14. Commit all of the errors you ascribe to others as you are listing them.
15. Still don't add anything substantive as you commit error no. 14.
16. Hope that no one ever calls you on your lack of substantive contribution, and, if exposed, that you can blame others by listing a list. |
Stratos and ordinary OFC. I stress again; I've heard this system and loved it, but don't understand why, if Stratos is just OFC, that any other decent OFC from a reputable supplier, cannot be used in its place?
Is it cold-treated, annelaed in some way, a mono-crystal filament, or an alloy of some kind? Has it secretly been treated with C37 lacquer or some such potion?
Thanks for your reply Sead. I hope everyone's differences can be resolved soon (or better still, put to bed), so more useful discussion can take place.
Justin |
What is C37 lacquer, as opposed to other lacquer? AudioNote Kondo also uses a similar lacquering process on their similarly thin conductor, bare wire term'd speaker cables -a procedure they call "tinning", applied in seven coats - and many of the observations here of the Sakura wire are very similar to my own reactions to the AudioNote stuff. My understanding from AudioNote is that this lacquering process is critical to the sound of the wire relative to issues of wire composition or configuration. Connection? |
|
I recently received the Super Cables Cookbook from Vacuum State Electronics, in which Allen mentions that he now instinctively reaches for C37 lacquer when finishing his cables. In fact, a colleague of mine in the UK-based Audiocircle has mentioned that, in preference to foil designs, he was to try ultra-thin cable with this type of lacquer.
As I write this, things are starting to click into place ... 'Chemical X' (thankyou Dexter) is appearing slowly out of the fog of my ignorance. If sound can be considered (in electronics) a type of electrical shockwave why not tune it in the way master luthiers did in days gone by?
Justin |
I will try to comment on the recent posts in one, just to save the bandwith, if you don't mind.
»… if Stratos is just OFC, that any other decent OFC from a reputable supplier, cannot be used in its place?«
Justin, nobody said other cable can't be used instead of Stratos. It is a matter of preference and majority seems just to like it better than other variants of the same type of cable.
»Is it cold-treated, annelaed in some way, a mono-crystal filament, or an alloy of some kind?«
Of course it is cold treated and of course it is mono-crystal, I could not imagine a good cable done other way. It is also natural that it has been annleaded through a process that makes it OFC (there are different levels of purity as you know). It is also very important to stress out that it is not just lead that makes impurities in copper. Quite often, one of the impurities in copper are gold and ferrite. Could be some more but these greatly affect the color of copper as well as they increase the elasticity of copper. Have you noticed how brittle OFC copper is?
No alloy. It would negate the whole purpose of getting copper as impurity free as possible. A tiny portion of brass maybe wouldn't be a bad thing, just as a spice, hehehe. No, I don't think there is anything but copper in there. I have not done any spectrometric observation that could scientifically backup my claim but I have no intention whatsoever of looking into the subject from the scientific point of view (I am not a scientist and besides that I only care how it sounds, not breaking my head too much over too many why – I have realised long time ago that we are just tapping the surface of the great sea…)
»Has it secretly been treated with C37 lacquer or some such potion?«
No, I can assure you that we don't treat our shelf and/or demo products chemically or in any other way.
That doesn't mean we don't have our little secrets but none of them, again, are not applied as a treatment to freshly made products.
47Labs, however, has a product that is marketed in Japan only due to it's high price for an accessory (originally it was intended for dealers) and that thing does demagnetizing of different »things« on a permanent basis (records, CD's, cables, turntable parts etc). Anything that fits in there goes and makes quite some difference as I have been told – I have not tried it yet but I hope to when the finances allow.
Also, it is a matter of a culture and prestige among artisans in Japan and each of them has some secret potion. 47Labs is no excuse to it but, again, it is something strictly for a personal use, none of the dealers have even heard or seen this thing. Well, even I have only found out about it when I got a small bottle as a personal gift, not before.
»Thanks for your reply Sead. I hope everyone's differences can be resolved soon (or better still, put to bed), so more useful discussion can take place.«
Differences are ok. If we all would agree on everything, this world would be a boring place to live in.
***********
»What is C37 lacquer, as opposed to other lacquer?«
Asa, there are many, many kinds of lacquer receipes known (or better yet, kept as very important secrets) throughout the history. Even now, experts can only guess the exact proportions used by the old violin makers or by the famous piano makers, also the ways of application etc. Too much unknown.
C37 is some kind of modern receipe only today Enemmoser got the marketing idea that was unknown in the 18th and 19th century – not to use it for a product but to make it the product as such. Coming from Vienna where the tradition of lacquer receipe making is a »national sport«, it must be that he had great fun exploring on how to make it. I have my guesses on basic elements used for C37 but I would rather avoid speculating. In any case, the additions to lacquer affect the mechanical characteristics after and during the drying process and all the way through aging of it.
So, lacquer per se is just a lacquer. Okie, there are several kinds of it but nevertheless. What you add to it, how you apply it, how many layers you apply (and their interaction indicates the need for different thickness and application method as well) makes hell of a difference. It is a painfull process but since I have tried to mimic instrument making proces opposed to just a design of a speaker in my Essence speaker I simply had to do some experimenting and to try to dig deeper into different kinds of lacquers. By no means I imply that I have achieved anything important, yet the approach has a certain positive offset from the traditional way of thinking about speakers.
»AudioNote Kondo also uses a similar lacquering process on their similarly thin conductor, bare wire term'd speaker cables -a procedure they call "tinning", applied in seven coats - and many of the observations here of the Sakura wire are very similar to my own reactions to the AudioNote stuff. My understanding from AudioNote is that this lacquering process is critical to the sound of the wire relative to issues of wire composition or configuration. Connection?«
There is a connection. Not in the lacquer but the in the understanding of the fact that dielectric (and it's mechanical interaction with conductor) is as important as the conducting material in a cable. Material used as dielectric in Stratos has as we call it »self-lubricating« characteristics, thus there is no need to treat it in some special way – dielectric itself does the thing.
Btw, the cable in question is 47Laboratory cable. Sakura Systems is 47Labs distributor in US of A. I know, 47Labs sounds so… western… and Sakura sounds so… eastern.
******
»I recently received the Super Cables Cookbook from Vacuum State Electronics, in which Allen mentions that he now instinctively reaches for C37 lacquer when finishing his cables. In fact, a colleague of mine in the UK-based Audiocircle has mentioned that, in preference to foil designs, he was to try ultra-thin cable with this type of lacquer.«
Say hello to Allen from me. He is quite a nice guy.
Speaking of ultra-thin cables, I still have not found the wire for my tonearm that I would say »yeah, that's it«. Any suggestions for a tryout?
»As I write this, things are starting to click into place ... 'Chemical X' (thankyou Dexter) is appearing slowly out of the fog of my ignorance. If sound can be considered (in electronics) a type of electrical shockwave why not tune it in the way master luthiers did in days gone by?«
This electrical has also a mechanical aspect to it. So, yes, I say, let's tune it into some music. :-)
Cheers,
Sead
p.s. Justin how have you been? Haven't hear from you in ages. How is London? |
Just re-read my earlier post so as not to be redundant.
Anyway, Mr. Kimura, designer of the 47 Labs products, said that the OTA cable is based on telephone wire. He said that his goal as a designer was to reproduce acoustic music not rock or synthesized music. He reasoned that since telephone wires go on for miles yet preserved the tonal quality of one's voice he felt it would help him attain his goal. The wire is made in Japan by a company that makes telephone wire.
As to the exact process I do not know exactly how it is done. However, Mr. Kimura always looks for the simplest ways to do things; the components he uses are common off the shelf items not custom made, but he is very specific as to how to implement them. And I would suspect that no voodoo/black magic is involved in the making of the cable. I suppose the reason for the high cost, about a dollar a foot, is because it is made in smaller runs with his logo on the jacket. You should see the power cord wire that he gave my friend.
One final note, there are many websites in Japan that are dedicated to copying Mr. Kimura's designs and even on how to improve them. If you have access to a computer with Japanese windows/browser and can read Japanese you should check them out. They probably have many lower cost alternatives that are better than the Sakura cable (Japanese audiophiles are absolutely fanatical, and have clubs that meet weekly. The difference between us and them is that they like modifying things internally; they'll take a portable cd player that runs on AA batteries and turn it into a world beater!). |
In the years following WWII, a lot of the mysteries of the world have lost some of their secret status. Coatings being one.
In a previous company, where I learned the craft, the sacredness of a formulation was an important thing. To the point where a many a recipe consisted of tens, if not hundreds, of ingredients.
Questions concerning these ingredients(along the lines of "eye of newt") would often be answered by something being a "masking agent". In other words, something that would throw off anyone who tried to copy it. These were often things like peppermint, rosemary, lavender oil, etc. It was also suggested that some things were added to make the smell of the product more agreeable.
All in all, a lot of my work was spent on revising the formulations. Stripping all of the unnecessary elements out, in order to leave only what was essential. In every case I can think of, the products were only improved. In the information age, it was not such a priority to hide a formulation, as a base recipe(which would work well) could be acquired with tremendous ease. Marketing and the company itself became more important than what went into the can.
In a general sense, lacquer is lacquer. One of two more "traditional" ingredients which would be included in a lacquer.
Lac, the resin from the plant native to Asia is the classic base of lacquer. Hence the name. And, the reason that lacquer was a product of cultures such as Japan, China, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, and India.
The other is the more modern nitrocellulose. The ingredient found in most of the "real" lacquers of today.
One of these polymers would be dissolved in a solvent(often a hydrocarbon from the less environmentally conscious days such as toluene, xylene, etc.) to make the coating we refer to as lacquer. These formulations are very, very simple. In addition to the polymer and solvent, a leveling agent(various) might be added to promote a smooth finish(as opposed to orange peel), and perhaps also a flatting(silica powder) agent to reduce gloss if a satin finish is desired.
Products would differ from company to company in the ratio of polymer to solvent, as well as things like leveling agents employed.
Also, there are brushable and sprayable lacquers. Brushable laquers have a higher polymer to solvent ratio. On the order of 24 - 27% solids(polymer). Whereas sprayable lacquers would contain a higher percentage of solvent, in order to ease sprayability, vis a vis lower viscosity.
More recently, the word lacquer has been bastardized to include polyurethane, acrylic, etc. formulations; just a name given to a clear topcoat used for these purposes to convey a sense of high quality of the product.
Presuming that two products consisted of the same polymer(be it lac or nitrocellulose), were both targeting the same application(brushable or sprayable) process, and were of high enough quality to ensure a smooth, pinhole free coating, not much difference should ever exist between them.
|
I just wish I'd kept up the Japanese my neighbour used to teach me! Anyone know of a Japanese-English translator on the web?
Telephone wire, huh? Hmmmmm.
Justin |
Wow, Trelja, that's great stuff. For future reference, gentlemen, THAT'S substantitive. Thank you, I learned something I didn't know. |
Trelja,
I feel the need to thank you for participating in the discussion on lacquers. I think it is a valuable contribution.
Listening to you speaking is almost like listening to my lacquer specialist and I mean it in a very positive way as this guy is an old and very experienced "wolf".
On the negative side, I feel the same professional “one applies to all” approach, disregard to audio being a rather peculiar and specific application. At least that was the problem that I had with my people until I managed to sat them down and offer them to actually hear (and not just see, what was their professional focus throughout their complete careers) the differences in variances of their own work.
Of course there is a lot of marketing rubbish (like in every other aspect of life) but the fact remains, at least in my personal experience, that lacquer has a strong importance on sonic behaviour of a product (in this particular case, loudspeaker). I am not an expert on lacquers and my findings are strictly limited to the empirical auditive conclusions that were drawn from different samples prepared by those knowledgeable on the subject on my request for specific samples.
It is interesting that (and I guess that corresponds to your statement) certain additives in recipes affect the visual appeal more than sonics yet the technique applied and number of layers (viscosity of each; thickness; application; drying method and some other) do have a strong impact on the mechanical (thus auditive as a logical consequence to the resonant) characteristics of the "coating".
Some additives can affect the dielectric characteristics of a lacquer but there I really don't have sufficient experience to discuss on the subject.
In any case, we are talking nuances here (rubbish speakers remain rubbish, regardless) but nuances make the accountable difference. Not to be mistaken - some nuances human ear and brain can perceive with more precision than the most sophisticated measuring equipment.
Best,
Sead |
Thanks to all for making this an interesting conversation.
I too, have wondered a lot about interconnects and dielectric. Often, the "truths" are passed on to us, and we have not much opportunity to let our ears decide. Unlike other classic arguments in our hobby, it is harder to really ferret out what is going on here. Look at our own site. Here we debate things like tubes, transistor, digital, analog, copper, silver, floorstander, and monitor. But, what about lac, nitrocellulose, acrylic, urethane, polyester, polypropylene, vinyl, PVC, PVDF, and teflon?
Harder to get a handle on. Even harder to find people who have can offer much in the way of substantive information. I profess my own lack of understanding when it comes to whether a K dielectric is preferable to a low K. And, does each lend a certain sonic signature? I would love to know. A low disapation factor is a good thing, but that is a truth for most conversations regarding capacitance.
I agree that the BS detectors must be on high alert, as perpetually exists any number of people who claim to have the truth, and offer it for a price. Often, in actuality they know little more than us. Selling a completely contradictory thing the next time we look.
As far as the chemical side goes, if I can offer anything of value, I would be honored. Being a coatings chemist was a wonderful job, and gave me accidental exposure to so many things I never foresaw.
One comment about additives, I would not consider them significant in terms of dielectric performance. Most of what would be included in a formulation will not be around very long, due to the fact that they are driven off via evaporation. For a coating of this type, it's basically the polymer, the flatting agent I previously mentioned, and any plasticizers(which also eventually evaporate) the formulator would include.
We have already discussed the polymers.
The flatting agent was also mentioned. It would normally be silica, in the neighborhood of 0.25% - 1.0%, so I would say we can declare it insignificant. Anyway, my feeling is that in this application, there would not be any flatting agent in the recipe in the first place.
A plasticizer is simply a very, very high boiling solvent which makes a resin softer than it normally is. Many plastics(the resin, or polymer as I keep calling it) are hard and brittle. But, their use in the field is required, and the need is for them to be soft and/or flexible. Hence the plasticizer. These chemicals are normally of the pthalate family. I would need to open a book to see their chemical structure to determine whether they would increase or decrease capacitance. However, they too, would be of a low concentration.
A word on lacquers before the topic goes away. I was in The Home Depot last night, picking up a few quarts of Minwax acrylic, when I noticed that there is a very reasonably priced(downright cheap) nitrocellulose based lacquer that they carry. Something like $30 for a gallon. In checking out the label, I noticed that the entire formulation was printed on the back(the information age point of my prior submission). It made me think of this thread, and that if anyone was interested in trying this lacquer technique, this product seemed ideal. My memory of what I read showed me nothing that would preclude it from being used in the manner described above. If anyone was interested, I could revisit the store with a more thorough eye, and read the ingredient list again.
The cable could simply dipped in the can, removed, and allowed to air dry. A bit of heat would speed drying, although more pinholes might be possible. Lacquers tend to be some of the fastest drying coatings anyway(due to their low boiling solvents - which this product contains), so the suggestion might be moot.
From what I have always read about Kondo-san, he may well be using the lac based variety of lacquer. It is a traditional Japanese treasure, and he has always seemed to fit that mold. Doing things meticulously. An artist as much as an engineer. Concerned about things most others do not even consider. Using materials of a more "organic" type and feel.
Some of the "rules" for applying this lacquer may be good, some may just be ritual. One that comes to mind is that if seven layers is good, why not use eight? Does it not sound as good, have we reached the point of diminishing returns, or is seven just good? I can offer that a pinhole free(microscopically, hence electrically) film is probably not reached until perhaps the third coat. It's just the nature of most coatings.
I can also say that in working with lacquer(in my home remodel), more layers are better. From my own experiences with furniture, going past 7 or 8 starts to get me where I wanted to be. Conventionally, products tell us to use about 3 coats. I didn't get the look I wanted. But, I accidentally ran into someone who knows about furniture, and she told me that 20 coats is often what is needed. So, I experimented with more and more layers, up to 20. I can honestly say that things get better, but you reach a point of the ridiculous. Diminishing returns, big time. As I said, I just did this for experimentation. Sure, I would love for the furniture I am currently working on to look like it did with 20 coats of lacquer, but there is no way I would ever be able to apply that many to all the pieces I am currently working on.
And, incidentally, because of the increased resistance to the day to day, I opted for polyurethane or acrylic over lacquer. And, because I am working with maple and value the pristine color, I ended up going for acrylic. It forms a water white(crystal clear) film. Polyurethane usually adds a honey hue, which I sometimes like on oak. My only regret is that I now have to buy this stuff, whereas I used to make it. |
So, Trelja, would it be that the additives evaporating contribute to instruments becoming better with time -- at least to a minor degree?
I'm thinking of trying lacquer on a pair of I/C -- could it work using a brush rather than dipping?
Cheers |
Greg, thanks for getting involved.
These additives that I saw were all low boiling(fast evaporating) solvents, other than the phtalate which was listed(would serve as the plasticizer).
The ingredients I recall(other than the nitrocellulose and plascticizer) were things like toluene, xylene, MIBK(methyl isobutyl ketone, etc. Most of these would all probably not be around more than a day, two at the most(assuming room temperature or above). I can look up the boiling point of MIBK to see how long it should persist, but I don't think it's very long.
I think that long term the only thing that chemically would be altered is the evaporation of the plasticizer, which could be deterred by coating the lacquer with something else. But, this evaporation could theoretically alter properties over the coming years. The evaporation would be along the lines of what we witness in speaker cones or surrounds drying out. It's the same thing; plasticizer evaporation.
I would advise dipping rather than brushing. Especially, in light of this product dealing with interconnects. Dipping is so easy, and the film formed would be much more homogeneous, pinhole free, and sonically consistent from cable to cable.
Brushing is inconsistent, especially layer to layer. I don't believe one could ever have two layers that were more or less the same. Much less, one part of the wire as opposed to the other.
Simply dip the wire in the gallon can. Remove it, and hang to dry. That's it. Following the manufacturer's advice on dry time, you can then dip the wire for the next coat.
If you have access to a magnifying glass or microscope, you can look at the film with a more crital eye. An ohmeter is the way to make sure that you have gotten to where you need to be, but it's difficult with wire. Basically, your goal is to keep applying layers until the resistance goes to open. Conversely, a low resistance indicates the flow of electrons is still occurring, and that we are still working with a resistor. A good capacitor has not been created. A capacitor is what we are trying to build here.
As I said, it is tough to do with a thin gauge wire...
My opinion is that after three coats, we should have a capacitor. In other words, a pinhole free film. One in which no electron flow can take place.
|
Thanks, Trelja. So the trick is (pls forgive the dumb question) to strip the teflon -- or whatever -- outer & dip the bared wire shielding & conductors into the can & then hang the IC by the terminators. I could lightly sand the dried coating, clean, and re-dip, and once more. My ohmetre is the standard digital type -- but could I try some readings?
Cheers |
Not a dumb question at all, Greg.
Yes, if the wires are presently coated, if you wanted to evaluate the sound of using lacquer insulation(and ONLY lacquer), the currently polymer coating would need to be removed.
I would attempt to clean the bare wire in either lacquer thinner, MEK(methyl ethyl ketone), or acetone(dimethyl ketone, or methyl methyl ketone). Actually, all three are fairly close to each other. Acetone and MEK are both ketones, and close in size, so their functionality and use is almost identical. Acetone has a lower boiling point(so it will evaporate a bit faster), due to it being a bit smaller. And, acetone is a good bit less toxic. Lacquer thinner is something along the lines of a mix of the two(maybe other ketones - like MIBK - ketones will all work more or less the same), with the addition of aliphatic and/or aromatic hydrocarbons(maybe toluene, xylene, stoddard solvent, etc. - I apologize for not know the formulation right off the top of my head...).
I don't think a hydrocarbon buys you anything in this situation, so you are probably better off just going with acetone in the first place. Hydrocarbons will not do anything to things like PVC, polypropylene, polyurethane, teflon, polyethyelene, or polyester(PET[PETE] or PBT). A hydrocarbon would simply be a latent(nonfunctional) solvent in this case.
After stripping and cleaning in solvent, if you notice that whatever residue(if there was any in the first place) from the wire is getting removed or becomes gummy, you are on the right track. Contrary to a bad thing, the residue becoming gummy means you have hit the nail on the head. You have found a solvent capable of attacking the polymer you want to remove. You could then leave the wire in that solvent for as long as it takes to remove everything. Going back every so often to manually remove that residue.
Let's hope that just stripping does the trick, and no residue remains.
Since we are hot on the trail of the meticulous Kondo - san, we might as well discuss things to a very minute point. After stripping the wire, it will need to be prepared. I would recommend going over the bare wire with 0000 steel wool. I believe he was the first to dicuss a wire's surface, and its effect on sonics. The better the surface, the better the sound(it's actually the main focus of the new AudioQuest line). As there is oil in the steel wool, cleaning off with the acetone, MEK, lacquer thinner previously discussed.
You are now ready for the lacquer coating. Although I know the importance of sanding between coats(from my furniture finishing), I would suggest trying this(at least on a test wire, before you do the whole project) without any between coat sanding. Sanding with a paper from 220 to 600 grit or even 0000 steel wool is meant to abrade the coating; providing more surface area for the next coat to adhere to(thus making the bond stronger).
However, that abrasion may well serve as your enemy in this case. Sanding always leaves a fair amount of the bare material exposed. Exactly what we are trying to avoid here. We are trying to form an insulation on the wire. I am not so sure that we want to remove a lot of the insulation each time we apply a coat of lacquer.
Conversely, this may be the method employed by Audio Note. And the explanation of the adherence to using 7 coats of lacquer. As I stated before, my guess(from prior experience) is that three coats would begin to provide an insulation with no holes.
If you wanted to test with a multimeter or ohmeter, set for resistance measurement. Then, you could simply attach one lead to one the bare ends of the wire. Test the wire at various points along the insulation. If the reading stays open, you have an insulator. If you are able to measure something, current is able to flow from the wire through your lacquer coating. In this situation, I would always add two to three additional coats of lacquer. The lower the resistivity reading, the worse the insulation.
A note of caution, make sure that as the number of layers are built up, the coating is not stiff enough to crack. This would mean that the insulation becomes useless. But, as we have already established that people are using lacquer to coat wires, it should not be a problem.
By the way, if you(or anyone for that matter - first come, first served) are really interested in pursuing this, I have a quart of Deft Clear Wood Finish that I would be happy to give to anyone who wants it. This is a great product, a brushable nitrocellulose lacquer. Being brushable means that it has higher solids than a sprayable lacquer; hence each coat would be thicker. Solids content is 25% +/- 1%.
Solids content is related to your dried coating thickness. A coating with 25% solids would yield a dried film twice as thick as one with 12.5% solids. Thus, half as many layers would need to achieve the same final film.
I used a bit in testing on wood(very nice indeed), but decided to go with acrylic for my application. So, if anyone wants it... Others may pick this up a KMart or Lowe's. I believe it was around $10 for a quart.
GOOD LUCK!
|
Trelja, thank you for your meticulous & thorough directions. I've made an off-line copy for reference!
And thank you for the offer -- unfortunately I live too far away to take you up on it!
Happy hols!
Cheers, and I'll keep you posted when I get down to it; I am going to try this! |
"Has anyone tried this "minimalist" cable kit? After receiving a recommendation from someone with similar musical values to myself, and whose ears I trust, I could not resist ordering one. I will report on how they sound in a few weeks, but am interested in others' opinions too."
by Redkiwi on 05-21-01
I have followed this thread for several months now. As someone who greatly believes in the influence of cables, hence my interest in this site and continual efforts at upgrading, I am not at all convinced by the exchanges, or the experiences, shared. Why haven't more people tried this cable? Can we get back to Redkiwi's original question? |
Gray: The only way to be "convinced" is to actually try and/or listen to this product (the design of which goes against the grain of what most people assume is needed for quality sound). Because of these assumptions many feel that it is not worth $600 for a roll of 26 gage solid core copper/Teflon cable and a few plastic RCA's. Having tried other 26 gage Teflon coated cable I do not assume, but know that they are not the same (the last being XLO's product). What exactly are you looking for - a new slew of product owner's of which you will believe their observations? LOL. |
I take your point - it is a bit of a "cart and horse" situation, where many people, like me, are waiting for others to commit "the act of faith". However, having said that, silver cables were in the same boat at one time. But there are now many, relatively cheap, "copycat" manufacturers for these cables today, reflecting the intrinsic value of this type of cable and rewarding those who were prepared to commit this act of faith. |
Gray,
The first 2/3rds of this thread chronicalled very closely several AG members making this "act of faith" and detailed quite eloquently their findings on the 47Labs OTA cables/IC kit.
I've been using the 47 OTA's in Roksan and Rega systems for over 1-1/2 yrs now and continue to be impressed and satisfied.
My own positive experience has resulted in a number of friends switching away from their former cable faves to the OTA in systems as diverse as Audiomat,VTL and CJ valves to Exposure and Rowland systems with equally fine results.
Considering that 47Labs does not promote the OTA other than as an recommended adjunct to their own electronics with no advertising of the cables at all,I'd say that the number of non-47 Lab users here at AG exceeds what would be expected for such a product and that they also appear to be exceptionally enthusiastic and pleased. |
Gray: I don't know if this is true, but once read that the OTA is a type of cable which is used for telecommunications in Japan, which has received some type of additional treatment. The only thing that I know is that I have been unable to locate a ready made cable that has the extremely thick Teflon insulation that the OTA uses and to purchase such insulation separately is not an inexpensive undertaking, plus I would have no way to properly run a six nines copper wire through this insulation without leaving a major air gap (which the OTA does not have). I have already tried "beefing up" the thin Teflon insulation on the XLO cable with a reverse wrap of Teflon plumbers tape without much success. My advice is that if you are not ready to spring $600 then try out the inexpensive Radio Shack solid core copper magnet wire in order to get a "taste" of what the OTA will sound like. The spool runs $3.99 and it contains three different gages (30,26 and I forget the lower gage). I prefer the 26 gage, but some also like the lower gage (so try both). Carefully remove the laquer from the ends of the wire with fine steel wool and then hook it up as speaker cable. It will take it 100 hours or so for the sound to stabilize. Since the laquer coating is questionable, IMO, I did make certain to separate the (+ & -) runs from each other when installing it to avoid the possibility of a short taking place. This is a single run cable and two runs will be required for each speaker (that is not bi-wired). If your cable runs are 10' of so there should be enough wire (of each gage) on a single spool. I used the RS cable in an inexpensive SS system with very good results (a bit of the OTA sound), but to be honest will not hesitate to rewire this setup with the OTA once I can afford another kit. |
Dekay and Caterham, thank you for your reasoned replies to my rather provocative comment. As I rather enjoy experimenting with cables, I will try your suggestion Dekay. |
Gray: You are welcome. Perhaps you can take take the magnet wire further than I have @ this point as I never got around to trying a reverse wrap (tacky side out) of Teflon plumbers tape on it. You could also follow up with a second wrap with the tacky side in. I will not have the bedroom system (where I like to play around with things like this) up and running for another month myself and will probably start by experimenting with a vintage tube amp that I just picked up instead of fooling with cables. In any regard, I look forward to your findings. What I did find about this wire is that it sounded better to me a single runs (instead of twisted pairs). |
I just discovered that the "Teflon" tape that I tried on the XLO wire is not Teflon (per the local hardware store). I went there to get another roll and discovered this. The Teflon tape that I just purchased has no adhesive (which is better for our needs) and it was very inexpensive ($1.50 a roll). I will just fasten it @ the ends with a small piece of adhesive tape when I try wrapping the wire again. |
Haven't looked at this thread in while and forgive me if Trelja in his usual thoroughness addressed this, but- be careful when you use these solvents. Most of them are easily absorbed thru the skin, and the vapors I believe are also dangerous (in terms of toxicity and flammability). Working outdoors for all of you California types may be an answer, but the really low boiling point products evaporate so quickly that you have to be careful. Probably not a big problem if you are dipping them into a gallon can, but be very careful about ventilation, open flames (including pilot lights for you basement experimenters) etc. I apologize if this has all been gone over before, or if my chemistry is too hazy (too much recreational chemistry along with my organic chem when I was in college, I'm ashamed to admit), but I do remember problems with paint stripper and other furniture refinishers which are mostly organic solvents like MEK and acetone, toluene, and the like. Your speakers won't sound to good if either they or your brain are (is?) fried. Have fun. |
Please help. I got the Stratos kit about three weeks ago and immediately set up the speaker wires. My observations were pretty close to everyone here (boy, do horns sound good now), and I have made firm believers out of a few cable doubters (including, to a certain degree, myself). I must, however, be the biggest idiot in the world as I can't seem to get the interconnects together. I have assembled a pair (actually a pair and a half) and with a little 'wiggling' of the plugs can get one channel to fire. When I try to hook up the other channel, I can't get any sound at all despite all the 'wiggling' and repositioning that I try. Now it's not simply the run of interconnect or the terminals as I can switch the cables or switch the channels and can almost always get one channel to work. I've already broken one of the machined white pieces and have about two feet in scrap on the floor and I'm at my wits end. At this point, I really wish there was an option for the mechanically idiotic to have the interconnects pre-assembled. |
Raguirre: You are doing better than I did in the beginning (I wasted over 35 feet of the OTA) and to date have broken 5 of the white center posts. As far as the center post goes, you can try adding another loop or two around the white post. This will give you more of a chance of making a good solid contact. When you install the center (white) post just press it all of the way into the female RCA and then pull out ever so slightly. This has always worked for me and I have used the IC's with at least six different pieces of equipment so far. The black (outside) part of the RCA should not have any trouble making contact, but if you feel that it is too loose then do a double loop (through the small hole on the side) before going back through the longer channel/hole. I have noticed that the female RCA's on different gear do vary a bit as far as the fit goes and these two slight deviations regarding the assembly of the IC's should do the trick. I do wish that 47 Labs would redesign the center post to make is stronger as it is structurally very weak where the cross hole goes through the shaft (or @ the least offer free replacements of the center post) but other than this I have no complaints about this product and am looking forward to your further comments once you remedy the contact problems you are experiencing. |
Thanks DK, I'll give it another go with the extra loop on the center post, I hope this will solve my problem. I'm almost too embarassed to ask this, but just to make certain the cable should go from white to white and from black to black, right?
As far as the speaker cable is concerned, I really have enjoyed going back and listening to my favorite recordings with it installed. I don't speak fluent audiophile, but what I have observed is that trebly type instruments (*especially* horns) have more of the edge that they have in real life. More important, though, is that everything just seems to be 'faster'. It's hard not to tap my feet and even super droning ambient type music (Yo La Tengo's latest effort or anything by the American Anolog Set, for example) seems more vibrant and alive. Admitedly the cable I replaced was nothing special (Tributaries copper and silver coated copper braid) but this was as significant for me as replacing my PSB's with Triangles. Associated equip: Ah Tjoeb 4000 into Jolida 302A via Tributatries interconnect, into the Stratos, into Triangle Zephyrs. Actually, if you're familiar with the Triangle line of speakers I think that this cable does well what I like about those speakers. |
Do not "wiggle" or turn the connector while it is in the jack. Simply pull it out and then turn it and then re-insert it. First, though, pull out the connector that is working and look at the orientation of the wire. Then turn the other connector to match this orientation.
The designer, told my friend that the material that is used to make the connector does not store any electrical charge like ordinary plastic. And it is designed to create a single point of contact. A harder material may not work as well.
If all else fails use the Eichmann bullet connectors. |
Sorry for the lack of contribution to the discussion for some time but it was impossible for me due to an increased workload.
To understand why there might be problem with making contact, one must look into the design of female RCA connectors (the ones on the chasis), particularly the inner, signal "lip" that makes contact.
Some female RCA connectors have round lips that make full 360 degree contact. With these an OTA RCA will make an instant contact however you plug it in. 47Labs chasis RCA connectors are made this way.
Other types may have either single or double "strip" contact surface and with these, you need to align the spiral that you make with OTA cable bare ends over the plug that cable makes contact to it. Sometimes several tries may be needed but once you have the contact, problem solved. With ground cable plugs in place, it should be safe to make this adjustment with gear turned on (volume on lower value, however, is better). If no contact, unplug completely the signal only plug, rotate a bit and plug in again, repeating this until there is a solid contact.
These differences in construction does not mean that one female RCA connector is better than the other.
I am confused, however, how Dekay has managed to break even five of inner plugs (Dekay, if that means anything, I think I have one extra and could send to you, for more I would have to ask Japan)... Delrin is pretty elastic material.
Ultrakaz, your friend is right about Delrin static properties but that is only one part of the story about this material and why it is used in this design - on the other hand, your friend is wrong if he says OTA is a telephone cable. It's starting design premisse was based on a telephone cable design and that is where the similarity ends.
Best,
Sead |
Hi Sead:
The ones that break the most are the ones connected to hot tube gear and/or a SS amp which runs predominantly in class "A" (also quite "hot" @ the RCA's). I assume that it is the heat that weakens them (as these female RCA's are not on the "tight" side) and/or thermal cycling as I do not leave the tube amps on all of the time. One of the center shafts, however, was broken due to my error when not maintaining a 90% angle when removing it from a Bel Canto DAC (which has very tight fitting female RCA's on it). Once again, all of the posts failed at the "cross hole" section which is without a doubt a structural weakness in the design. I realize that tooling expenses are quite high, but would suggest eliminating the "cross hole" entirely and instead using an "outer ring", which would slip over the shaft, for this locking purpose, if retooling ever comes up. This should not effect the sound (it may even improve it as it would eliminate the haphazard "loop" which most likely occurs when threading the wire through the "cross hole") and it would make this part a great deal stronger (both by eliminating the "cross hole" and by adding the "ring" surround to the section which is subjected to the greatest amount of stress when installing/uninstalling the RCA's.
As far as Matching RCA's with the OTA counterpart, I have never seen the "strip" example of these type of connectors but recently became aware that the OTA RCA's are not compatible with vintage type RCA's (the ones currently on a Pilot 240 amp that I am using). The easy solution to this is to replace the female RCA's on the vintage piece (as they are garbage anyway:-).
On another note, someone once mentioned to me that OTA "banana" plugs (for attaching the cable to speakers) would be an interesting addition to the kit. This may have been RedKiwi's suggestion, but I cannot remember for sure, and am unable to locate the old email.
I will add that I have probably installed/uninstalled the connectors a great deal more than what I would consider the "norm" due to experimenting with different cable configurations over the past 8 months. I also never asked for replacements outright, though did make it clear as to why additional ones were required (but @ that point I had only broken 1 or two of them as I recall).
I do not wish to detract from what I consider to be a truly high end but affordable (to many of us) product, just to detail my experiences with it in which the positive's far outweigh the negatives (that is if sound is one's main priority).
Good to see you back in the forums again. |
Dekay,
»…. Once again, all of the posts failed at the "cross hole" section which is without a doubt a structural weakness in the design. I realize that tooling expenses are quite high, but would suggest eliminating the "cross hole" entirely and instead using an "outer ring", which would slip over the shaft, for this locking purpose, if retooling ever comes up.«
If I am picturing it right in my head, the outer ring can't make a solid spiral that would withstand even three unplugging, thus would make life even harder and the spiral pretty loose. The entire purpose of the cross hole is to ensure for a neat yet firm spiral.
Sure, this hole makes the plug less strong at this point but, nobody really thought of torsion force taking place there, and it should not be subject to torsion under the normal operation, therefore everyone should avoid twisting and rotating the shaft while plugged in, if nothing, it screws up the spiral aesthetics and also can lead to breakage of the wire. :-)
I hear you mentioning the heat and, that could explain it in your case. Heat, plus a bit of a twist and off the plug goes. Really, to my knowledge, you are the first one to break it… :-(
»This should not effect the sound (it may even improve it as it would eliminate the haphazard "loop" which most likely occurs when threading the wire through the "cross hole")….«
Theoretically, yes. Practically, I am not sure as the loop is there also in the signal return plug and I am failing to find something sonically wrong here. It sure would make things stronger but I really have no negative experience with this.
»As far as Matching RCA's with the OTA counterpart, I have never seen the "strip" example….«
Theta had these on some equipment, Marantz has them and lots of others do as well. Hm, maybe I have not found the right word, that is also possible (but I think you know what I mean anyway). Again, this means nothing in terms of quality of a connector.
»On another note, someone once mentioned to me that OTA "banana" plugs (for attaching the cable to speakers) would be an interesting addition to the kit….«
Banana plug makes a subtle but noticeable improvement in terms of further reduction of sonic glare and even better palpability. That is, in speakers that have standard banana binding posts. I think the reason bananas are not part of the OTA kit in US is the fact that most of customers wants to use the kit in the most rational way, thus replacing bananas in favour of two additional RCA plugs (to make for 3 sets of interconnects) should be looked at in this sense. In Europe, we normally supply bananas with the kit but we have two RCA connectors less in the kit.
I dunno if Ivo is following the discussion but he may be able to fill in with his impressions about bananas, as he has done a thorough testing with and without. Also, after some burn in time, I hope that James will share his impressions with us as well, since he's got bananas in with his kit.
The best thing, however, is to avoid 5 way binding posts in general as it presents (IMO, as I don't want to get into discussion with anyone dissagreeing on this) such a waste of material in order to fascinate an average consumer.
»I will add that I have probably installed/uninstalled the connectors a great deal more than what I would consider the "norm" ….«
It should be no big deal to have the broken ones replaced.
»I do not wish to detract from what I consider to be a truly high end but affordable (to many of us) product, …«
No need to mention this. I uderstand perfectly well.
»Good to see you back in the forums again.«
Thanks.
Best regards,
Sead |
I just finished using some smaller pieces of OTA as jumpers from some female rca's (to PCB) that I replaced on an amp that Dekay very kindly sent me. If anyone out there has any leftover wire that they would consider selling, please e-mail me. I'm thinking of enough to do a half-metre interconnect, and if I'm not mistaken, I would need about 2 metres (or 6 feet) to do that. I'm also thinking of a little experiment with an ungrounded power cord which would require about another 8 or 10 feet, but that is not critical. So if anyone has either 6 feet or 14-16 feet that they'd sell me, please let me know. Just bare wire, no connectors required. |
Hi Sead:
Now that you brought it up, I may experiment with separate entrance and return holes/channels on the outer (neutral) portion of the RCA connectors. These will, of course be DIY "jobs", but the "loop", again haphazard in this application, (as it may or may not occur depending on the position of the wire) is something that does not "jive" with the reduced metal mass philosophy of the overall design, as this would add up to approx. 33% more metal mass to the connector (granted that a "loop" does occur), plus the uncertainty of the effect of the "loop" itself. I have noticed a substantial difference in the sound by how the cable is attached to the speakers/amp in that looping the wire around a binding post does some strange things to the LF response (a smaller contact area, sans loop, is my much preferred method). I now wonder if eliminating the possibility of a loop occurring (in any instance) in the IC's would also have beneficial results?
I do not quite understand your comments on the "outer ring" suggestion as this is by far the greatest stress point on the middle post of the RCA's (both when installing and uninstalling the RCA). The outer ring (plus...sans the second hole in the post) would significantly reinforce this specific area and would only be compromised by the tightness of the fit (on the post) and the single strand of 26 gage "bare" wire which would be forced under and held by the ring. These compromises are in comparison to engineering the concepts into a "one piece" unit. Maybe what I am envisioning is not made very clear by my wording as this is a difficult area for me?
I realize that the people who do not have these materials @ hand do not have a clue as to what we are talking about, so will end this discussion here.
Please feel free to email me directly with further thoughts/info and if we come up with anything that makes sense it can then be added to the thread. Now that you have sparked my interest, I will certainly play around with this as time and energy permits.
Unfortunately I just sold my SET amp, which was my favorite "window into the music" and super for testing gear (now using a push/pull amp in pinch). But fortunately I today purchased a vintage stereo SET console (complete with light weight paper drivers) that I hope to "part out" and have up and running in the next couple of months, granted that I can figure it out with the help of a few "web friends". It was $20 if I can get it out of the shop by tomorrow morning, so it is time to hit the hay right now.
As always, I look forward to further dialog.
Best regards,
David |
Hello Sead, here is my small contribution to the OTA cable discussion.
I definitely prefer the Storatos speaker connection with the bananas in the setup. My impressions, after a number of trials with and without them in the system, were that the bananas reduce distortion and harshness, while giving more air and naturalness to the sound. Everything seems smoother but more open and relaxing.
Using of bananas is very simple but you should be careful when plugging in the banana in the speaker binding post: do that slowly without rotating the plug.
Best wishes to everyone
Ivo |
Thanks for the info Ivos. Never knew they existed until Sead mentioned them. I will have to think of something to use to try this out (I'm in the USA). |
Has anyone tried WBT or Cardas RCA connectors with the OTA wire? |
WBT, Cardas and similar RCA conenctors are exactly what 47Labs has tried to avoid with their delrin RCA connectors. For us it is clear that excessive metal used for a "solid construction" has very little to do with good and fast transient response due to susceptability to RFI and EMI interferences. Not to mention soldering as a thing one would like to avoid whenever possible... You should look at 47Labs RCA connector as if there were no connector at all and, if absolutely have to compromise, compromise it the most rational way. At the end, some of these connectors are considerably more expensive than 47Labs ones so there is not even the advantage of cost cutting... If forced to a compromise, I would use cheap plastic connectors as the ones used with DNM cables.
Best regards,
Sead |
Dekay, sead: your exchange has inspired me to get back on this forum in a more empirical fashion. The main purpose of this post is to report on a recent OTA experiment I performed.
Purpose: The aim of the experiment was to find out if a 47 Labs OTA phono cable could improve upon previous phono cables in my system (e.g. Fadel Art Reference One Phono, Coincident CST Interconnect, Ortofon AC-5000 Silver, NBS Signature and Statement).
Apparatus: Two 25 cm lengths of OTA were made up. (47 Labs endorses short signal lengths, and I chose to reduce the length of my phono cable by more than 1/4th in agreement.)
Procedure: After 100 hours of break-in, the OTA phono cable was installed between a Simon Yorke S 9 turntable (with Temper Transfiguration Supreme cartridge) and a 47 Labs Phonocube.
Observations: It was very easy to hear immediately that this was the best phono cable I had ever had in my system. More space, instruments were better separated, they sounded larger, more independent, more solid; rhythms flowed better; voices were felt as if the body of the singer were present in the room; low-level detail and dynamic energy was much better than any of the cables listed above: subjectively I had the impression for the first time of being at a live performance. However, I noticed that the installation of this small phono cable had altered the timbre of the whole system: my VAIC monoblocks now had a gutsy, slightly distorted quality more like Jadis. And then, in between songs I recognized that the system was picking up stray radio-frequency interference: its level was low, but annoying. My analogue set-up was now picking up a German FM radio station around 106 MHz, which specialized in kitsch jazz vocalists!
Other signs (intermittent "pong-sounds" from the Phonocube) indicated that the OTA phono cable was picking up sufficient radio-frequency energy that audio rectification (overdrive of the input stage of the PhonoCube by stray radio frequency fields, resulting in the production of interference) was taking place. In my particular case, the RF interference could be eliminated by regrounding the turntable, but returned whenever the turntable or pickup arm was touched again. Not wanting to tamper with the PhonoCube, I rejected the idea of installing a RF choke into the phono stage circuitry. (This can normally be done by connecting a small LC parallel-resonant circuit trap in series with the base lead of the input transistor, or even a small coil tuned to parallel resonance with the RF signal.) Enclosing the turntable set-up in a copper screen structure was not something I wanted to pursue, except in case of emergency. Instead, I chose to re-install OTA, but cut to a length such that it provided trap action with respect to the frequency of the interfering signal. This is ordinarily done by cutting the phono cable to an odd multiple or odd sub-multiple of a quarter wavelength corresponding to the frequency of the interference. For an interference frequency of 106 MHz, a cable length of 70 cm was required. No way! I was not going to triple the length of OTA after what I had gained by shortening it to 25 cm. Returning to a 1.0 m phono cable only confirmed my decision. As soon as a 1.0 meter phono cable was installed, voices took on a reduced quality, seemed covered over, and possessed alot less verve. All instruments sounded flatter, lazier, the three-dimensionality of the recording was lost, everything seemed more boring, dynamics were not as striking, brass instruments no longer had their high-frequency resonance, and the whole sound image lost its live attack. Even though it was not exactly a tuned stub, I quickly re-installed the 25 cm OTA cables with DIY shielding (something like Bill Ying's cable jackets was in my mind as I built my OTA shielding; however, mine are alot more futuristic--silver-- than Shun Mook's Catholic purple). The pickup end of the shielded OTA was left ungrounded and the shielding was only grounded at the phono stage end, so that the RF energy saw a very high impedance at the input end of the cable. It worked! The raucous, gutsy, fuzzy timbre was gone from my VAICs, and there was no more noticeable RFI.
Conclusion: I thought after this experiment that perhaps OTA Kit should perhaps include some simple, grounded cable jackets for shielding OTA in cases where electro-magnetic fields might lead to interference. Perhaps 4 little Shun Mook-like jackets might be included. I cannot help but feel that OTA, WITH the shielding, is slightly better: fundamental tones are slightly more solid, there is a little more relaxation and ease, and the music flows slightly better. The tonal balance even seems to shift subtly when the jacket is moved to different portions of OTA, much like the changes that one can induce by varying the contact area at the ends of the cable. Perhaps these jackets can provide resonance dampening, and current channeling one day in their own way.
|
Nice post, Slawney. I use a Shun Mook cable jacket on my Hovland phono cable and like it. |
Slawney: Mark (Palmnell) discovered that a slight "twist" was required when using the OTA as phono IC's (in order to reduce hum/interference). We discussed this outside of the forums and I recall that the twist/cross was every 1" to 1.5" (which is easy enough to try if you are using the OTA RCA's @ the phono preamp connection). I am still waiting on a few parts (male IEC and cartridge leads) before I tear into my TT, but will be replacing the IC's with the OTA once all of the parts are here. Mark had noted that this slight "cross" did not close in the sound as I have noted that doing this to analog IC's does. Let us know if this works out. |
Asa: Hovland was the next phono cable I was going to try. What length are you running? Dekay: I considered twisting the OTA phono cables. After all, Simon Yorke twists the TT arm cables very tightly. Likewise, I thought that I would have to twist the phono cables rather tightly to achieve a shielding effect, and I was worried about breaking OTA. Also, I was worried about stress at the plugs, with all of that force applied to the wires to keep them wound around one another (PhonoCube is pretty small and light, and I can easily imagine the unit being lifted off of its feet by this). If you say that 1" twists are enough and that there is no degradation of the sound, I will try it. But I am very pleased with the existing set-up (straight 25 cm runs of OTA under my DIY RFI shields). The next step is to by-pass the female RCA plugs on the Simon Yorke TT completely and connect the phono cable directly to the termination pins of the SY TT arm wires. This will require an additional DIY component: an insulated cable support system to hold the four wires apart so that they do not touch and short out. In the end, this OTA phono cable experiment is a "dream come true" for me: phono cables were one of the biggest single disappointments for me over the years, and I had always dreamed of shortening this connection to the minimal. Hence always my purchase of small-size phono stages that I could situate on the platform next to the TT. The success of OTA in this application was beyond my expectations: I am in awe. Keep us posted on your OTA phono cable experiment, dekay. I am going to try your OTA digital cable design soon enough. |
Slawney: Yes, I need to figure out a good "stress" relief system as well (for making hard connections on IC's). They have a tendancy to break off @ the solder connections. I will check the local hardware store for something made out of Teflon. You might try contacting Mark directly in regard to the phono IC's that he attached to his Linn TT (he may have further info/comments available by now). I also have a sample of an Amp-Cool product which silver coats copper and I was thinking of applying this to the OTA before soldering it with silver bearing solder. Don't know what effect this will have, but I am curious as to whether it will improve the connection. This is a powdered silver product which forms a chemical bond with the copper when applied cold. |
Slawney,
I agree with you that OTA can be tricky in a phono cable and that using an additional shielding can be a value added. My findings also correspond to yours in respect of the lenght being an important factor when used as phono cable. In my particular case, I am using it in a shortish run (50cm) and without shielding.
Actually, Kimura was surprised when he heard that I am using it as a phono cable as well as it was not the original intention for this cable. Only better solution I heard so far in my setup was the integral run of wire from cart to PhonoCube (with part going out from tonearm being shielded), but for reasons of me a) changing wiring of my tonearms (other than under b) frequently b)modified Koshin 801 I am using at the moment would not allow for a rewire (well, maybe it would but it is a brand new one and I would hate to mess around it as yet). Besides, I just love it as is. :-)
Fortunately (otherwise it would not make any sense to discuss this cable as anything even worth mentioning and not something extraordinary) these occurences are not present when used as digital, linelevel interconect nor as a speaker cable. Actually, (although I have not used specifically Shun Mook shielding), my experiences with shielded OTA in a non-phono cabling are not very positive.
Have you tried it yet in your digital setup or between preamp and your VAIC's and/or speakers?
Best regards,
Sead
p.s. Did you get my mails? I sent them from 3 accounts, just in case. :-) |
I would never twist the OTA cables, even in the 5" distance. The degradation in sound occurs in any kind of twisting. They have to be free and loose in order to achieve the best performance.
Ivo |
Last night I proceeded with a second, more radical OTA phono cable experiment.
Purpose: the aim of the experiment was to bypass the Simon York output connector plate/bracket (fitted with insulated gold-plated RCA phono sockets) and connect the Simon Yorke tonearm wiring to PhonoCube via an extremely short OTA bridge.
Apparatus: Two OTA phono cables were made up anew. The RCA plugs were positioned on one side; the other side was sculpted/crimped into receiving pins for the SY tonearm wiring clips, taking great care not to tarnish the OTA wire with finger contact. The total length of these phono cables are 4.8 cm measured from the tip of the OTA RCA plug to the free end of the cable. (Imagine an even shorter length of the pre-made OTA RCA plug/wire assemblies that are now packaged in plastic envelopes with the kit.) The PhonoCube was positioned 3 cm away from the SY 9 TT and the SY tonearm wires were clipped to the end of the OTA pin leads, always being cautious of the free-standing nature of PhonoCube.
Observation: Sound quality was even more immediate, dynamic, and faster than the 25 cm OTA lengths I used in the previous experiment. Instrument positioning, focus and outlining was the precisest I have ever heard, and the tonal balance was (and I mean this) utmost neutral. Sound stage was even further extended. The equipment all operated flawlessly, and no difficulties were experienced with RFI.
Reflections: At this point, OTA's main role is to provide a minimal hook-up point for the SY tonearm wire. The comparative lengths (about 50 cm of SY tonearm wire and 4.8 cm of OTA) make it clear that, if cable contributes to sound, then it is the SY tonearm cable that is the major contributor. This internal tonearm wiring is 0.60 mm silver plated copper wire, sheathed in a p.t.f.e. (Teflon) coating. Simon Yorke insists that the phono cable should be of an equal or larger gauge than the tone arm wiring. I do not know why it is such a critical factor that the phono cable be larger than the tonearm wire, but it is, at least for him. However, OTA is 0.20 smaller. Nevertheless, I do not think that this causes the electrons in the SY tonearm wire to slow down when they reach OTA. :-) I can also imagine a further step to this phono cable experiment. With the goal of replacing the SY tonearm wiring altogether and the four clips holding it now to OTA, use an integral run of OTA from cartridge to PhonoCube input, like sead mentions. In this case, I wonder if it would be best to strip off the protective tubing of OTA and Teflon coat four 50 cm lengths of the OFC wire (without any silver-plating). (I got a little lost during the discussion of lacquers on this forum, can anyone tell me how to coat OTA in p.t.f.e. Teflon? or to silver-plate it?) Factors such as sead mentioned with his Koshin 801 tonearm make this project equally difficult with the SY tonearm: I would need to obtain a second SY tonearm. Multiple tonearms are not included, and the one I have is sealed to make tonearm wire replacement impossible. Of course, I could stick to the tonearm I have and run OTA tonarm wire strands outside it... but this would not be as good, mechanically, electronically and cosmetically. It would surprise me if OTA used in this fashion would be an improvement over what I now have, given the superb quality of the SY tonearm wire. However, OTA has a way of astounding you.... A few additional points: twisting the previous 25 cm runs of OTA was not sufficient to prevent all of the RFI and compromised the sound quality slightly (tone was choked, closed off, there was less bi-partite stereo separation, and more line noise and hum). Also, the excess axial force when using twisted strands acted on the PhonoCube input jacks, and I thought this would adversely affect the units longevity, so I disconnected it. I now use the untwisted 25cm runs to connect PhonoCube to the preamp. The idea is the same as the 4.8 cm bridge I just installed: the shorter the run of OTA the better. In fact, in every case when I have used OTA as an analog hook-up, I liked the shortest possibe alternative the best (which is not the case with every cable I have used). Furthermore, short runs break in faster. As far as OTA not being designed to function as a phono cable, I say: listen with your own ears. Once I got it down to 25 cm. it outperformed by a large margin the reference cables I had used in the past. Decreasing it to 4.8 cm brought out the last refinement in focus, neutrality, and speed. But this will not be possible for people with large phono stages (of course, they can go out and buy a smaller one :-) IMO, getting it down to 25-30 cm is sufficiently rewarding. I know that there is a gigantic difference between that and a 1.0m run of OTA (which is a gigantic difference to a 1.0m run of Ortofon, Fadel Art, et. al.). The difference between 25 cm and 4.8 cm is not as gigantic. I even wonder if record producers ever imagined that their recordings would be listened to in this way: gated snare drums shoot by so fast through a 4.8 cm run of OTA that you can hardly register them, and double-tracked vocals (ala George Martin's Beatles recordings) sound embarrassing when you hear them so close up. Finally, I haven't tried OTA on digital yet, nor on loudspeakers. Dekay's digital design (DDD) is on the agenda though. |
Since the preceding post was written, difficulties with this set-up have emerged due to subtle accumulations of RFI on the tone arm cables. To its credit, PhonoCube has enough sensitivity to render this RFI in the wire more audible than any other phono stage I have heard. Also, I am certain that the turntable itself is acting as an antenna and passing on certain amounts of RFI/EMI to nearby PhonoCube. Simply put, at the heart of the matter is that this "minimal signal length TT/PhonoStage hook-up" involves the danger that high-frequency energy can be passed fairly directly into the phono stage. I advise caution, esp. for people who live in areas of high RFI/EMI.
Two things were done: 1.) light-weight, flexible foil shields were installed on the tonearm wire, and 2.) an RFI housing/trap was built to surround PhonoCube. However, night-time listening must be conducted in dim light until I cover the shields and traps with nonreflective material: a 125 Watt shined at the TT system from across the room is enough to cause discharges.
The results of installing OTA digital cables (straight, with no knots or uneven lengths) was positive. I do not know if it is the correct impedance, but with its fast transient response, OTA Stratos wire is perfectly fitted to transmit the bandwidth of digital audio data (which, unlike analog audio, occurs in the Megaherz range).
Surprisingly, the performance of these OTA digital cables deteriorated quite alot with shields. Unshielded, they were clear, detailed, precise, focused, pure. Shielding obliterated their purity. They became awkward, wanting in precision and emphasis. Unshielded, I took a pleasure in digital OTA comparable to the one I get from the bloom given off by well-designed tube amplifiers. Shielding made it grey, warm, blurry. I do not know the precise reasons, but make the effort to construct shields and you will see for yourself. |
But I don't think it's advisable use the OTA from cartridge to Phonocube. The problem is the bare OTA wire itself is too stiff to be a good tonearm wire. The sitffness will play havoc with the tonearm's antiskating. This is rather unfortunate because as the output of the cartridge is very low, the fewer solder joints you have the better it would sound. So it looks like in my system I've no choice but to use a more flexible tonearm wire before joining it to the OTA cable. |
Hi Guys,
Anyone tried using the OTA for power cords yet? I thinking to trying it out soon. Any special way to terminate/dress the power cords? Feedback much appreciated.
Best Regards,
Bill |
