Cable burn in?

[Chuck]

rough heels?

Yeah, I'm an old guy like you 
Colorado Spings has an arid climate, so I need the moisturizer.

I believe in using good cables too.

[Chuck]

rough heels?

Yeah, I'm an old guy like you 
Colorado Spings has an arid climate, so I need the moisturizer.

I believe in using good cables too.

When I say "good cables" I mean $100 good, not $10,000 good 

[BobW]

heh-heh,  he said annulus   

[Javier Cinakowski]

Thanks to everyone in this thread.  It's been an education.  Im not sure I have an opinion, but a cable is a cable.   

[SparkE!]

The skin effect is talking about paralleling several smaller wires to form a large conductor. It was discovered by Tesla I agree with the skin effect I think it is better to have several smaller conductors form a larger one infect its impossible to find solid conductors that are 2ga in use as speaker wire anywhere So I would say that it is a fundamental of conductor theory. And widely accepted that as the frequency changes so does the flow of electrons across a conductor change its location. This was part of the fundamental theory for the magic hi pass low pass speaker cable but, what they failed to realize is part of the skin effect states that a frequency of say 60hz will move to the outside of the conductor by say as much as 50% to 60% but how does the low frequency know what wire to piggyback onto? This is the magic part of the magic cable that can not be explained by anyone to my satisfaction

Current bunching is a newly discovered effect of the flow of current and it is what it says it is current that bunches up in a conductor there have been studies using plasma as a conductor an a luminance technique was employed to see the phenomenon it exists. But how have the cable crackpots been able to fix it there are theories that changing the geometry of a conductor will decrease current bunching and the skin effect only one problem with this theory NO ONE HAS BEEN ABLE TO SHOW IT IN REAL LIFE.

I guess if they say they have done it we should just take them at there word right? I think NOT. also they now claim (these same cable voodoo guys) that impedance and capacitance no longer mater in a conductor because they have solved all the problems with there geometry Have they changed the laws of physics while there were at it that says in every conductor this is an opposition to the flow of electrons referred to as resistance or impedance? I guess its like jack and his magic beans No one has seen them but yet some of us still believe lol not me.

If you can not measure it and graph it and put in on paper then it's a theory and theories are just that. Some people use them to create the illusion of a great product I say show me the proof if you can't show me the proof how do you know it works in the first place??


Chris Church 

what are your thoughts on current bunching and the skin effect?

Chris, skin effect doesn't have anything to do with paralleling smaller wires to form a large conductor, except that some people use that method to combat the effects of the skin effect.  Skin effect is, in laymen's terms, the tendency for AC current to concentrate itself near the surface of a conductor that carries it.  The higher the frequency, the closer to the surface of the conductor that the AC current runs.  Some people use multistrand cable composed of individually insulated wires to form a larger conductor that is less susceptible to the skin effect.  The magnitude of the effect and its effect on the phase response of the cable are mathematically tedious to compute and these effects tend to be quite small, but predictable, at audio frequencies.  For one of the best descriptions that I've seen of skin effect at audio frequencies and the related effects of conductor diameter and spacing on audio frequency electrical signals, go to this link:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/skineffect/page1.html

Please note that this is a 5 page article, so be sure to look through all 5 pages.  Also pay attention to the geatly expanded magnitude  scales shown.  For reference, an attenuation of .01 dB amounts to reduction in signal amplitude to 99.77% of the original amplitude.  Also notice how extremely small of a difference there is between silver and copper in terms of their conductance per meter.  Then start to realize that one skin depth at 10 kHz is a little over 1/2 cm, but people silver plate copper cable only to a depth of perhaps a couple thousandths of an inch (about 1/20th of a mm), so unless you are using really thin wires, the silver plating has very little effect on frequency dependent attenuation.  It's probably arguable that you could notice a slight benefit by using 100% silver cable, but the difference of using silver plated copper cable vs. plain copper cable is going to be imperceptible for any reasonable length of cable.   You could tell the difference if you ran a mile of cable, but that's not something that people are likely to do.  You'll get more loss in a 10 foot run due to body oils that you inadvertently leave on the cable terminations than you'll get from not using plated cable.

Also on this same site is a good introductory discussion of transmission line theory and other relevant topics if you are trying to understand the validity of the various claims made by cable makers.  For those other topics, you'll want to go here:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/Analog.html

[balou2]

...damn...should've turned left at Albequerque.

Overall point in my mind?  If someone wants to spend the time and money to increase their recording/playback quality, lett'em.  Period.  No science, no analysis, no shit.  If you're spending $1000 on cables and haven't done your homework, you deserve to get shafted.  All cables are new at some point, so "burn-in" is an inevitable reality.

I will likely be purchasing new cables in the near future (likely from Chris Shepherd in fact).  These will likely be the Atlas All Cu Navigator cables.  I will specifically request that the cables ship UNTAINTED (i.e. never having current run through them) and make a reference recording on my home stereo as the first thing they see.  After that, I'll burn'em in, and run the same test, under the same conditions:

• Same termperature
• Same recording
• Same time of day
• 
  
  • Every possible controllable aspect will be in place, and short of a clean room or vacuum, it should be closely enough constructed.
    
  [pulls out soap box]
  
  Regardless of all of this, I think it would be more valuable if the tone of peoples' posts were steady.  I value nearly EVERY persons' view who posts on this site...at least most of them.  What I don't value is the name calling, or judgement-passing that some folks offer up just because they have differing opinions.  Even when name calling is not directed at someone specifically, throwing out an insult based on a generalization could offend other folks who actually DO what the insulter is bagging on.  That sucks.  Debate is good...even healthy disagreements are good...but damn folks, sometimes a subject just needs to be dropped.  So...everybody...just fuck off.  
  
  [off soap box]
  
  Back to the Clipper's game.
  miike
  
  

[F.O.Bean]

Debate is good...even healthy disagreements are good...but damn folks, sometimes a subject just needs to be dropped.  So...everybody...just fuck off. 

[Brian Skalinder]

Interesting (in a painful sort of way) discussion.

Chris, I think the only way to ensure you get the test YOU want is for YOU to do it.  Don't expect other people to do it for you.  Either <a> do it yourself or <b> let it go.

$0.02

[SparkE!]

Brian, are there any of your 24 bit recordings up on archive.org that would have a good 5 to 10 second section that would be suitable for testing cables?  Eddie from Ohio has some good vocal sections, but your notes indicate that it's 44.1/16 and that there is wind noise from a fan.  Maybe something from My Morning Jacket, 2006-04-22?  Maybe some Josh Ritter from the night before that?  You've got some great recordings of Goran Ivanovic Group, but they are so different from the norm.

[Brian Skalinder]

Brian, are there any of your 24 bit recordings up on archive.org that would have a good 5 to 10 second section that would be suitable for testing cables?  Eddie from Ohio has some good vocal sections, but your notes indicate that it's 44.1/16 and that there is wind noise from a fan.  Maybe something from My Morning Jacket, 2006-04-22?  Maybe some Josh Ritter from the night before that?  You've got some great recordings of Goran Ivanovic Group, but they are so different from the norm.

I think the recording itself is secondary, we really need to agree on the methodology first.  If everyone agrees with Chris' suggestion (edited slightly) of digital source > DAC > cables in test > ADC > digital recorder, then just about any reasonably good sounding recording will do the trick.  EFO probably isn't a good choice since it's all folk, and I flubbed it by not running my windscreens, anyway.  I'd skip MMJ 4/22/06 since it was recorded in a gym off a crappy sound system.  The Josh Ritter recording would do the trick since it's a full band, one of the upbeat numbers would probably work best.  Or MMJ from 10/22/2005 Vic Theatre would work, too, though maybe not everybody prefers the sound of subcards.  Or maybe the WSP samples I used for my dither comparison (available at tapers.org in the gear_comparison directory, l/p = tapers4all/tapers4all).  Or...any number of nice recordings on LMA of which I'm not aware.

But you know, as I think about it, Chris is probably right in that a studio CD would work well.  No audience recording off a small club PA will provide full range, while a properly selected studio recording - even better one with which most people are familiar - will certainly do so.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

Good to see so many interested in this comp. Some bickering is natural..

Regarding test sources, I would suggest a source which has a wide and deep soundstage with several distrinctly imaged performers.  Generally, that implies non-PA.  I suppose a studio cd would work but do we really want a source that isn't a two microphone recording with a natural soundstage (vs. mixer created)?   We may want to avoid sources with copyright issues that might complicate hosting/distro of the results down the road.

[SparkE!]

I can kickdown some classical, if anyone is interested. Maybe some of the Hutchins Consort. They're massively wide, acoustic, and the frequency range represented is totally complete (as much as acoustic music can be complete).

Great!  All I need is a short 5 to 10 second segment of high quality, broad spectrum audio that would be listenable to a wide range of people.  I just want to make sure that people are responding to the differences they hear in the recordings and not to the musical style of the source material itself.  I can provide you with a place to upload it via PMs or I can pull it from an FTP or HTTP site if that works for you.

[SparkE!]

Let me poke around a bit, and see what I can find.

Thanks!  I really appreciate this.  I just don't have any sources that I consider to be of high enough quality or that I think will have a broad enough appeal to be appropriate for this type of test.  I've got recordings that I think are very good, but it's hard for me to honestly say that they will have broad appeal among the diverse group of people on this board.

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

I don't think anyone gets my point so I am just going to not post.

Taking some time away to research those anecdotal reports I directed you towards? 

Edit:  and just so I'm not a complete class clown, here's a post from a guy who hears differences in cables and I would take bets that his hearing is better than the hearing of anyone who has posted in this thread.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1147806702&read&3&4&;

[eric.B]

I don't think anyone gets my point so I am just going to not post.

Taking some time away to research those anecdotal reports I directed you towards? 

Edit:  and just so I'm not a complete class clown, here's a post from a guy who hears differences in cables and I would take bets that his hearing is better than the hearing of anyone who has posted in this thread.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1147806702&read&3&4&;

from the thread you referenced..  I love this post..

05-17-06: Jaybo
don't laugh, but with most well designed, neutral components.....less is more. outside of the sonic generalizations of copper, silver, or hybrid cables, there is no cable brand that will dramatically 'fix' anything. if the old MIT'S sound better to you. use them. I have 15 year old Acrotech wire that i can't throw away....they just don't do anything wrong...in fact they don't do anything that stands out either........cables shouldn't bloom or vrrroooom or create anything. they should just solidly link components.