Impendance - Resistance & the story of "Z"


Can someone please help a non-engineer understand the difference between the two with regard to cable deisgn. (Aren't they the same? Is it me or is the use of both terms somewhat confusing?)

Reading a certain manufactures literature, it states that lower "Z" in a cable is always better. Is this really true and can someone explain why? They have an interesting graph showing their cable with a "Z" below 1.0 and all other cables tested with "Z" above 1.0

Just looking to understand. Thanks.
joperfi

Showing 1 response by joperfi

I want to thank all who took the time to respond and educate the non-EE’s (me) on this complex topic. I now have a better understanding of things. The reason I asked in the first place was because the manufacturer of the pre-amp I just purchased suggested that a long interconnect to the amp would be OK if I used and IC that kept the resistance low. I will now go back and ask if he meant resistance or impedance. (Does anyone know what he may have meant? He does not publish an output impedance spec for the pre-amp).

Sean, in particular, thanks for explaining the concept of an impedance transformer as related to interconnects. I see now how the electrical parameters of the components connected along with IC’s have a big impact on the “complex impedances” of the system. Understanding that the impact of a cables “Z” (nominal impedance) depends on its application (amp-speaker or source-pre-amp) wouldn’t one now question the cable manufacture that say’s that a lower “Z” for both IC's and SC's is always better? Perhaps I missed something.

Regards,