Jump to content
IGNORED

Those who own Audioquest cable...what do you think?


Recommended Posts

Perhaps, but we don't know for sure what the video sounded like BEFORE suffering the horrible Youtube compression !

 

D-Tronics or AQ could make the fully uncompressed video available for download. But for you maybe they will fly out with the master recording and burn it to a CD on your system ;-)

Link to comment
Recently swapped my Audioquest Vodka 10M and .75M to the new Nordost Heimdall 2. Using a network connection between a NAS to Router and Router to Aurender. All I can say is Tidal sounds much better now. I particularly hear it in the bass more but in general the sound is more complete. I have tried A/B with local content and although streaming is not as good it just got much closer with this upgrade. At the time Nordost did not have a network cable so took a shot with Audioquest. Fortunately my son is just getting started so he will get the AQ cables.

 

 

I've got $1600 that says I can fly out with a layer 3 switch and a client and server computer with dual NICS. Setup a LAG that lets me swap cables at will with zero interruption in the play back and you will crash and burn.

 

It's time to put this bullshit with SQ of Ethernet to bed.

 

I'll bring the BJC cables and what ever cables you have would need to at least be thrown on a certification analyzer.

 

Let me know and I'll PM you all the pertinent details.

Link to comment
How do you think I feel. I spent real money for AQ products. Including some rather expensive for the time (though not even middle priced in the current environment).

 

I think I could have drawn up some more believable responses versus what he did. Some that would have went over better as well. So partly the boiling pot of snake oil combined with an attitude he need not even bother with anything better. I don't think he did himself any favours. He has lots more money than me though, so maybe that makes me the dummy.

 

If you haven't seen post # 111

 

You should. ACK just owned Bill Low / AudioQuest in one post. He pointed out the circular logic and ultimate hypocrisy.

Link to comment
If some of you guys spent as much time listening to stereo equipment, as you do arguing about it, threads like this wouldn't be necessary.

 

I found out by shear oddity years ago I can have music playing and type all at the same time. I'm telling you it was a fluke and the obviousness of it hit me like a bolt of thunder ;-) (yes I understood what I just typed, it's a joke and relax).

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
a) you are saying that the differences in sound between cables is or might be due to an as yet undiscovered physics that will alter quantum electrodynamics and change the very understanding of the world as we know it? are you suggesting this is possible?

 

b) the placebo effect is real, very very real.

 

Remember that we can send men to the moon, color photos back from Pluto, smash Atoms together and prove theories 100 years old but the entire science establishment is staring at 3 foot section of extremely limited bandwidth cable with abject bafflement about people hearing sighted differences with cables that measure either identically or well with in the margin of error.

Link to comment
While it is possible that there might be some as yet undiscovered physics that might explain interconnect sound, it is also pretty highly unlikely. And while I won't close the door on such a possibility completely, I have to point out that if such an unknown quantity did exist, then it's affect on areas of electronics other than just a low-frequency signal like audio would have surely been noticed by someone somewhere by now. IOW, the chance of such a phenomenon altering only the sound of electrically transmitted music, and nothing else, would seem to be all but impossible.

 

That's just crazy talk.

Link to comment
I'm just trying to share something with others here on this forum in my journey. No more or no less.

 

Not trying to imply I am better than anyone in anything at all. Quite the contrary, I have seen an improvement over the years of being able to distinguish real changes from not real changes.

 

It's really not that big a deal.

 

Are you showing at Axpona?

Link to comment
Really? Do tell. So you are saying that it's crazy of me to say that it is unlikely that there could be some as yet unknown characteristic of wire that is so special that it affects ONLY musical waveforms while ignoring all other analog signals? Wow!

 

Text does not convey the tone. I'm in complete agreement with you. I.E. You're making too much sense i.e. "That's just crazy talk".

 

Remember if you bring too much logic to the conversation they'll start asking for you to be banned.

Link to comment
Don't you understand? What we have hear might be called the "reverse placebo effect" that these objectivists continually suffer from. Even if they hear actual differences, they reject them as being real unless they can be confirmed by measurements or double blind tests. It is an article of faith that their ears cannot be trusted. :)

 

That's a 'way out there' thought. This entire thread is predicated on what Mark Waldrep of AIX Records heard. A (subjective) difference of HDMI cables in a potential AQ marketing video and then measured the audio (objective) and confirmed his subjective observation with objective data.

 

Come to find out they messed with the audio in post production.

Link to comment

There can be a lot of data available:

 

Belden RG6 (1694a):

 

Nom. Characteristic Impedance:

Impedance (Ohm)

75

 

Nom. Inductance:

Inductance (μH/ft)

0.106

 

Nom. Capacitance Conductor to Shield:

Capacitance (pF/ft)

16.2

 

Nominal Velocity of Propagation:

VP (%)

82

 

Nominal Delay:

Delay (ns/ft)

1.24

 

Nom. Conductor DC Resistance:

DCR @ 20°C (Ohm/1000 ft)

6.4

 

Nominal Outer Shield DC Resistance:

DCR @ 20°C (Ohm/1000 ft)

2.8

 

Nom. Attenuation:

Freq. (MHz) Attenuation (dB/100 ft.)

1.000 0.240

3.580 0.440

5.000 0.520

6.000 0.570

7.000 0.610

10.000 0.710

12.000 0.780

25.000 1.080

67.500 1.650

71.500 1.690

88.500 1.860

100.000 1.950

135.000 2.240

143.000 2.300

180.000 2.570

270.000 3.170

360.000 3.690

540.000 4.600

720.000 5.380

750.000 5.500

1000.000 6.420

1500.000 7.990

2000.000 9.370

2250.000 10.010

3000.000 11.780

4500.000 14.920

 

Max. Operating Voltage - UL:

Voltage

300 V RMS

 

Start Freq. (MHz) Stop Freq. (MHz) Min. RL (dB)

5.000 1600.000 23.000

1600.000 4500.000 21.000

 

Sweep Test

Sweep Testing: 100% Sweep tested 5 MHz to 4.5 GHz.

Link to comment
Yes, I have listened to radio frequencies picked up by cables (called "antennas" when they are intentionally used for this purpose) and conducted into electronics many thousands of times.

 

Actually you are listening to the demodulated information embedded in the fixed frequency carrier.

 

It's like my dialing up your cell phone with a fax machine and having you listen with pencil and paper at hand so you can write out my pizza order :)

Link to comment
Except:

 

1. People do hear differences in cables, often repeatable.

2. They are not hearing imaginary differences.

3. What is causing the difference?

 

We know what it is not - it is not massive differences in LCR. It is also, not imagination.

 

Conundrum - which always means one thing. There is some factor there we are missing.

 

-Paul

 

Where are these write ups at?

Link to comment
Since the RF band includes all commonly used digital sampling rates, just wondering what the possible effects in a DAC might be.

 

Understand that I am not pretending to have technical knowledge and was simply throwing out responses off the top of my head to mansr's question, which was how cables with identical LCR measurements could possibly sound different.

 

The first thing I thought of was behavior with respect to noise and interference. Would you say that cables cannot differ in regard to such behavior, or that noise and interference need not be taken into account?

 

They should be nill because the sensitive parts should be in an rf cage/oven.

Link to comment
So a well shielded cable is a waste of money?

 

And the same with regard to crosstalk - shielding or insulating conductors from each other is a waste?

 

Not at all. I have a roll of Monoprice mic cable that I use for all my RCA and Balanced assemblies. 18AWG and 98% braided copper shield with drain wire.

 

Really well constructed and not cost prohibitive.

Link to comment
Then obviously you don't have a signal chain that benefits from having continuity of the 0 volts (earth) connection from Power Amplifier, through the Preamplifier, then extended to the source component which can result in very low S/N if the design of the actual components is first rate.

 

I'll refer you to the RANE engineering notes. I don't have a pre-amp. I'm straight from Balanced out on my PCIe sound card to amp.

 

Sound System Interconnection

Link to comment
Then obviously you don't have a signal chain that benefits from having continuity of the 0 volts (earth) connection from Power Amplifier, through the Preamplifier, then extended to the source component which can result in very low S/N if the design of the actual components is first rate.

 

How would you know what my setup is like? That's a rather entitled post to make with zero facts.

Link to comment
I apologize for the irritation of asking a million questions, but I don't know the answers and I'd like to.

 

What's the reasoning behind calling for shielding in the balanced spec? Is there an equivalent spec for single-ended, and if so why is no shielding or a floating shield OK?

 

I would start by taking a coffee break and reading the RANE notes on this. The shield on balanced wires is because ground is 0 voltage and all the noise can be shunted there without any effect on the -/+ pairs.

 

SE connections work and they can work well. They are not optimal technically speaking.

Link to comment
Then obviously you don't have a signal chain that benefits from having continuity of the 0 volts (earth) connection from Power Amplifier, through the Preamplifier, then extended to the source component which can result in very low S/N if the design of the actual components is first rate.

 

I don't need to read your RANE engineering notes. My reply was in response to this statement from you .

 

 

And again I will state: How do you know what my setup is? I have a total of one SE cable. That is my Home Theater (I have dedicated 2.0) sub woofer.

 

Goes from my AVR to a Art Clean Box Pro (active isolation transformer) to a Crown XTi 4002 to four 12" subs.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...