Jump to content
IGNORED

Cable differences are real


mansr

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, manisandher said:

 

'Microgravity', not 'zero g' - common misconception 😏

 

Mani.

Facts like that don't matter for real high end products. Never have. Zero g I say and that makes it true. If you don't believe me, listen and hear for yourself. The way to accomplish that is proprietary.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, mansr said:

That would be a fair assumption, but in this instance it isn't entirely accurate.

 

Yes, jackets diameter and jacket color with tongue firmly in cheek ... but more realistically, the cable length could affect reflections etc ... that said I’m not going to compute nodes in my head 😂

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Arpiben said:

Clear that you didn't use any directional coupler, thanks.

Direct from AFG Output (BNC F) to RF Input (N F) it is simply not possible without adaptors.

On top of RF Input N->BNC  adaptor you probably also used  banana/BNC and RCA/BNC ones.

I obviously used adaptors as required, N-BNC and BNC-RCA, all 50 Ω. The AFG output and RF input are both 50 Ω as well.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, MetalNuts said:

 

I knew the difference can be measured someday.  Notwithstanding, some people may still maintain their view, ignore the data and laugh at people who can hear the difference.

Since Heaviside did the telegraphers equations based on Maxwell's work around 1870, cables have been studied extensively, I don't think they are going to find something new for audio, look what we can do with cables these days, transmit signals in the GHz with no problems...

What data, sighted hearing is not data....

Link to comment

Longer cables will have greater losses at the high frequency range. So the nice smooth graphs with greater sloping at the end will be the longer ones. I went through this Saturday night (after a beer or two it seemed like a good idea) just cant find what I wrote.

I suspect the 11 is the zip chord, Audioquest is probably 9...

8 puzzles me... that's quite a dip.

Fun anyway, reminds me of some cable measurement for speaker cables and standard RCA IC's, differences could be measured but apart from the odd bespoke audiophile cable, all differences were way down in the low dB (inaudible).

 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Arpiben said:

Add a directional coupler  and a reference load for calibration, then sine sweep in the desired frequency range and you will get the Return Loss ( VSWR ) curve. 😉 

 

There's some nice info on return loss here: https://ar-t.co/geekspeak.html. (I own a Legato USB-spdif converter, which I think is great, albeit only 16/44.1-capable.)

 

Mani.

Main: SOtM sMS-200 -> Okto dac8PRO -> 6x Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Tune Audio Anima horns + 2x Rotel RB-1590 amps -> 4 subs

Home Office: SOtM sMS-200 -> MOTU UltraLite-mk5 -> 6x Neurochrome 286 mono amps -> Impulse H2 speakers

Vinyl: Technics SP10 / London (Decca) Reference -> Trafomatic Luna -> RME ADI-2 Pro

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, mansr said:

It doesn't have a sine sweep option. I guess they want you to buy a separate AFG for a full feature set.

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

It doesn't have a sine sweep option. I guess they want you to buy a separate AFG for a full feature set.

1 hour ago, marce said:

Longer cables will have greater losses at the high frequency range. So the nice smooth graphs with greater sloping at the end will be the longer ones. I went through this Saturday night (after a beer or two it seemed like a good idea) just cant find what I wrote.

I suspect the 11 is the zip chord, Audioquest is probably 9...

8 puzzles me... that's quite a dip.

Fun anyway, reminds me of some cable measurement for speaker cables and standard RCA IC's, differences could be measured but apart from the odd bespoke audiophile cable, all differences were way down in the low dB (inaudible).

 

 

Indeed case 8 is presenting an almost 14 dB dip @ 47 MHz. 

Assuming a cable propagation around 5 ns per meter (coax).

In principle the measured cable should have a length between 2-3 meters  or be damaged at 2-3 meter from RF Input.

Let us wait for the results.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, mansr said:

It doesn't have a sine sweep option. I guess they want you to buy a separate AFG for a full feature set.

 

Indeed and sometimes options are quite expensive compared to naked test equipment.

I should have one Tektronix similar to yours at workplace, I will verify tomorrow. I may even check a few RG58 with external AFG and share when time will allow.

I am not doubting at all in your measurements, my questions were raised because your post trigger my curiosity. I am used with Return Loss measurements but at much higher frequencies and different type of 'cables', cf picture. I needed to refresh my memory back to such low frequencies. Rgds.

 

 

t006_r00442_v3.jpg.06aaedf607a109bf9472cf9e350465f8.jpg

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, marce said:

Longer cables will have greater losses at the high frequency range. So the nice smooth graphs with greater sloping at the end will be the longer ones. I went through this Saturday night (after a beer or two it seemed like a good idea) just cant find what I wrote.

I suspect the 11 is the zip chord, Audioquest is probably 9...

8 puzzles me... that's quite a dip.

Fun anyway, reminds me of some cable measurement for speaker cables and standard RCA IC's, differences could be measured but apart from the odd bespoke audiophile cable, all differences were way down in the low dB (inaudible).

 

 

I just re-read the descriptions and noticed that the zip cord is 13m long. On that basis, I would agree with you and presume it's #11 (or perhaps #9). Could be wrong though. Will be very interesting to see the full results!

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, mansr said:

The best part about that zip cord is that I ordered 10 m. After using some of it, there's still 13 m left. Thanks, Farnell.

 

Must be an MQA cord...😋

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment

The biggie that is generally ignored is handling noise - yes, people will say this is too far down to matter, but every system I've been involved with has always needed this area to be considered. As an example, on the last visit to the local audio friend we lost quality at one stage - going in circles for a bit - then I noticed that an external cable had lost its normal spacing layer, because of interaction with the components.

Link to comment
Just now, Sonicularity said:

How can I verify that all of my external cables find their normal spacing layer?  Is there anything I can measure to get an accurate sense of the interaction between the cable and components?  If not, what would I listen for so I could identify any problems?

 

Apparently you have to "go in circles for a bit".

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...