I am with MC on this one? Huh? That makes little sense. Except at low frequencies, with any large size conductor, the inductance will dominate over the resistance most of the time and the DF changes with frequency. b4icu477 posts01-21-2021 2:24amMr. millercarbon
With all the respect to your empiring methode, it will take you a
lifetime to tune into the right cable, and still you may not get there.
On top, when cables are relatively costly, it may cost you a bit.
If
you would step up and use your brain, you could be there (the best
cable for your system) at one try, just by a small calculation. I'll be
happy to do that for you. All I need is the Amp's Df figure and the
length of the cables required. |
http://bit.ly/3sUrqds Also found this review from the one and only Martin Colloms, HiFi Critic Mag. Scoring a 95% and AUDIO EXCELLENCE Townshend F1 Fractal Cable review It seems to back up Millercarbon’s trusty empirical lugs: http://bit.ly/3sUrqds |
Mr.
millercarbon
Your model I-880 is a tube amp. Those, tend to have two ways to go with:
1. Provide no data or very little. So DF spec. is not to be found.
2. Tube amps have a nature of low to very (!) low DF figure.
I would take an educated guess, that it's under 20.
For that kind of DF, a home phone cord would do the job.
DF in Amp's evolution was a factor. Even first SS amps tend to have some lower DF then found today...Lets look at the Revox A-78, with DF of 30! In the late 70's on the gold era of Japanese Amps and Receivers, and till today on that kind of Integrated Amp's, the most common DF was 40. To most of them, and there were hundreds of model per year.
When some hi-End power amps, with high current capabilities (multiply power by X2 (W)) when load decreases by half (8 ohms to 4 ohms, or 4 ohms to 2 ohms and so), DF went above 100 and towards 1,000. After Digital Amps were introduced and improved, Df figures of 4,000 and above became common. |
Mr.
audio2design
You may be with whom you like to.
1. You ,may throw more complication on the subject, yet you bring no solutions: What is the parameter to look at, and what is its relations to the system its connected with?
2. As long as you stay at the dark side (see no relation and pick your cable blindfolded as not understanding its role), your journey may have no end. You may keep looking till the end of days and not found it. I wonder if you will be the lucky guy to get the right cable on your first attempt (as if calculated and applied) just like buying once in a lifetime a lottery ticket and hit the jackpot...
3. For me, and I explained why no L and C to involved in that calculation, had found the way, to get there on the first attempt, every time I do it.
There are two threads here, with people who were willing to participate and tried it out, getting amazing results, putting away to storage cables costed thousands of $$$ they used before, and get a DIY cable costs less than $100 to replaced them, because they sounded so much better.
On top, I also found out, that when a calculation shows that an X AWG is required, its providing the best sound. If you try going even thicker, sound remain the same. Good, but not better.
|
Blah blah blah....so many people with so much advice and self assuredness. Most have not laid down tons of cash over the years exploring all the different cable designs with various systems and environments. Most of the advice is from a limited perspective or biased mindset. On a well mated system, in a relatively decent environment, recent MIT cables and power cords allow the music to flow unimpeded...no roll offs or compression or lack of detail. What comes through is a lifelike sonic soundscape with dimensionality, accurate tonality, realistic dynamic swing and an organic palpability that is astonishing! When you hear the presence and energy in your music conveyed with such an uncannily truthful manner, goosebumps usually follow...and then a huge grin! |
