Bob, that article on cables, like just about all of them, misses the key point - any cable or electronic part is made of real materials which do not behave nicely when you zoom in really closely on them. There are all sorts of parasitic effects, metal to metal, temperature, movement, static behaviours - which create noise; it's a nightmare world if you look too closely at the electrical activity. And unfortunately that noise is right on the edge of being audible if a system is "transparent" enough, if the volume is high enough. Worrying about pure resistance, capacitance and inductance all the time is a complete dead end as far as attaining high quality sound is concerned ... it's all about the cable not being "perfect" as an electrical signal transport system - it's not a textbook problem!!
Master Built-What are Owners Hearing That They Didn't Hear With Other Cables
- Thread starter Steve Williams
- Start date
This article? ? http://www.co-bw.com/Audio_Cables.htm
That's why I posted it; so that we can discuss it. I have never said that what I post is the audio cable bible, I just share what other engineers/audio scientists have published on audio cables. I'm glad you mentioned what you just said; not many people have your sharp/incisive insight.
The link is basic audio cable info. You are right about chemical reactions of various conductive materials entering in contact with each other...small but verifiable...in the tiny amount of noise they produce/introduce. We are discussing and trying to comprehend by learning more. That's what audiophiles scientists attempt to do...some. :b
* Francisco has an excellent question regarding the level of capacitance in the Master-Built cables, and also their performance with SS audio gear.
It might sound irrelevant to you Frank but not to me..."everything is important" (Mike Lavigne's one of his favorite lines), and that's a fact of life.
I'm quoting Francisco (microstrip):
"I am waiting for the proper moment to ask about the performance of MasterBuilt cables with solid state systems - I see mainly opinions involving tube systems.
And also asking the mandatory technical question - the MB is a low, medium or high capacitance cable? IMHO it is the only relevant technical question about cables!"
That's why I posted it; so that we can discuss it. I have never said that what I post is the audio cable bible, I just share what other engineers/audio scientists have published on audio cables. I'm glad you mentioned what you just said; not many people have your sharp/incisive insight.
The link is basic audio cable info. You are right about chemical reactions of various conductive materials entering in contact with each other...small but verifiable...in the tiny amount of noise they produce/introduce. We are discussing and trying to comprehend by learning more. That's what audiophiles scientists attempt to do...some. :b
* Francisco has an excellent question regarding the level of capacitance in the Master-Built cables, and also their performance with SS audio gear.
It might sound irrelevant to you Frank but not to me..."everything is important" (Mike Lavigne's one of his favorite lines), and that's a fact of life.
I'm quoting Francisco (microstrip):
"I am waiting for the proper moment to ask about the performance of MasterBuilt cables with solid state systems - I see mainly opinions involving tube systems.
And also asking the mandatory technical question - the MB is a low, medium or high capacitance cable? IMHO it is the only relevant technical question about cables!"
Bob, yes, everything is relevant, everything matters - but there are simple levels - "Is the circuit I've plugged into live or not?" 
- right through to the most esoteric; which is where things get interesting, really interesting. Along that line all sorts of things figure - one would hope that the more basic matters are sorted out, before getting "deep and meaningful" ... .
- right through to the most esoteric; which is where things get interesting, really interesting. Along that line all sorts of things figure - one would hope that the more basic matters are sorted out, before getting "deep and meaningful" ... .
"Keep in mind that no one really knows why this all works anyway."
That line ? was taken from the first article I posted.
...A large part of the text itself. Here's the full link: CABLES AND CONNECTORS: THEY'RE MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOU THINK
That line ? was taken from the first article I posted.
...A large part of the text itself. Here's the full link: CABLES AND CONNECTORS: THEY'RE MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOU THINK
Why it works in a general sense doesn't really matter - the irksome bit is when it doesn't quite work the way you want it to; and why two configurations work differently enough to be audible - it's the "Why is there this difference? What can I do about it? And what's the smartest way of making it work properly; that is, that they sound the same?" Q & A bit ...
I'll give a little hint,: RCA sockets, almost all of them, are crap; the first thing I do with any system is rip them out, throw them in the bin, figuratively speaking - I don't want a high powered car engine to be secured to a chassis using some fencing wire, just because that's what everyone uses ...
I'll give a little hint,
: RCA sockets, almost all of them, are crap; the first thing I do with any system is rip them out, throw them in the bin, figuratively speaking - I don't want a high powered car engine to be secured to a chassis using some fencing wire, just because that's what everyone uses ... More impressions on the sound of my bedroom system with the ultra IC:
1) There is a relaxed nature in the way the dynamics ebb. There is no strain whatsoever when the music starts to get loud.
2) Voices are really clear and pure. In some cases, I can hear overtones of the voices.
3) Plucked strings and piano stand out as they sound specially realistic.
4) Even the ambience sounds very clear.
The overall sound is very relaxed, dynamics are very natural, and this clarity is like washing my face with one of the best facial wash. The feeling after washing is my skin feels very clean, I feel that my pores can breath, and yet the natural moisture on my face has not been washed away with the dirt. That is the best analogy I can think of.
1) There is a relaxed nature in the way the dynamics ebb. There is no strain whatsoever when the music starts to get loud.
2) Voices are really clear and pure. In some cases, I can hear overtones of the voices.
3) Plucked strings and piano stand out as they sound specially realistic.
4) Even the ambience sounds very clear.
The overall sound is very relaxed, dynamics are very natural, and this clarity is like washing my face with one of the best facial wash. The feeling after washing is my skin feels very clean, I feel that my pores can breath, and yet the natural moisture on my face has not been washed away with the dirt. That is the best analogy I can think of.
As you should. The thread's title is simple and clear enough.
What this has done is give the "usual suspects" another opportunity to repeat the same things they have stated in the past on numerous occasions.
Another case of "uninvited guests" who contribute nothing to the specific thread's topic.
Last edited:
I don't want a high powered car engine to be secured to a chassis using some fencing wire, just because that's what everyone uses ...
With all due respect, do you honestly consider your system a "high powered car engine"?
I strongly suspect many on this forum would disagree.
I'll give a little hint,
I'm curious what you use instead of RCAs?
Cheers,
Of course not. But if it were one then I would be silly to use something which is possibly a severe bottleneck on the quality ...
When I started my "proper" audio journey 30 years ago I tried living with the RCAs, by using various serious cleaning regimes on the connections. This went on for some months, but never provided a long term solution - I could always hear the damage being done to the quality of the sound, and it was unacceptable. So, I bit the bullet, and hard wired - which means that I removed the RCA plugs and sockets of the connection, fed the cable through the holes now left in the chassis, and directly soldered the cable copper conductors to the circuit board. The two components were now a single circuit - the weak link in the chain had been eliminated.
This solved that problem. Period. For as long I wanted to listen. So I've used this method on every system since, as one of the first things I do. Interestingly, a local audio friend uses Naim gear, with their famous DIN connectors; better than RCA but still a problem; I've been prodding him to do something about it, and last listening session he finally seems to have accepted that the gremlins in the sound we could hear may be caused by that - he'll try hard wiring also.
This is simply unrealistic and frankly absurd for folks on this forum who have invested in a quality preamp and associated interconnects.
What is your purpose in posting on this forum and on this thread?
What is your purpose in posting on this forum and on this thread?
Frank, I have read that some audiophiles change their RCA jack connectors from their components. We know that the Tiffany type are much stronger and last longer. But for most audio gear and music lovers (common mortals) would it be more practical to simply abide by an easier set of rules:
? http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/howto.html
* About the HDMI connectors?
________
The most important feature speaker wire can possess is low resistance at audio frequencies. The makers of expensive audiophile speaker cable claim their products are better because they have a frequency capability that extends into the MHz range. But there is no evidence that wire capable of carrying frequencies many times higher than what it will actually carry is useful or worth the extra money. Some of these cables are made up of many separate strands that are individually insulated - this arrangement is called Litz wire - to combat "skin effect." Skin effect is the propensity of current to flow on only the outer surface of a wire at high frequencies. Since the inner portion of the wire carries less current, the wire's overall effective resistance is greater at the very high frequencies. But skin effect occurs in substantial amounts only at frequencies many times higher than what humans can hear.
The only truly negative effects you could attribute to speaker cable are too high a resistance (which affects an amplifier's damping factor), and high frequency losses due to cable inductance and capacitance. But you would need a long cable length before the reactive components (inductance and capacitance) affect anything within the audio range. Damping factor is the ability of an amplifier to absorb voltage fed back to it from the speaker. When you send a tone to a standard magnetic loudspeaker and then stop that tone, inertia causes the cone to continue vibrating. And as it vibrates a voltage is generated. The amplifier's output circuit attempts to halt that vibration by presenting a low impedance load - ideally, zero Ohms (a short circuit). So, while low-resistance wiring is clearly important, nearly any sufficiently heavy wire will suffice for a speaker cable in the lengths used by most recording studios. Heavy gauge zip cord is ideal for runs of twenty feet or less, and it's readily available in #14 and even thicker gauges.
Anyone care to comment on the ? above?
? http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/howto.html
* About the HDMI connectors?
________
The most important feature speaker wire can possess is low resistance at audio frequencies. The makers of expensive audiophile speaker cable claim their products are better because they have a frequency capability that extends into the MHz range. But there is no evidence that wire capable of carrying frequencies many times higher than what it will actually carry is useful or worth the extra money. Some of these cables are made up of many separate strands that are individually insulated - this arrangement is called Litz wire - to combat "skin effect." Skin effect is the propensity of current to flow on only the outer surface of a wire at high frequencies. Since the inner portion of the wire carries less current, the wire's overall effective resistance is greater at the very high frequencies. But skin effect occurs in substantial amounts only at frequencies many times higher than what humans can hear.
The only truly negative effects you could attribute to speaker cable are too high a resistance (which affects an amplifier's damping factor), and high frequency losses due to cable inductance and capacitance. But you would need a long cable length before the reactive components (inductance and capacitance) affect anything within the audio range. Damping factor is the ability of an amplifier to absorb voltage fed back to it from the speaker. When you send a tone to a standard magnetic loudspeaker and then stop that tone, inertia causes the cone to continue vibrating. And as it vibrates a voltage is generated. The amplifier's output circuit attempts to halt that vibration by presenting a low impedance load - ideally, zero Ohms (a short circuit). So, while low-resistance wiring is clearly important, nearly any sufficiently heavy wire will suffice for a speaker cable in the lengths used by most recording studios. Heavy gauge zip cord is ideal for runs of twenty feet or less, and it's readily available in #14 and even thicker gauges.
Anyone care to comment on the ? above?
To Frank and to Bob I would like to remind you what the topic is and both of you are way off topic. Would both of you kindly refrain from the distracting jabber as it has nothing to do with this thread
TIA
TIA
To point out that if your goal is to achieve optimum sound then you may need to go some extra yards to achieve such. If less than optimum is acceptable and your pleasure is to have a nicely set up system, which presents well visually, then by all means connect in the normal fashion; in particular, in this thread, a new alternative now seems to be available, that these MB cables appear to largely inhibit the problems that arise when connections between parts of a system are not optimised.
Of course, the real answer is for the audio industry to bite the bullet, and devise a far better method for connecting gear together; electrical engineering knows that RCAs are a terrible design, it just became a standard because no-one did anything about having better decades ago.
So you are saying that to optimize sound, one must perform major surgery on your IC's and the corresponding component inputs / outputs, effectively destroying any resale value on the IC's and components, is recommended?
This does bring up an interesting question... what if MB built cables for proprietary use systems like Naim DIN or DarTZeel's 50ohm BNC?
I can say that I too have considered options away from RCA's. But all-in-all I have very little beef with cables as are. To me there's more problems with electronics and the way they influence behaviors cables can exhibit more or less. But why wouldn't someone take the easy route and just buy cables such as MB that seem to inconsequentialize the issues?
I can say that I too have considered options away from RCA's. But all-in-all I have very little beef with cables as are. To me there's more problems with electronics and the way they influence behaviors cables can exhibit more or less. But why wouldn't someone take the easy route and just buy cables such as MB that seem to inconsequentialize the issues?
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |