Directional speaker cables - switching direction

Scvan - Excellent way to summarize. I sense a sense of humor that makes me think we might get along.

Jea48, Your welcome Jim, happy new year to you.

If a manufacturer cannot explain the reasoning behind the arrows on the cable besides "we think it sounds better" then you are clearly buying a product from a company that has no business putting arrows on cables.

Audiolabyrinth,

Thank you for your kind words,

Happy holidays,
Jim

Jea48 - interesting quote. I thought it was interesting that they found a way to measure what they were hearing. I would guess that they used that measurement for future designs. What they heard could be measured
12-26-14: Mceljo

Ya, "they" found a way. Just remember why "they" looked for a way in the first place.

As long as manufactures put arrows on cables to show signal flow direction and say try the cables in both directions for what sounds best in my system I will follow their directions. It's nice to know the theory why but in the end all I care about is how the cable affects the sound of my audio system.

If somebody is hell bent on proving the theory why cables are directional then that person should by all means find a way to measure the differences.

Jea48,

That was a good article. What I picked up from it was that over 40 years ago he heard something on caps and couldn't measure it at that time.

The ability to take measurements and analyze data has improved dramatically over the last 40 years.
Any of us can quickly do a frequency response curve of our system at home that is probably much more accurate than could be done then. The hardware costs very little and the tools to do so are now free.

I think the simplest thing that can be done is simple measurements of signal into a system from a source versus what is being output by a speaker (of course you can measure at any point in the system). If you can hear something you didn't hear before it is probably something that was picked up by a mic during recording and should be able to be picked up by a mic again. With modern computers it is pretty easy to compare these signals and find A X B differences and inaccuracies in the signal.

There may be some not so well understood principles in audio reproduction, but if we can hear it I contend that is can be measured, maybe not understood, but at least measured.

Jea48 - interesting quote. I thought it was interesting that they found a way to measure what they were hearing. I would guess that they used that measurement for future designs. What they heard could be measured

The most important thing in this hobby is keeping an open mind. Which can be rather challenging when one considers some of the things that have come down the pike such as wire directionality. Demagnetization of CDs. Demagnetization of cables. The Green Pen. Mpingo disc. The Intelligent Chip. Holographic foils. The Red 'x Pen.

Measurements, analysis, listening, and the instincts, experience, and intelligence of the designer are all key factors influencing the degree of success or failure that will be achieved in the design process. That's the bottom line, IMO.

Happy holidays!
-- Al

Anyone see the irony? Noel Lee of Monster Cable talking about hearing the difference between capacitors.

Great Post Jea48, the more I read what you have to say, the more I respect you, I enjoy your post, cheers.

Mceljo,

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Quote from John Curl Interview.
Page 15/18 and 16/18.

"I was working with Noel Lee and a company
called Symmetry. We designed this crossover and I specified these one
microfarad Mylar caps. Noel kept saying he could 'hear the caps' and I
thought he was crazy. Its performance was better than aluminum or
tantalum electrolytics, and I couldn’t measure anything wrong with my
Sound Technology distortion analyzer. So what was I to complain about?
Finally I stopped measuring and started listening, and I realized that
the capacitor did have a fundamental flaw. This is were the ear has it all
over test equipment. The test equipment is almost always brought on line to actually measure problems the ear hears. So we’re always working in
reverse. If we do hear something and we can’t measure it then we try to
find ways to measure what we hear. In the end we invariably find a
measurement that matches what the ear hears and it becomes very
obvious to everybody."
End of quote.
http://www.parasound.com/pdfs/JCinterview.pdf
.

Mceljo, there are thing that cannot be measured but still can be optimized. You can see (oscilloscope) and hear the evidence of Transient Intermodulation but it is very hard and there are no standards to measure it. In addition amplifier with great other specifications can actually sound horrible. It gets extremely complex when you add system synergy.

Often praised high Damping Factor in my class D amplifier is DF=4000. If it is good, then Atmasphere amplifiers with DF<1 (4000 times worse) should sound horrible, right? Atmasphere amps also have 10x higher THDs - they should sound very bad, right? Atmasphere designer must be one of those "Mad Scientists" :)

I wanted to follow up my previous post that was cut short to feed my kids.

If there are physical attributes in audio equipment that cannot be measured but have a real impact on the sound, then the audio industry is effectively reduced from engineers and designers to a bunch of mad scientists developing products by trial and error. The real downside to this idea is that there would be no way to know if a given product would be better or worse in my system because it was developed using trial and error methods to please a few individuals in at most a few select systems. There would never be a reason to assume that an expensive product would perform better than a cheap one.

I don't know how components are actually designed, but it should be possible to measure the final signal while changing specific design attributes one at a time to learn what the effect is. It seems obvious that the closer the original signal the final signal the better the product is.

One thing is for sure, if you can't measure it then you can't design it. This is interesting as most companies at least attempt to advertise using some scientific claims.

Scvan, even assuming that we know everything (we had no idea about existence of transient intermodulation until 70') certain things might be very difficult to measure. How do you propose to measure signal propagation speed in the cable or characteristic impedance and dielectric absorption. What about shielding? How do we test coupling characteristic of different types of electrical noise (capacitive, magnetic, electromagnetic). What frequency spectrum and what type of modulation shall we use to emulate real life conditions.

People who learned about R,L and C believe, that everything can be measured. There is a thread "Capacitor log Mundorf Silver in Oil" on Audiogon running for years (currently 2588 posts) where people discuss sound of capacitors. Would you tell them that two capacitors of the same RLC have to sound the same?

How do you propose to evaluate digital cable that in my opinion is system dependent and might even sound different in identical systems at different locations.

We don't even have clear way to measure amplifier's power and the one listed as the strongest might actually be not the loudest. Perhaps testing has some value - 20W amplifier is clearly not 200W but other than that testing IMHO is a joke. Are you, for instance, sure that 1% THD tube amplifier has to sound worse that 0.01% SS amp? Would amplifier with wider bandwidth always sound better? If anything, price or weight might be better indicators of sound quality.

Everyone talks about data but no one ever does anything about it. How come reviewers never measure cables or fuses? Too lazy?

Hi scvan, check out the inductance and capacitance of the Tara Labs Grand Master Evolution cables, should come as a shock to you, since you like specs.

It is true that some audiophiles believe in something other than science, which is fine. However, I don't think any of the manufacturers feel that way. I'm sure they don't just stumble upon something and say "hey this sounds great" and sell it. It probably does happen that way but 99.99999% of the time it doesn't.

May some may disagree, but if it sounds different b/w two tweaks or components then the actual sound wave being generated by the speaker is different. If the sound wave is different a high-end transducer (mic) can pick that up and record it. It is that simple.

Magic doesn't exist except on stages in Vegas.

If nothing more than serving my own purpose, I think the data should exist and be available to the public.
People fret on this board about picoseconds of jitter but then ignore other data. It is all very odd to me.

Scvan - the problem with your idea is that a lot of audiophiles believe that science isn't up to measuring audio equipment. As stated in the post just prior to mine, things can measure the same and sound different. I agree that it is impossible to measure every attribute of a component, but believe that a lot of things believed by audiophiles are not significant, if true, to be audible.

Scvan, don't forget to measure amplifiers and speakers as well, because as we all know if things measure the same they have to sound the same and when they measure better they have to sound better :)

I must say this post is really inspiring me, maybe it is the spirit of the season.

I'm thinking of starting some website that investigates claims of various manufacturers of all types of hi-fi goods. I see too much going back and forth, which is fine. But we should all have data on our sides to make a decision. Maybe a potential site that does measurement of goods, and then measurement of those goods in a fixed system. In addition to that, outside labs can give feedback. I think I am on to something here.

I would really enjoy this and I think it would bring clarity and openness to this hobby. Hopefully it would propel things forward in the positive way.

12-23-14: Scvan
I would really be interested in the study from hi-fi tuning. Can someone point me to a link?

Here it is. My comments on it can be found in the first of my posts dated 5-14-12 in this thread.

If I recall correctly, there was a revised version of this paper that was subsequently issued by HiFi Tuning, providing measurements of some additional fuses and incorporating some minor changes. I recall stating that my comments about the first paper remained applicable to the second one, but I can't find the link offhand.

Regards,
-- Al

can you imagine what would happen If tara labs claim's was false?, I do not believe they would base their entire company on the claim of 8-nines mono crystal, super annealing process and not be what they claim, ha, ha,he,he, Im sorry, I got a good laugh out of that.

I'm thinking that mono-crystal is the name used because single crystal is a real term and is only used in labs. Single crystal and mono-crystal are probably two different things.

Here is a piece of single crystal copper that is not as pure as Tara Labs claims their copper to be.

http://www.mtixtl.com/Mc-Cu-e-50D10C1.aspx

I'm considering buying some Tara lab cables, and sending them to a lab to see what they really are.

Am I the only one that clicked on the link and got 1000's of images of miscellaneous stuff?

Using the same logic, obviously hi-fi does not exist:
more_images

I would really be interested in the study from hi-fi tuning. Can someone point me to a link?

I am willing to concede that, at this moment, not everything in the universe can be measured. But I will not concede that anything in the audio domain cannot be measured. If you can hear a difference there are microphones that measure it with much better accuracy than human ears.

Has anyone done these tests? tests To think a machine cannot out do you on this tests can easily be proven.

Some may disregard laws of physics on this board, but doing so just goes to show that they are clearly not open minded and willing to use evidence to make judgements.

I too believe in Santa Claus because you can't not measure his existence, he just has decided to not give me gifts in several years.

Geoffkait,

You really need to brush up on your reading and comprehension skills of what you have read.
.

Jea48, excellent point. One wonders why nobody ever measures wire or cables or fuses to see if they meaure differently when inserted into the system one direction or the other. Wait, someone did meaure fuse directionality! Is that good enough for you? Hi Fi Tuning published the results of a third party test of HiFi Tuning fuses compared to some other fuses, comparing one direction vs the other and with and without cryo. So it's not true that differences cannot be measured and don't exist. They do exist and can be measured, and have been measured! Hel-loo!

Thankyou jea48 for the microscoptic images of mono crystal copper, and the proof of the differences that is analized that you provided by the link called-images.

Scvan, all Tara Labs cables are hand made in the u.s.a., years ago, Tara Labs did make some cables in china, they got into alot of trouble with saying that they were made in the u.s. and was not, now that was only the lower tier cables when all that happened, that said, I asure you, all Tara cables are hand made in the u.s., and the answer to your question, since I personally know and speak to Matthew Bond, The engineering department is in Australia where Matthew lives, there is a whole team that works with him engineering, Tara Labs also has the purest copper in the industry, 8-nines, occ copper is 6-nines, both are mono crystal copper, absolutley there is a sound difference between the two, I have owned them both, Tara Labs use to use occ copper before they started extruding their own copper, manufacturing is done in Ashland, OR.

I want to clarify something. I honestly believe that some people hear a difference in the directionality of cables. I just do not feel there is a scientific explanation for this. This a belief thing.
I find that the only evidence that has been submitted is evidence from people that could make money off of cables, like cable manufacturers.
12-19-14: Scvan

"I find that the only evidence that has been submitted is evidence from people that could make money off of cables, like cable manufacturers."

Not true.

Just spend some time searching the archives on the subject on Cable Asylum and Tweakers' Asylum.

Scvan,

Your problem is unless the differences can be measured by existing test equipment the differences cannot exist.

You posted on this thread that cable differences can be heard when connected to an audio system. Yet you have failed to say one way or the other the differences can be measured by any test equipment that exists today. If the differences cannot be measured then the differences do not exist and therefore are merely manufactured snake oil.

Al, thanks for keeping me straight.

"Mono-crystal", nice marketing term. Are there any electron microscope pictures to prove this?

I can almost guarantee that no one can hear 3 9's vs 100 9's difference. The cables in out speakers aren't that good, nor is the copper on the PCB's of our electronics.

Tara labs have facilities in the US, Vietnam, China and Indonesia. Where do they do their engineering and manufacturing? Also, I would love to see the size of their marketing department vs the size of the engineering department. After all they are a "lab".

P.S: Here is the paper I referred to above. See Figure 2, although it addresses a coaxial cable rather than speaker cables. At 20 Hz the propagation velocity, while much slower than at higher frequencies, is about 5,000,000 meters per second, easily fast enough to be utterly inconsequential in the context of a home audio system.

Regards,
-- Al

12-19-14: Geoffkait
Al, what difference does it make if the speed of the electromagnetic wave is variable? For the purpose of argument let's say the speed vary between half the speed of light (or about ninety thousand miles per second) and say 3/4 speed of light (or about 135,000 miles per second). Are you suggesting that a difference of a foot or two in cable lengths would be audible due to difference in time it takes the signal to travel the length of the cables? Now, the dielectric material could affect the sound, but that's a different issue.

Geoff, I'm suggesting no such thing. I was just correcting a misstatement of fact. I agree completely that differences in signal propagation times will be of no practical or sonic significance whatsoever, under any reasonable circumstances, even if the two cable lengths are significantly unequal. I say that despite the fact that some cable marketing literature would have us believe otherwise. And I say that despite the fact that deep bass frequencies propagate a good deal more slowly than higher frequencies, perhaps 50 times more slowly at 20 Hz, according to what I consider to be a highly credible paper I recall seeing.

As you alluded to, however, several other cable parameters and cable effects, which under some circumstances might be sonically significant, are proportional to length. As I indicated to you and others in the recent thread on unequal cable lengths.

Regards,
-- Al

I have read all the recent post here, one explaination stands out to be the best of why some cables are truly directional, so here is why my Tara Labs Omega Jumper's are directional,,,Another industry first is TARA Labs' propriety annealing process, known as SA-OF8N 99.999999% copper (super-annealed, oxygen-free, eight nines pure copper). This creates a unique, long, unbroken crystal structure called “mono-crystal”.

I want to clarify something. I honestly believe that some people hear a difference in the directionality of cables. I just do not feel there is a scientific explanation for this. This a belief thing.
I find that the only evidence that has been submitted is evidence from people that could make money off of cables, like cable manufacturers. Of course it is always good marketing to say, "buy my product because of X Y and Z". My skepticism comes from the lack of 3rd party evidence or ABX comparisons or anything.
I disagree with Kijanki on something. I strongly believe we have the tools to measure these sorts of things. If you can't measure it directly on the cable, but hear a difference, there are certainly mics our there that are much better than my ears.
I have a a mic at work that is capable of 4hz to 100khz +/-3db. If anyone on this forum can hear that well, please call me because I want to take you around the world as a side show. We also have mics that are +/-0.5db for smaller ranges, I certainly can't hear that well, but it is easily measured.

Mike, thanks for your comment.

Getting back to speaker cables, it occurs to me that what I said about connector-related impedance discontinuities in relation to digital cables may have some applicability to speaker cables as well. Speaker cables will to some degree act as antennas, picking up Radio Frequency Interference from various sources, such as nearby cables, power cords, digital components, switching power supplies, light dimmers, fluorescent lights, possibly wifi and even radio stations. That RFI will presumably be at frequencies that are too high, and at amplitudes that are too low, for the speakers to reproduce it and for our ears to hear it. However if the amplifier uses feedback, and if (as I would expect to often be the case) the amplifier's output impedance at RF frequencies is significant, some of that RF energy will be introduced into the feedback loop. Non-linearities and intermodulation effects within the amp may then result in that energy affecting sonics at audible frequencies.

And the magnitude and frequency characteristics of the RFI that is injected into the feedback loop can be expected to vary to some degree depending on the differing impedance discontinuities and mismatches at the two ends of the cable.

The magnitude and frequency characteristics of the RFI that is injected into the feedback loop might even differ significantly depending on the exact physical placement of the spade lug or other termination on the binding post, and/or its positioning relative to nearby metallic surfaces on the amp. As I said early in this thread, when hard to explain and/or seemingly implausible phenomena are being addressed, multiple back and forth comparisons are called for, to be sure that the observation is being attributed to the right variable, as well as to verify that perceived differences are perceived consistently.

Best regards,
-- Al

Al, what difference does it make if the speed of the electromagnetic wave is variable? For the purpose of argument let's say the speed vary between half the speed of light (or about ninety thousand miles per second) and say 3/4 speed of light (or about 135,000 miles per second). Are you suggesting that a difference of a foot or two in cable lengths would be audible due to difference in time it takes the signal to travel the length of the cables? Now, the dielectric material could affect the sound, but that's a different issue.

Actually the differences in wire directionality have been measured. These measurements appear on the data sheets on the Hi Fi Tuning fuses web site. Also provided are differences between cryo'd and non cryo'd fuses (wire). Hel-loo!

Here is the Link for the Sterophile/transport Delight article I quoted earlier.
.
For some strange reason when I paste the link between the [url ]....[/url] brackets the web site is not displayed.

Sorry guys about the bad link in my last post above.
Try this one.

Charles Hansen
.

Many people believe that we should be able to determine that cables are not directional if they present the same measurement from both sides hence two cables with the same measurements should sound identical. I don't believe this to be true. I seriously doubt that one can measure any difference between oxygen free copper (thousands of crystals) or zero crystal copper that comes from continuous casting process - a slow cooling in heated molds to avoid crystallization. Best instruments wouldn't be able to measure this but many claims it makes a difference. Would I be able to tell the difference chopping off 3' of one of the speaker cables - most likely not but my cables are very neutral sounding. Perhaps audio possesses a little bit of black magic?
12-19-14: Kijanki

I agree.

Existing technology test equipment cannot measure the differences.... That does not mean they do not exist though.
But the trained human ear can hear the differences.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Existing technology.....

Posted by Charles Hansen (M) on January 16, 2010 at 17:26:35
In Reply to: Ping, Charles Hansen posted by jea48 on January 16, 2010 at 15:32:09:

Finally, it should be noted that we *do* orient all of our axial-leaded plastic film capacitors. When the capacitor is wound, one of the leads will be connected to the outside conductor and the other lead will be connected to the inside conductor. Orienting the capacitor in the circuit properly makes a difference in the sound quality.

It took us a while to figure out how, but we built a machine that allows us to tell which end of the capacitor is which. It is a pain, but we sort every single capacitor and mark it for the correct orientation at each point in the circuit. If we had to *listen* to every capacitor to determine the correct polarity, I don't think anybody could afford to buy our products...

>http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/55/558658.html

.
Jim

Al, Kinjanki, Scvan and Jea48 thanks for the references and posts to an interesting subject. I feel I am getting some truthful and pretty much non biased information I can use to consider how to evaluate and what to work with in my system.

Thanks, Kijanki. Agreed on all counts, although IMO the words "little bit" in your post should be particularly emphasized.

To quote an excerpt from page 4 of the article:

I performed the same tests using the low-jitter PS Audio Lambda transport as source. The results were very different. With a good source, cable direction didn't make a difference in the measurable jitter (fig.10). This suggests that the SV-3700—or any poor-quality transmitter—reacts with the cable's impedance to create jitter-inducing reflections in the interface. The directionality was probably caused by differences in the way the two RCA plugs were soldered to the cable; any bumps or discontinuities in the solder or RCA plug will cause a change in the characteristic impedance, which will cause higher-amplitude reflections in one direction than in the other. These reflections set up dynamically changing standing waves in the interface, introducing jitter in the embedded clock. These problems were reduced by the Lambda's higher-quality output circuit. In short, the worse the transport, the more cables—and their direction—affect sound quality.

Exactly what I speculated in my previous post, with some added elaboration based on the measurements that were performed.

Best regards,
-- Al

Al, link works if you remove last characters after "9".

Their test proves what you just said - digital cable is not exactly symmetrical presenting slightly different characteristic impedance on both ends. This is very different from directional properties of wire alone carrying analog audio signals.

Many people believe that we should be able to determine that cables are not directional if they present the same measurement from both sides hence two cables with the same measurements should sound identical. I don't believe this to be true. I seriously doubt that one can measure any difference between oxygen free copper (thousands of crystals) or zero crystal copper that comes from continuous casting process - a slow cooling in heated molds to avoid crystallization. Best instruments wouldn't be able to measure this but many claims it makes a difference. Would I be able to tell the difference chopping off 3' of one of the speaker cables - most likely not but my cables are very neutral sounding. Perhaps audio possesses a little bit of black magic?

P.S: My post just above was written before Jim's post immediately above it appeared. I haven't yet read the Stereophile article he linked to, but I'll post back later if it prompts any further thoughts.

Best regards,
-- Al

12-18-14: Geoffkait
I also do not happen to think the dielectric material affects the velocity of the signal. As I already said I think the velocity of the signal is fixed (constant) for a given medium, I.e., copper or whatever.

That is not true, Geoff. What Kijanki said is correct. For starters, see this Wikipedia writeup. Many other references can be found which will further confirm this. Widely varying propagation velocity specifications for various cables utilizing copper conductors can also be found.

12-18-14: Jea48
An experiment for those of you that use a CD transport and a separate DAC. If your digital coax cable has a solid core center conductor try this experiment. First listen to a good sounding CD with a strong female voice. Find a particular track you like and listen to it closely a few times. Now flip the digital cable end for end and then listen again. One good CD that comes to mind is, Etta James "Love Songs" track 1) "At Last". Also try a good sounding CD with a piano solo. Post back your results.

I don't use a separate DAC, but FWIW I can hypothesize a reason why a symmetrically designed digital cable may sound different, under some circumstances, depending on the direction in which it is connected. My hypothesis, though, has nothing to do with the wire itself having directional properties, and says nothing about the possibility that a symmetrically designed cable conducting analog signals may be have directional properties.

The connection between a digital cable and its connectors will have an impedance discontinuity and inaccuracy to some non-zero degree, which will result, to some non-zero degree, in some fraction of the amplitudes of whatever RF frequencies it may be asked to conduct being reflected back toward the source of the signal. I would expect the magnitude and character of that impedance discontinuity to not be totally identical at the two ends of the cable, due to small differences in solder application, crimping, etc., and perhaps even to dimensional tolerances in the connector.

Also, the output impedance of the component driving the cable and the input impedance of the component receiving the signal will not be precisely accurate.

Therefore the impedance mismatches between the cable and each of the connected components will differ depending on which end is connected where. And digital audio signals contain frequency components extending well into the RF region, up to at least tens of MHz. (Keep in mind that the risetimes and falltimes of the signal contain significant frequency components that are much higher than the clock rate and the data rate).

Depending on these factors, and also on the length of the cable, and also on the data rate that is being transmitted, the resulting reflections may very conceivably affect waveform quality at or near the mid-point of positive-going and negative-going transitions of the signal, those transition mid-points being what the receiving circuitry responds to. Degradation of those parts of the waveform will affect jitter, and therefore potentially sonics, to some degree. And that potential degradation will, per the earlier parts of this explanation, be affected by which connector is mated with which component. It will also be affected by whether the more significant of the two potential mismatches is at the receiving end or the transmitting end, and by the degree of impedance mismatch at both ends (which will affect how many back and forth re-reflections occur until their amplitude becomes insignificant).

See this paper for further discussion of the effects of impedance mismatches and waveform reflections on jitter, although the paper does not address the question of directionality.

If all of that sounds a bit far-fetched, IMO it is less farfetched than an assertion that wires themselves have directional properties to an audibly significant degree.

Best regards,
-- Al

The revelation that digital interconnects and their direction can introduce large differences in measured jitter was quite a shock. The differences heard between digital interconnects—and in their directionality—have now been substantiated by measurement

.
>http://www.stereophile.com/content/transport-delight-cd-transport-jitter-page-9


The Why? Who cares.... The point is, there was a difference. A measurable difference.
.