Do CD Transports benefit much from upgraded power cords?


Your experiences?

rockadanny

Spectral results--Each count was 12 hours. High resolution gamma spectroscopy using NIM's. The NIST certified rate is 20.030 CPS for the Region of Interest (ROI). The region of interest is approximately 661.7 keV. 

Results--As you can see, the filtered data is very close to the "True" count rate as per NIST certification. The filtration costs > $50,000 and cleans up the AC power before it powers the sensitive electronics. The crystal operates at - 200 degrees Celsius and is ultra sensitive to electronic noise. 

Using a Nordost Power Cable made no statistically relevant difference as compared to a standard cable. 

I am not sure what this means on the sonic front but if a Power Cable made NO difference on highly sensitive equipment, how could it make a difference on a CD transport. 

 

      Counts per Second (CPS) (Unfiltered)   Counts per Second (CPS) (Filtered)   Counts per Second (CPS)(Unfiltered) (Stock)    Counts per Second (CPS) (Unfiltered)(Nordost)
                   
Count #1   20.645   20.121   20.643   20.693
Count #2   20.711   20.154   20.702   20.701
Count #3   20.689   20.101   20.698   20.692
Count #4   20.705   20.098   20.702   20.712

@thecarpathian

You asked in my opinion what "is the best type copper for cable application?".

I am here primarily to learn, so really I am the worst person to ask!  However my physics background forces me to apply Occam's razor to claims.  If there is a simple explanation, it is more likely to be correct than a complex one.  Or as Einstein said, make the explanation as simple as possible, but not more so.

To your question: Theoretically, for high voltage transmissions lines, aluminium is best with a steel core to hold it up.

For microwave frequencies, use hollow pipes because of the skin effect.

For speakers, usually a high current application, the shorter the better.  Ideally the amplifier is in the speaker so its output can be feedback-corrected to match the speaker.  Otherwise you probably want low resistance in the cable and the connectors.  If you halve the length, or double the cross section, you halve the resistance.  Note that all speakers have varying impedance across their frequency range, especially around cross-over regions.  Changing the resistance of the cable will alter the tonal balance, for better or worse.  Changing the purity and crystal structure only have small effects on resistance.

The mere act of changing a cable scrapes oxidation from its connector surfaces, and suddenly the resistance drops a bit.  The speaker gets a bit louder and louder sounds better.

In practice, most of my cables are cheap!  I did buy one slightly up market power cord but I cannot find it.  I did modify one power cord by adding ferrite chokes to mitigate RFI emissions and that solved a particular problem.  I still feed my Quad electrostatics with the Naim speaker wire my dealer threw in forty years ago.  I re-terminate it every few years.

When I bought current-hungry KEF Reference 1 speakers I bought a pair of QED silver coated copper leads with a fancy twist, secondhand.  I could bi-wire them but can't be bothered - still enjoying them too much.

I did buy some van den Hul balanced interconnects, because the blurb on their website made some sense from a physics viewpoint.  They use the cable weave invented by Alexander Graham Bell.

Am still seeking advice on rewiring my old SME tonearm!  Reducing the number of corroded connections and going balanced has some appeal!  Siver litz or copper?

My digital connections are all HDMI, no dramas as long as they include Ethernet. I only stream audio in order to sample tracks, and then it is WiFi to my phone and Bluetooth to my pre-amplifier.

Basically a cable sceptic but so many report benefits, they can't all be wrong.  Can they?

@grunge1000

Spectral results--Each count was 12 hours. High resolution gamma spectroscopy using NIM’s. The NIST certified rate is 20.030 CPS for the Region of Interest (ROI). The region of interest is approximately 661.7 keV.

Results--As you can see, the filtered data is very close to the "True" count rate as per NIST certification. The filtration costs > $50,000 and cleans up the AC power before it powers the sensitive electronics. The crystal operates at - 200 degrees Celsius and is ultra sensitive to electronic noise.

Using a Nordost Power Cable made no statistically relevant difference as compared to a standard cable.

I am not sure what this means on the sonic front but if a Power Cable made NO difference on highly sensitive equipment, how could it make a difference on a CD transport.

Can you plug tubes into that thing and have it show the relevant statistical difference between a Mullard and a Telefunken?