It's Simple

+ almarg...And, all parts must work together for the purpose of producing "your sound."
Kenny

“It has long been my feeling that many audiophiles overattribute intrinsic sonic characteristics to cables, power cords, and various tweaks, when their sonic effects result primarily from interaction with the associated hardware. Those effects thus tending to differ among different applications, which in turn is often a significant contributor to weak correlation between performance and price.”

Is this related to system synergy as a whole?

Kenny.

Ian (ieales), thanks for providing the outstanding paper referenced in your post just above. It does indeed reinforce the notion that a given cable will tend to sound different depending on what it is connecting and the system it is being used in, as you stated at the outset of the thread. And as I illustrated with three specific examples in the first of my posts dated 2-27-2018 in this thread.

It has long been my feeling that many audiophiles overattribute intrinsic sonic characteristics to cables, power cords, and various tweaks, when their sonic effects result primarily from interaction with the associated hardware. Those effects thus tending to differ among different applications, which in turn is often a significant contributor to weak correlation between performance and price.

Thanks again. Best regards,
-- Al

Some might find this Cable Snake Oil Antidote interesting with respect to LRC, the signal and the system.

As originally stated, cables affect the sound and the effect is system dependent.

Another's opinion on a cable in a vastly different system may not be valid.

You gets some cables and ya hooks em up...den ya listens!  Pretty simple...no math needed.

Of course you look at it differently...

Hello. My name is <fill in the blank>. I own a mansion and yacht.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7dCTwlAI8Y

gdhal"As to fraudulence, I look at a bit differently. As soon as I mentioned my rationale for wanting to skype - because seeing and hearing you lends credibility to the authenticity of your interest - and that it is a possibility you are merely a 14 year old school girl"

Of course you look at it differently you have to defend yourself your $25,000 USD listening challenge was exposed as a FRAUD and that is why your posts were deleted by the thoughtful and purposeful moderators as protection for contributors to this forum who may have fallen victim to your extortion! I wouldn't skype because as I told you UP FRONT all discussions must be in public to protect all involved from the very devious deception you sought to perpetrate as has been clearly shown to all who have carefully followed your subversive behavior here.

I think the thoughtful and purposeful moderator’s have done an exemplary job in undertaking the management of these forums and in particular have acted swiftly and decisively to delete repeated posts by those who would seek to defraud the audiophile members of this community....

I do recall a number of your threads were also deleted.

As to fraudulence, I look at a bit differently. As soon as I mentioned my rationale for wanting to skype - because seeing and hearing you lends credibility to the authenticity of your interest - and that it is a possibility you are merely a 14 year old school girl without the financial means and/or legal authority to enter into any agreement - did I validate your insincerity.

EDIT:

Apologies to the OP for any thread pollution. I'm hopeful this would be my last post in this particular thread. 

I was unaware this forum tolerated cross thread stalking. 😳

gdhal"Audiogon ought to modify their policy where moderation is concerned. Just my opinion, of course."

I think the thoughtful and purposeful moderator's have done an exemplary job in undertaking the management of these forums and in particular have acted swiftly and decisively to delete repeated posts by those who would seek to defraud the audiophile members of this community as you have done with your $25K USD "challenge" and efforts to obtain personal information about users here by employing skype as part of the extortion plot so I can see why you think the moderation needs to be changed!

To the ops original thought . You mean this can all be scientifically explained ! Crap , I liked the mystery and unknown aspects of wires and cables . Thanks for shattering the illusion .

It's a pleasure to read an Audiogon thread where Geoff is totally ignored, in spite of his attempts at garnering attention. 

Audiogon ought to modify their policy where moderation is concerned. Just my opinion, of course.

As the thread suggests, "it's simple" really.

Al, I should've known better.  I calculate dividers almost every day, but yesterday was my "slow" day.  On positive note, I didn't make any bank transactions  :)

Kijanki, the calculation of a 6 db difference you provided in your post yesterday was correct, but it was for the wrong thing :-)

Note that in Ian's calculation there is also a 6 db difference between the 4 ohm situation and the 8 ohm situation -- the voltage drop **in the cable** of 10 millivolts vs. 5 millivolts!

Best regards,
-- Al
 

I kind of hate to bring this up, but there are obviously many variables besides L R and C involved with how cables sound, some of which I’ve alredy mentioned. There are also the variables of floor borne vibration and static electric charge, which is why cables should usually be suspended off the floor and why some sort of anti-static spray or device should be employed. A demagnetizer should be employed, making magnetism another variable. There are other variables, too, perhaps beyond scope. All of this, plus what others have posted, such as metal purity, etc, suggests that L R and C are not really the only game in town, as much as we might aspire to embrace mathematics and “classical electronics” as the end-all do-all for our hobby. It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.

Ieales, thank you for correction. I assumed gauge 17 (worst case) that is 0.1 ohm for total of 20ft, but calculated it wrong. The difference in level between 4 and 8 ohm speaker is 0.1dB. That’s most likely inaudible.

Ian, your calculations are of course correct, and I would note for the record that Belden 1311A is AWG 12 (12 gauge) wire.

However as I'm sure you'll agree two of the expressions that were used in the calculations were not written correctly:

4Ω: 4 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.990V across the speaker
8Ω: 8 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.995V across the speaker

Should have been written as:

4Ω: 4 / (4 + (2 x 0.02)) = 0.990V across the speaker
8Ω: 8 / (8 + (2 x 0.02)) = 0.995V across the speaker

Best regards,
-- Al
 

@kijanki

I’m not going to correct all your errors, but this the level math:

Assuming 0.02Ω in each cable lead [12’ of Belden 1311A or almost any equivalent gauge cable] with a 1V drive at the amplifier terminal:
4Ω: 4 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.990V across the speaker
8Ω: 8 / (2 x 0.02) = 0.995V across the speaker
db: 20 * log ( 0.990 / 0.995 ) = -0.043db

Doubling the lead resistance, +3 AWG numbers, only has 0.086db loss.

On a speaker with an impedance that varies from 4 to 16Ω, the total delta across the 20-20k is 0.13db or ±0.065db which is extremely difficult to hear on a dynamic signal.

Let us not forget directionality and cryogenics. You know, if you want to compete with the big boys.

Proximity Effect, Skin Effect, Purity, Metal, Plating, Insulation Dielectric, Fatigue, etc.

yes, these and others are probably as important as LRC, especially R, although changing R changes the reactive LRC. 

definitely not as simple as just LRC especially when, as indicated, 75mm of wire, strategically placed, can completely change the sound by an enormous amount. 

once someone works it all out then it is probably simple - until then - although building a bridge is usually not simple yet we see them everywhere.  Some bridges can be very simple but do they really do the job, in some cases sufficiently so and in other cases not so... perhaps there are too many variables, and too many assumptions, to allow over simplification, although like bridges some simplification is possible and sufficient.

Ieales, Let’s imagine 0.1 ohm (both ways) cable connected to 8 ohm speaker that has lowest impedance of 4 ohm. At 4 ohm we have divider of about 1/40 equal to -32dB while at 8 ohm we have 1/80= -38dB. Do you think that 6dB difference in audible area won’t make any difference?

You might be right that cable R can be ignored only for the purpose of damping factor, since there is always speaker’s own impedance in series with back EMF force (and 2/3 of it is resistive), but one can argue that capacitance and inductance are not that important either. Almarg pointed out that speaker, having inductive character most of the time, has very high impedance at high frequencies (where cable inductive reactance can go as high as 1 ohm) while capacitance plays very small role because of low output impedance. As for the skin effect, that you mentioned - it starts at about gauge 18 with copper at 20kHz. Our ears are not very sensitive to volume change but are very sensitive to frequency smear. When you change loudness by 1 dB nobody will be able to detect it but when you adjust treble by +1dB you can detect it easily. In order to provide low resistance without frequency smearing companies split wires into multiple strands. It won’t help much as long as the strands are in magnetic field of each other (skin effect exists). To improve it cable designers place conductors on hollow tube (or flat cable pattern) reducing magnetic field to one that comes only from neighboring wires.

Got it backwards ieales!

@yping 

such as IMD, etc

Distortions like TH, IM, TIM are active components faults.

There are numerous other cable properties: Proximity Effect, Skin Effect, Purity, Metal, Plating, Insulation Dielectric, Fatigue, etc. All these properties have an effect, but well below LRC.

For all intents and purposes, cable R can be ignored as it is a minor fraction of speaker R. Longer runs, say 25 feet or 30 feet, cable R can equal amplifier R, cutting Damping Factor in half. Additional length also increases L & C, which can cause stability problems.

Cables should be as short as reasonably possible, of the same length and as straight as possible [Bends increase L, but this is more theoretical than practical].

In general, the more current, the shorter the wire should be. Therefore, amps should be as close as possible to the speaker with long inter-connects from the low level electronics.

I guess that is a long-winded way of saying that the higher quality my system is, the more a simple thing like a cable improves things, or the opposite. For my system and ears, I have found that to be a consistent reality.

I am fine admitting that I am no expert. But I have develped a theory of a sound system, which I describe as the “limiting variable” theory. It works for me. In my limited experience, my system will usually sound only as good as the quality of one or two limiting variables - the amp, pre-amp, speakers, the cables, the source, etc. When I introduce a new variable, it usually makes a difference, sometimes good, sometimes not, but very rarely none at all. If it makes a positive difference overall, then I move to the next limiting variable and change or tweek that component, cable, etc. If it makes no difference, I conclude that the limiting variable lies elsewhere. It is not scientific, but it works for me quite well. Sometimes my system hits a plateau, and it just wont improve with what I have. That is when I know that I must move up in overall quality for everything. But, even then, I usually start with one variable - significantly better speakers, for example, and start the process over again. There is not a perfect correllation between the cost of a component, cable, etc. and whether it is or is not a limiting variable. Some bits just sound better with other bits. But, when a bit makes a strong, positive difference, I conclude that its predecessor was likely a limiting variable.

good read.  Unfortunately it is not as simple as LRC.  Faithfulness to phase and amplitude is important and aspects of LRC are important, especially reactive LRC relative to its affect on phase and amplitude. There are probably other factors that are important, such as IMD, etc, and some we do not know about or how to measure them.

simple, nope, not even close but once someone works it all out then it is probably simple.  until then...

@ieales

By recorded music I mean the final format that is used in a consumer system to play back. This is long after countless engineers have busted their asses trying to capture being in the room with the artist.

Faithfully reproducing the recorded signal at the output can be comparatively measured using test equipment. Another great qualitative measure (using our ears) on digital audio is to pass the recorded music from DAC to analog and then back to digital via ADC and then looping this a significant number of times. Each circle around the loop results in a small loss in fidelity. A higher fidelity component will be able to loop more times than a lower fidelity component before any audible differences are heard.

I think there is engineering protocol and it has mostly definite parameters. And then there is the real world. They both effect each other but are not exactly the same because engineering cannot conceive of every complexity although it does extremely well thankfully. A reason why we have some nice systems.

@lalitk

I think I’m falling back on letting the chips fall where they may. No amount of good intentioned sharing of experience can go without the ground and pound crowd, without the self appointed saviors of those who don’t need saving. They have an axe to grind and they keep it sharp but seem to strike the same blows, over and over and over, and yet nothing falls.

@ieales,

Welcome to the jungle. 👍

All the best,
Nonoise

@shadorne

I’m sorry if I’m not making my self clear.

Seriously, please explain how one judges "faithful to the recorded music."

I am truly interested because countless engineers have busted their asses for more than a century to bring playback ever closer to being in the room with the artist.

An appropriate plain cable or wire is not going to change amplitude or phase in any meaningful way.

This link shows Phase and Impedance for 3 speaker wires:
Bob Carver’s Music Ribbon, Rega Duet and a development prototype.
http://www.ielogical.com/Audio/TriWireZ.jpg

Every component, be it tube, transistor, transformer, resistor, capacitor, connector, wire affects the signal passing through it. Surface mount parts sound different because they have vastly different inductance.

I once replaced 3 inches of wire in a recording console main mix buss module with a better one. I did not tell anyone. I was in my shop next to the studio and the engineer came in and said "What did you do?" Why? "It’s effin’ amazing. The bottom is tighter, there’s more punch, the mids are cleaner and the pain is gone, highs airier." I showed him what I’d replaced "You’re sh.....n’ me! It maybe the most significant improvement you’ve ever made."

What exactly is a plain cable?

@nonoise,

Should we even bother to engage shardorne when it comes down to....

- Measurements,
- Jitter in digital audio
- Cables

He will hammer you down until you give up the argument 😉

+1 Shadorne

ieales thank you for your insight. I really appreciate it. I am sure Shadorne meant to say thanks to. I agree with most of what both of you have said.  I do think you both are agreeing on a lot but shadorne is getting caught up on a few particulars. But like ieales said everything has an interaction with another thing. Hope I get this right .Shadorne likes to say that a good engineered component will not vary as much as others say their systems change with a seemingly small tweek. To me any component will change with associated components weather it is inside of the piece i.e capacitors, resistors, diodes fast or slow, or it is on the outside i.e. speakers, cables, digital and it’s parameters. It all matters. I do agree that well designed equipment can be more consistent with changes and from component to component. Now if someone has a system dialed in that it doesn’t get effected much by changes and they like that that sounds good for that person. If a person has the opportunity to improve their sound with some changes and they like I want to hear about that and I wouldnt call that junk. Just my opinionated opinion.

Boy, that was a short honeymoon. 

@Dave_b  

Sure Dave, so happy you are fortunate enough to enjoy your “judicious ignorance”.

+1 @Shadorne

@ideales

You clearly didn’t read what I said. I said faithful to the recorded music and NOT to the singers voice or sound BEFORE it reaches the studio microphone and is modified by said microphone. Nobody but nobody expects recorded music to reproduce the live event perfectly.

Sorry but you aren’t making any sense and your reading comprehension is poor. An appropriate plain cable or wire is not going to change amplitude or phase in any meaningful way. You have lost all credibility despite an appeal to your expertise as a designer.

”Involving the listener” is a meaningless concept and a bunch of hand waving - it can’t be measured and it most certainly isn’t high fidelity or faithfulness to the recording. 

@shadorne 

However a system’s degree of fidelity can be quantified in how faithful it is to the actual recording it is presented

Who's on first? 

The instant the sound wave hits the microphone diaphragm, absolute HiFidelity is gone.

Alan Turing [of The Imitation Game] devised a test for computers: the machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human.

There isn't a studio in the world where the sound is the same on both sides of the glass. By the time it gets to the consumer, it is all Lo-Fi by Turing Test standards.

The true test of any playback system is does it involve the listener in the music of their choosing. That is all that matters. Arguing about relative merits with the ill-educated is pointless.

I was a recording and electronic design engineer and invented the Vocal Splicer. I quit recording in the late 80's with the rise of drum machines and computers. I had a business installing recording studios and manufacturing electronics for the recording industry. We also modified recording electronics. Later I worked for a recording console manufacture as head of Analog R&D.

I'm pretty certain that a great many audiophile products could be shown to have no or even negative effects in terms of absolute amplitude and phase coherence. Those that do affect phase and amplitude may improve some systems, have no effect in others and be down right negative in still others. It astounds me that there is so little proof and so much hyperbole.

As far as understanding LRC and "minimize any artefact from bits of wire", yes I understand LRC. And yes, it is possible to design to minimize wire effects. However, that may be counter productive. If I design an amplifier or loudspeaker that sounds better and better with every better and better designed cable, I'd say mission accomplished. An amplifier or loudspeaker that showed no improvement with better cable, I'd class as mediocre. When I say better cables I mean better in terms of design to maintain phase and amplitude so that the signal is the same on both ends with a wide range of driver and load topologies.

What's the accepted unit of measurement for hysteresis?

Moby Grape rules! But what’s up with prices, even for CDs? Gad zooks!!

@ieales.

I agree with you 100% that the various recordings and masterings issued and manufactured may not be faithful to the original sound of the band. However a system’s degree of fidelity can be quantified in how faithful it is to the actual recording it is presented - no more no less. So there is such a thing as high fidelity and the higher the fidelity the less altered the sound should be!

Do you know of a good recording of Moby Grape - love that band?

Are you an engineer? You talk of L R and C but do you understand the relative impact that these factors play and do you understand how important component design is and component matching is in order to minimize any artefact from bits of wire....

Welcome! aboard- ieales
Happy Listening!

dave_b

big fan of Transparent cabling here. I have only heard the MM2 series.
Give a shout-out for your local Transparent dealer/retailer.
Happy Listening!

@shadorne  

“faithful to the source recording”

Ain't no such thing. Sound suffers the death of a thousand cuts. I once missed out on a Grammy nomination because the record company head ordered Bernie to add 3db of compression overriding the producer and I. The disk you get is often not the music recorded. A pal on the nominating committee said we were a shoo-in but for the compression.

I recently did a bit analysis of Fagan's Nightfly. Pals and I have pre & post IMEI versions covering multiple decades. The post version I have is markedly inferior. It has been eq'd and compressed. Happens all the time that marketing types order changes and 'engineers' who've never been in a studio make arbitrary changes because "Anything I do will make this .... better"

I recently purchased a replacement Moby Grape CD. It sounds like it was made from MP3. Record companies can be butchers!

Speaking of MP3, either it is turned off or I leave. Here's why:
http://www.ielogical.com/Lossy/LossyEncodingSoundsBad.html

A high fidelity setup will allow you to hear what the mastering engineer intended.

The mastering engineer is just another colorist in the chain. Depending on the project, Doug and his setup could work wonders. On another, not so much. His 'Direct to Disk' work was incredible.

If the budget would support it, we'd master at Doug's, Bernie's, Steve's, etc. The monitor system itself alters the sound. It could expose or mask, turning a feature into a flaw or vice versa. Sometimes, we'd cut multiple lacquers [refs], each from a different manufacturer, at the same place. The lacquer itself added coloration. As did the tape deck, desk, EQ, cables and cutting head. 

Once the refs were cut, they were checked in the studio for fidelity to the mix and also on multiple home systems. On cheap systems to make sure they would play and mega systems to make sure they had as close to studio quality sound as possible. On one project, Side 1 was cut at one lab and Side 2 at another.

If the artist had enough clout, we'd request the pressing be done at a specific plant and limit the number of impressions per stamper.

All of the above added far more coloration than decent cables.

Sadly today, too much "music" is done on a laptop and for a phone.

@people - please be civil.

 Breaking in new custom made Transparent Ultra Gen 5 cables...oh my!!!

The varying degree can range down to 0. The less it matters, the fewer who should care. Some will care no matter what because individual perception itself is a HUGE factor always! Maybe the biggest!

And cables do matter!

EVERYTHING matters!  cables, capacitors, FUSES ...

Lalitk...precisely what I was trying to convey:)