You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I was thinking more UN52...being retro 😉
Country of origin is a whole other topic...
If you’ve got any digital devices, make sure you stock up on £1450 usb cables.
But you need their £11k speaker cables to hear the difference.
Only the gauge of the wire, you want thicker diameter wire for longer runs - but that's it.
I used to work on the technical side of TV - the only difference between cables (phono, USB & HDMI) was the quality of the connectors at either end. If you were constantly plugging and unplugging cables then the more expensive ones tended to last longer. Apart from that there was zero difference, nothing measurable even using fancy kit.
Hold on a minute, I might have un-learned something I was told 35 y3ars ago...
My favourite wheeze was making sure both speaker cables were the same length even if one speaker was much closer to the amp.
Are you telling me I don't need 4 metres of cable coiled up behind my stereo just to keep each channel the same length?
Are you telling me I don’t need 4 metres of cable coiled up behind my stereo just to keep each channel the same length?
if you think your hearing is good enough to notice the length of time of something travelling at the speed of light over 4 meters (hint, its around 13 nanoseconds) then you're doing it right 🙂
I guess if you have got a cable that's causing problems (high capacitance, high resistance, etc) then you probably do want the same amount of it on all channels, otherwise I can't see a reason to.
I was thinking more UN52…this is a retro thread
So was I, which is why it's a great analogy.
UN52s (mains cable) just work brilliantly doing exactly what you want a BB to do, which is let the cranks spin freely and last for ever. A nasty cheap BB (bell wire) will probably get a bit grindy pretty quickly and will pack in after a while. You can get a Royce (fancy speaker cable) or something for ££££s more, but it will not work any better than the UN52.
if you think your hearing is good enough to notice the length of time of something travelling at the speed of light over 4 meters (hint, its around 13 nanoseconds)
...or the difference between two identical CDs, one of which has had a green felt tip drawn around the edge 😉
I guess we disagree then...and we've all chosen analogies to suit our positions.
dmorts:
If either you shifted position or the speakers moved position during the cable switch
“If”…neither would happen in any half decent demo.
Moving your head position if seated would be enough in a room with significant and uncontrolled* bass frequency room modes, hence my leaning forward example. Moving 20-30cm puts you right into the half wavelength of 130-200 Hz, i.e bass to low mid-range.
*As I also said, these can be difficult to control
I guess if you have got a cable that’s causing problems (high capacitance, high resistance, etc) then you probably do want the same amount of it on all channels, otherwise I can’t see a reason to.
After running two different lengths of QED 79 with a NAD amp for quite a few years, one channel of the amp was considerably quieter than the other.
And I've offered on here to demonstrate the difference between speaker cables a dozen or so times, but no one has taken me up on it. 🙃
I use a track from a Cornershop album with a gated very deep bass sample. With some cable I can clearly hear the gated effect, with some I can't. It's pretty obvious when you hear it. 🙉
if you think your hearing is good enough to notice the length of time of something travelling at the speed of light over 4 meters (hint, its around 13 nanoseconds) then you’re doing it right
I think i used to spout some pish about "soundstage" and "impedance".
But yeah if you work out then a 3m difference in cable length is 10 nanoseconds, which changes the soundstage by less than one hundredth of a millimetre.
£100 on IsoAcoustics iso-155 monitor isolation stands
£120 on IsoAcoustics iso-200 subwoofer isolation stand
Actually most of that stuff seems pretty good value. The stands are an aesthetic thing as much as anything. Not bad value for something to stick you're speakers on. I was looking for some screw in feet for a subwoofer the other week and thought I'd get another set of these only to find they're £65! (set I've got were thrown in with the sub when I bought it in leiu of all the cables I didn't need)
And an SSD should last longer than a spinning disc, and save you the hassle when it dies.
£60 on 2 x 1.5m Audioquest Pearl Ethernet cable, yep…..I bought 2 relatively expensive Ethernet cables, comments are welcome.
£30 on a Audioquest Pearl usb a to usb b cable
but that stuff. Really. You could have spent another £85 on more expensive speakers.
Physics says no. Audiophiles say yes.
Before you start banging on about physics, there is probably a lot about perception in the brain that we aren't aware of. For example we know that you can't hear sounds above 20kHz if you are young. But has anyone done any experiments on the perception of that sound?
Square waves and sine waves sound different, because a square wave is an infinite sum of odd-numbered harmonics. You can hear the harmonics but your brain interprets it as the same frequency but a different type of sound, it feels 'harder'. And before you all start shouting this is a GCSE Physics demo, it's very obvious.
I'd be interested to know much this changes at higher frequency. If no sound above 20kHz hd any effect then a super high frequency sine wave would sound the same as a square wave. But if they don't, then harmomics above 20kHz would be influencing sound even if not directly perceptible. Which is something I've heard suggested.
Before you start banging on about physics, there is probably a lot about perception in the brain that we aren’t aware of
It wouldn't seem a difficult experiment to compare the output at the of an audiophile cable and some off the shelf electrical copper and see if there are any differences.
The key fact for me has always been that pro studios where the music is recorded and mastered don't use fancy audiophile cable (I suspect except where they're getting it for free/are being paid to advertise it)
Never mind Cougar’s bike, does the James Randi foundation still offer the million quid prize for this? I know that they used to and to the best of my knowledge no one ever managed to claim the prize.
It's bizarre that people aren't queueing up to make themselves instant millionaires.
The stands are an aesthetic thing as much as anything.
Nah, I have to disagree with you on that one (but I would say that wouldn't I?) they do make a noticeable difference in my fully treated room and they raise the speakers/tweeters to the correct height for my listening position - swap them out with something else (books/blocks wood/foam pads) for the same overall height and it is very obvious, even my mother can hear the difference and she has the ears of a 65yr old with mild tinnitus.
Do yer self a favour and ignore everything audiophiles say. There isn’t another subject on the internet where such pish is spoken.
... he said, on a cycling forum. (-:
I haven’t tried mains cable anyway. Point is that speaker cable does make a difference, and we agree there. T+E may be accidentally better than many HiFi options, but this would be more of an amusing coincidence rather than proof that cable doesn’t matter.
Nonsense. It's not accidental, it's physics. Cable of course makes a difference, to a point, but that point is considerably lower than thirty quid an inch for platinum-coated directional wires infused with unicorn semen and hand-rolled on the coconut-oiled thigh of a Filipino virgin. Once it's good enough it's good enough, you ain't gonna get more out than what goes in.
[EDIT: bloody hell, I've just realised, I need to start selling self-amplifying cable. A niche in the audiophile market! Dragon's Den here I come.]
Can you explain how better cable than this, say your mains cable, does make a difference; and yet there’s nothing better than the mains cable?
Sure, this is the same argument as Mol's. Take the mains wiring in your house, replace half of it with wire twice the gauge and the other with wire half the gauge. Is one measurably worse?* Is the other measurably better?
(* - on fire)
(though interestingly it’s described as copper covered aluminium now – I’m sure it used to be pure copper)
(AIUI, could be wrong,) electricity flows across the surface of the wire not inside it. So that shouldn't make any difference.
the purpose of the hi fi is to sound good/accurate.
Are those two things synonymous? I rather think they aren't. I rather think they aren't at all.
I used to work on the technical side of TV – the only difference between cables (phono, USB & HDMI) was the quality of the connectors at either end.
Anyone here for the full half hour? (-:
in my fully treated room
I'm almost afraid to ask...
the only difference between cables (phono, USB & HDMI) was the quality of the connectors at either end.
BITD I spent a few quid on an IXUS Scart lead. It was a good improvement over the shitty SCART cables that would come free with your DVD player.
But as I actually understand the difference between a digital an analogue signal I'm not really inclined to waste money on fancy HDMI, USB or Ethernet cables
https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/studio-sos-guide-monitoring-acoustic-treatment
in my fully treated room
I’m almost afraid to ask…
room treatment is probably the only thing that really matters once you have half decent kit. the recording studios i have been in have various devices on the wall to prevent unwanted reflections. SOS do a home studio help visit thing, and the majority of the time its the room that is the problem
(inaccurate monitoring) not the kit.
Oh, I know, and I agree. I'm just curious as to what a "room treatment" would consist of to someone who spent sixty quid on three metres of CAT5.
BITD I spent a few quid on an IXUS Scart lead. It was a good improvement over the shitty SCART cables that would come free with your DVD player.
This is 100% true IME.
Cheap SCART cables seemed to allow the multiple analogue signals to interfere with each other. A massive difference when I used a decent quality one. (It was about £15 - £20 if I remember correctly, not some crazy money).
BITD I spent a few quid on an IXUS Scart lead. It was a good improvement over the shitty SCART cables that would come free with your DVD player.
But as I actually understand the difference between a digital an analogue signal I’m not really inclined to waste money on fancy HDMI, USB or Ethernet cables
100% agreed on all of that.
The difference between a £20 SCART lead and the one free in the box will be night and day. Not least because it's likely RGB-wired rather than composite.
The problem arrives when you apply analogue thinking to digital, the two are not comparable. Much to the chagrin of the 'audiophile' industry who still want you to believe the opposite so they can continue to sell you expensive snake oil.
And please don't get me wrong, I'm not ragging on "hifi". I've spent an astonishing amount of money on AV over the years, including silly speaker cable. But times change and technology moves on, it's not 1990 any more.
Yes. Bigger, fatter and more expensive the better.
Now you can ignore all the other answers that are doubtless going on about measurable differences in a very boring way, probably by boring engineers who have no soul.
Why shouldn't it make a difference? All audio components are basically a collection of connectors that take the signal from one place to the next, inside a box. Why wouldn't the connections between boxes make a difference too?
Right? It's a scientific fact that red bikes are faster.
I’m just curious as to what a “room treatment” would consist of to someone who spent sixty quid on three metres of CAT5.
Ok, this is what my room treatment looks like, And the cables are CAT7 which makes a difference, as 7 is better than 5...obviously (in a spinal tap fashion)😉
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Yes, the eve light strips are still to be fitted correctly, need my bro to help with that.
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
And 3 further panels still to be fitted to ceiling above desk/first reflection points, need my bro to do that as well.
£2.5k well spent in my opinion.
£2.5k well spent in my opinion.
Well, given that many people would think that spending that much on a bike is mental, that's fair enough I suppose.
I can totally see the sense in minimising reflective sounds in rooms; that seems sensible. But I'm with @cougar on the cables. a USB/network/whatever cable; is either within the spec and transmits data without error or it's not. Speaker cables need to be sufficient to carry the signal without loss; and no more.
I distinctly remember ads for very expensive power cables for hifi equipment; which would no doubt be plugged into a £2.50 plastic socket; wired with whatever 2.5mm T+E the electrician had in his van when your house was put together.
It's all lies 🙂
I distinctly remember ads for very expensive power cables for hifi equipment; which would no doubt be plugged into a £2.50 plastic socket; wired with whatever 2.5mm T+E the electrician had in his van when your house was put together.
Was it Naim that sold a load of power treatment boxes called things like "Hi Cap" "Top Cap" and "Super Cap"
I remember thinking it was total snake oil but it made a massive difference to the sound of their kit.
I can totally see the sense in minimising reflective sounds in rooms;
Actually you don't want to minimise them, you want to control them. If it is it too flat it will sound wrong. The pic below is of a recording studio being set up and the reflectors above their heads are just that - they are there to make a controlled amount of reflection so things sound right. It is about perception as has been mentioned many times here already.
I have a suspicion that a couple of the people that make those loudspeakers are keen mountainbikers so may even be on this forum 🙂
Are those two things synonymous? I rather think they aren’t. I rather think they aren’t at all.
No you are quite right. Good is subjective. Accurate isn't.
Was it Naim that sold a load of power treatment boxes called things like “Hi Cap” “Top Cap” and “Super Cap”
They were power supplies not "power treatment boxes". A good PSU is a definite requirement for a power amp though perhaps not a pre-amp which I believe Naim intended those PSUs to be used with.
ok; maybe I wasn't specific enough "minimise unwanted reflections" might have been better 😀
Anyway; found the mains cables...
fair enough. Those mains cables though... I don't know if I'm more offended by the price or having a K in the name.
We've got a fully treated room including being suspended on isolation springs. Music sounds very odd with no reflections...
Anyway; found the mains cables…
That's cheap. What you really need is one of these, or maybe 2 or 3, depending on your set up.
There isn’t another subject on the internet where such pish is spoken. 😆
Dunno aero carbon wheels 🙂
How to make your own Fake wheel company
My 2p for what its worth, I'm aligned with the Audio Engineer way of thinking rather than the Audiophile way of thinking. Getting the correct cable construction and properties is essential in my book and does measurably effect the sound your hifi will produce.
But this means using the correct type of cables such as shielded twisted pair for interconnects and low resistance, low capacitance cables for speakers that are the correct gauge for the power and length etc ... just putting a random conductor in-between will not give sufficient quality.
In my younger years when I was well in the audiophile camp, I thought I could hear the differences in the character of some cables but no idea if I could actually hear the difference in a proper A/B test. But also I have no idea of the properties of the cables I was using. It could well be the capacitance between the cables had a 30% difference which was responsible for the sound difference rather than the extra magic the manufacture added to the fancier cable.
For the OP's system, its a budget end system which will not be particularly resolving so I would advise only making a moderate effort on cables. For the interconnects get some shielded twisted pair stuff, lots of good candidates on amazon from £5-£15 I'm not sure you need to spend more than this. Depending on your amplifiers power and distance to speakers I would guess 2mm^2 conductors should be enough there are many oxygen free copper cables on amazon for ~£2-3 per meter available. Try to go for figure of 8 shape rather than the conductors separated as that increases the capacitance and impedance.
But as I actually understand the difference between a digital an analogue signal I’m not really inclined to waste money on fancy HDMI, USB or Ethernet cables
Mostly agree but not entirely. It depends on the protocol and transmission method. Ethernet has error correction built in to the protocol, what ever the transmitter sends the receiver will get (or at least work out what the message was supposed to be), it either works or it doesn't, I don't understand how a better CAT cable or special audio network router helps in this situation.
With SPDIF there is no error correction and its possible to get corruption onto signal so having a cable that correctly meets the standards does help here. Many cheaper coax connections are not 75-Ohm and are often 50-ohms, while these still work fine and transmit the signal they can cause reflections and corrupt the signal. The receiver then needs to interpolate the signal to guess what bits it has lost. This guess may not be correct so the final signal will not be exactly the same.
Are you telling me I don’t need 4 metres of cable coiled up behind my stereo just to keep each channel the same length?
Coiling a cable will increase its inductance. I wonder if this effect is more measurable than the difference in length (which is not detectable in my opinion) 😉
room treatment is probably the only thing that really matters once you have half decent kit.
Very much agree with this. Getting speaker position correct and treating room nodes and relefections etc I believe has a huge effect on the sound quality and doesn't have to cost much. The hifi mags used always suggest spending 10-20% of your system value on cables. But I'd say spending that on room treatment will give you much better benefit and then just buying some modest cables.
Any recommendations then on best place to set speakers, i know you should not place them directly in a corner? So sound doesnt “bounce” around?
@scud, Any wall will reflect the sound and also enhance the bass. So usually speakers should be placed away from back wall and away from side wall to control the reflections and bass enhancement effect. But in the real world this is not possible, so prioritise moving away from side walls first. I believe your speakers are quite small and I'm sure they would have been designed knowing people wont position them out in the room. So putting them close to the back wall shouldn't sound too bad. If you can adjust the hight you place the speakers, try and have the tweeters at ear level, if they are too high angling them down a bit might help sound better. You can also play around with how much you toe your speakers in towards your listening position. This can help give a more accurate placement of instruments. Not all speakers need toe in and also it could mean people sitting outside of the ideal position have an even worse sound.
You need to do some experimentation to see what works for you as it depends on personal preference and the many different variables in your room. Move the speakers away form the wall play and track and listen, move them close to the wall play the same track and listen. Can you hear the difference? if so which one do you prefer. etc ... similar to bracketing when setting up suspension on a MTB.
I gave up using cables a while back and have moved over to hydraulic. Provided you can get a decent bleed they are much better…
I feel a huge difference. The sound is more fluid, more dynamic...
Just buy some good headphones instead. No cable interface issues, no placement woes, no carpeting the walls or having to purchase stands made from specially cured concrete etc.
OP reporting back in. Had day off work, so didn’t realise this thread has been a runner...
Thanks Jairaij and others for sensible answers.
Somafunk, I only wanted cables before, now I want what looks like the Starship Enterprise!!
I don’t dare ask about placing turntable on sorbothane sheets or if 180g vinyl is better..
How are you knowing where to place your absorbers? There are plenty of measurement software options using a mic at the listening position that can help.
I'd be interested in what early reflections are coming from your desk. Normally the smaller the desk the better but in reality it's a compromise between acoustics and a usuable work area.
In traditional studios the advice is often to place monitors on stands behind the mixing desk meter bridge to avoid large reflections. It's less relevant for smaller DAWs as you don't have the huge flat surface of the mixing desk. Might be worth checking though
I don’t dare ask about placing turntable on sorbothane sheets or if 180g vinyl is better..
180g... What about 220g?
https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/
molgrips
Full Member
Physics says no. Audiophiles say yes.Before you start banging on about physics, there is probably a lot about perception in the brain that we aren’t aware of. For example we know that you can’t hear sounds above 20kHz if you are young. But has anyone done any experiments on the perception of that sound?
Square waves and sine waves sound different, because a square wave is an infinite sum of odd-numbered harmonics. You can hear the harmonics but your brain interprets it as the same frequency but a different type of sound, it feels ‘harder’. And before you all start shouting this is a GCSE Physics demo, it’s very obvious.
I’d be interested to know much this changes at higher frequency. If no sound above 20kHz hd any effect then a super high frequency sine wave would sound the same as a square wave. But if they don’t, then harmomics above 20kHz would be influencing sound even if not directly perceptible. Which is something I’ve heard suggested.
buy yourself one of those 25khz dog whistles, play your music. get someone to blow it while you listen. then come back and tell us what it's doing to the music.
Speaker cables need to be sufficient to carry the signal without loss; and no more.
And...
Cable of course makes a difference, to a point, but that point is considerably lower than thirty quid an inch for platinum-coated directional wires infused with unicorn semen and hand-rolled on the coconut-oiled thigh of a Filipino virgin. Once it’s good enough it’s good enough, you ain’t gonna get more out than what goes in.
Again, where does this this discrete point appear? When is it good enough, and can't, according to @cougar and others, get better at all?
dmorts : How are you knowing where to place your absorbers?
I had a fair idea as to what I could achieve on my budget, ive spent enough time in studio's over the years to have a layman's understanding and appreciation of room acoustics but called on a friend who designs studios from scratch - from adapting garden studio builds to complete professional studios £1m+, short of building a room within a room and designing from ground up this was the most effective compromise for myself.
Room was mic'd up and swept with various frequencies to determine issues then nails were hammered into the wall to temporarily hang panels to begin with, from there using his knowledge and equipment he adjusted panel placement/height/depth and resolved problems to enable a large sweet spot in the centre of the room where my chairs sit - in a room this size and type of construction it is far from ideal/perfect but its the best that could be done on my limited budget within the timeframe. Ideally id have him build specific helmhotlz resonators for the back and front wall and design absortion/diffusion specific to the room but I don't have tens of thousands to spend so went cheap pre-made from GIK Acoustics. Once placement was decided and proper fixings were installed then the room was stripped and painted and everything was thrown back in.
And you're right, the desk is an issue for first reflection points from the monitors but the isoacoustic stands are bloody brilliant, I knew when I began planning what I wanted yet when you attempt this on a budget everything is a compromise that affects the next issue - ive got secondary progressive ms and wanted somewhere where I can sit in the perfect sweet-spot with everything to hand and limit my movement to the bare minimum, the position of the CXN v2 network streamer on the desk is not the best either but it falls to hand with minimal exertion so its another compromise positionally, and the 27" iMac is another reflection point - it sounds much better with the monitor out of the way under the desk but that's not really practical - although I have been seriously looking at a simple hydraulic ram that would sit behind the desk and raise/lower the iMac as needed.....this is perhaps a bit ott but never say never.
After all that I still had to drop the low freq response -2db @ 60Hz and -2db @ 200hz along with adding +1db @ 10KHz and +1db @ 3.5KHz to get it really sounding sweet.
Treatment of bass in a 3.3m x 4.2m room with such panels as ive used is always going to be compromised as to their efficiency, I went as far as I could but still had to apply a bit of eq to the lows/highs.
Sounds very good to my ears now though, the difference compared to how it was before is night and day. Richie Hawtin - Plastikman sounds crisp and defined and I can happily listen for hours everyday.
Everyone on this thread is an amateur.
This guy appears to have spent £6.5k each in two subwoofers and then decided his room is a bit small.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/333882237880
Again, where does this this discrete point appear? When is it good enough, and can’t, according to @cougar and others, get better at all?
It's been explained already, when the cable no longer impedes the signal.
It's like solar panels, there is a minimum energy required to get one to work, after that any excess energy is simply wasted as heat. Cables are the same, shitty ones are shitty but decent ones do the job and anything better is just wasted effort.
You're literally arguing against science. Stop it, you're making a fool of yourself.
Ok, this is what my room treatment looks like, And the cables are CAT7 which makes a difference, as 7 is better than 5…obviously (in a spinal tap fashion)😉
That's a lovely, lovely room. And I have the same chair. (-:
But, bookshelf speakers a metre apart? Sub directly under the right speaker? And CAT7 has exactly the same credence as your Spinal Tap's 11.
Two and a half grand burning a hole in your pocket, I reckon I could have made that room sound immeasurably better and saved you about two grand. You should have taken funkmasterp's advice.
Couple of points:
The 2 grand cable argument is a straw man.
It's the same shite as gravel specific saddles etc.
I haven't compared cables for ages, because with the current system it's a faff, but.......
I CAN tell the difference between QED 79 strand, Naim NAC A4, Mission Solid Core and good quality mains twin and earth.
Sorry, but I can.
The Naim is quite neutral, has a deep bass but a restricted top end.
Mission solid core/quality mains cable compresses the frequency extremes.
Solid core/mains cable became a 'must have thing' back when my ears were relatively fresh.
The difference between Naim cable and mains twin and earth cable was bloody obvious.
I can only assume that those who doubt the difference haven't actually tried it.
Yes, there is a load of shite talked about HiFi.
But most of it these days seems to be spouted by people who can't be arsed conducting a few basic experiments.
Again, where does this this discrete point appear? When is it good enough, and can’t, according to @cougar and others, get better at all?
You have a two-lane motorway. It's congested, so you expand it to a three-lane motorway and then you see traffic is flowing freely.
Where's the discrete point here then? Shall we build a four-lane motorway? Why? A 9-lane? A 47-lane? A thousand?
There is no "discrete point" because that's not how analogue works. But you don't need a pipe seven inches wide to supply a bath tap, the water ain't gonna come out any faster.
Sorry, but I can.
No you can't.
Got something to put up against my Surly, under controlled double-blind conditions?
shh, they'll be telling you they can tell the difference between 256AAC/320MP3 and FLAC next. 😆
I've offered you the opportunity to take me up on this many times over for the past ten years.
Tier 4 dude.
But, yes. Or, we could have a coffee. Whichever.
I mean, holy shit,
I could wager a power kite. I've got too many of those too.
Cougar : But, bookshelf speakers a metre apart? Sub directly under the right speaker?
Not bookshelf, they’re monitor speakers designed for near field listening which where I sit (yeah, very comfortable chair) puts me right in the sweet spot for listening, sub is also placed in the optimum spot for uniform bass response in the room and crossover is set accordingly. I prefer sensible listening volumes, loud enough to feel the bass but not obnoxious levels.
they’re monitor speakers designed for near field listening
Why have you bothered 'treating the room' then?
sub is also placed in the optimum spot for uniform bass response in the room
Honestly, I was just being spiky with the sub comment. Apologies.
Is woppit still on here?
I CAN tell the difference between QED 79 strand, Naim NAC A4, Mission Solid Core and good quality mains twin and earth.
Sorry, but I can.
Under double blind conditions?
Ok for the "when is enough enough" types; let's have an example 🙂
So; taking some bog standard 1.5mm mains cable like this (at just over £1/m)
It's got a resistance of some 13.3Ohm/km
You've got (for the sake of argument) an amp that is capable of delivering 200W to the speaker; peak power. Let's say it's a worst case (in terms of cable) and that's it's output is low voltage; but high current. Say 25V.
I = P / V - so this gives a max current of 8A.
Your speaker cable is - again reasonably worst case - 10m long; because you have a massive room and like the amp by the sofa and the speaker at the opposite end of the room.
13.30 / 100 = 0.133 Ohms of resistance in your cable.
V= I * R - so your 8A * 0.133 = 1.0664V across your cable.
P = V * I - so that 1V loss * 8A equates to about 8W lost in heating up the cable; and 192W going to your speaker; so a 4% loss.
Now; 200W is ridiculously loud. So let's go with something more reasonable; maybe 50W
now you're looking at 2A of current; for a 0.25V drop across the cable and 0.5W power loss - which is ~1% loss.
So, I'd be totally happy using these for a home setup; power loss is negligible at reasonable power levels; and the 8W at 200W actually isn't terrible. The reality is an amp outputting 200W would probably have a much higher output voltage and a lower current; which would reduce losses compared to these calcs.
Over to the rest of you 😀
It's not about power loss. There are many things at work here that I'm probably not aware of but I think that the inductance and capacitance of the cable run are more significant than the impedance alone, because they will create a small tank circuit that will attenuate certain frequencies.
You’re literally arguing against science.
It always makes me laugh when people say this. You are arguing with the science that you know about. You probably aren't aware of all of the science that spans electrical engineering, material engineering, neurology and psychology, and even if you did you'd only know about the things known to those branches of science. Audiophilia isn't exactly a top priority for psychological research so there could easily be a lot going on that we don't know about (and don't start banging on about placebos whenever someone mentions psychology - we know, ok?).
I don't know how anyone who knows about science, particularly its history, can bang on the table shouting BUT SCIENCE! in these arguments. Science isn't a complete description of the universe, it's a description of what we currently know.
It's absolutely about power loss; in a "when is enough enough" discussion.
Losses / "colouring" due to frequency response are close to zero for audio frequencies in these kinds of cables.
I will forever remain sceptical that there are significant, even measurable, differences between something like the cable I posted and "audiophile" cables costing orders of magnitude more.
I too am sceptical.
The link is interesting as it clearly shows there is an effect on frequency response. He then goes onto say it's inaudible, unfortunately without a reference.
I'd like to see the same experiment repeated with other cables.
Why have you bothered ‘treating the room’ then?
You can still get strong 'early' reflections with nearfield monitors.
I used to be into all of this, I did a master's degree in acoustics, then got married, had kids..... you need space to have a decent setup.
From what I remember the most favourable concept was removing all strong early reflections from the surfaces in the room, but allowing later, more diffuse reflections. This is called a RFZ (Reflection Free Zone) room. This gave you accuracy in reproduction but the later, diffuse reflections made it more comfortable to work in and not like an anechoic chamber. It's like Live End, Dead End but better.
I had a fair idea as to what I could achieve on my budget
Good, it can definitely get out of hand!
Ideally id have him build specific helmhotlz resonators for the back and front wall
The trouble with helmholtz is they have to be built very accurately, especially if just targeting one low frequency mode. As part of my masters I looked at using a 12" speaker as a low frequency helmholtz-type absorber. It works in the lab. I built an enclosure for the loudspeaker of a certain volume to target a specific frequency. But because it's an electro-mechanical system, you can fine tune its resonance by adding a network of resistors and capacitors across the loudspeaker terminals.
molgrips
Full Member
I don’t know how anyone who knows about science, particularly its history, can bang on the table shouting BUT SCIENCE! in these arguments. Science isn’t a complete description of the universe, it’s a description of what we currently know.
Speaker cables aren't a frontier of science. 😆
Why have you bothered ‘treating the room’ then?
treating a room is fine, every room has a different acoustic signature, so that can and will have noticeable differences. You can test that for yourself, just walk in to each room in your house and speak, you'll hear your voice sounds audilbly different in each room.
And you don't need spidey senses to hear it. 😆
Speaker cables aren’t a frontier of science. 😆
Have you not heard of Prof. Brian Cox, audio cable physicist? 😆
You can test that for yourself, just walk in to each room in your house and speak, you’ll hear your voice sounds audilbly different in each room.
And you don’t need spidey senses to hear it. 😆
Oh for sure, Bathrooms typically have a very noticable echo, due to all the surfaces being hard and reflective. A typical living room with lots of soft furnishings, not so much, assuming it's not a laminate floor.
I think there's definatley a happy medium/law of dininishing returns before you start covering every available surface in cardboard egg boxes though.
@molgrips - to be fair; he says the difference is 0.17dB @ 20kHz
Given it's almost impossible to notice differences below 1dB; and 20kHz is at the upper end of most peoples perception; Whatever effect that may have I think we can agree it's going to be pretty minimal.
stevehine
1dB; and 20kHz is at the upper end of most peoples perception;
I'd be surprised if anyone on this thread hears much above 15/16khz tbh.
Personally, my 43 year old, headphone damaged ears, canny hear a sine wave above 13k. 😆
ransos
Free Member
I CAN tell the difference between QED 79 strand, Naim NAC A4, Mission Solid Core and good quality mains twin and earth.
Sorry, but I can.
Under double blind conditions?
No, but I'm willing to try. 🙂
You bring the pizza, the beer and a shedload of banana plugs. 🙃
I could hear a 20khz tone (only just about perceptible) a few years back using an audio test CD. Probably not now.
mattyfez
Free Member
You can test that for yourself, just walk in to each room in your house and speak, you’ll hear your voice sounds audilbly different in each room.And you don’t need spidey senses to hear it. 😆
Oh for sure, Bathrooms typically have a very noticable echo, due to all the surfaces being hard and reflective. A typical living room with lots of soft furnishings, not so much, assuming it’s not a laminate floor.
I think there’s definatley a happy medium/law of dininishing returns before you start covering every available surface in cardboard egg boxes though.
defo, but there is obviously perceptible differences in different rooms though, as you illustrate. So it's fair do's, how far people take it is up to them mind.
How did this get to 158 posts when the answer is "no"?
Marketing. 😆