What is it about most audiophile cable designs that make cables sound like Tone Controls?

[ssfas]

@Wavetouch I know a lot of people won't agree with me and I'm not going to try to change your mind.

I generally agree with your comment and the principle that the best cable is no cable at all, which is why I’ve often favoured integrated systems with a few components as possible. No cable ever added anything, it only ever takes away. Different power cables can have different shielding and different methods of noise, dissipation, which can affect the component. They are providing power to. There are, of course practical considerations such as flexibility, one of the reasons why I use Puritan cables.

There are no golden rules for analog cables and they can behave differently based on their design characteristics. The science behind this is long established (L, R and C to start). There is a new kid on the block that is certain to win a Nobel prize for being able to turn base metals into superconductors. The reason being that no less than five Nobel prizes have already been awarded for superconductor theory, including its initial discovery, but nothing as dramatic as this claim. Given given that the highest operating temperature of a copper-based superconductor is about -150 C, I would recommend handling super conductor cables with a pair of barbecue tongs or something similar.



When I opened this thread, I noticed that of the seven banner advertisements at the top they were all for cables. This reminded me that there is one thing that cables add, and that’s about 30% to any audio manufacturer’s gross profit margin. There are few manufacturers who can resist the financial lure of jumping on this particular bandwagon.

 

[treitz3]

All power cables (PC) degrade the sound quality. The good PC degrades SQ little. The bad PC degrades SQ a lot. The sound of perfect PC is the original music.

I don't think all PCs sound alike. All hi-end PCs sound different. Even same model and brand PCs made in a same day sound different each other because no one knows how to make a proper audio PC. All PCs in the world aren't made properly except my PCs.

Hello and good morning to you, sir. With all due respect, I'd like to remind you of one of the TOS of this forum.

9. Where possible, please avoid generalizations which create heated arguments. Please don’t say “all amps sound the same” but rather, “all the amps I have heard sound the same to me.” Following this rule not only makes for a calmer atmosphere, but also saves you hours and days of aggravation while you try to defend your point of view!

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

www.whatsbestforum.com

Your statement (highlighted in bold within the above quote) is the example I am referring too.

Tom

 

[Vinyl Valet]

I use mid-priced WireWorld cables since their design goal from the beginning has been to be as neutral as possible. With them installed, if I still hear an issue, I fix it elsewhere rather than using a colored cable as a band-aid. I generally find that it's a speaker and/or listening position or other acoustically related issue. Of course, optimizing AC, network and component isolation is important before I go off trying to solve subtle sound quality issues.
With that said, I've never heard big differences between different brands of cables like many audiophiles do or claim to do.

 

[Carlsbad]

@treitz3 My apologies. I have deleted the offesive post.
Jerry

 

[ssfas]

Don't think you said anything offensive.

The irony of the superconductor claim, and others like it, is the reference to "conductivity". The primary factors in analog cable design are inductance, capacitance and resistance - a common aim is to reduce inductance as low as possible without much increased capacitance. Townsend get extremely low inductance with very high capacitance, which they counter with a Zobel network, and their cables have been popular for 40+ years. So if conductivity is reference to resistance, it's a bit off the mark.

I tend to think that if a cable has stood the test of time, and I'm talking decades.

 

[Wavetouch]

@treitz3 My apologies. I have deleted the offensive line. I'll remember your kind advise.

 

[Atmasphere]

Does anyone understand what it is about most cable designs that audiophile cables are used as tone controls? Can an audiophile cable not be a tone control?

As quick examples, let me pick on a couple of the "bigger guys": Nordost seems to have high resolution but lacks bass while Transparent has more robust bass, and these are then recommended by dealers to solve these types of problems

Thanks in advance

You'll find that the lower the output impedance of your source (or preamp output) the less effect the cable will have in your system.

The reason we produced a balanced line preamp instead of single-ended was so that we could get away from cable interactions. I knew Robert Fulton back in the late 1970s- more than anyone else he founded the high end cable industry. But I also played in various orchestras, which often got recorded. So I heard how balanced lines really were completely neutral; when it came time to add a preamp to our lineup, we produced a balanced line preamp so as to allow the customer to not have expensive cables and still get the best performance possible.

But in order to do this, the balanced equipment must support the balanced line standard. You'll note there is no standard for RCA cables... The balanced standard prevents ground loops and prevents cables from having an effect on the sound. So our preamps have always supported that standard (part of which is known as AES48).

It never occurred to us to not support the standard. But in the decades since we started producing our balanced products, we've seen that many manufacturers went ahead and ignored it. This has generated a debate about which is better. If the equipment is set up right and the balanced line standards are observed, I found there is no going back. Its like having the best cables ever and not having to worry about them any more.

 

[Ron Resnick]

You'll find that the lower the output impedance of your source (or preamp output) the less effect the cable will have in your system.

I understand this.

Why would the high frequency roll-off of a high capacitance cable be neutralized by balanced inputs and balanced cables?

 

[Atmasphere]

I understand this.

Why would the high frequency roll-off of a high capacitance cable be neutralized by balanced inputs and balanced cables?

If the balanced line standard is observed, then the source driving the cable will generate its pin 2 output with respect to pin 3 and vice versa, rather than ground. So while capacitance to the shield might be fairly high, the capacitance between the twisted pair within the shield is lower.

If the balanced source is referencing ground and if its output impedance is fairly high, then all bets are off- such a source might not be able to drive cables any longer than a single-ended source might, or maybe even less!

Part of the balanced standard is low impedance drive capacity. In the old (tube) days, the standard input impedance was 600 Ohms for line level. In those days if you saw an XLR output, it was assumed it could drive 600 Ohms. Since we were building the first balanced line products for home stereo use, we assumed our preamps had to be able to drive such a load and they do (even though they are tube).

I've harped a lot about AES48 which is the balanced connection standard, but the low impedance aspect is nearly as important, as the low impedance swamps smaller effects like cable capacitance, inductance, insulation dielectrics and so on: the things that otherwise dictate how a cable will 'sound'.

 

[Ron Resnick]

If the balanced line standard is observed, then the source driving the cable will generate its pin 2 output with respect to pin 3 and vice versa, rather than ground. So while capacitance to the shield might be fairly high, the capacitance between the twisted pair within the shield is lower.

If the balanced source is referencing ground and if its output impedance is fairly high, then all bets are off- such a source might not be able to drive cables any longer than a single-ended source might, or maybe even less!

Part of the balanced standard is low impedance drive capacity. In the old (tube) days, the standard input impedance was 600 Ohms for line level. In those days if you saw an XLR output, it was assumed it could drive 600 Ohms. Since we were building the first balanced line products for home stereo use, we assumed our preamps had to be able to drive such a load and they do (even though they are tube).

I've harped a lot about AES48 which is the balanced connection standard, but the low impedance aspect is nearly as important, as the low impedance swamps smaller effects like cable capacitance, inductance, insulation dielectrics and so on: the things that otherwise dictate how a cable will 'sound'.

I understand.

Thank you very much, Ralph!

 

[Wavetouch]

New live recording.

 

[Dogberry]

I have bought cables as expensive as I cared to acquire (2k speaker cables, and 1k interconnects) and then replaced them with the cheapest eBay cables. I don't suppose anyone cares to know if I could hear any difference?

 

[Wavetouch]

I have bought cables as expensive as I cared to acquire (2k speaker cables, and 1k interconnects) and then replaced them with the cheapest eBay cables. I don't suppose anyone cares to know if I could hear any difference?

I am very interested. What did you find?

 

[Dogberry]

I could not hear any difference! And believe me, I'm mad about that!

 

[Wavetouch]

I believe you. Though I believe every cables sound different, but almost cables and audio systems sound veil/glare which masks the real sound behind veils.

What are your speakers? Were you able to return expensive cables?

 

[Dogberry]

Speakers are Quad ESL2905. Currently the power amps are sitting right beside them, and to use a eight foot cable that's as thick as a banana seems daft when I need less than one foot. I bought them a long time ago, but they still conduct!

(not my photo, but same Monster Sigma 2, these are 15ft))

There was a period a couple of years ago when my amps were off for capacitor upgrades and I went back to using my old Quad 34/306 combo and I remembered how they used to come with little skinny interconnects just a foot long There was even a stand that the 34, FM4 and 306 could be mounted in making them look like a modern kitchen stereo which could only fit the little interconnects:

(again, not my photo as I don't have the rack)

So, thinking if it was good enough for Peter Walker it would be good enough for me, I addressed the tangle of cables behind the components between my turntables with cheapo skinny interconnects from Amazon. The result was that there was less of a rat's nest there, and I couldn't hear any difference in sound! I had been using Atlas Navigator All-Cu cables, and the place where I find I still need them is on the longer runs from pre-amp to power amps. Skinny un-shielded cables pick up hum there.

Chris

 

[treitz3]

Oh, I'd love to give feedback....I will refrain.

Tom

 

[A-Line]

Then there cables like Purist Audio that act as filter, but that's whole new thread by itself..