The Science of Cables

It's very simple. Sources have LCR properties. Destinations have LCR properties. Cables interpose an LCR filter between them. Add in recording, source, speaker and room colorations and all bets are off on how a particular cable 'sounds'.

Cable sonics are entirely system dependent. See http://ielogical.com/Audio/CableSnakeOil.php

The great problem is there are many charlatans selling to the ignorant and insecure, aided and abetted by an audio press enamored with bling listening on systems that constantly change. 

@taras22
IF it’s not simple, just exactly what wire properties other than LCR affect response?

@teo_audio
the tests were done on excised tissue and "it remains to be seen whether these findings are relevant in the normal inner ear of living animals." A single photon is detectable but it conveys no information.

@bsmg
Cables carry the signal which is ultimately detected by the ears. Ears, err I mean listeners, can be trained.

Manufacturers make all manner of claims. When trained listeners hear no difference, the purveyors claim inadequate biological capabilities. Fanboys poo-poo blind tests trained listeners pass with aplomb.

From start to finish, music recording and reproduction is a series of equalizers.
Expecting 2m of balonium will undo everything that preceded it is utter folly.
Expecting 2m of balonium will improve all systems is an even larger load.

@boxer12   Some of us have been hearing cable differences for more than half a century. We then used science and numbers to determine how that could be, given the prevailing wisdom that everything sounds the same. cf Stereo Review

@chrissain  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Regardless of the cable, it is quite possible to assemble systems where Brand X beats the pants off the Gold Standard. There is no universal best and COST DOES NOT CORRELATE TO SOUND QUALITY

@taras22  Film?!?!?! go away! <vbg> Z-curve? Bleccchhh. I effing hated doing music for films and TV! Great music buried for a door slam or tire squeal. What a waste!

@kalali Exactly. So much of the attraction is bling. And the names!! If it keeps up there will be Chocolate fudge, Caramel swirl...

@cd318  Perhaps it would be instructive to model the Naim output, the cable and their loudspeakers. While Ivor could often be off the beam, often he was spot on.

@taras22 
I'm sure you and Ken are justifiably proud of your cables.

The problem I have is the hyperbole.

Most metals' conductivity decreases when liquid. If there are any voids in the 'fill', conductivity drops like a stone.

The only natural metal liquid at room temperature is mercury which has 1/60 Cu conductivity. The DCR could be overcome by making the wire 60 times as large, but then L would decrease by a factor of about 6. C could be kept the same by changing dielectric.

So if one keeps R and C constant, changing L by a factor of 6, one has created a new filter and one that is probably quite audible. Depending on source and destination response, the new filter may be a plus and maybe not.

To claim "TEO’s Liquid Cable interconnect cables are best characterized by their absence of character. … etc." strains credibility.

If the cables are not in fact a flowing material, then the "Liquid" moniker is just more marketing malarkey.

@taras22 

"The only natural metal liquid at room temperature is mercury"

EGaInSn - Thank-you for confirming.

Other than being liquid, there are few properties that one would consider ideal for audio electronic connection. The material's primary benefit over solid connectors is that it is 'stretchy.' Given that audio connections remain fixed, using a material which has lower conductivity and non-constant or inconsistent charge density seems pointless.

See http://www-personal.umich.edu/~kaviany/researchtopics/SYu_JCP_2014.pdf and https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/23746149.2018.1446359

It may have sonic properties that differ from Cu and Ag, but that is the same claim made by every other cable maker for their product!

@taras22 
selling zen as engineering offends, as do split infinitives.

"to boldly"
 boldly what?

It's bingo day at the seniors center.

Sadly, there's more intelligence there than here or the freshman class at almost any college in America.

The 'spiritualists' here remind of the BBE Sonic Maximizer from the early 80's. On poorly engineered program, it could be 'interesting'. On well recorded and mixed material with good sound stage presentation, it was a nauseating buck of mush.

Too often I have endured demos of 'discoveries' which do 'enhance' the sound, but only if one re-defines enhance: v. - intensify, increase, or further change the quality, value, or extent of a reproduction in a manner inconsistent with an original.

'Bandaids' to cover defects only ensure the production of more defects.

I cannot see the tweeks of AC, and cables as being band-aids.

That's all they are. ALL interact with source and destination. NONE are 100% neutral.

chaos theory

Don't make me laugh. The initial condition is OFF. The next condition is IDLE. IDLE changes with age, voltage, temperature, pressure and humidity for some transducers. There is no way some high resistance, poor charge density goop is going to ameliorate anything. More than likely, it is undergoing constant change ala the BBE Sonic Maximizer.

So we all (kinda) agree that cables have an impact on sound quality...we all want to hear the ‘pure, unaltered sound’ coming out of our speakers... how about the cables that were used during the recording session? I doubt all those record studios use ‘high end’ cables...

Many studios do use 'high-end' cables. I wired many with Mogami, Canare, Belden, Monster, etc. Some spent as much on cable as the mixing desk.

However, those same studios all have a different sound due to room,  electronics and microphones. We often drove across town to record in a specific space for its sonics. The Complex, Sunset, Record Plant, Oceanway, Capital 'A', Village, or cross country to Hit Factory, Sony, or offshore to Monserrat, Abbey Road, etc. So when you get a piece recorded in multiple rooms, whose cable would you use? Change cable per disc? Track? Chorus?

Add in EQ & compression by the earless A&R department in yet another facility.

Add in sonic changes from watermarking, disc stamping, etc.

Add in sonic thumbprints for player, pre, amplifier.

Add in sonic bootprint for speakers.

It's a wonder it's listenable at all.

I just roll my eyes when I read equipment reviews where the kazoo on this or the conga on that or the calliope on the next had some particular authority. All that has happened is the endless series of colorations has aligned to what the reviewer thinks something sounds like. BUNK!

>>> NO PLAYBACK SYSTEM ANYWHERE EVER SOUNDED LIVE <<<

@prof 
 +1 - keep on firing.

@prof 

I would personally differentiate those cable companies from "High End" cable companies

"High End" means engineered for a purpose, not some charlatan's pipe concoction for visual/cosmic appeal. Nordost speaker cables are in the YFJ [You're Freaking Joking] category. First time I saw them I thought, "How bad would my system have to be for these to make it 'better'?" First time I heard them, I was nonplussed. The $100k system was 'nice' but did not engage me playing Miles, Queen or SFO. Yawn...

@taras22 

 Funny you mention that capacitance thingee

Keep digging. C is but one parameter. As in most things, there is no free lunch. Electronic design is about optimizing. The Schroeder method Increases C but decreases L & R. In some systems this could be an improvement, not so much in others. Then there are the 'Y' parameters and the routing/interweaving of multiple connectors. It all depends on the SUT [System Under Test].

Maybe I'll start the 'IEales Method' wherein I use 200' interconnects in counter wound ellipses around my listening position to better envelope me in the aura. Shheeeesh!

@cleeds
Confirmation bias? Not bleeding likely. Please don’t read into what I didn’t write. I did not say I compared them.

I hadn’t been into a Hi Fi store in about 15 years. Treated room. Magico S7s, McIntosh monoblocks, McIntosh pre, interconnects unknown. Nordost something speaker leads. Played "So What?" from LP "Kind of Blue". "We are the Champions" and some SFO suggested by salesperson, streamed.

2nd time, another store, Focal Sopra 1 & 2. Moon something electronics. My 3 tracks, all streamed.

Both times, yawn. NOT what I expected.

I recorded for a living. The sound in a good control room is as close to live as one will ever hear. I still get goosebumps after more than 30 years thinking about some sessions. Today I’m retired, but volunteer as production chair and put on 7 live shows a year. I took over sound check last year. Thus far, nothing but compliments on how much better the sound is this year. I strive for the live sound in the seats. When I hear a HiFi, that’s what I want, Row G, Center 21 & 22. I wanna be grabbed and made to pay attention. When cats hear my system, they say things like "Man, I can hear everything. It’s so precise. And I don’t hear anything. It’s just all there!"

@cleeds 
Confirmation bias is 'experiencing' a change where there is none.

Having messed with the math, manufacture and sonics of multi conductor cables in decades past, an interleaved/interwoven construction clearly has electrical and sonic benefits.

When I first saw them, I thought "Why would anyone build a cable like that and not interleave + and -?"

Listening confirmed exactly what I experienced from previous exposure to the class.

@cleeds 
If I hear an amplifier clipping, I don't need to compare to know it.

@cleeds 
No, I'm not saying that Nordost cause clipping.

Clipping has a distinct sonic signature and one does not need to compare amps to determine it is happening.

Interwoven vs parallel cables also have distinct sonic signatures. I would have been shocked if the Nordost had sounded like interwoven, with which I am well familiar and prefer.

I'm not a sceptic.
I don't believe in magic.

2C½(LR) - yup, that's a new filter.
Add in more LCR for Y - yup another new filter.
Change loop area - yup, that changes LC - yup, another new filter
Only a magician would expect no change

DO THE MATH

This last page is the most unscientific hilarity seen in many a long while.

My company wired LA studios for about 15 years. We used Belden, Mogami, Canare, Monster, <some I forget> depending on what the client wanted.

The studio owners expended many hours listening to obtain the best sound with their equipment. They had the opportunity to make comparison with live performers, be it a Marshall stack, really famous vocalists, 50 piece string section, ETC!!! Without any shadow of a doubt, you all have recordings you rave about that were recorded in these rooms.

Children, cables sound different depending on the connected devices. There is no magic bullet. Skinny AWG might sound good with a speaker with one set of flaws and fat AWG better with a different set of flaws. Change length, geometry, insulation, connectors and all bets are off.

Not 1 in 1000 has any technical expertise whatsoever or been within 100 miles of recording studio. You're all talking out the side of your neck!!!

Pro and HiFi cables are made to make money. FULL STOP. In both cases, the uninformed consumer is fair game.

Holding Pro companies’ feet to the fire is extremely hypocritical given the mountains of malarkey which pervades the HiFi cable market.

In the Pro world, it’s about getting clients through the door. The cables need to get the job done to the satisfaction of the client. Most of it is buried in the walls so has ZERO jewelry appeal, which is oft foremost in HiFi. The only place pro cable has any value is between the client’s ears.

Just as with a home system, depending on the room and equipment, Mogami may sound better than Canare. In the end, all the matters is the quality of the recording.

In the studio, we would use mic cables dating back to the 40’s or the latest and greatest or something in between, depending on the singer, microphone, equalizer, limiter, recorder and tape. We also had patch cords made of Mogami, Canare, Monster, Belden, etc. Some cables had silver plated connectors. Some, gold. All had a signature. Regardless, all were replugged at the start of a session. IMO, most audiophiles fail miserably at rigor when evaluating new kit. Hence a never ending attempt to hit an always moving target.

As far as measurements, what and how are you going to measure. Who cares if they measure well but don’t sound very good in the application. "If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you’ve measured the wrong thing." -- Daniel R. von Recklinghausen, HHScott

Based on your reaction, I suspect you have not used many different cables in your home system.

I was evaluating cables, by calculation, measurement and sonics, as an educated audiophile, long before you purchased your first Rat Shack receiver or I became a pro. I have bins of them in the garage. About the time you went RS, I was using Yamaha Class A amps, Mitch Cotter silver phono cables and interconnects and Oracle speaker cable, custom twisted. A friend owned a Rat Shack store. I still have my Minimus 7s, but the electronics? I’m sure they measured well, but "How could you?"

As far as my speaker cables, Kimber BiFocal-XL. Why? Because they sound very nice. Inconsequentially, they are also engineered for the job and provably so. The missus HATES them!!!

powerful method for improving an audio system?

beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Millions of people drink *$. I'll take the headache.

One thing I still don't understand is which cable parameters that are responsible for what we call "transparency"

It depends on what's stuck on the cable ends.

For example, a loudspeaker with excessive group delay and a ringy tweeter may require a cable that makes a more coherent speaker sound 'polite'. A tube amp with a puffy bottom may require a cable that makes a solid state amp sound anemic.

HiFi's great shame is too close a focus on parts and not enough on the system, iow "Not seeing the woods for the trees."

So.. Belden ’confirms’ the existing science of high end cables.

So cable haters and naysayers....where’s your hater god now?

Please don't equate well designed cables with the 'EQ filters' that so many 'high end' cables represent.

He also said that two cables with the same "RLC" measurements could have completely different sound.

DOH! That is no surprise.

There innumerable ways to lumped L, C & R parameters. The signal responds to an infinite series of µL µC & µR. GEOMETRY is every bit as important.

Mr Kait, don't forget to mention ink color and font.

Source and Load impedances also figure into the sonic equation.

As well designed as the Iconoclasts are, there are a whole range of systems extant where a group of trained listeners with similar preferences are going to react from

             YECH!
to
             MEH
through
             OY VEY!!