Audio trends and snake oil

1,557 Comments

1. August 28, 2022 at 8:13 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://successstory.com/spendit/most-expensive-audio-cables

   Reply
2. August 28, 2022 at 8:16 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://luxurylaunches.com/gadgets/costing-71000-this-handmade-24k-gold-audio-cable-is-the-ultimate-accessory-for-an-audiophile.php

   Reply
3. August 28, 2022 at 8:17 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://www.facebook.com/groups/2420755034736319/permalink/2858405797637905/
   Here’s a true story about cables. Sorry it is heresay, but I trust the source. So a gentleman I met who runs an audio company was looking to provide interconnects to his customers so he can sell them the entire package, source to speaker. To figure out which product he wants to brand as his own, he gets a few samples of 2m long cable at various price points, from a couple of dollars up to several thousand dollars, and he tests them. He finds the cheapest one is bad, then a few in the middle are all about the same, and then the most expensive one is… different. It rolls off the highs a bit, which seems surprising. After looking into it, the interconnect is advertised as “boosting the bass”. The company goes to lengths to convince the buyer that the competitor cables all sound “thin” and only their cables allow the full weight of the music and bass to come through. And for this the cable manufacturer charges $10,000 for 2m. Moral of the story: there is a sucker born every day. Trust in science, not marketing or peer pressure!

   Reply
4. August 29, 2022 at 4:16 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Capacitor sound
   https://www.facebook.com/groups/DIYAudio/permalink/5489072734491861/

   This ground breaking paper revolutionized audio circuit design in 1980. It was written by celebrity audio circuit design engineer Walter Jung of Analog Devices. A must read for all serious Audio Amateurs and DIYers who build their own audio circuits. Although this paper is forty years old, its message is still valid today. This paper contains hi math and is difficult to read, follow, and understand for most people. There is also good practical information that can be used in modern audio circuits and is worth enduring the hard read in my opinion.
   .
   Tap or click the rectangle box below to download and read. …

   Modern capacitors work the same today as they did in 1980. This paper covers mature and proven technology that will never need a reevaluation. The paper is difficult to read and hard to understand for an audio amateur, DIY Audio homebrewer, and laymen. Perhaps it could be transcribed and re written without all the hi math in a way so that more people could understand, benefit, and apply it.
   .
   PICKING CAPACITORS. Walter G. Jung and Richard Marsh
   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjS3sjw2ez5AhVrxosKHWebBScQFnoECAMQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dadaelectronics.eu%2Fuploads%2Fdownloads%2F13_Theoretical-and-practical-Electronics-papers%2FPicking-Capacitors-W-Jung.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0uRmqE9ayLCqekKyUkWneO

   Picking_Capacitors_1.pdf
   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjS3sjw2ez5AhVrxosKHWebBScQFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmilbert.com%2FFiles%2Farticles%2FPicking_Capacitors_1.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1I3KgBX4O5iuZF7y_Lk1O_

   Picking_Capacitors_2.pdf
   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjS3sjw2ez5AhVrxosKHWebBScQFnoECA0QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmilbert.com%2FFiles%2Farticles%2FPicking_Capacitors_2.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1FPo7bM7BnkM-_qUPn4-9R

   Check also
   http://www.reliablecapacitors.com/oldRC/www.reliablecapacitors.com/pickcap.html

   There’s also this by Rod Elliott, if you want something slightly
   easier to digest: https://sound-au.com/articles/capacitors.htm

   Also some more modern material : https://linearaudio.nl/cyril-batemans-capacitor-sound-articles

   https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=20891

   Reply
5. August 30, 2022 at 10:54 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Cable theory links and cable claims:
   https://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/intere.html
   https://silversmithaudio.com/cable-theory/
   https://luminousaudio.com/blogs/luminous-audio/122919363-cable-sonics-explained-why-cables-do-make-an-audible-difference
   https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/interconnects-and-speaker-cables-matter/
   https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/audio-cables-wiring
   https://www.basisaudio.com/basis-cable-system
   https://www.referencefidelitycomponents.co.uk/articles/design-of-interconnects/
   https://www.referencefidelitycomponents.co.uk/articles/design-of-interconnects/
   https://www.psaudio.com/copper/article/cable-design-and-the-speed-of-sound-part-three/
   https://www.tributariescable.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Tributaries_Data-Sheets_8AB.pdf
   https://itstillworks.com/difference-between-cable-interconnect-17248.html
   https://www.empiricalaudio.com/computer-audio/audio-faqs/short-versus-long-cables

   Audio Interconnect and Speaker Cable Myths and Facts Revealed
   https://www.audioholics.com/gadget-reviews/speaker-cable-and-audio-interconnects
   The audio industry has its share of marketing nonsense, especially when dealing with the topic of speaker cables and audio interconnects. In this interview, Hugo Rivera (VP Marketing of Audioholics) asks Gene DellaSala (President of Audioholics.com) to discuss some of these common myths and to also give general advice when shopping for audio cables. We discuss everything from speaker cables to audio interconnects.

   (iC)
   Audio Interconnect Performance:
   Claims Versus Laboratory Measurements
   https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257-MIT.pdf;sequence=2

   The measurements conducted on the cables, aside from the noise and THD+N
   tests, failed to conclude anything as to why some cables allegedly sound better than
   others. The THD+N and noise tests gave one remotely possible explanation as to why
   some cables might sound better, but it failed to give any correlation between price and
   performance or construction and performance. Therefore, it is the basic conclusion of
   this research that cable quality is of very little consequence in audio systems.
   During my search for interconnects to test, I talked to a salesman at two different
   stores, and both gave me about the same advice/information regarding cables. In effect,
   what they said was that different cables sound better in different systems – that some
   cables may make one system sound bright and “airy” while making another sound flat
   and dull. They recommended trying different cables to see which sounded better in my
   system.
   pon hearing this advice, it lead me to wonder what about a cable could make
   one system sound good and another sound not as good. A big issue in all of this is
   pyschoacoustics and the perception of sound. What sounds good to one person may not
   sound good to another. Furthermore, if someone knows that they purchased the
   supposedly best cable on the market, it may lead them to believe it is making his audio
   system sound better – the “paying more must lead to better performance” thought. In
   reality, a listener who was unaware of the change may never notice the difference.
   No clear formula exists for choosing which manufacturers’ cable to buy, what
   model to buy, and how much to spend. It is surprising how well the Radio Shack product
   and the MC Interlink 100 performed (and how low their lumped-parameter values were
   in comparison to the more expensive cables), despite their low cost and simple
   construction.

   Cable Theory for Skeptics
   Notes on Townshend Audio Isolda speaker cable
   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi_87utru75AhVnW_EDHS4NAE44ChAWegQIGxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.audiosciencereview.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fattachments%2Fcable-theory-and-isolda-pdf.23945%2F&usg=AOvVaw29I4Nlu5AQCwLR1AxGJcnS
   http://www.townshendaudio.com/isolda-speaker-cables/

   It does all sound a bit far fetched. Admittedly. But there is a theory or hypothesis for almost
   every doubt expressed on the subject. In fact, it is often surprising how simple some of the
   explanations are.
   We could state simply that the better a cable is electrically, the better it will sound. However,
   the exact analogue of this hypothesis as regards amplifiers (that improved THD figures
   automatically implies improved sound) has been well debunked, so we should be rash to
   claim that. The point is, both for amplifiers and cables, that the ear functions in such a
   strange manner (as far as anyone can tell, which isn’t all that far) that “better is not always an
   obvious direction. In fact, it can be argued very convincingly on philosophical grounds that
   “better “must always be defined empirically, i.e. by ear, subjectively.
   From the point of view of audio design, this is highly unsatisfactory. What is needed in design
   is a well-defined set of design criteria, and subjective judgement is not by any means the best
   way to derive such. However, one must do the best one can, by correlation between many
   observations of many phenomena under many circumstances, by many observers. Science
   tends to come down to this. It’s all very confusing really, especially if one is accustomed to
   believing in the objectivity of knowledge.

   So when we do say the Isolda cable has better electrical properties than other cables, there
   are two important factors to bear in mind. The first is that for a component to be “perfect”,
   optimum electrical characteristics are a sine qua non. The second is that the cable design
   arose by application of theoretical principles to a practical situation, with evaluation carried
   out, ultimately, subjectively.
   It is the business of impedance matching in audio cables that raises the most eyebrows.
   Impedance matching is not normally considered an issue at frequencies where the cable
   length is less than about a quarter of the signal wavelength. However, cable theory does not
   in fact predict any variation in wave behaviour with cable length or frequency, as regards
   reflection from a mistermination. Signal reflection still occurs, but its effects at low
   frequencies in short cables are over in such a short time, as a proportion of frequency, that
   they are generally negligible.
   The attached graphs show what happens in various cases when very fast risetime pulses are
   applied to a length of cable, terminated correctly or otherwise. Basically, the output signal
   from the cable rises in a staircase fashion, where the width of each step is equal to the transit
   time along the cable twice (end to end and back), and the height of each step is dependent on
   the degree of mistermination – gross mistermination gives smaller steps, hence more of them,
   hence a slower rate of rise. Rate of rise is also slowed by high loss dielectric material.
   Bearing this in mind, the ideal cable for any AC application is one which is impedance
   matched to at least one end and which has very low losses in the dielectric.

   It has been pointed out that it is not possible to match the impedance of a loudspeaker exactly
   in a cable, as it varies over quite a wide range. This is true; however, it seems reasonable
   that one should do the best possible, which means in practice taking an average impedance,
   in most cases the quoted nominal impedance of the loudspeaker. This minimises the
   standing wave ratio in the cable. Since standing wave effects are more important at higher
   frequencies, it is arguably not vital to allow for low frequency aberrations in impedance
   characteristic, and many loudspeakers have only relatively minor impedance variations above
   about 4kHz.

   The recent upsurge of interest in audio cables has produced a staggering variety of
   loudspeaker cables in assorted forms. These cables vary from the simple (house wiring TE)
   to the complex (MIT shotgun) and from one extreme of bulk (Van Den Hul SCS 2) to the other
   (DNM). About the only thing these cables have in common is that they have been designed
   almost exclusively on the basis of an incomplete analysis of the factors affecting “cable
   sound”
   The chief factor and the one most frequently overlooked is the hearing mechanism. The old,
   “safe” assumptions about human hearing (“the ear has a response from 20Hz to 15 or 20kHZ
   and is not sensitive to phase, amplitude variations of less than 1db, frequency response
   nonlinearities of less than 2dB or distortion of less than 0.3%THD”)
   Give a drastically incomplete, indeed inaccurate picture;

   The second neglected factor in consideration of audio cables is the interaction of the cable
   with the transmitting and receiving circuits at either end of it. It is relatively trivial to measure
   the loss along a piece of cable by differential methods (but see note 3 below), but this does
   not take into account the behaviour of the driving amplifier when loaded with the cable. (An
   extreme case is the oscillatory behaviour of certain power amplifiers when connected to a
   loudspeaker via cable of low inductance- in this case; the amplifier requires the cable
   inductance to act as part of the Zobel network at its output which maintains stability.)
   Because of the response of amplifiers, particularly high feedback amplifiers, to very high
   frequencies, it is necessary to consider cable interaction to frequencies well above the audio
   band

   Classical transmission line theory predicts that a transmission line (cable or waveguide) has
   an associated characteristic impedance, Z

   When a transmitting or receiving circuit with an output or input impedance equal to Z is
   connected to such a line there is a complete transfer of power to and from the line with no
   reflection. If a circuit of impedance not equal to Z is connected, there will be some reflection
   at the end of the cable. This is true for any frequency, “from DC to daylight”.
   “Impedance matching” is employed for example in radio antenna circuits, where a 75ohm
   aerial feeds a 75ohm input via 75ohm cable.
   It is normally assumed that impedance matching is only an issue at frequencies where
   wavelengths are comparable to the length of cable, since only at frequencies around or above
   this will standing waves be set up, resulting in drastic power loss and even transmitter
   damage. However, the wave reflections still occur at lower frequencies, and in the case of a
   line misterminated at both ends multiple reflections will travel up and down the cable for a
   long time, depending on the degree of mismatch and the cable loss.
   The majority of loudspeaker cables consist of two conductors side by side, insulated with
   either PVC or PTFE. This form of construction typically gives a characteristic impedance of
   around 80ohm, which is a poor match to the average loudspeaker impedance of 8ohm and a
   very poor match to the average amplifier output impedance of around 0.2ohm. Hence
   reflections can be expected, leading to audible problems. Such widely spaced cables are
   also susceptible to radio frequency interference and are noticeably sensitive to their
   surroundings, as the electromagnetic field associated with the signal passing through them is
   not confined in space.
   By contrast, Townshend “Isolda” Impedance Matched cable has a characteristic impedance
   close to 8ohm for optimum loudspeaker matching and minimum reflections in the audio band.
   The cable is also comprised of two flat strips, a construction which confines the signal’s EM
   field within the cable and minimises the effect of surrounding objects and interfering fields

   Additionally, the DC resistance of the cable is low; this is another basic factor affecting cable
   performance

   The Townshend “Isolda” cable satisfies the basic criteria of low loss lumped parameters and
   matched characteristic impedance. It has very low DC resistance and low loss at high
   frequencies, a consideration which tends to result in somewhat improved subjective
   performance in audio cables for reasons which are not immediately obvious

   Note 1 there has long been confusion in the hi-fi world about “high capacitance cable”.
   Townshend cables have a very high capacitance by most standards, 600pF/m. However, the
   point of impedance matching is that, with an 8ohm load on the end of an 8ohm cable, the
   amplifier sees only 8ohms (resistive), with no series inductance or shunt capacitance. With
   high impedance cables, the load is seen in series with some or all of the cable inductance.
   With cables of lower than 8ohm impedance, the load is seen in parallel with more or less of
   the cable capacitance. Of course, this only applies to a theoretical 8ohm load,
   unrepresentative of most loudspeakers, but the deviations are relatively small and the
   approximation is generally valid. In the extreme case where the loudspeaker impedance
   tends to infinity, an amplifier might see as much as 6000pF of cable capacitance with 10m of
   cable. If the amplifier has a high output impedance of 1ohm, the effective time constant is
   6ns, equivalent to a -3dB point of 25MHz

   Note (5); in a very simple experiment, we established that the ear can easily detect a
   frequency shift of 0.1.% at 10kHz, (This is the best resolution our signal generator would
   allow.) If one assumes that the ear discriminates frequencies by measuring time intervals
   between successive zeros or maxima of a waveform, as is suggested by some
   psychoacoustic research, then it can apparently differentiate between the 100us per cycle of
   10kHz and the 99.9us per cycle of 10.01kHz. This in turn implies that the effective resolution
   of the ear is better than 100ns. If so, the reasons for audible differences between cables are
   entirely obvious (as, incidentally, are some of the reasons for the inferiority of 44kHz digital
   recording). The subjective quality of the effects is however still mysterious

   Reply
6. August 31, 2022 at 10:57 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   MEASUREMENTS: Analogue RCA Interconnects.
   http://archimago.blogspot.com/2013/05/measurements-analogue-rca-interconnects.html

   Audio Interconnect Performance:
   Claims Versus Laboratory Measurements
   https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257-MIT.pdf;sequence=2

   Measuring Low Level Interconnects (RCA cables / patch cords)
   http://conradhoffman.com/Low_Level_ICs.htm

   Cable Resonance
   http://www.cardas.com/insights_cable_resonance.php

   I’m often asked, “Why should I use Cardas cable instead of standard zip, 12 awg Parallel Twin, or the wire that came with my system?” Pure musical accuracy, “that you can hear”, is the obvious answer. There are many small points of degradation between the musician and the listener in an audio chain. Some are very obvious, both to the ear and with measurement. Others are more subtle, but part of the cumulative mud. Many things that contribute to the mud can also be measured.

   There are many easily performed measurements that show the difference between cables. With a little experience you can even predict sound anomalies by looking at wave form characteristics and input/output comparisons. The sound, or wave form and input/output comparisons of 12 gauge, bare stranded zip cord contrast nicely with our entry level cable, Crosslink.

   There are many speaker and interconnect cables on the market. I suggest you listen to the difference between any typical parallel twin and 12 gauge twisted pair. If you can’t tell the difference, don’t spend your money on high end cable. Focus your system a little better.

   Unlike video cables, audio cables do not live in a matched impedance world. The wavelength of the audio signal is too long to establish a true transmission line. Impedance characteristics dance all over the place. This, combined with the necessary high impedance termination supplied by the audio components, creates a very poor situation. The electrical and electromechanical qualities of the cable are no longer nulled, as they are in the “perfectly balanced transmission line”. Cables that look pretty good in the 75 ohm or 110 ohm, balanced world suddenly ring like a bell and become microphonic and misbehave in general.

   If you try to maintain resolution over a 124 db or even a 100 dB range (not an issue with video), the ringing becomes significant. Interconnects are no different than capacitors with respect to the effects of capacitance x dissipation factor. A cap that measures poorly will not display good low level resolution characteristics and neither will a cable. The next time you measure the dissipation factor on a capacitor, instead of plugging the leads into the little clippy things on the meter, use a pair of Radio Shack clip cords to bridge it to the meter. You will see that the cap leads make a very measurable difference in capacitor performance. Good interconnect cables measure like good capacitors. Cables that measure like bad capacitors, sound like bad capacitors.

   There are many good economical interconnects on the market. My cables are better by a subtle but measurable margin. That margin matters to some, to others, it does not.

   IOSR Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering
   e-ISSN: 2278-2834, p-SSN: 2278-8735.Volume 16, Issue 6, Series I (Nov. – Dec. 2021), pp. 40-53
   DOI: 10.9790/2834-1606014053 http://www.iosrjournals.org 40 | Page
   An electrical study of single-ended analog interconnect cable
   http://boson.physics.sc.edu/~kunchur/papers/Interconnect-cable-measurements–Kunchur.pdf

   IOSR Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering
   e-ISSN: 2278-2834, p-SSN: 2278-8735.Volume 16, Issue 6, Series I (Nov. – Dec. 2021), pp. 40-53
   DOI: 10.9790/2834-1606014053 http://www.iosrjournals.org 40 | Page
   An electrical study of single-ended analog interconnect cables
   Milind N. Kunchur
   University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, U.S.A.
   Abstract: The influence of interconnecting cables on an audio system’s performance is a controversial issue.
   This is partly because commonly measured parameters such as resistance, reactance, frequency response, and
   common distortions do not show meaningful differences. The present electrical study of line-level single-ended
   (unbalanced) analog interconnects, provides a more comprehensive picture surpassing the common
   specifications. It was found that uncommon time-domain effects such as reflection sequences and non-ideal
   capacitive behavior, along with noise, can better distinguish the electrical performance of interconnects of
   different grades.
   I. Introduction
   Music reproduction spans a wide spectrum in sonic fidelity, ranging from mainstream consumer
   applications (e.g., portable devices and computer audio) to elaborate “high-end audio” (HEA) systems. The
   latter typically consist of separate specialized components such as optical transports, digital-to-analog
   converters, preamplifiers, power amplifiers, and loudspeakers. Interlinking cables between these components are
   an inevitable necessity. The possibility that cables might affect a system’s sonic performance remains a
   controversial and contentious subject, because of the rarity of published research proving audibility of cables
   (and for that matter the audibility of any audio-configuration change other than replacing the loudspeakers).
   Nevertheless, there is a sea of anecdotal claims by audiophiles that cables influence sonic performance, and
   there exists a well-established audio-cable industry.
   Skeptics dismiss cable audibility as a “snake-oil claim” partly on the grounds that certain
   measurements—for example, of RLC (resistance, inductance, and capacitance) and FR (frequency response)—
   do not reveal meaningful differences between cables. Also cables are viewed as non-distorting linear networks
   between components that can be characterized by fixed transfer functions. However, as shown here, such views
   of how cables operate are incomplete and incorrect.
   Recently published work [1] proved psychoacoustic discernment of two analog cable pathways,
   demonstrating audibility of the smallest change in an audio chain up to that point. The work underscored the
   need to use an audio system of sufficient fidelity to avoid masking subtle differences, and emphasized the
   benefit of extended-duration listening that resembles audiophile auditioning. Those experiments compared a
   balanced-cable pathway with a single-ended (unbalanced) pathway, because this could be done without adding
   external switch boxes and wiring. However, that approach prevented distinguishing whether noise differences
   between pathways originated from the balanced-versus-unbalanced topology or the cables themselves. It also
   prevented studying TD (time-domain) effects, as this would have required (for the balanced cable) additional
   circuitry (differential amplifiers, etc.) which would have introduced its own signal alterations. Various previous
   works have emphasized the importance of TD signal alterations at higher fidelity [2–12]

   Noise pickup in cables through EMI (electromagnetic induction) and RFI (radio-frequency
   interference) is a well known problem that depends not only on how well a cable is shielded but also on details
   of the grounding scheme and the impedances of the host circuit. These issues are well covered in [19–22]. Noise
   was found to be the main distinguishing measurement in [1] (where TD measurements were not carried out for
   the reasons mentioned earlier related to balancing), where their “cable A” (balanced interconnect) had lower
   noise and a more detailed sound. The present work shows that a similar unbalanced cable has a comparably low
   noise level, so the superior noise performance seems to be more related to better shielding than to the topology.

   Summary and Conclusions
   The effect of cables on the sonic performance of an audio system has been a contentious subject for a
   few decades [31]. The controversy is fueled in part by the paucity of journal-published blind listening tests that
   prove there is at all an audible difference. Listening tests are tricky and can easily produce both false negative
   and false positive results; the relevant psychology and neurology is reviewed in [1, 32–36]. Another reason for
   disbelief in interconnect audibility may be due to a misguided focus on irrelevant measurements such as
   frequency response, resistance, and nominal reactance, whose resulting signal errors are indeed far below the
   presumed audibility thresholds.
   The present work investigated other kinds of signal alterations during transmission through a cable,
   besides the above parameters. It was found that noise in some cables exists at audible levels. While the nominal
   reactive time constants may possibly be too short (<100 ns) for discernibility, the decay times arising from non-
   ideal effects are not obviously negligible (~1 s), especially when multiple occurrences combine along the audio
   chain. Within the audio community at large, there tends to be a misunderstanding and underestimation of the
   spectacular capabilities and extraordinary sensitivity of human hearing: For example, the ear can detect a
   cochlear basilar-membrane amplitude of ∼1 pm [37–39] and has a temporal resolution in the microseconds that
   has no direct connection with the maximum audible frequencyk.
   The present work found clear systematic differences in the electrical performance of interconnect
   cables of different grades. Besides the electrical signal alterations studied here, vibrational effects
   (“microphonics”) may also potentially affect cable performance [17]. However unlike loudspeaker cables,
   interconnects lie in high impedance circuits and carry low currents. Thus they have smaller magnetic forces and
   induced voltages from mechanical motion. Another potential source of signal degradation in cables is
   triboelectric noise from internal motion; but it is estimated to be 180 dB below typical signal levels [45].
   Previous work [1] demonstrated the audibility of cable pathways, pointing to differences in RF noise
   pickup as the likely cause. But it left open the question of whether the noise differences were due to shielding or
   balanced versus unbalanced topologies. The present work sheds light on that question by showing that its
   unbalanced cable S (of the same brand as cable A in [1]) is almost equally quiet. Furthermore, there are clear
   time-domain performance differences between the various interconnects tested. While cable manufacturers
   undoubtedly make a variety of measurements on their own products during the course of their development, the
   present results are of value to the consumer because they provide measurements across different brands made by
   a non-commercial entity

   Measurement System for the Characterization of Hi-Fi Audio Cables
   https://www.planetanalog.com/measurement-system-for-the-characterization-of-hi-fi-audio-cables/
   July 21, 2005
   by Planet Analog
   Comments 0
   Print Friendly, PDF & Email

   The transmission of an electrical analogical signal between two devices requires a suitable cable that should allow for transferring it with low distortion and losses. Ideally a cable does not introduce power-losses and the electrical signal applied at the input is transferred integrally to the output, without any modification of its parameters. Unfortunately, in real conditions, there is always an alteration of the transmitted signal, because of reactive and resistive (parasite) parameters of the interconnection system constituted by the cable and the two end connectors.

   The behavior of a real interconnection system can be evaluated considering different parameters, such as the signal attenuation and distortion that can become critical with the increasing of the frequency.

   The general opinion of Hi-Fi end users is that the choice of audio interconnection systems has an audible effect upon the perceived sound. This is the reason for frequently experiments with various types of cables and the motivation to purchase expensive cables which claim to provide a high level of subjective performance.

   In recent years, the production of these devices has grown out, even if some manufacturers publicize special cable qualities without any established scientific basis.

   Even if, from a technical point of view, it is normal that the properties of a connection system may affect the transmitted signal, the perceived subjective differences between cables can have different explanations.

   According to the IEC standards, the measurement of cable parameters requires the adoption of complex procedures, also because some standards refer to cable for general purposes . The aim of this paper is the development of a measurement procedure for the performance evaluation of the high-quality cables adopted for professional audio applications. The main features of these high-performance cables are: attenuation lower than 0.25 dB in the frequency range of DC-50 kHz, resistance around to 0.1 ohm, and inductance in the range of 6-24 H.

   In the paper we will report and discuss the experimental results related to the characterization of a set of Proel Die-hard professional cables.

   Reply
7. August 31, 2022 at 11:48 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Using Measurements to Clear up the Cable Controversy
   Are more expensive cables worth the price?
   https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-3134902

   The effects of speaker cables on speaker performance can be measured and can show that changing speaker cables could have audible effects on the sound of a system.

   So Do Speaker Cables Make a Difference?

   What these tests show is that the people who insist you can’t possibly hear a difference between two different speaker cables of reasonable gauge are wrong. It is possible to hear a difference by switching cables.

   Now, what would that difference mean to you? It’d definitely be subtle. As the blind comparison of generic speaker cables we did at The Wirecutter showed, even in the cases where listeners can hear a difference between cables, the desirability of that difference may change depending on the speaker you use.

   From these admittedly limited tests, it looks like the big differences in speaker cable performance are due primarily to the amount of resistance in a cable. The biggest differences measured were with the two cables that had substantially lower resistance than the others.

   So yes, speaker cables can change the sound of a system. Not by a lot. But they can definitely change the sound.

   Reply
8. August 31, 2022 at 11:51 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Measurements of 6m zip-cord speaker cable in frequency and time domain
   https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurements-of-speaker-cables-in-frequency-and-time-domain.22894/

   Interesting read, and you’ve done well to include a frequency sweep.
   I am not being a critic or critiquing you and methodology but have you tried physically placing wooden blocks about 25mm cubed squares under your cables and tried remeasuring? An awful lot of interference comes from the floor of many buildings with hidden pipes and electrical wires under the floors. I noticed no zobel circuit on your circuit design, is that intentional if so that’s ok and totally fine it doesn’t change the data you have collected.

   I will not comment on wooden blocks.

   There is no Zobel, however there is a terminating resistor R1 (I hope you have seen it in the schematics) which is more effective than the Zobel against reflections and EMI coupled voltage into the cable.

   If there was any interference or reflections, you would see it in the 10kHz square plots. They are clean, both before and behind the cable, so your suspect is incorrect. I will not bother anymore to communicate on wooden blocks and similar purely marketing aids. If you have any measured results, please go on and post it. With proper description of the test and calibrated X and Y axis of the plots.

   The flat cable looks like this:

   It has bigger distance between the wires (than a zip-cord) and this increases inductance and reduces capacitance of the cable.

   Again, a voltage transfer ratio of voltages behind the cable / before the cable as a function of frequency was measured, which shows the frequency response of the cable in isolation, with the load used.

   Please see the rise of frequency response above 5kHz due to capacitive character of the load at high frequencies. Also see the 0.2dB dip in zipcord FR at 150Hz due to high resistance of the 2×1.5mm2 zipcord with 5m length.

   Conclusion
   It is impossible to say that “cables make no difference”. It is not true. The cables depending on length, construction and speaker used may make an audible difference, even if they are as short as 2m. 5m of 2×1.5mm2 zipcord makes 0.2dB deviation at higher bass, into quite standard speaker load. This starts to be audible. The speaker cable should be as short as possible and monoblocks placed near the speaker are the best option in case of passive speakers.

   Edit: the zipcord used was 2×1.5mm2, length 5m.

   Measurement into 4ohm resistive load

   Now I would like to show a measurement into 4ohm resistor load. The cable used was the zipcord 2×1.5mm2 of 5m length, same as in the previous post. The frequency response of this cable into 4ohm resistor is exactly as would be predicted, with high frequency roll-off due to cable inductance and resistive drop at lower frequencies. The technically oriented guys may easily calculate R and L of the cable based on 4ohm load knowledge. This measurements confirm that we need to know the speaker complex load to be able to speak about cable effects. And we also need to know cable R, L, (and C) parameters.

   Reply
9. August 31, 2022 at 11:57 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   The “Sound” of Speaker Cables: an Analysis
   https://www.psaudio.com/copper/article/the-sound-of-speaker-cables-an-analysis/

   Speaker Cable Face Off 1 – Measurements
   https://www.audioholics.com/gadget-reviews/speaker-cable-face-off-1/speaker-cable-face-off-1-page-2

   Measurement System for the Characterization of Hi-Fi Audio Cables
   https://www.planetanalog.com/measurement-system-for-the-characterization-of-hi-fi-audio-cables/

   SPEAKER CABLES: Science or Snake Oil
   https://www.passlabs.com/technical_article/speaker-cables-science-or-snake-oil/

   Reply
10. August 31, 2022 at 12:05 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    The Effects Of Cable On Signal Quality
    http://audiosystemsgroup.com/CableCapacitance.pdf

    System designs often require output amplif ier stages of microphones and line-level
    devices to drive long lengths of cable with its associated capacitance. Most
    equipment works well in this application, but some equipment will allow significant
    signal degradation. The simple fact that measurable problems exist calls for m ore
    consideration of these factors by manuf acturers. Until that happens, sy stems
    designers must pay more at tention to output circui t specifications and
    performance.
    Several years ago, I was asked to study the effects of different types of microphone
    cables on sound qua lity. I used time delay spectrometry (TDS) to measure
    microphone response with a variety of cabl e types and lengths. I fed a loudspe aker
    a TDS sweep via a power amplifier. Micropho nes were set up a short distance from
    the loudspeaker, and I measured the respon se with le ngths of m icrophone cable
    varying between 5m and 150m. The receivin g end of the mic cable was connected
    to a resistance typical of that found in modern mic pre-amplifiers (1,000 Ω).
    Measurements were made with the inpu t of the TEF analyzer bridging the
    microphone terminals (at the sending end of the line) and at the receiving end. I
    observed two important effects.
    • High-frequency peaking/ringing . Some microphones exhibited a significant
    peaking of high-frequency response relative to their response with a short ca ble.
    This peaking was attributed to the capaci tive loading of the microphones output
    stage by l ong (50m- 150m) l engths of cable. I confirmed this assumption by
    substituting a fixed capacitance equivalent to the cable length and made all
    subsequent measurements with this fixed capacitance instead of the cable. (See
    Figure 1.) The degree of response peaking varies widely from one microph one type
    to another, amounting to more than +3dB at 15kHz in the worst case measured.
    No significant differences in frequency or phase response were obs erved from one
    cable type to another (except as related to capacitance per unit length) or from one
    end of the cable to another.

    Well-behaved Most microphones exhibited some rolloff (typically -3dB at 30kHz)
    and resistive loss (typically 0.3dB) with cables of 1,000 feet or more. (See Figure 2.)
    The dynam ic micr ophones measured prima rily fell into the second category and
    tended to exhibit more rolloff than the condenser mics.

    Based on the microphone study it seemed
    like a good idea to investigate the output
    stages of l ine-level audio devices.

    he device
    output was then connected to v alues of
    capacitance equivalent to cable lengths
    between 50m and 250m, with and without
    a 600Ω load resistance.
    The results this time w
    three categories of responses, depending
    on the design:

    igh-frequency peaking/ringing. A significant peaking of high-frequency response
    some ro lloff (typically – 3dB at 3 0kHz)
    and resistive loss (typically 0.3dB) with
    cables of 1,000 feet or more. (Swe ep
    rate: 15028. Hz/s; bandwidth, 122 Hz.)
    Based on the mi
    like a good idea to investigate the output
    stages of l ine-level audio devices. Once
    again, I used the TEF analyzer to drive the
    input termi nals of the device under test
    and then measured the output. The device
    output was then connected to v alues of
    capacitance equivalent to cable lengths
    between 50m and 250m, with and without
    a 600Ω load resistance.
    The results this time w
    three categories of responses, depending
    on the design:
    was measured in only one manufacturer’s equipment, but it was quite serious. (See
    Figure 3A.) Capacitance equivalent to only 50m (150 feet) of cable produced a peak
    of 7dB at 2 0kHz and enough phase shift to raise questions about stability, such as ,
    will it oscillate? Increa sing the capacitanc e to an equivalent cable length of 200m
    (650 feet) reduced the peak slightly, to only 6dB and moved it down to 13kHz. (See
    Figure 3) A system using this device is going to have serious problems with
    sibilance and will sound pretty “spitty” with music.

    Well-behaved. A slight rolloff (typically -0.5dB at 20kHz) appeared with extremely
    long cables (2,000 feet or more) with most equipment that had output impedances
    of 100 Ω or less.
    This equipment had no measurable response variations with cables of 200 meters (650 feet) or less.

    Excessive high-frequency rolloff. A severe high-frequeny rolloff appeared with
    equipment that used a 600 Ω output stage — typically -3dB at 16kHz with 150m
    (500 feet) of cable and a high-impedance load. Adding a 600Ω load (at either end of
    the cable) raises the -3dB frequency to 32kHz (-1.5d B at 20kHz), but at the
    expense of 6dB of headroom. (See Figu re 5.) Longer lengths of cable are
    proportionally worse. Any device t hat has an actual output impedance of 600 Ω will
    have problems driving long lines. This is not the sa me as the unit’s minimum
    recommended load impedance — nearly a ll pro equipment is specified for a 600 Ω
    load, which indicates that it can supply enough current to drive the load

    Reply
11. August 31, 2022 at 12:09 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Cable pathways between audio components can
    affect perceived sound quality
    http://boson.physics.sc.edu/~kunchur/papers/Audibility-of-cable-pathways–Kunchur.pdf

    The arena of highest fidelity in music reproduction, sometimes referred to as high-end audio, has
    many controversial claims and contentious issues. One such controversy is whether the cables and
    topology used to interlink components together make an audible difference. There seems to be a
    disparity between anecdotal experiences reported by audiophiles and published formal scientific
    research, as to what are the minimal changes in system configuration that can be audibly distinguished.
    With the motivation of bridging this divide—which may originate from differences in instrumentation
    and subject-listening conditions used by the two groups—this work utilized a high-performance audio
    system and an extended-duration listening protocol that more closely resembles audiophile auditioning
    conditions. With these measures, the present work was able to prove through direct psychoacoustic
    testing that two different analog-interconnect pathways can be audibly distinguished

    CONCLUSIONS
    High-end audio is a subject that is shrouded in controversy.
    Aside from loudspeakers, consumers exhibit varying
    degrees of skepticism as to what affects sonic performance.
    The most contentious ingredient in the chain is the
    interconnection between components, which concerns both
    the topology (balanced versus single-ended) and the
    characteristics of the cable itself. This work shows that two
    system configurations differing only by the interconnect
    pathway are audibly discernable, even by average listeners
    with no special experience in music or audio. To the
    author’s knowledge, this may represent the smallest change
    in an audio system proven to be discernable through IRB
    approved blind listening tests.
    The success of these experiments depended first
    on assembling an audio system with sufficient fidelity to
    avoid masking the minute differences being auditioned.
    Secondly, the approach to designing blind listening tests
    was scrutinized to see what might improve sensitivity. An
    extended multiple pass (EMP) listening protocol was
    developed, because preliminary experimentation along with
    other published observations [22]–[23] indicated that it
    would be more likely to form a robust and detailed
    impression of a HEA system’s sound quality compared to a
    short-segment comparison (SSC) method

    This work did not conduct an exhaustive
    determination of all possible physical causes of sonic
    differences in interconnects. For example, time-domain
    effects such as reflections were not studied because a
    balanced cable requires a differential amplifier and extra
    cable (both adding their own noise and distortions) before
    an oscilloscope. However, the electrical measurements
    conducted here indicate that noise levels may be one
    determining factor of sonic performance. The
    measurements also show that characteristics such as
    resistance and frequency response, that naïve consumers
    may focus on, are irrelevant for distinguishing HEA
    interconnect cables.
    A worthwhile future extension of this work, would
    be to develop high-performance instrumentation that can
    cleanly switch between two single-ended interconnects.
    This will allow assessing sonic differences arising from
    cables’ transmission characteristics that are unrelated to
    topology, and also facilitate the study of time-domain
    effects

    Reply
12. September 1, 2022 at 5:28 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Audio Myths: Silver Wire sounds bright
    https://www.decoaudio.com/deco_audio_silver_wire.html

    Reply
13. September 2, 2022 at 10:51 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Increasing the Main Filter Cap in an Amplifier – What Happens?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47aDmfMwpCw

    Adding parallel capacitors in this case lowers the effective ESR which can have beneficial effects such as the reduction of the oscillation originally noted in your analysis. Nice job!

    Reply
14. September 7, 2022 at 8:10 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    We all listen with our brains. Because it’s the only thing that gives “sense” to those air vibrations. So people “hear” differences that do not exist. An they are not to blame for it.

    Reply
15. September 7, 2022 at 11:43 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://alpha-audio.net/review/megatest-speaker-cables-real-measurements-samples-and-blind-test/
    https://www.planetanalog.com/measurement-system-for-the-characterization-of-hi-fi-audio-cables/

    https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measured-speaker-cable-difference.25807/
    https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measured-speaker-cable-difference.25807/page-2#post-882378

    Using Measurements to Clear up the Cable Controversy
    Are more expensive cables worth the price?
    https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-3134902

    Cable myths: reviving the coathanger test
    Updated 6/13: polling results added
    https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/

    Reply
16. September 7, 2022 at 11:44 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Scientist Finds Measurable Difference in HIFI Audiophile Cables ! PROOF
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4R6I_TtKQQ

    Cable measurement is not science. Why no double-blind cable test?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjaF7r2acog

    Reply
17. September 8, 2022 at 9:40 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Improve CD Sound By Shaving?
    https://hackaday.com/2022/09/07/improve-cd-sound-by-shaving/

    We always enjoy the odd things that people do to try to get better audio reproduction. Exotic cables, special amplifiers, and higher resolution digitization come to mind. Most of this is dubious, at best, but [Techmoan] brings up something we must have missed back in the day: shaving CDs with a gadget that was marketed as the “CD Sound Improver.” The theory is that bad CD reproduction comes from light scatter of the laser. The solution, according to the maker of this vintage equipment, is to cut a 36-degree bevel to act as a light trap.

    The device claims it reduced vibration, improved audio, and even helped DVDs playback better video. As you might imagine, this has little hope of actually working. The box is essentially a motor-driven turntable, a razor blade, and a port for a vacuum cleaner to suck up the mess. You were told to color the edge with a marker, too.

    On the one hand, this seems ridiculous. Of course, it seems crazy that a marker on a CD would defeat some forms of copy protection, but — of course — it did. Apparently, quite a few people plunked down around $500 to trim the plastic of their CDs. There were plenty of positive reviews, too. But as you might expect, there’s no actual benefit to doing this operation.

    Shaving Compact Discs to improve the sound (?!)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-QxLAxwxkM

    Today I’m using a special lathe that cuts a 36º edge into a CD to improve the sound quality. Is this madness…I aim to find out.
    V.FAQ… Q) Why didn’t you just rip the CDs into the computer?
    A) Because I wanted to use a regular Audio CD player. Since the improvements claimed related to audio produced during CD playback (at 1x), this is what I chose to concentrate on.

    Reply
18. September 15, 2022 at 7:19 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    All You Need To Know About AMPLIFIERS To Fix Stuff – A Beginners Guide To Audio Amplifier Repair
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oWBcTTeMNQ

    NOTE TO BEGINNERS This video is suitable for anyone with at least a basic knowledge of electronic components, particularly Transistors. If I covers topics here that you are not familiar with I strongly recommend you watch my other videos in the ‘All You Need To Know About’.. series first. In particular ‘All You Need To Know About Transistors To Fix Stuff’

    CHAPTERS
    00:00:00 Introduction
    00:08:10 Amplifier Classes
    00:10:33 Class A Amplifiers
    00:17:34 Class B Amplifiers
    00:24:52 Class A/B Amplifiers
    00:29:47 Class G & Class H Amplifiers
    00:42:10 Bridge Mode
    00:45:40 Class D Amplifiers
    00:50:21 Test Equipment
    1:04:38 What Goes Wrong
    01:24:09 Practical Example
    01:43:33 Epilogue

    Reply
19. September 20, 2022 at 6:26 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Loudspeaker cables – how do they make a difference?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9LInP1Njis

    How can a loudspeaker cable change the sound of your loudspeakers? Harley Lovegrove; recording engineer, loudspeaker designer, musician and business man, explains what happens inside a loudspeaker cable and what effect it can have on what you hear. He explains the process of choosing a neutrally balanced loudspeaker cable for the Pearl Acoustics, Sibelius loudspeaker. From the way electrons behave in the conductance of a cable, to balancing the priorities between key component selection to room acoustics and eventual ‘fine tuning’ with cables.

    Reply
20. September 21, 2022 at 1:17 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Hi-fi has always worked on the law of diminishing returns vs increasing price. In other words, a £2k system should sound clearer/louder/punchier/more accurate than a 1K system, and a 3K system will be an improvement on a 2K system but to a lesser degree than the scake of improvement between 1K and 2K.

    Reply
21. September 21, 2022 at 2:52 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/DIYAudio/permalink/5569513403114460/
    What do you think about film caps “sound” in your builds ? Are Wima’s worth to buy or maybe basic caps or ok? I’m building Studer’s 169 eq and I’m wondering what I should buy.

    First of all focus on type, not on brand. Styroflex, polypropylene or NP0 caps in signal path are recommended.

    Ok in terms of sonic according to the BBC audio engineering design guidance. Hope this helps.
    1) polystyrene
    2) teflon
    3) PET
    4) polyester
    5) polycarbonate.
    Paper-wax are sonically neutral but don’t have a long-life.
    The outside foil should go to the source or ground connections to ensure minimum noise floor. google how to determine this.

    I’ve even seen tests showing distortion from the schoopage so I try to use film caps with welded leads…

    Wimas are very good quality parts.

    Reply
22. September 24, 2022 at 12:09 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    DIY audio diacussion:

    If op-amps sound like crap, then that must mean there isn’t a single good sounding album out there. All recorded music has already been through at least dozens but probably hundreds of bog standard NE5532 op-amps.

    it’s almost like circuit design matters more than what opamp you use.

    after experimenting with preamps i’ve found that a lot of 70′s amplifiers share nearly the same preamp circuit. in my professional opinion the trick to good clean sound is a simple preamplifier that isn’t extremely complex and to just use some decent op-amps with it, now you don’t have to get all extravagant but I personally like the sound of OPA604′s. i’ve installed them in place of TAC7136P in some SX780s and SX880s and its just wild how much the unit changes in sound quality from doing this. if anyones interested in one of my Mod-Boards just send me a PM and i’ll hook you up with a direct link to its Oshpark page

    70s opamps are horrible. They didn’t get good till the 80s. End discussion.

    I have swapped a lot to opa604 opamps with extremely good luck. The opa604 stays stable and deals with the higher voltage most 70s opamps use.

    I have ssl, PYE, la2’s, distressor, 1176 compressors, api 2500, etc, etc. all discrete,

    Reply
23. September 27, 2022 at 4:49 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    It’s funny but also let’s all remember that if it wasn’t for James B. Lansing, none of you would have a job and L Acoustic wouldn’t exist

    JBL – JUNK BUT LOUD

    JBL stands for
    Just
    Bluetooth speakers,
    Lately

    Reply
24. September 27, 2022 at 9:59 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Transparency standards for electronic devices exist,
    I see no reason to depart from the standard suite of tests
    SINAD is one critical measure, not the only one.

    As far as what makes a real difference to listeners, I think that is dominated by speaker distortion (particularly IM), transient recovery time and dispersion. For IM, the one I have liked most is the multitone test routinely conducted by Joseph Crowe, where he characterizes this vs spl level.

    I do NOT see “caring about specs” and “caring about how it sounds” as in any way different.

    Source: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2420755034736319/permalink/2943308589147625/

    Reply
25. September 27, 2022 at 2:41 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    What’s audiophile quality?

    Audiophiles are an exceptional breed of people who are fascinated by pure audio, motivated by sound quality and addicted to audio gadgets.

    An audiophile seeks to reproduce the sound of a live musical performance, typically in a room with good acoustics.

    Audiophile needs to

    1. Sound best at low power levels
    2. Moderate power for domestic applications
    3. Reliability less important, since it’s a home entertainment device, and not a money making tool.
    4. Appearance for domestic environment.

    So I gather for an amp to qualify as an audiophile grade it must therefor be declared as such by an audiophile.

    The term high-end audio refers to playback equipment used by audiophiles, which may be bought at specialist shops and websites.[5] High-end components include turntables, digital-to-analog converters, equalization devices, preamplifiers and amplifiers (both solid-state and vacuum tube), loudspeakers (including horn, electrostatic and magnetostatic speakers), power conditioners, subwoofers, headphones, and acoustic room treatment in addition to room correction devices.

    As in many things audio, the difference between good enough and “better” may be 10x to 100x in price and some of us really don’t hear the difference. This concept must be maddening to those of you that can

    I’ve been confused by what makes an amp “pro” for some time.

    What makes a “pro-amp” a “pro-amp” are a 19″ width and rack ears.

    Are almost always using balanced 1/4″ TRS or XLR for powetär input
    Speaker outputs are typically speakon

    Pro needs to be:

    1. Reliable for commercial use… if it breaks, someone is losing money.
    2. Typically very powerful relative to home gear, because it’s going to be powering a much larger space.
    3. Set up to connect with pro loudspeakers and sources, hence different input and output options than home gear
    4. Fan cooling is fine, because the amps typically located fairly far from listeners.
    5. Cheap as possible to achieve above points.

    *1. High power output per dollar, aka “rack density”
    2. Exceptional low impedance drive capability for multi-bins
    3. Low profile 1U/2U enclosures
    (4. Network connectivity)
    (5. Internal DSP)

    Zero emphasis on exterior aesthetics (they’re not pretty, they are functional).

    Not necessarily “high current”, but typically capable of driving 4 ohm or even 2 ohm loads with tons of power output. The bulk of PA speakers or arrays are 4 ohm, as opposed to 8 ohm.

    In more recent years, compact size and lighter weight per watt. Old pro amps could be big and heavy, but newer ones are light weight and compact designs, so 10Kw of power in a road case does not require a forklift to move.

    Pro amps are typically not “voiced” to a “house sound” like many consumer amps are. What goes in, comes out–just much louder.

    the audio industry is using the term “Pro Amp” far to much. I would say a good 75% of the amps being called that a professional would never use, nor are they. The term pro amp is being used so much for “Cheap” and very poorly made equipment

    Professional audio companies and establishment will buy the best for the job and it’s not all that cheap. In fact some of the top Crown amps in current production will cost $4000+. You see a professional doesn’t really care about the price, they need the beast and whatever the cost it will be covered. They can write off the cost of their equipment on their taxes and will be profiting immensely with it
    Marketing. … . .

    Some do use pro amps for home stereo and are very happy with them. Others claim pro amps are good for bass but weak at the higher audio frequencies. Your mileage may vary.

    Sources:
    https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/why-is-a-good-pro-amp-not-audiophile-quality.845389/
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audiophile

    Reply
26. September 27, 2022 at 2:44 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://electronics.howstuffworks.com/high-fidelity-high-definition.htm

    Reply
27. September 29, 2022 at 10:21 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    New Power Amplifier Watts vs Old Amp Watts & Power (Public)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ4N-gCCl0o

    The way pro audio amp manufacturers rate power amps over years has changed drastically. A new watt is way different than an old watt and each has its assets and issues. Here is the first video of several I am doing on power amps.

    00:00 Intro
    00:44 All watts are not created equal
    01:23 Old amp power specs vs new amp specs
    02:00 Analogy to cars
    03:50 Different ways amps deliver power
    05:50 Power delivery duration
    07:10 Thermal constraints
    07:50 Impedance vs peak power vs time
    09:22 Amp capabilities vs music type
    10:55 Test methods to hear loaded amp output
    12:20 Outro

    What Happens When an Amp Toasts? (Public)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_0UZviEDhc

    Testing a Powersoft T902 power amplifier to see if the amp toasts when driven with varying frequencies into an atypical load

    00:00 Intro
    00:42 Test Setup
    01:41 Test Description
    02:13 Wall Voltage vs Shock Factor
    05:16 Heating it up
    06:13 Loading and ramping up the voltage
    08:00 Varying the frequency
    09:42 Reviewing the test results
    11:00 Outro

    Reply
28. October 1, 2022 at 8:26 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Are some audiophiles are the biggest nuts on the tree?

    This might actually be the stupidest audiophile product I’ve seen. Normally there’s at least a tangential relationship to hypothetically real issues….but this one has absolutely no basis in reality.

    Not only can CDs not be magnetized, Even if your CD was somehow extremely magnetic, there’s no mechanism where that would have any impact whatsoever.

    Demagnetizing CDs?!
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mH4v8b1tGSQ&feature=youtu.be

    Reply
29. October 1, 2022 at 8:26 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Demonetize your pocket :DDD

    Reply
30. October 5, 2022 at 11:14 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Why stereo can’t sound live
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMvgAzbS7A0

    Is it possible stereo can sound like a live recording?

    Reply
31. October 5, 2022 at 11:22 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Big vs small loudspeakers
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i17ycNgW5t8

    What differences in sound quality happen between big and small speakers?

    Viewer comments:

    It seems EVERYBODY get this wrong. 90dB = spl @ 1w/1m BUT the standard test is measured with a 1khz signal. As you go lower in frequency the power demand to produce the same 90dB spl increases. John Darko even made a whole podcast about speaker sensitivity and power requirements and totally misses this.

    Nobody’s ears are flat in amplitude versus frequency either, so from the mid range to treble frequencies people’s ears are more sensitive also, especially at lower SPL’s. That’d be more prominent than a given speaker’s measured amplitude flatness over frequency at a specific power level, since power level will affect the ear’s response, although 90 dB SPL should pick up the low end and high end a lot better than if talking 60 dB SPL. A lot to think about here, things are not as simple as people always try to make them out to be.

    Room acoustic support low range. In open air or big hall power requirements are sky rocketing but typical room walls are helping to limit power. .

    A bigger speaker will give you more bass, and that might give the impression that it plays a bit louder than the smaller bookshelf speaker, even though they have the exact same sensitivity and playing at the same loudness.

    Reply
32. October 5, 2022 at 11:24 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Does simple sound better?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C93T1PH-dhI

    A common audio belief is that the simplest signal path sounds the best and therefore when you peek inside a component and see a ton of parts, it’s probably not going to be a pure audio piece. Paul helps us break down this mystery into understandable terms.

    Reply
33. October 5, 2022 at 11:24 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Can high end audio’s prices be justified?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBPVf61yDF4

    There are speakers, amplifiers, and cables reaching astronomical pricing levels. Can the cost of building these high priced items ever be justified?

    What the hell happened to high end audio?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc8giom5XDY

    It seems like back in the day high end audio manufacturers were more concerned with sound quality than making money. Today that role seems reversed. Is it true and, if so, why?

    Reply
34. October 5, 2022 at 11:25 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Should we say goodbye to linear amplifiers?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG3ShA417Kw

    Now that Class D amplifiers seem to be taking over even the high-performance area of musical amplification is the day of the linear amplifier over? What’s the future of linear amplification?

    Reply
35. October 6, 2022 at 9:47 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Custom Audio Cable Making DIY Guide
    https://www.performanceaudio.com/custom-audio-cable-making-diy-guide

    Making your own cables is fun, easy, and gives you the knowledge you need to both make and repair your own cables! In this custom cable DIY guide we will let you know what is required to get started, and walk you through step-by-step making your first cable! In order to make your own custom audio cable, you will need these parts and tools.

    Reply
36. October 6, 2022 at 9:48 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Is it cheaper to make your own cables?
    Making your own audio cables provides you with complete customization when it comes to cable length and connector types. The best part about making your own audio cables is that it’s cheaper than buying them pre-assembled, and if your cables ever break, you have the tools to fix them.9 May 2022
    https://www.blackghostaudio.com/blog/how-to-make-your-own-audio-cables

    Reply
37. October 6, 2022 at 9:48 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/diycables.html

    Reply
38. October 7, 2022 at 11:32 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Using Measurements to Clear up the Cable Controversy
    Are more expensive cables worth the price?
    https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-3134902

    The effects of speaker cables on speaker performance can be measured and can show that changing speaker cables could have audible effects on the sound of a system.

    Measurements of speaker cables in frequency and time domain
    https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurements-of-speaker-cables-in-frequency-and-time-domain.22894/

    Reply
39. October 7, 2022 at 11:33 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Megatest speaker cables – real measurements, samples and blind test!
    https://alpha-audio.net/review/megatest-speaker-cables-real-measurements-samples-and-blind-test/

    Reply
40. October 7, 2022 at 11:51 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Measuring Guitar Cables
    https://missionengineering.com/measuring-guitar-cables/

    There are plenty of exaggerated, and even outright fake claims about audio cables. I wanted to take a mixture of common factors that might impact a guitar cable, some based on sound engineering principles, and others that might be a bit more tenuous, to see which are measurable with commonly available lab equipment. The first stage was to list various factors that I would like to test, the second to devise tests for them.

    Conductor Materials

    At normal temperatures, the International Annealed Copper Standard lists the Top 4 best metallic electrical conductors relative to Copper as:

    Pure Silver – 105%
    Copper – 100%
    Pure Gold – 70%
    Aluminum – 61%

    Copper and Aluminum are the most commonly used in cables. Silver provides a very small improvement in conductivity at significant cost increase. Silver also reacts with oxygen and hydrogen sulfide in air creating a film over the surface that could potentially offset the small conductivity gains. Some cables using different mixes of all silver or silver and copper are available at the high price end of the market. Silver plating is also sometimes utilized in audio cables.

    Gold is expensive, and rated at less conductivity than copper. The main benefit in cables is its high resistance to oxidization.

    Aluminum’s claim to fame is weight, or rather lack of it. Although conductivity is rated at 61% of Copper, aluminum is often used in high current applications such as long distance power transmission where the lower cost of Installing and maintaining Aluminum cables offsets any loss in conductivity performance vs Copper.

    Resistance, Inductance, Capacitance

    When we connect a guitar pickup to an amp via an insulated 2 conductor cable, we are creating a circuit with resistance (R) inductance (L) and capacitance (C). This RLC circuit behaves as a low pass filter. As we change different values of the components by adding more, longer and different cables, the center frequency and slope of the filter change. This goes some way towards explaining what many people refer to as tone-suck. Some of the high frequencies can be attenuated as a result of this filter effect.

    Oxygen Free Copper

    Like fat free foods, or drug free zones, Oxygen free copper is not completely free of oxygen. For example ATSM C10200 Copper is called Oxygen Free at 0.001% Oxygen. While very small percentages of Oxygen in metals maybe important in certain manufacturing processes, or very precise measuring equipment, there is no consensus that it is of benefit in audio cables. However, OFC is not especially expensive, so cable manufacturers will often use it anyway, as there is not really much downside unless you are aiming for really low cost.

    Microphonics

    Where vibrations from mechanical actions such as moving, hitting or stepping on the cable are transferred into the electrical signal. It’s mainly the mechanical construction of the cable that influences this. The Triboelectric effect where static electricity builds up from the rubbing together of dissimilar materials within the cable can also cause issues. Manufacturers can usually minimize this through optimum choice of dialectric materials that exhibit this effect less, or even adding an additional conductive layer to dissipate the static charge.

    Skin Effect

    Skin effect is a phenomenon where alternating current density tends to get distributed towards the outside circumference of a wire. This is certainly proven to occur. Some applications even use hollow cables: Since the skin effect results in a large percentage of the current being carried around the outside of a wire, the center is just removed altogether saving weight and cost. However the effect is frequency dependent, with the skin depth becoming smaller with higher frequencies.

    Wikipedia lists skin depth in copper at 10kHz as 652 Microns. 22AWG wire is 643microns, meaning the skin depth is actually greater than the diameter of a typical guitar cable.

    Research from University of St. Andrews in the UK shows measured power loss due to skin effect with internal impedance taken into account in a 4mm copper wire to be 0.02dB at 25KHz. That’s a power loss too small to recognize in a practical audio system, at a frequency too high for humans to hear. Once you get down to frequencies within the range of human hearing, any power loss due to skin effect was recorded as virtually zero in common household copper wire.

    Directionality

    Some guitar cables maybe considered directional because they have two internal conductors for signal and a separate screen. The screen is disconnected at one end. This can help in some circumstances reducing noise from ground loops. These cables will normally be marked which end has the shield disconnected. This can only work with cables specifically designed for this with a separate shield. Most shielded guitar cables use the shield as the return and so cannot be disconnected without breaking the circuit.

    Results

    The biggest single factor impacting change was the length of the cable. Total resistance of the cable assembly (including jacks) is reduced by more than half on the 2ft Silverline compared to the 15ft. Capacitance was reduced almost six times, which is directly proportional to the change in length within the margin of error.

    Conclusions

    Shorter is better. Although it’s obviously not practical to use a 2ft guitar cable, minimizing the number of cables and keeping down the length helps. Use as short a cable as possible from your guitar, and use a buffer first in line if at all possible. If your environment requires a really long guitar cable, consider using active pickups, or a wireless system instead.

    The very low cost cables in the test did not perform very well. The Neewer had a much higher capacitance than the others which would be audible in most guitar setups.

    The Zaolla Silverline was most expensive cable in our test, and had the lowest tip resistance and the second lowest capacitance so there’s no doubt it scored well. The Silverline was also noticeably lighter than the other cables. The 18AWG core in the Kirlin helped it turn in a low resistance measurement very close to the Silverline, although capacitance of the Kirlin was not great.

    From $20 up, the differences between the expensive and mid-priced cables were small, especially in capacitance where it most matters.

    I wasn’t able to come up with a reliable, repeatable and unbiased test for microphonics that doesn’t require expensive mechanical lab machines that I don’t have easy access to. I thought about a small rubber hammer like the type used for testing microphonics in amplifier tubes, and fitting it to a micro-controlled stepper motor to repeatedly tap a cable with the same force.

    Reply
41. October 7, 2022 at 11:54 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.ap.com/technical-library/ap-cable-quality/

    Reply
42. October 7, 2022 at 11:58 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    The Effects Of Cable On Signal Quality
    By Jim Brown
    Audio Systems Group, Inc
    http://audiosystemsgroup.com/CableCapacitance.pdf

    System designs often require output amplifier stages of microphones and line-level
    devices to drive long lengths of cable with its associated capacitance. Most
    equipment works well in this application, but some equipment will allow significant
    signal degradation. The simple fact that measurable problems exist calls for more
    consideration of these factors by manufacturers. Until that happens, systems
    designers must pay more attention to output circuit specifications and
    performance.
    Several years ago, I was asked to study the effects of different types of microphone
    cables on sound quality. I used time delay spectrometry (TDS) to measure
    microphone response with a variety of cable types and lengths. I fed a loudspeaker
    a TDS sweep via a power amplifier. Microphones were set up a short distance from
    the loudspeaker, and I measured the response with lengths of microphone cable
    varying between 5m and 150m. The receiving end of the mic cable was connected
    to a resistance typical of that found in modern mic pre-amplifiers (1,000Ω).
    Measurements were made with the input of the TEF analyzer bridging the
    microphone terminals (at the sending end of the line) and at the receiving end. I
    observed two important effects.
    • High-frequency peaking/ringing. Some microphones exhibited a significant
    peaking of high-frequency response relative to their response with a short cable.
    This peaking was attributed to the capacitive loading of the microphones output
    stage by long (50m-150m) lengths of cable. I confirmed this assumption by
    substituting a fixed capacitance equivalent to the cable length and made all
    subsequent measurements with this fixed capacitance instead of the cable. (See
    Figure 1.) The degree of response peaking varies widely from one microphone type
    to another, amounting to more than +3dB at 15kHz in the worst case measured.
    No significant differences in frequency or phase response were observed from one
    cable type to another (except as related to capacitance per unit length) or from one
    end of the cable to another

    Well-behaved Most microphones exhibited some rolloff (typically -3dB at 30kHz)
    and resistive loss (typically 0.3dB) with cables of 1,000 feet or more. (See Figure 2.)
    The dynamic microphones measured primarily fell into the second category and
    tended to exhibit more rolloff than the condenser mic

    Based on the mi
    like a good idea to investigate the output
    stages of line-level audio devices. Once
    again, I used the TEF analyzer to drive the
    input terminals of the device under test
    and then measured the output. The device
    output was then connected to values of
    capacitance equivalent to cable lengths
    between 50m and 250m, with and without
    a 600Ω load resistance.

    Reply
43. October 7, 2022 at 11:59 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.passlabs.com/technical_article/speaker-cables-science-or-snake-oil/

    https://www.planetanalog.com/measurement-system-for-the-characterization-of-hi-fi-audio-cables/

    Reply
44. October 7, 2022 at 12:00 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Cable measurement is not science. Why no double-blind cable test?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjaF7r2acog

    Do Fancy Audio Cables Make a Difference?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLghg0QXPzs

    Reply
45. October 7, 2022 at 12:07 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Debunking myths about audio cables
    Save yourself some money: in audio, “basic cable” is a good thing.
    https://www.soundguys.com/debunking-myths-about-audio-cables-13093/

    If price doesn’t matter, why is there so much expensive stuff out there? The cynical answer is also the real one: marketers have had great success in parting people from their money by over-hyping basic components. No accessory outside of the Blackbody (or its successor, the Firewall) has seen as much of this naked swindling than audiophile cables.

    Analog cable myths

    Now, it is true that back in the day, cheaper cables were made with less-than-ideal components and had fairly poor quality control. When Monster cables hit the scene, people loved to bash how much they cost, but you did get a somewhat decent build quality to them for the investment, along with a lifetime warranty. But that was a long time ago, and nowadays you can get cables for dirt cheap that not only perform their function almost perfectly, but will also stand up to the test of time.

    The argument for audiophile cables basically follows this logic:

    The cable’s task is to carry an analog electrical signal from the source (or amp) to your speakers.
    The cable is made of materials that present impedance (resistance and capacitance).
    In doing so, the cable affects the signal that reaches the speakers.

    Now, this is true (to some degree). However, for headphones, that degree is small enough that you can safely ignore it—despite colorful online arguments about it. If you’ve read our article on amplifiers, you’ll know that the easiest way to properly power something is either to lower the resistance or increase the power. Narrow wires will have more resistance, so if you need a lot of juice or you want a 20+ foot cable, it’s possible you could do with thicker cables. But since headphones require a comparatively tiny amount of current compared to bookshelf speakers, the same logic follows for how thick their wires need to be. Manufacturers aren’t bad at their jobs, and they definitely won’t skimp on any component that determines how good their product sounds, so the included cables are generally pretty good for your equipment—it’d be bad for business if they weren’t.

    Higher quality materials will also rarely make a big difference—you could even use a coathanger as a speaker wire in a pinch. Using gold and palladium for their high conductivity ratings sounds nice, but you’re not getting double the cable quality for double the price: you’re just paying extra money for a luxury of debatable merit. So when someone tries to sell you ridiculously priced cables, be sure to laugh in their face. Your money would be much better spent on more useful things.

    Really, the biggest thing you should worry about is whether or not your cables are properly shielded. However, that’s another problem that’s extremely rare nowadays, and unless you’re buying some no-name penny-cable from a bin somewhere, you won’t need to worry about it. If you are having interference issues, you can try moving your cables away from common sources of electromagnetic (EM) interference, such as your computer, router, etc. If that doesn’t work, then it’s time to consider better cables.

    Digital cable myths

    So that covers analog cables, but what about digital? The previous logic doesn’t hold up at all. These damn things carry ones and zeros: while you might need a powered USB hub to get a signal over long distances, these cables either work or they don’t. Errors are massive and readily noticeable—and when those happen just get another cheap cable. Whether you’re transmitting video or audio, the same is true. For example, systems that use HDMI will cut out your video if it detects problems, as that’s how the encoding works.

    Not convinced? Digital signals—electric or optical—are quite different than analog signals, because we’re only dealing with ones and zeros to communicate information. While the methods to do this are more advanced than the example I’m about to give, the lesson here is that digital cables will work or not—nothing in between.

    No matter how “degraded” the signal is, no matter how noisy it gets, a USB, HDMI, or optical cable (that uses light to transmit data instead of electricity) will always deliver its payload unless there’s something severely wrong. If the cable doesn’t work, spending more money on a higher quality one won’t necessarily solve your problem. The cable is either broken, or there’s something preventing the transmission of a readable signal—likely a compatibility issue.

    Jitterbug

    Another common myth surrounding digital audio is that buying the right cables can reduce what’s called “jitter.” That claim is again based in a small dram of reality, but wildly overblown.

    “Jitter” is a type of distortion that doesn’t express as noise, but as an imperfection in bit timing—making your waveform ever-so-slightly changed in pitch. You can sometimes hear it as a warble in cymbals or sufficiently high piano notes, but for the most part, you won’t know it’s there until it’s pointed out to you. Essentially this is caused by extremely tiny imperfections in sample rate—if a sample period varies too much from its target, data can be changed—albeit only a little tiny bit (rimshot).

    While it is true that extremely long cables can potentially introduce jitter, it’s not true that it’s a big deal. In fact, the largest source of this is actually the recordings themselves—and it’s impossible to correct for that. Truth be told, jitter in digital sources typically peaks in signals so inaudibly that you’d need dedicated measuring equipment to detect it. Famed audio blogger NwAvGuy did a deep dive on this subject a while back, and even his worst recorded sample from a crappy PC motherboard resulted in a level of -88dB… something near-inaudible to the vast majority of people at a safe volume. And that was ten years ago—a lifetime in motherboard technology.

    I’m not saying this doesn’t exist, but if you never knew of jitter as a problem before, don’t worry about it. Your vinyl and cassette collections have astronomically worse problems in this department (speed variations causing distorted audio).

    Wrapping up

    Now, there’s plenty of first-hand user testimony about audiophile cables—analog and digital—improving experiences. However, that’s another grumpy article for another time: psychoacoustics is a whole different ball o’ wax, and tackling confirmation bias and other common problems is going to result in hurt feelings.

    Cable myths: reviving the coathanger test
    Updated 6/13: polling results added
    https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/

    We often harp on the fact that nobody needs audiophile-grade… anything around these parts, but where we make our name is proving it. Today, we’re going to try to prove one way or another whether or not high-end cables make a difference for your equipment.

    The myth: cables matter

    If you’ve ever shopped at a commission-based big box retailer, you’ve probably had someone try to upsell you on expensive cables, gold-plated interconnects, or even specialty power cables. The notion they’re trying to sell is that spending more on a premium component will somehow improve the performance on your stereo setup by adding a more “valuable” part.
    “In several review sites, you’ll see many people swearing up and down that different cables will improve or alter your listening experience somehow, but this isn’t strictly true.”

    In several review sites, you’ll see many people swearing up and down that different cables will improve or alter your listening experience somehow, but this isn’t strictly true. While it’s possible that some cables will alter the sound in minor ways (usually due to cable length), that’s not a good thing: it means that the cable is falling short somewhere. By the design of all modern audio equipment, your cables should not affect your signal… assuming you have the proper connectors, gauge, etc.

    Reply
46. October 7, 2022 at 12:07 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/proof-(by-measuring)-that-(expensive)-speakers-cable-is-total-bs/25/

    Reply
47. October 7, 2022 at 12:09 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Workflow to test the quality of XLR microphone cables, and have a quantitative measure of this quality
    https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/531459/workflow-to-test-the-quality-of-xlr-microphone-cables-and-have-a-quantitative-m

    Reply
48. October 7, 2022 at 12:10 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.kw-masterointi.fi/audiokaapelit

    Reply
49. October 7, 2022 at 12:15 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://foorumi.hifiharrastajat.org/index.php?threads/kohtuuhintaisten-v%C3%A4likaapelien-sokkovertailu.86322/

    SUMMA SUMMARUM:
    Kaapelien järjestys ja nimitykset vaihdettiin kuuntelukertojen välissä, mutta korrelaatio kahden havaintokerran välillä on pääosin havaittavissa. Käyttämäni testikappaleet ovat varsin erityyppisiä ja käytetty kuunteluaika kaapelia kohden lopulta lyhyt, joten osalle kertyi jossain määrin epäloogisen värikäs kuvaus erilaisia ominaisuuksia.

    Kaapelien väliset erot ovat tietyiltä osin selkeitä: erityisesti laulajan s-kirjaimen sihahduksesta, suhahduksesta tai sen luonnollisuudesta on helppo erottaa jyvät akanoista. Myös yleinen korkeiden taajuuksien taso ja stereokuvan avaruus vaihtelevat paljon kaapelien välillä. Basson tasossa ja laadussa on eroja, mutta korva ei ole matalilla taajuuksilla yhtä herkkä havaitsemaan niiden muutoksia.

    Verrattain lyhyen testin aikana huomio kiinnittyi siis pääosin melko simppeleihin asioihin. Silti joitain abstraktimpia havaintojakin tuli esiin. Johtuuko “rytmisyys” ja “kiva fiilis” sitten high-end -mystiikasta, matalista säröarvoista, tietyn taajuusalueen tasaisuudesta/mutkista vai puhtaasta sattumasta, jää tällä erää avoimeksi kysymykseksi. Selvää on, että kuuntelijaa sekä oheislaitteistoa vaihtamalla havainnot muuttuvat.

    Yksiselitteisesti parasta kaapelia en löytänyt.

    Vastaukset alkuperäiseen kysymystenasetteluun:
    1. Kuulen kaapeleiden välillä objektiivisesti todettavia eroja!
    2. Hinnan ja äänenlaadun välillä ei tunnu olevan mitään korrelaatiota ainakaan tässä otannassa. Korumainen liitin, kaunis hopeinen punos kaapelin ympärillä ja kova hinta eivät kerro äänenlaadusta vielä mitään.
    3. Jatkan Musical Bluen sisäänajoa ja testausta kuten liikkeelle lupasin, mutta toisaalta myös näpertelyvietti polttelee. Taidan hakea Niinimäeltä lisää liittimiä ja erilaisia kaapeleita metritavarana seuraavia vertailuja varten. Perusfiilikseksi jäi, että monien valmiskaapelien hinnoissa on reilusti ilmaa välissä.

    Olipa mielenkiintoinen testi! Kiitos kun raportoit tulokset tänne. Asiallisia kaapeleiden sokkotestejä ei tosiaankaan ole liikaa. Mukavan ennakkoluulottomalla asenteella piuhoja testailit.

    Hyvä jos testi kiinnostaa! Kuten jo todettua, laitekohtaisesti vaihteleva CD-annon ja vahvistin-oton sähköinen sovitus ja tietenkin kaiuttimen sointitasapaino vaikuttavat olennaisesti arvioihin. Mitä enemmän saadaan eri kuuntelijoiden vaihtelevilla laitteistoilla tekemiä asiallisia vertailuja esiin, sitä enemmän näillä testeillä on ristiinlinkittynä merkitystä – vielä jos yksi tai useampi kaapeli (tai yleisellä tasolla mikä tahansa laite) ovat olleet vertailussa samoja. Tämä oli julkaisuni pääasiallinen motiivi. Valintaoppaat mallia What Hi-Fi ovat asia erikseen…

    Tarkennan vielä kuunteluarvioitani siten, että “diskanttia” oli havainto ja “s:n suhina” vasta kritiikkiä – nämä ominaisuudet tahtoivat tosin tulla käsi kädessä.

    Musical Bluet ovat tällä hetkellä ympärivuorokautisessa sisäänajossa. Vahvistimen otto on kuormana, mutta ei ääni ei sentään tule ulos. L

    Todella mukavaa luettavaa, kun joku jaksaa tarkasti kertoa omat mielipiteensä testin jälkeen. Tämän ja muidenkin testien perusteella voi sanoa että hinta ei ratkaise. Jos tuplaat hinnan, niin todennäköisesti et saa parempaa vaan erityyppisen saundin. Kannattaako siis testailla kalliita kaapeleita, vai pelkästään edullisia? Tottakai hinta luo mielikuvia äänenlaadusta ja pääsee kehumaan kavereille hintaa, mutta onko omaan settiin parhaiten sopivan kaapelin löytäminen mahdollista edullisemmasta päästä? Selvää kuitenkin on, että kaapeleissa on eroja (ainakin minun mielestä).

    Ehkä paradoksaalista, mutta itse on kuullut pienimmät erot juuri välikaapeleissa! Ja suurimmat… virtajohdoissa. Kaiupinkaapeli jää siihen välille.

    Et ole ainoa! Täällä on testattu melkoinen läjä erilaisia kaapeleita vuosien saatossa ja aika usein lopputulos on ollut samanlainen.

    Reply
50. October 7, 2022 at 12:17 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://avplus.fi/vertailussa-kaiutinkaapelit-onko-eroja-vai-eiko-ole/

    Vaimennuskerroin?
    Vaimennuskerroin on vahvistimen ominaisuus, joka kuvaa sen kykyä vaimentaa kaiuttimesta takaisinpäin tulevaa energiaa. Vaimennuskerroin on vahvistimeen liitetyn kaiuttimen impedanssin ja vahvistimen ulostuloimpedanssin suhde (Vk = Zk/Zv). Jos esimerkiksi kaiuttimen impedanssi on kahdeksan ohmia ja vahvistimen lähtöimpedanssi on 0,05 ohmia, tällöin vaimennuskerroin on 8/0,05 = 160. Tyypillisesti vaimennuskertoimen lukuarvo voi olla aina muutamista kymmenistä yli tuhanteen. Suurempi luku on parempi. Jonkinlaisena hyvän ja huonon vaimennuskertoimen raja-arvona pidetään lukuarvoa 50. Vaimennuskerrointa voi havainnollistaa vaikka seuraavalla kokeella: Irrota kaiutinkaapelit kaiuttimesta. Napauta bassokartiota tai sen ripustusta kevyesti nopealla sormen liikkeellä. Havainnoi miltä matala tuhmp-ääni kuulostaa. Kytke kaapelit takaisin kaiuttimeen ja napauta uudelleen. Kuuletko eron? Kytke vahvistin päälle, mutta pidä äänenvoimakkuus nollassa. Miltä napautus nyt kuulostaa?

    Reply