The Science of Cables

I imagine that if you would dismiss all these persons' conclusions you would say it is due to confirmation bias. 

From my perspective we have made great progress; we are at the point of asking skeptics to try something. Previously it was all theoretical discussion. Now, there can actually be something done to perhaps change some minds. Because we all know how effective decades of arguing on the topic has been. :(

cd318, would you like to try Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement?

I am looking for a simple "yes" or "no". Let’s stick to ICs, and if you become abusive or ridicule I am finished discussing it with you. If you say yes, and would like to cordially discuss it, I am open to it.

BTW, for those just joining us... Schroeder Method is at this time still experimental; I advise that it is a "do at your own risk" activity. Thus far there have been no negative outcomes re: equipment reported, but there is concern by some regarding class D amps. I encourage anyone who is not sure to consult with their equipment manufacturer as to suitability of it. (P.S. Ignore laughter and ridicule; push on for an answer to suitability. I have received everything from mockery to congratulations by designers and manufacturers). Curious parties should read the original Audio Blast article on Schroeder Method at dagogo.com

Elizabeth, while celander provided the answer, I thought I would respond as well. While a particular IC may may have multiple conductors, Schroeder Method specifically pairs full cables, which means paired ground wires as well.

celander likes the HAVE Inc. product, and I enjoy the Audio Sensibility products (reviewed in a short Audio Blast article at dagogo.com).

My understanding is that theoretically Schroeder Method should sound like a double length IC (Over the years I have found 1m to sound slightly better than 2m), but the outcome that is happening with Schroeder Method is a vastly superior performance to even the shorter single IC. It seems logically to be completely wasteful, redundant, potentially causing problems, etc. In other words, it seems a stupid idea.

However, the sound is fundamentally improved over single IC, on the level of a big dollar component change, not a tweak. Ergo, not wasteful, redundant, causing problems, etc. Smart.   :)

I will summarize the results seen so far; the Schroeder Method has been used now in dozens of systems and has resulted in 2 instances, both with headphone setups, where the outcome was considered  marginal, but users still chose to use it over single IC, and the rest deemed clearly beneficial and very happy they tried it. The observations are piling up that it is not system dependent, or not nearly as system dependent as you think. i.e.  It is considered to cause improvement in some rigs and degradation in others. If dozens of rigs show marked improvement, and two showed marginal improvement, and there has not been an incident of clear degradation, then the dismissal that, "In some systems this could be an improvement, not so much in others," is starting to face statistical probability of being an incorrect conclusion. Also, the guess that it all depends on the SUT [system under test] would not be correct.  

There are now four makers of cables (TEO Audio, Audio Sensibility, and now ANTICABLES, as well as a smaller outfit on Agon; sorry, can't recall your moniker) that are making Schroeder Method ICs. I do not believe these people are opportunists, but are responding to customer request/feedback.

I have no interest in a lengthy argument about it. You will either accept the informal comparisons and observations of those who are trying, or you will stick with your impression of it. I imagine that if you would dismiss all these persons' conclusions you would say it is due to confirmation bias. If that is your position, given the additional information I shared above, then you likely will not try it. If you do not wish to try, we can simply be in disagreement, and I will move on to others who have expressed doubt, but are willing to try.

Are you going to try it or not? If you respond with ridicule or an attempted explanation of why it won't/can't work I will consider that a "no" and will move on.  :)

Would any of our skeptics like to try the Schroeder Method of Interconnect Placement?

Except for the fact that you contradict yourself by consciously choosing specific cables for the given system in hand ---to act as tone controls.

• Invest in good room acoustics
• Use tone controls,
  
• DIY your own speakers so you can get a feel for how you can alter the sound directly,
  

"If someone is advancing/producing something for sale, is that really called a "hobby"?"

Hobby, lifestyle, profession it doesn't really matter. What does matter is listeners are exploring their passion differently as these communities move away from the magazine reviews and on to their own discoveries, and are willing to share those explorations.

I hope you guys can see this huge change taking place in the listening community, that you are a part of. Once you guys get past the ego bending I hope you realize how much expertise is here and how that experience builds (documents) many paths to both successfully and not so successful listening. There are not two people here who have the same sound in their home as the next. Do you guys realize that? Some of you here in all honesty are not pleased with what your system is doing. Others can't be more happy with the sound their getting. But one thing you all have in common is some music sounds good on your system and some doesn't.

The more you look into the variables, and not plug & play, the wiser you are becoming about the audio signal and the audio chain. Your moving toward your system becoming a variable tool. Plug & play is the long way around, and some of you are getting that big time. Others not so much.

but let me paint this

What if you had lets say 5 different cables that you like, and if you could take the best of each one and combined them you would be happy. What's stopping you? While these guys have their technical go arounds, you could be using cable that is variable, and with a little work you could make it match your system perfectly. Not only that but as your cable continues to burn in you can tweak the cable to a new setting.

This science is a variable one folks and everyday someone is finding that out. What about you? Do you really want to stay on spin cycle talking instead of doing?

not I, been tuning a long time and have enjoyed watching people convert for over 30 years now

Michael Green

Confirmation bias is ’experiencing’ a change where there is none.

I did not say I compared them.

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.

"How much are dealers gonna make by demoing cables or room treatment or tweaks?"

So if you are happy with functional mediocrity go ahead and knock yourself out, but please don’t try to impose your rather dogmatic beliefs on others.

"You are the one being dogmatic, and must simply enjoy mediocrity."

What’s wrong with being intellectually honest, consider the points someone is ACTUALLY making, instead of making stuff up to disparage?

"You are the one being dogmatic, and must simply enjoy mediocrity."

Its not only bad form, especially when you resort to calling the non-believers stupid or idiots or ignorant, but back-slapping self-righteousness is going end up really hurting your shoulder.

"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 ...

First time I heard them, I was nonplussed.

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

 Funny you mention that capacitance thingee

I would argue that on a slightly handwaving way, you can study "electricity" using classical physics. After all, much of it can be understood through Maxwell's equations. However, if you do this, you simply have to consider the charge densities, dielectric constant, magnetic permeabilities, et cetera as black boxes.

Quantum mechanics kicks in if you want to understand why a material is a conductor or an insulator

.............................................................................................................................

What is the difference between resistance and impedance?Asked by: Venudhar

AnswerResistance is a concept used for DC (direct currents) whereas impedance is the AC (alternating current) equivalent.

Resistance is due to electrons in a conductor colliding with the ionic lattice of the conductor meaning that electrical energy is converted into heat. Different materials have different resistivities (a property defining how resistive a material of given dimensions will be).

However, when considering AC you must remember that it oscillates as a sine wave so the sign is always changing. This means that other effects need to be considered - namely inductance and capacitance.

Inductance is most obvious in coiled wire. When a current flows through a wire a circular magnetic field is created around it. If you coil the wire into a solenoid the fields around the wire sum up and you get a magnetic field similar to that of a bar magnet on the outside but you get a uniform magnetic field on the inside. With AC since the sign is always changing the direction of the field in the wires is always changing - so the magnetic field of the solenoid is also changing all the time. Now when field lines cut across a conductor an emf is generated in such a way to reduce the effects that created it (this is a combination of Lenz’s and Faraday’s laws which state mathematically that E=N*d(thi)/dt , where thi is the magnetic flux linkage). This means that when an AC current flows through a conductor a small back emf or back current is induced reducing the overall current.

Capacitance is a property best illustrated by two metal plates separated by an insulator (which we call a capacitor). When current flows electrons build up on the negative plate. An electric field propagates and repels electrons on the opposite plate making it positively charged. Due to the build up of electrons on the negative plate incoming electrons are also repelled so the total current eventually falls to zero in an exponential decay. The capacitance is defined as the charge stored/displaced across a capacitor divided by the potential difference across it and can also be calculated by the size of the plates and the primitivity of the insulator.

So simply resistance and impedance have different fundamental origins even though the calculation for their value is the same:

R=V/I
Answered by: Martin Archer, Physics Student, Imperial College London, UK

Impedance is a more general term for resistance that also includes reactance.

In other words, resistance is the opposition to a steady electric current. Pure resistance does not change with frequency, and typically the only time only resistance is considered is with DC (direct current -- not changing) electricity.

Reactance, however, is a measure of the type of opposition to AC electricity due to capacitance or inductance. This opposition varies with frequency. For example, a capacitor only allows DC current to flow for a short while until it is charged; at that point, current will stop flowing and it will look like an open. However, if a very high frequency is put across that capacitor (a signal that has a voltage which is changing very quickly back and forth), the capacitor will look like a short circuit. The capacitor has a reactance which is inversely proportional to frequency. An inductor has a reactance which is directly proportional to frequency -- DC flows through easily while high-frequency AC is stopped.

Impedance is the total contribution of both -- resistance and reactance. This is important for AC analysis and design. At DC, reactive elements can be replaced with their steady-state model (capacitor->open,inductor->short) and resistance can be considered. (this isn’t true for transient analysis)

It is important to mention that while energy goes into both, it is only ’burned off’ through resistance. Power has to be given in terms of resistive power and reactive power. Resistive power actually burns off energy into heat while reactive power simply stores energy in E-fields and B-fields.

Often you’ll hear about the ’impedance’ of transmission lines, like the cables which run between components of your stereo system, and impedance of things like speakers. You’ll also hear that it is important to match these or else you’ll get reflection.

This is a much more complicated subject, which a few answers have commented on in recent questions about light and its speed.

However, what I want to mention is that when you hear about the impedance of a transmission line, like speaker cable or an antenna or coaxial cable or anything else, this does not represent energy which is "burned off" in the cable. This has to do with how energy is stored in the cable as it propagates down it. The cable does not (well, in reality it does, but assume the lossless case for simplicity) get hotter as a signal travels down it. It is not proper to think of a ’75-ohm cable’ as a 75-ohm ’resistor.’ That 75-ohms is purely reactance (ideally, though there really is attenuation in real cables).

Note that impedance and reactance are both given in units of ’ohms’ just like resistance. Capacitance is measured in Farads and inductance in Henries, and these relate to impedance, but they are not measures of impedance. As I said, the impedance of a capacitor is inversely proportional to its capacitance and the impedance of an inductor directly proportional to its inductance.

This may sound a little abstract. Impedance really is an abstraction of things that are far more complicated (things like time constants and rise times) that electrical engineers have to constantly consider. The idea of ’impedance’ allows for many of these things to be wrapped up into one subject so that they are easier to communicate.

The short answer is -- impedance includes reactance, and reactance includes effects which vary with frequency due to inductance and capacitance.
Answered by: Ted Pavlic, Electrical Engineering Undergrad Student, Ohio St.

“Over the years we have been able to develop cutting edge production techniques and technological innovations that both improve the quality and precision of our manufacturing process and propel the capabilities of our products to previously unattainable levels. The Valhalla 2 range benefits from the gains of those years of research and development in every aspect of its construction.

While V2 cables remain true to the Nordost design philosophy, using silver-plated, OFC solid core conductors, extruded FEP insulation, a mechanically tuned construction, and asymmetrical grounding, the advances made from that jumping-point are astounding.

V2 cables use Dual Mono-Filament technology, along with an innovative, proprietary connector called the HOLO:PLUG®, designed to be the best possible interface between the cable and component. The combination of these two ground-breaking technologies allows Nordost products to perfectly match our philosophy of low mass design, optimal signal transfer and perfect impedance matching.”

Have at it