Which cables go with what?????

This was actually designed by a few of us as a weight loss program! At least it's worked for Gunbei!

Audioengr initiated a topic that needed discussion.

What, no more posts??!!

I was getting a great education following this thread, and laughing my ass off too!

So, now the mess is in two places!

I recently posted a link from a thread on AA and tied it into this one. If someone wants to read it and the comments that were made there, you can find it in a thread entitled: physical basis of synergy. I tied the two together as i thought that they were inter-related in more than one way. I also thought that the people expressing opinions there might be interested in the opinions being expressed here.

Needless to say, i'm running my mouth in both threads : ) Sean
>

Dekay,was just kidding myself!nt

Flex:

The power cord; because it is on the supply side of the power supply is the only device that must endure the entire workload of the system. For this reason they also create/produce their own brand of distortion when not designed effectively.
I can’t give you a number on the reduction in distortion because of the variables;
however, the change is massive especially when one or more is used.
Mechanical resonance is part of the problem but there is an aspect I have not mentioned; all I can tell you is that the design produces negative impedance without the use of resisters, inductors, capacitors; this allows the resonance tuning to be effective.

Sean:

Our “direct drive” speaker (not a product for sale at the present) is full of proprietary innovations like the ports, driver mountings, support structure which the cabinet rest on etc. The power cords are so critical to the speakers performance it simply will not function with and degree of proficiency without them.

Abe:

Hmm, gender VS attractiveness is generally not an issue with heterosexual men/women (rolling of the eyes).

I think the photos viewed were from a Hifi show (can't remember the event off hand).

Anyway, I was just kidding about "it" bugging me.

"his wife is easily a gazillion times more attractive (than Steve)."

I should hope so unless your into the same sex thing!

So are you implying it might be a subliminal promotional thread? Kinda of funny if that is the case!

RCH:

Regardless of what/any intent Steve had in regard to starting this thread, I will say that his premise is an odd one (this not being the first time he has wierded me out, nor hopefully will it be the last).

I can't imagine seriously discussing this one (this concept) as it has too much of "The Chicken or the Egg" quality going for it.

Yes, I first thought that the thread might be financially motivated (especially after the two year old piped in:-), but now it seems fairly obvious that Steve was just dreaming/thinking outloud/online.

As far as any self promotion goes I'll be damned if I can ever remember the name of his cable company (and I have read tons of his AA posts), so he must be doing a very poor job of it.

The only thing that really bugs me about Steve is that his wife is easily a gazillion times more attractive (than Steve). I mean, what's up with this?

Audioengr, ALL cables have a sonic signature, just as ALL electronic components have a sonic signature. It's simply a matter of choosing a collection of components that, to YOUR ears, do least damage to the music. I'm all for applying sound scientific principles to cable design but, in its present state, science can only tell us so much, hence the diversity of equally valid approaches. The list of 'respectable' cable manufacturers you posted is completely arbitrary and FAR from complete.

Rjwood: AudioEngr has done the self promotion before in past threads somewhat disguised. The fact that this thread has over 68 posts supports this. Great publicity!

Okay Corona, supposing that it were somehow possible to eliminate the modulating effect of vibrational motion on the fields carried on a/c cords (and I'm assuming you're talking about mechanical and not electrical resonance), what percentage of that 80% distortion through the entire record/playback chain do you think is going to be reduced?

Resonance is present at every point in a playback system. If you reduce it in the power cord, where the a/c signal after passing through a transformer, admittedly becomes the base of the audio signal, then how do prevent resonance from being reintroduced in signal cables, within the electronic components including their wiring, and most of all within the speaker environment?

Corona: So, now you are trying to say that "proper" power cords could correct / reverse the physics involved with speaker design ? That is the only way for me to take what you are saying... Sean
>

PS... I think that ports with flares on the entrance and exit ( aka "aeroports" ) alleviate much of the problems associated with this type of design. The high impedance peak / poorer transient response / increased ringing / lack of power transfer that is directly related to the electro-mechanical resonances of such an alignment are still something that plague such designs. This is obviously taking this thread WAY off track though....

Rjwood wrote:
"your system is only as good as its weakest link and that weakest link could be a cable, 'neutral' or otherwise."

Certainly agree with this. This is why it is so important to start with cables that do not add any sonic signature of their own.

Sean:

I don’t think you are stuck in the Stone Age; in fact you are one of the few people in this forum who understands how far off the mark audio is. Many years ago an audio engineer friend told me, “You must remember audio is approximately 20% music and 80% distortion”. Presently things have improved but we still have a long way to go.
The “blow hole” effect you mentioned in reference to ported speakers is directly related to the problem I keep referring to: power cords. We have been in business for over six years so why am I now posting on this forum? Why do I not talk about our other products? Why do I keep repeating the same issue? Could it be the answer has nothing to do with business? Could it be this product is so revolutionary that all by it self it could change the entire audio situation? If this is fact than how do you convey such advancement to the public? Well you are certainly not going to do it in an arena that is constantly serving up Pablum. Now don’t get me wrong Pablum is a good thing, but the threads in this forum are drowning in it. I really feel for the Audiogon people that stare at that stuff day after day. We think the only way to promote a product this advanced is through direct experience and this is what we have done. One guy hears a demo, contacts a friend and so it goes. Now, what is the relationship between the speaker and the system’s power cords? There are various electromagnetic disruptions that take place all the time within the cord’s structure; these create all forms of distortions which are passed into the system’s circuits. The music is then superimposed over it and sent to the speaker. The effect of this causes the bandwidth to become “clamped” or compressed, limiting frequency, dynamics, resolution etc. The solution we have found establishes a relationship through tuning the mechanical resonance of the cord in reference to the propagation of its field. I know the E.E. manuals claim that no such relationship exists but this is why, until now, no one has been able to solve the problem. How do we know the effectiveness of this tuning? Because it is done while a signal is being sent through the system and the effect is clearly audible. If you believe this to be either fact or fancy, the performance level of the product still remains the same.

Sean asked:
"What consistent factors have you found amongst all of these cables that makes you think that they perform better than other cables not mentioned ?"

This is easy. First, there is some science behind these cables. The L, R, C and Dielectric Absorption (DA) have been optimized to some extent, as well as the wire size. Second, the metallurgy of these cables is "good". This means that some attention has been paid to the fabrication and processing.

Nrchy, I didn't accuse Audioengr of "pushing his own cables". I'm just questioning whether it's appropriate for a manufacturer (and most of us know about Audioengr's products) to start such a thread. Self-promotion can take more or less subtle forms and Audioengr could easily change his username.

Audioengr fails to acknowledge that cables are components too! Of course, your amplifier must have enough power to drive your speakers and, similarly, there shouldn't be an impedance mismatch between your source component(s) and preamp, or preamp and amp. But given that these basic issues have been addressed, your system is only as good as its weakest link and that weakest link could be a cable, 'neutral' or otherwise.

Audioengr and I have disagreed on many subjects in the past, but at the point of pushing his own cables I have to take exception. After all the discussion on this and other threads I still do not know what cables he makes or sells. He isn't pushing too hard!
In my opinion he is pushing his design philosophy and understanding more than his cable. I'm sure his opinion is just as welcome here as anyone elses.
I guess we'll continue to disagree, but I always like to read what he has to say. Who knows, I might learn something after all.

Audioengr: What consistent factors have you found amongst all of these cables that makes you think that they perform better than other cables not mentioned ? That is the whole point that i was getting at earlier when i asked "what electrical or physical characteristics make a cable neutral" ? Sean
>

Rjwood wrote:
"Oh, and if Audioengr is really starting these threads for the benefit of us mere music lovers, perhaps he could nominate a few manufacturers whose cables perform at the same exalted level as his own?"

Sure, I can do this:
Bogdan
Audience
Acoustic Zen - certain cables
Siltech

Bwhite wrote:
"So from your statement about preamps - I gather you don't view them as too important. What about source components? Are they important?"

Preamps are certainly important. The point is: that in most systems there the SYNERGY between the pre and the amp is not too important, In other words, several good preamps will all behave about the same. There are exceptions to this, such as my own amps, which seem to require a lot of drive to sound dynamic, and therefore a low output impedance preamp.

Source components are the MOST important to nail right. If these are wrong, you will chase your tail indefinitely trying to fix the sound. I have a significant number of customers that have subjectively "bright" or sibialant systems just because their CD source is not optimum. This is precisely why I offer a demo source "system" to audition. Htye just leave a deposit and they can compare the Transport, DAC and SP/DIF cable to what they have to determine where the weakness is.

Nothing is completely neutral but there are degrees of closeness. Audio electronics companies like Meridian, Spectral, Linn, Levinson, Goldmund that design complete systems do strive to convey the signal end-to-end with as much linearity and as low distortion as possible. I believe this is what Audioengr is referring to.

It is also possible to define neutrality from a listening standpoint, as recording engineers do when they use a live mike feed as a reference for any subsequent changes in sound.

The problem is for the ordinary audiophile who has neither an oscilloscope nor a reference sound to work with.

I agree with Audioengr when he says most cable manufacturers do not understand cable physics. There is nothing easier to do than change sound. Avoiding changing it is what is difficult.

"Oh, and if Audioengr is really starting these threads for the benefit of us mere music lovers, perhaps he could nominate a few manufacturers whose cables perform at the same exalted level as his own?"

I do not see he is promoting his wares. I do see other participants sharing their views though.

"NO audio component, passive or otherwise, can be completely transparent."

Exactly,but there is a place at which you can enjoy the place you get to in your system. No component will ever get to the true live event,but it's what illusion you think comes closest to it that matters to the owner in my opinion.

"If you take two identical cables and alter just a single design parameter, e.g. conductor purity, in one of them, they'll sound different."
Agree partially becasue there are those things which will not be audiable. IF you change some things they will not be noticed I think is what I am getting at. Purity is the reason why I am looking seriously at cryo processing.

I think Robert Lee of Acoustic Zen has it right when he says that cable design is as much an art as a science (Mr Lee is, I understand, an ex-professional violinist). Being a pro musician ahs nothing to do with making up wires except the fact that you would know what the real sound of a particular piece sounds like. There are to many variables involved in design and playback and synergy is one of them. If a Cable can reproduce Instrumental Music correct ,but tthen you play vocals and they are not true then it is a bad cable, in my system anyways.

A piece that can be considered SOTA has the ability to be more syngistic placed in any system it is inserted. This I think is the goal of the good designer. If AZ Cables can accomplish that then they are worthy of being SOTA.
Almost anything can be considered an ART BTW if it has be perfected over time IMO.

Just a few things I noticed.

Audioengr, you may have had an "illustrious" career in the "computer business" but your premise that audio cables are either neutral or coloured is just bunk. NO audio component, passive or otherwise, can be completely transparent. If you take two identical cables and alter just a single design parameter, e.g. conductor purity, in one of them, they'll sound different. I find these claims by manufacturers to neutrality, transparency, or whatever, to be arrogant in the extreme and have far more respect for those that let their products - and the MUSIC - speak for themselves. Whilst I'm not enamoured of all of his work, I think Robert Lee of Acoustic Zen has it right when he says that cable design is as much an art as a science (Mr Lee is, I understand, an ex-professional violinist).
Oh, and if Audioengr is really starting these threads for the benefit of us mere music lovers, perhaps he could nominate a few manufacturers whose cables perform at the same exalted level as his own?

Have been following this thread for quite some time and I absolutley did not see the justification in attcking Steve for trying to get some feedback over synergy which is a paramount importance I see in mixing and matching Wires or synergy for use as tone controls.

How many times I have witnessed or read about others witnessing the factor of combining the correct components or wires which make or break a system is really to many to keep track of. I have been lucky in my quest over the years to only have used one amp that was realy a disaster whereas cables are another story. There is alot more examples of cables than components making or breaking a system in my reads.
Alot of times people will make the mistake of selling good components when all they had to do was switch wires. Real perplexing questuon and one that warrants futher investigation.

If I want tone controls I would have them on my Pre so I try to just have a synergy which to my ears aim for the truth of the components bringing out the areas of the recordings that I would not normally hear. If I cannot make out what the vocals are and hear the clash of Cymbals then I try something else till I hear what I know is there and it sounds natural.

Damn I never used Tone controls even when I had them with my Pre-Amps.

As stated I have nothing against AudioEng. starting this thread.Been very informative till I have had to go through post attacking him for asking posting a controversal topic which I have asked in several other post in different ways. If he were saying BUY MY CABLES! BECAUSE THEY ARE THE BEST! then It would warrent such opinions or opposition,but I have not seen that. Why then should the question of starting this thread even be considers.

JMO

Good idea, now there's one Everest missed in his acoustics book :-)

Why would it be so hard to look for component synergy? There are probably only a small number of components and speakers you would seriously consider anyway.

It's the cable voodoo as currently practiced that I find mystifying. Reading hundreds of posts trying to narrow down what someone else thought the character of cable x going from component y to component z sounded like in house z' with dedicated lines z'' and power conditioner z'''. But what's it going to sound like when you get it home? And how much money are you going to throw away doing this.

Seriously - cables have been getting better in the last few years. I would predict that there may be a convergence toward what Audioengr is saying; that cable ideas will stabilize around a few good ideas, and that neutral cables will feature prominently though not exclusively.

What an awesome thread! I love it! :) The first three posts hit the nail on the head in one way or another - that being the simple FACT that nothing we have to work with in audio is truly neutral. Everything on this planet produces a sonic signature of one type or another when energy is applied to it, and to assume that it doesn't is pure fantasy.

Audioengr wrote: "If the average audiophile spent his time trying to weed-out the tone control cables and get some neutral cables, then all that would be left is to determine the right synergy between his or her components."

Audioengr, do you have stock in FedEx? UPS? :) Reason I ask is I cannot personally imagine the amount of cash *I* would have had to spend over the years shipping an endless variety of components in order to obtain perfect, ideal synergy between designs from different manufacturers from every corner of the globe. Tongue in cheek of course but no doubt FedEx and UPS certainly benefit from all this insane audio buying activity.... Doncha think?

To that regard, I would personally rather be paying the shipping costs on 1 pound cables vs. 50 pound components. Am I crazy?

Audioengr wrote: "In some cases also preamp-amp synergies are important"

Hmm... I cannot think of a single instance where preamp "synergy" is NOT important. It doesn't take an audio engineer to understand that resistance applied to the lowest level signal in an audio system and / or amplification of that very same low level signal could potentially do the most to alter that signal -- or does it?

So from your statement about preamps - I gather you don't view them as too important. What about source components? Are they important? Also you're forgetting what may in fact be the most significant "component" in any system - the room.

IMHO, cables are a god send - tone controls or not. I would rather place a cable in my system than undergo a 6 month construction project to correct the acoustics of my home.

Nrchy - your respect index just went up a notch. ;>)

Corona, isn't disagreement and discussion allowed here? Can't we have opposing view points and still enjoy the same hobby.
Audioengr is far better educated than I in these matters, we still disagree, but that doesn't mean that each of us is not entitled to our opinions and the ability to argue them in a civil manner. How boring would this site be if everyone agreed on everything.
I have learned a lot from people here, even those with which I disagree.
Audioengr, keep up the good work!

I don't believe you, A/E. I'm the Psychic, remember...

Sonic_genius wrote:
"AudioEngr: If you have the education and experience that you claim then you would be a fool to be in the high-end audio cable business."

Not really. I've already had a 26-year illustrious career in the computer industry and I took early retirement. I don't need the cable business to survive. I do it because I'm passionate about it. This has several advantages:

1) I'm not going belly-up any time soon
2) I'm doing this business for the right reasons
3) High-end audio shows are really a kick
4) I like the people much more than the egg-heads that I worked with in the computer bussiness

Sean: Call me now! I'll give you a free psychic reading...

I don't think that Audioengr is guilty of doing anything but trying to share knowledge in an educational manner. He's made WAY too many posts ( both here and on AA ) conveying nothing more than helpful information for anyone to claim anything other than that. If he had made the same statements without being a cable manufacturer, would anybody have thought twice about it ? Would this thread have just turned into the typical "downward spiral" that most cable threads end up in rather than an attack on his integrity ? Sean
>

I wasn't able to get my mother-in-law to believe I was sorry she couldn't spend a month with us but...I just saved 30% on my car insurance!

Robert

AudioEngr: If you have the education and experience that you claim then you would be a fool to be in the high-end audio cable business. NASA, JPL come to mind or running your consulting company.

Or course retiring to the woods of Oregon ain't that bad and living off the cable biz. income (racket)...

I think Audioengineer has been very up front about any possible conflict of interest. Furthermore, he has demonstrated a degree of generosity of knowledege that only a few others have. I think we should encourage it.

With all respect, Nighthawk, I disagree on the first paragraph. People usually do their best thinking in the areas they work in, and its pretty easy to distinguish serious content from a sales pitch. RCrump actually writes all the time at the AA Cable Asylum; maybe Agon just isn't as challenging?

What a mess!

Corona: The fact that you would desire to build a ported speaker for "hi-fi" use tells me more than any of your vague generalizations / thinly veiled advertisements that you call "responses" ever could.

Ported speakers are for applications where quantity is more important than quality or where compromises are necessary to obtain "reasonable" extension out of driver that is less than optimal to begin with. You can tell me that i'm "stuck in the stone age" and need to "catch up with technology", but i'm not the one that is trying to take out of phase information and make it arrive in phase.

Since we are still stuck working within the laws of physics, i prefer to do the best we can with what we've got and minimize the potential for damage. Installing a "blow hole" into a cabinet and allowing sound to leak out of it at any given frequency, phase and velocity does not make for anything less than a compromise from the start.

Audioengr: My comments about the length of the signal path in your speakers was meant to demonstrate that, even as careful as you've been with selecting active components, you are still FAR from hearing what a time and phase coherent signal sounds like. With as much care that went into designing the active components that you have and minimizing distortion within the signal chain, ALL of your signal is now fed to you via indirect "coupling" via capacitors. This is not to mention that, even though your speakers may have a relatively flat impedance and frequency response, much of the nuances of the signal are getting "devoured" by impedance compensation networks, etc.. If you doubt this, disable the Zobel's on the woofers and / or mids and then do a frequency sweep. If the output rises as frequency is increased ( as compared to "stock" ), the "extra" signal that your hearing / measuring was derived from power that was otherwise "lost" or "eaten up" by the Zobel(s). As such, it is only logical to deduce that lost output is the result of lost signal. Signal that you would otherwise hear / be able to put to use. Sean

>

PS... I have speakers with no crossovers and speakers with 30 parts in the crossovers. Any time you put a "component" between the driver(S) and the amp, you loose something somewhere while trying to gain something somewhere else. As such, the usual "victims" in such an exchange are those things that are audible i.e. a reduction in harmonic structure, air, liquidity, natural presentation, etc... in order to "gain" in the areas of things that are "measurable" i.e. flatter frequency response, lower distortion, etc.. The end result is typically a speaker that measures well but sounds "lifeless", "sterile" and "power hungry". After all, all of those "passive parts" have to be energized to do their jobs. It would be silly to think that they worked for free, wouldn't it ? As to what "energizes" them, that would be the signal that you are feeding them from the amp. Signal that is now lost and can never be recovered. Sure, it can be further altered, but it can never be recovered.

Audioengr, I call 'em as I see 'em. When you start a thread in the same area as the product you sell, your motives are suspect. RCrump sets a good example of how a manufacturer should conduct himself. Perhaps he could give you some pointers. Observe he has never started a thread in the cables section.

Corona, you should read the posting guidelines for this forum. One of the reasons for declining a post is "Posts that are obviously trying to sell something". Several of your posts fall into this category, referencing 10 years of research and a magic power cord you've developed which defies the laws of physics. Now ask yourself, "Should I be here?".

Unsound wrote:
"System synergy is dung? What about impedance matching between pre and power amp, between power amps and speakers, between speakers and rooms, etc.."

I agree with you 100%. Synergy between amps and speakers is critical. Sometimes between preamps and amps as well. However, it goes beyond impedance. However, published impedances, for inputs anyway, just amounts to whatever resistor that the manufacturer decided to solder across the inputs for the most part. There are more important parameters, such as input capacitance and drive required to get good dynamics etc... These have a bigger impact on the sound and the synergy.

Flex wrote:
"Audioengr's original argument is that IF you match components well enough, including with tubed systems, that it is at least possible to get the cable influence out of the equation. Obviously cables need to be as well designed as possible (re S23chang) but the HUGE dependency of system sound on cable parameters can be avoided"

Precisely, you've got it!

Then we can focus on creating a database of which components and speakers synergise well together. Every once in a while, you read a review where this component synergy happens by chance. I'm sure everyone has read one of these reviews at one time or another. Cable swapping just further muddies the problem by adding too many variables.

Corona wrote:
"Maybe this will help; it took us three years to build a ported dynamic speaker with no x-over."

My hats off to you. I had though about doing this myself, but I don't have a lot of speaker design experience. But I thought it would certainly be possible. I imagine it took a lot of messing around with speaker efficiencies etc..

Sean wrote:

"do you think that your gear / system is representative of the majority of components / systems in use today ?"

Probably not, but the interfaces are similar. The difference is that everything I have is heavily modded. You can get the same mods if you want from me.

"How many parts are in the crossover network of your speakers ? You probably don't have enough fingers and toes to count them all."

There are about 20 capacitors. I know because I am in the process of modding them. This is an exception because it is a complex crossover used in the KEF 104/2.

"Based on their posts here; maybe they don't have enough customers to keep them busy."

I actually wish it were true. This has been my busiest summer yet. I don't even get to go flyfishing much - and the lake is only a half mile away.

"Audioengr starts the thread knowing full well it will serve as a promotional vehicle for his product."

Bullshit - It just irks me how many audiophiles believe this nonsense. I read hundreds of posts like:
"what speaker cables will sound good with my B&W 803's?"

I just want to dispell these notions, that's all.

lemme@lone wrote:
"if a 15 foot run of cable can be readily had from Empirical, why does everyone else have so much trouble making a standard 3 footer that should have 5 times less 'signature'"

The answer is simple. Most manufacturers of cable do not have a clue about the physics. It helps to have almost 30 years experience doing hardware engineering design. I have been researching cables specifically for almost ten years, including computer simulations of IC's and speaker cables. These really help one understand the physics without the need to build hundreds of prototypes. It eliminates much of the trial-and-error. If you see a manufacturer of cables that uses a similar design for IC's and speaker cables, this is the first indication that they don't have a clue....

System synergy is dung? What about impedance matching between pre and power amp, between power amps and speakers, between speakers and rooms, etc.. I'm with Sean on this one, though I see Audio Engineers point. With out uniform standards, we need to find synergy.