Even worst than the measurement of a square wave going though an ADC DAC loop at redbook sampling?
As far as I remember the roll-off of my TA cables started around 200 kHz.
How Do You Shop For Cables?
- Thread starter witchdoctor
- Start date
Even worst than the measurement of a square wave going though an ADC DAC loop at redbook sampling?
As far as I remember the roll-off of my TA cables started around 200 kHz.
The "official" cable measurements are meaningless, as people will only show a frequency response measurement with great pride, nothing else. Some cable manufacturers have specific proprietary measurements, that are not standard and are used for their development, but are not interested in sharing them with the public. But even just the standard RLC measurements can have some meaning - but we do not know how to interpret them. Gary Koh had an excellent thread on this topic a few years ago on this subject in WBF, explaining how he developed his cables. Other manufacturers have different models.
In my experience discussing "audiophile" fuses ranks with the most contentious of audio topics, with even many strong proponents of cables making a significant sonic difference (and even some cable manufacturers) shying away from supporting the idea of "audiophile fuses".
Thanks for that.
I'm no stranger to contentious issues as the Entreq thread shows but changing the Aspect power cable and fuse is right at the beginning of the cable chain and the extent of the improvement is suggesting to me that it has made a real difference for the better.
Hence my interest in hearing of other members' experiences but I can't say I have not been warned!
I don't own the XL MM2 but older generation Transparent Reference cables. And yes, I do have test results that I have post in this forum and elsewhere. Here is the frequency response sweep of one:
The above shows that the cable acts like a low-pass cable compared to my generic coax. At 200 Khz, it is down over 5 db compared to 2 db for my cheapie coax cable.
A square wave can be decomposed into the following fourier series:
Seems complicated but it is not. It is saying that to make a square wave, you start with the sine wave at its frequency (2pi ft) and then add to it infinite numbers of odd multiples of it. A 1 Khz square wave is an infinite number of sine waves that have frequencies of 1 Kh, 3 Khz, 5 Khz, etc. going to infinity. Here is the spectrum of that:
And nice animation from the Wiki starting with just one component (i.e. the original frequency) and adding to it:
You only get a true, ideal square wave if you let the harmonics go to infinity. Variations and filtering of those harmonics will give you a distorted version of square wave.
Going back to the measurement, since the Transparent cable filters out the higher frequencies, it by definition cannot produce as "pretty" of a square wave as the generic cable which has higher bandwidth. The math and simple theory of signal processing disallows it.
Fortunately there is no requirement whatsoever for an an analog audio cable to produce perfect square waves. Take a 15 Khz audio tone. Its third harmonic is already at 45 Khz. And the one after that is 75 Khz. Who has a speaker that wants to reproduce up 75 Khz??? And we are just up to three components in that infinite series to make a square wave!
Reduction of these ultrasonic frequencies in the cable may turn out to be a good thing in a cable by limiting what goes into your speakers and amplifiers, both of which can get unhappy with excess ultrasonics. This may, may be a reason folks like transparent cables or others with filters.
So personally I don't worry about the filter. I used my balanced Transparent audio cable until recently between my Reel to Reel deck and my pre-amp. I recently replaced it with Mogami because it made my wiring a bit more organized. Not because I heard any of this filtering.
Bottom line, yes, you can characterize cables with a square wave because it is a very high frequency signal and it is easy to see its variations on a scope. No, you can't go by what you see there as far as audibility necessarily as it is a far more extreme test than what analog audio requires.
Now, let me know what that personal commentary was about in your post.
All the TA cables I have heard and owned exhibited the high-frequency rolloff seen in Amir's graph (starting at around 5k), and it's noticeable if you chain them (source/preamp, preamp/amp, amp/speaker) - I have posted about this in the past at some length. Squarewave response of a cable isn't an issue for me, for the reasons Amir explained. The editorializing of sound by cables - some much more than others - is; with TA being an extremely egregious case (e.g. the start of the rolloff in the audioband). For some reason, the rolloff is much more audible than the graph shows, perhaps because it also seems to affect the midrange, making for a dull sound, which can sound pleasing. All in all, I have ZERO respect for Transparent Audio products, starting with those cheap Amphenol connectors they use in the interconnects.
Last edited:
Can you explain what is meant by the comments "20 ohm Generator" and "600 ohm Generator"? What were the exact output and input impedance's used in these measurements? Transparent Reference cables were tuned for SS or tube with different networks, what type of cable was used?
Can I ask you what generation and type of TA cables have you owned? I have measured a few and never found anyone having a roll off starting at 5 kHz.
Speaking about their top cables - it is what I have experience with - they can sound dull if you use just the speaker cable and do not use the matching IC between source and preamplifier. If you use both, in appropriate systems you will have a very extended bandwidth, with plenty of detail and energy. BTW, they use plugs with cheap Amphenol fiber casings because they feel it sounds better than metal case plugs.
And yes, with cables (and all high-end equipment
) one man's meat is another man's poison ...
The Reference that Amir presumably measured was the latest one (I have a thread on phono cables where I discussed more details, here at WBF); the Amphenols are so cheaply made that the plastic casings ISN'T the first or only problem; the ones on that Reference cable, I found them for about $2 each on the net. Technology has moved so far beyond anything TA has to offer.
Sounds like they are compensating a little for harshness. But also Transparent uses a zobel I believe, which depending on values could die into audio range.
The perception of midrange tone, clarity and detail is heavily influenced by frequencies in the 10 kHz+ range. The perception of high frequency rolloff is also heavily influenced by bass extension, or lack thereof... so if your system has full bass extension it makes high frequency rolloff much more noticeable.
ack, can you explain how these comments are consistent with the following comment you made describing my system after I had recently installed these very same Transparent Audio cables? If they are an example of an extremely egregious case of editorializing the sound by cables, making for a dull sound affecting the midrange, how can they be in a system which is also the most accurate you had yet heard? Is the contribution of a suite of cables to the overall sound of a system, in fact, not that significant?
"PeterA and I appear to have the same goal - accuracy. Based on that, and considering his speakers cannot go as low, move enough air, and you can't really get the scale of an orchestra as with larger speakers, the sound is as he says - truly sublime, and overall (with the understanding that I have heard a few dozen systems only) the most accurate I have yet heard, save the Q series Magicos, and clearly a class above mine - a true reference system! It is QUITE impressive and the sound exceptionally realistic, to be honest, just perhaps a bit less resolving than mine.
Bravo Peter!"
I found through listening during the audition in my system, that these cables colored the sound less than the other brands I auditioned based on my reference of live music. Of course, that is only a subjective measure and may have more to do with my individual priorities and preferences. But you wrote that we appear to have the same goal - accuracy.
I make those assessments based on listening and comparing the sound to the same live reference that you use, the BSO, and guage accuracy. I do not look at measurements to tell me how the BSO sounds.
This is a thread about the process of choosing cables, not a science based discussion about the technical performance of specific brands. I brought up the example of seeing a particular set of measurements of seven cable brands and how they performed relative to each other as an example of perhaps how some other people might go about selecting cables. Based on only those plots which all looked less than ideal, I would not want to hear any of them. Seeing those graphs highly biased my opinion about those brands, some of which have been subsequently confirmed by hearing them in various other systems. All it did was confuse me and it did not help the process of selecting cables, for me. I'm sure others view this very differently.
We had this debate on connectors used by other respectful brands before - if a manufacturer uses a cheap part because he finds it sounds better I applause him for using it over nice looking perhaps more solid parts. And I have to say I do not see why modern or new technology forcefully results in better sounding cables - in fact I humbly admit I am completely ignorant in cable sound quality - I can not correlate any cable parameter varying within normal ranges with sound quality. But I know that in my system, some sound great and much better than others.
My question wasn't sarcastic...100% not. The word "toughness" and "impossible to answer" with full measure is not related to sarcasm...100% not. It's only my own belief. It was an honest question Peter. If I wanted to be sarcastic I'd make sure of it with an appropriate humorous and friendly emoticon/tone.
Anyway, Transparent cables are used by many audiophiles. Nordost too, and there are many more. It don't matter the ones we pick, that's a choice we made.
Mine are Kimber, my main ones, but I never tried Transparent, or Nordost, or others higher end. It wouldn't match my budget for one, and only if @ a good discount I can afford.
I bought mine because they had good reviews first, and they sounded fine with my smooth sound waking it up a little. So I kept them, but I too could have return them.
I'm not judging, not analyzing, not being sarcastic, simply making friendly conversation in this shopping thread for cables.
I have zero bias, and don't listen to nobody on what they have to say about cables but the people I trust first and foremost, like you.
No Peter, no sarcasm in my prior question, not with you, not with anyone else here @ WBF. I have very high esteem for experienced calibrated individuals.
And your post didn't need any deletion, to the contrary; it was an excellent adventure in hi-fi cable world. The sound you have and the service you had is without a doubt the best reason (one of) to do cable shopping that way.
Last edited:
Cables just don't turn me on.
My original cable selection process is embarrassing. I selected Transparent Audio cables not because I conducted exhaustive comparative listening tests via home trials in my own system but because those were the cables most used in demonstrations by VTL (which made my amps) and MartinLogan (which made my speakers) (and because Andy Payor used them).
I deduced that if both VTL and MartinLogan demo with them, then they must sound good in a VTL/MartinLogan system. The Transparent Audio cables sound good in my system, but I have never had any other cables in my system to compare to them.
My original cable selection process is embarrassing. I selected Transparent Audio cables not because I conducted exhaustive comparative listening tests via home trials in my own system but because those were the cables most used in demonstrations by VTL (which made my amps) and MartinLogan (which made my speakers) (and because Andy Payor used them).
I deduced that if both VTL and MartinLogan demo with them, then they must sound good in a VTL/MartinLogan system. The Transparent Audio cables sound good in my system, but I have never had any other cables in my system to compare to them.
Which just goes to illustrate that measurements alone may not entirely equate to the empirical expeareance!
My Own Kimber 8TC's are bagged, tagged and in the loft by reason of the latter.
Irrelevant quote, Peter; it was addressing the sound of a few pieces you played for me. The quote of mine you should have included, which is what I discussed a couple of posts ago, is how DARK your system sounds - and we have discussed this time and time again. It sounds very good, but it also sounds really dark. Another relevant related quote of mine to you may be how I really characterize Transparent cables ("crap").
You are really missing out, Ron. If you want I can swap you my audience 24SE and Tara Cobalt for your TT
That was a great post! It says volumes about integrity that they invited you to the factory and then customized a set of loaners based on your needs. WOW! The best part is that you found what made you happy and didn't have to return them, thanks for posting.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |