a truer response, it is their perception that is distorted.

Outside of OR on top of that, there's always the impedance related issues that are involved. Depending on the stability of the gear / circuitry involved, the various aspects of performance i.e. amplitude linearity, frequency response, transient response, distortion characteristics, etc... can be effected.

It should also be noted that any / all of these variations can be random at nature depending on the design of the gear and the impedances that they are presented with. Since the impedance that each cable introduces into the system is placed in series with the impedances of the connecting circuitry, different cables of varying impedances can introduce quite a few variables into the same component based system.

These are but three variables that can alter cable sonics. As previously mentioned, unless ALL of the variables are controlled in phenomenally tight fashion, the differences in cabling / system interaction are typically the result of multiple varaibles, not just one.

This is a PHENOMENALLY complex subject, that obviously can't be resolved in a thread like this. As far as i can see, we need to keep learning and sharing if we are to make any progress in this specific area. Sean
>

The dielectric becomes more conductive / lossy over a period of time. As such, the electrons DO interact with the dielectric, both in terms of conductivity and magnetic field. The measurements that i mentioned above pertain directly to this subject. Sean
>

Corrosion of a conductor can take place due to oxidation, thermal shifts and / or a chemical reaction. Due to the fact that many conductors are directly in contact with a chemically formulated material ( dielectric ) that is exposed to electro-mechanically induced voltages, vibrations and thermal shifts, it is quite possible for the conductor to become corroded within the cable jacket itself. This is due to the chemical make up of the the dielectric breaking down ( due to any of the aforementioned reasons ) and leaching onto the conductors. This is part of what i was discussing above i.e. cables changing sonics / electrical characteristics over time due to internal decay.

Scar: You are wasting your time trying to have a meaningful conversation with this individual. Been there, done that, won't go there anymore. Learned my lesson, as have many others in several different forums. That could be why this party has finally migrated over here i.e. he's running out of other people's sandboxes to dump in. Sean
>

Dpac996: You and Audioholics are absolutely right!!! I recant all of my previous statements, experiences and chalk it up to my ignorance of the "facts". Thanks for clearing all of this up for me. Helping me to understand that all cables of reasonable construction and parts quality sound identical will make my life ( and maybe even yours ) SOOOOO much better. Sean
>

Dpac: One can pick and choose as to what they think matters at audio frequencies, but the bottom line is that Audioholics believe and teach that all reasonably well constructed cables sound the same.

Since we know that all cables don't sound the same and / or provide consistent results under various types of installation conditions, all of their math equations obviously don't cover / explain all of the various aspects that alter cable / component interaction and system sonics. I'm not just picking on Audioholics, but all of those that blindly spout the same "cables are cables are cables" dogma.

As far as using smaller / larger conductors changing the sound of an interconnect, most cables terminate into a component that has an impedance that is hundreds to thousands of ohms higher than the series resistance of the cable. As such, changing the series resistance by even an ohm ( a LOT for a reasonable length cable ) via altering conductor size becomes a moot point. Please remove that factor from your arsenal of responses.

The fact that tonal balance and high frequency resolution, which is attributable to skin effect, are directly altered by changing conductor size, doesn't seem to phase them. One can build identical cables with the same nominal LCR, grades of conductors, grades of dielectric, grades of connectors, etc... with the only variable being conductor size and hear the audible differences. The fact that Audioholics profess that skin effect does NOT come into play at audio frequencies what so ever makes me want to disregard their findings all together.

No matter how much math one does, you can't explain away things that are really happening. When theory doesn't fit reality, which one is wrong???

As far as your comments go about shielding, this typicaly adds capacitance, not inductance. It can also change the velocity of propogation, depending on how the shielding is implimented. In doing so, it effectively changes the path length and loading characteristics that the source component sees, following some of the same principles that apply to transmission line theory.

I'm not saying that audio cables work the same as RF cables, but that many of the same principles can be applied. I also think that, because people like Audioholics / believers in archaic dogma have been conducting most of the testing in this area, we don't have many of the answers that might have otherwise already been explained.

Thinking within the box only lets one see what is in the box. Obviously, the variable results that occur under many different situations of cable / component interaction are OUTSIDE of the box, negating that line of thinking. As such, it leads to limited conclusions and possibilities, hence the problem with the theory not always fitting reality. Sean
>

I've always said that shielded cables will perform & sound better, when properly implimented. I just don't know of any commercially made cables that are properly shielded, mostly for the reasons you site above. Sean
>