[William Sommerwerck]

As some of you know, I quit Stereophile after a Totally Weird experience
with interconnects left me wondering whether I was same, and finally
realizing that my reviewing was not sufficiently reliable or consistent to
be published for money.

I still remain "open-minded" (or is it "empty-headed"?) on the subject of
whether interconnects can have a "sound" of their own. I don't rule it out
as a possibility, and I certainly wouldn't put cheap cables in an expensive
system.

Several years ago, Audiovox brought out some bright-blue semi-premium cables
under their AR label. They were downright inexpensive, verging on the cheap
(as such products go), but a Stereophile reviewer gave them a semi-rave,
saying you had to pay a lot more to get significantly better sound. (Whether
his evaluation was "correct" is debatable, but it's clear his opinion wasn't
influenced by the cables' low, low price.)

Audiovox recently introduced the "step-up" line, called the "Master Series".
(Nicht sein von Deutschland.) I've been replacing my cables with them, and
have no reason to complain.

What makes these "Master" cables interesting is that they pay attention to
the details -- the features you'd think a high-quality cable ought to
have -- without going totally overboard (eg, weird stranding, bias
batteries, etc). And they're cheap -- a 3' pair is only $38 from buy.com,
and buy.com pays the shipping. (Well... the shipping is hidden in the price.
But buy.com has one of the lowest base prices of anyone selling these
cables.)

"What are those wonderful features?", you ask. In no particular order...

gold-plated solid-metal machined plugs with a screw-down locking sleeve
Teflon-coated low-oxygen silver-plated conductors
two-conductor transmission (ie, the shield doesn't carry the signal)
separate shield, grounded at "input" end, with a ferrite RFI/EMI choke at
same end

They come in huge plastic screw-together boxes that look like a dinosaur
egg.

These are cables I feel even Arny could put in his home system without
embarrassment.

I ordered another four pairs this morning. They're hard to get, because they
sell out within a few days of buy.com getting them, then it takes at least a
month for a restock. (My buy.com account listing shows more than seven weeks
between my last two orders for 3' cables, both of which were placed on the
day they came back "in stock".)

Rush right out in a buying frenzy!

[William Sommerwerck]

I have had inexplicable experiences with cables, but you might also
consider that the fall weather is giving you an episode of good hearing.

This is certainly a pleasant time of year to listen to music. Cool, crisp
air. Everything seems "quieter" and more relaxed.


The statement that the shield doesn't carry the signal is suspect.
It never does.

These are consumer cables with RCA plugs. (Perhaps I should have made that
clear, though I thought it was "obvious".) Most such cables are coax, with
the shield one of the conductors.


The problem is with what it does carry: the ground loop. What is to
prevent the twisted-pair member connected to the outer shell of the
RCA from carrying the same?

There is no "twisted pair" connected to the outer shell of the RCA. But the
cable is still "unbalanced" and, yes, you could still have a ground loop.

This type of cable isn't new; it just isn't common.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:11:40 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

I still remain "open-minded" (or is it "empty-headed"?) on the subject of
whether interconnects can have a "sound" of their own. I don't rule it out
as a possibility, and I certainly wouldn't put cheap cables in an expensive
system.

So you aren't open-minded at all. You waste money on magic cables for
the odd few inches of signal path which are under your control. Don't
try to wriggle out of it!

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:11:40 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

I still remain "open-minded" (or is it "empty-headed"?) on the subject of
whether interconnects can have a "sound" of their own. I don't rule it
out
as a possibility, and I certainly wouldn't put cheap cables in an
expensive
system.

So you aren't open-minded at all. You waste money on magic cables for
the odd few inches of signal path which are under your control. Don't
try to wriggle out of it!

There are reasons for using a "better" ahem product other than sound
quality. I have expensive, and I have no desire to connect it with 29-cent
cables from a Chinese factory.

My point with regard to the AR cables is that, whether or not they really
"sound better", the design is good -- machined connectors, low-loss
dielectrics, separate ground shield, RF filtering; etc. I like well-made
stuff, and this product delivers the "well-made" without getting crazy about
it.

Fifty years ago I bought a single 6' Barker cable (not a stereo pair). It
cost something like $1.80. Consider inflation and compare that with the
price of a pair of the ARs. Granted, it's made in China, but it's of much
higher quality, and taking inflation/disposable income into account, it's
actually cheaper.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:44:21 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There are reasons for using a "better" ahem product other than sound
quality. I have expensive, and I have no desire to connect it with 29-cent
cables from a Chinese factory.

Don't you ever ask yourself "why not"? I only press this point
because you opened this thread with: "I still remain
"open-minded"....". Not quite sure why you chose to put it inside
quote marks though. Does "open-minded" not mean simply ... er...
"open-minded"? :-)

You don't care about (or need to in a domestic environment) ultimate
ruggedness or noise-rejection, else you'd be using professional gear
with balanced connections. Do you buy gold-plated paper-clips?

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:44:21 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There are reasons for using a "better" ahem product other than
sound quality. I have expensive equipment, and I have no desire to
connect it with 29-cent cables from a Chinese factory.

Don't you ever ask yourself "why not"?

Once in a very great while. People connected their Marantz and McIntosh
equipment for decades with relatively cheap cables and no one thought much
of it until Mister Robert Fulton stuck his nose in. *

The reason I remain "open-minded" (no, I'm not sure what I mean by the
quotation marks) is that I've heard gross differences among cables that were
well above the perceptual threshold corresponding to imagination.


You don't care about (or need to in a domestic environment) ultimate
ruggedness or noise-rejection, else you'd be using professional gear
with balanced connections.

Actually, my Parasound C2 controller and A21 power amps, and the Apogee DAX
3 electronic crossover, are connected with balanced cables. In a six-channel
system, there's no practical way to wire up the equipment with long
unbalanced lines.

Home listeners don't need cables that can stand being walked on or run over
by a hand truck with a load of equipment, but cables are sometimes abused
(accidentally or by being pused and yanked), so it's nice to have well-made
ones. I assure you, once you've used a cable with a solid-metal machined
plug, you're not likely to go back to "the other kind". I also like the
locking shell.


Do you buy gold-plated paper-clips?

Come on! There's no comparison. Gold hardly oxidizes at all, and makes a
better connection.


* When I worked for Barclay Recording & Electronics, Mr. Fulton came by to
set up some speakers for a demo. They were in a room with our best
equipment. The speakers, quite frankly, didn't sound very good. (This room
had its quirks, and we had to be careful about how the speakers were
positioned.) I was going to bluntly say so, but decided to be more
elliptical. "Mr. Fulton, do you feel these speakers sound as good as you
would like them to sound?" "Yeah, I think so." At that point I lost whatever
little respect remained for Mr. Fulton.

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:44:21 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There are reasons for using a "better" ahem product other than
sound quality. I have expensive equipment, and I have no desire to
connect it with 29-cent cables from a Chinese factory.

Don't you ever ask yourself "why not"?

Once in a very great while. People connected their Marantz and McIntosh
equipment for decades with relatively cheap cables and no one thought much
of it until Mister Robert Fulton stuck his nose in. *

Part of the problem is that the "relatively cheap cables" in that era
were actually well-made with good quality connectors and cable.

People started hearing differences between cables when manufacturers started
providing godawful vinyl cables with molded ends and outrageously high shunt
capacitance.

I believe that the issue is not that super-expensive cables will improve your
sound, but that super-crappy cables might degrade it. And sadly because of
the polarization of the market, there are very few cables available in the
range in-between now unless you go to a pro audio dealer or make your own.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

I believe that the issue is not that super-expensive cables will
improve your sound, but that super-crappy cables might degrade it.
And sadly because of the polarization of the market, there are very
few cables available in the range in-between now unless you go to
a pro audio dealer or make your own.

If that's true, then the AR cables seem a reasonable choice.

As you point out, one can always buy high-quality cable and premium plugs
and "roll their own".

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:32:15 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Home listeners don't need cables that can stand being walked on or run over
by a hand truck with a load of equipment, but cables are sometimes abused
(accidentally or by being pused and yanked), so it's nice to have well-made
ones. I assure you, once you've used a cable with a solid-metal machined
plug, you're not likely to go back to "the other kind". I also like the
locking shell.

Oh, I've used plugs that were too big and too heavy for the sockets.
Sometimes they broke them.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:35:22 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

I believe that the issue is not that super-expensive cables will
improve your sound, but that super-crappy cables might degrade it.
And sadly because of the polarization of the market, there are very
few cables available in the range in-between now unless you go to
a pro audio dealer or make your own.

If that's true, then the AR cables seem a reasonable choice.

As you point out, one can always buy high-quality cable and premium plugs
and "roll their own".

On my day-gig, installing audio/video stuff into mostly home
settings, we use the IXOS Studio line. In the past we used a
not-top-shelf Tributaries line. Both have been solidly
reliable for us (very! important considering the cost of a
warranty call-back) and not embarassingly expensive in a
smallish-town market.

But we also keep personal stashes of freebie giveaways,
scrounged from other customers, cable and satellite company
extras, etc. for the situations where even a modest brand name
interconnect seems inappropriate. It's "don't ask don't tell"
with the office, that's life. For some customers $20 would be
a lot of money for a "wire" - would be for me.

And, yes, we see *lots* of (cheapie) cable failures, and none
are pretty.

Much thanks, as always,
Chris Hornbeck

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
I believe that the issue is not that super-expensive cables will
improve your sound, but that super-crappy cables might degrade it.
And sadly because of the polarization of the market, there are very
few cables available in the range in-between now unless you go to
a pro audio dealer or make your own.

If that's true, then the AR cables seem a reasonable choice.

As you point out, one can always buy high-quality cable and premium plugs
and "roll their own".

For the most part I do. GC sells some decent RCA connectors for less than
half a dollar if you buy a bag of a hundred. They are gold-flashed, meaning
the gold does nothing but look nice, but they are as solid as any other RCA
connector and they are large enough to take RG-58 or whatever Belden has on
sale this week.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:32:15 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Home listeners don't need cables that can stand being walked on
or run over by a hand truck with a load of equipment, but cables are
sometimes abused (accidentally or by being pused and yanked),
so it's nice to have well-made ones. I assure you, once you've used
a cable with a solid-metal machined plug, you're not likely to go back
to "the other kind". I also like the locking shell.

Oh, I've used plugs that were too big and too heavy for the sockets.
Sometimes they broke them.

The ARs aren't, but I _have_ owned cables with them. Discrete Technologies
(Distech) made such, and they damaged the jacks on my Denon preamp. I had to
buy replacements.

[John Connors]

On 11 Oct 2008 17:32:33 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:44:21 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

There are reasons for using a "better" ahem product other than
sound quality. I have expensive equipment, and I have no desire to
connect it with 29-cent cables from a Chinese factory.

Don't you ever ask yourself "why not"?

Once in a very great while. People connected their Marantz and McIntosh
equipment for decades with relatively cheap cables and no one thought much
of it until Mister Robert Fulton stuck his nose in. *

Part of the problem is that the "relatively cheap cables" in that era
were actually well-made with good quality connectors and cable.

People started hearing differences between cables when manufacturers started
providing godawful vinyl cables with molded ends and outrageously high shunt
capacitance.

I believe that the issue is not that super-expensive cables will improve your
sound, but that super-crappy cables might degrade it. And sadly because of
the polarization of the market, there are very few cables available in the
range in-between now unless you go to a pro audio dealer or make your own.
--scott

I used to work in several high end audio shops in NYC back in the late 70s
early 80s while going to college and some of the stuff that got sold,
especially cables, was terrible.
Other cables were very good.

One other point about the esoteric cables sounding different is that at
least at that time, the capacitance and reactance of these cables (speaker
cables mostly) often interfered with the output of the amp or the speakers
themselves causing things to sound *different*.
Not necessarily *better* but different.

BTW we used to love the snob magazines like Sterophile etc because with
each new issue, literally to the day it was on the news stand, the
customers would be lined up at the door wishing to trade last month's *top
of the line* piece of gear for the latest review item.

Were there differences in the equipment?
Sure.
Could most people hear them?
Nope.
Could some people hear them?
Yep.

I remember one doctor who used to trade up maybe 3 times a year on various
gear and he had a set of golden ears for sure.

The one thing that stuck with me over all these years is that with the
higher end cables and gear you are getting (usually) a far superior
constructed unit that will last a long, long time and will retain it's
value.
Some people are willing to pay for that.

I use mostly high quality cabling, not because I really hear much of a
difference, sometimes I do, but because of the mechanical quality of the
cable.
I just had too many intermittent failures over the years with cheap molded
junk.

[Paul Stamler]

"John Connors" wrote in message
.. .

The one thing that stuck with me over all these years is that with the
higher end cables and gear you are getting (usually) a far superior
constructed unit that will last a long, long time and will retain it's
value.
Some people are willing to pay for that.

Indeed. I have a pair of Monster speaker cables that were pretty near the
bottom of their line in the late 1980s (not the fancy multi-gauge stuff,
just simple cables), and a pair of interconnects that were the same in the
early 90s. They've worked flawlessly for me -- and the speaker cables get
used for my remote monitors, so they go through a lot of plugging, wrapping
and unplugging. Both have worked flawlessly over the years while cheapies
have keeled over and died just being used at home.

Probably the best deal in cables, though, is to have Markertek make you up a
set from Canare cable.

Peace,
Paul

[Frank Stearns]

John Connors writes:

On 11 Oct 2008 17:32:33 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

snips

One other point about the esoteric cables sounding different is that at
least at that time, the capacitance and reactance of these cables (speaker
cables mostly) often interfered with the output of the amp or the speakers
themselves causing things to sound *different*.
Not necessarily *better* but different.

Setting aside truly rotten cables, sometimes *any* modest cable will "sound better"
because you knock loose the oxidation and other crud when you do the change-over
from old to new, and whatever the "new" cable is it'll sound better.

In many settings you can do a "major sonic upgrade" just by plugging/unplugging the
current (no pun) cables a few times. This is less of an issue when from the get-go
good connectors are used all around in a lower-Z circuit, but depending on the
environment and connection history might be worth a jiggle or two.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--

[Moshe Goldfarb.]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 07:02:23 GMT, Paul Stamler wrote:

"John Connors" wrote in message
.. .

The one thing that stuck with me over all these years is that with the
higher end cables and gear you are getting (usually) a far superior
constructed unit that will last a long, long time and will retain it's
value.
Some people are willing to pay for that.

Indeed. I have a pair of Monster speaker cables that were pretty near the
bottom of their line in the late 1980s (not the fancy multi-gauge stuff,
just simple cables), and a pair of interconnects that were the same in the
early 90s. They've worked flawlessly for me -- and the speaker cables get
used for my remote monitors, so they go through a lot of plugging, wrapping
and unplugging. Both have worked flawlessly over the years while cheapies
have keeled over and died just being used at home.

Probably the best deal in cables, though, is to have Markertek make you up a
set from Canare cable.

Peace,
Paul

Hey Paul!

Amen brother!

The quality of the cable, connectors and construction cannot be over
estimated IMHO.
As a professional musician who has been on many a tour, I can tell you that
the crap will fall apart real fast.
I learned the hard way.

Stuff like Hosa should be outlawed from any professional venue.
Even Radio Shack, the Goldens stuff is far better than the Hosa garbage.

I have Canarie, Rat Shack Goldens, Monster and some other custom made stuff
in my rig and I have absolutely no problems.
Great stuff IMHO.
One does not really have to pay esoteric prices to get decent, quality
cables.

BTW I *do* remember some Monster cable, braided stuff, that drove the
Magnaplaners in the showroom crazy.
It was some oddball impedance matching thing.
I love the sound of Maggies

But I should have bought the Yamaha NS1000's...
People panned them and thought I was nuts, but I loved the sound.
Really clear sounding to me.
They are now collectors items.
Go figure.



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Please Visit www.linsux.org

[John Connors]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 03:08:43 -0500, Frank Stearns wrote:

John Connors writes:

On 11 Oct 2008 17:32:33 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

snips

One other point about the esoteric cables sounding different is that at
least at that time, the capacitance and reactance of these cables (speaker
cables mostly) often interfered with the output of the amp or the speakers
themselves causing things to sound *different*.
Not necessarily *better* but different.

Setting aside truly rotten cables, sometimes *any* modest cable will "sound better"
because you knock loose the oxidation and other crud when you do the change-over
from old to new, and whatever the "new" cable is it'll sound better.

In many settings you can do a "major sonic upgrade" just by plugging/unplugging the
current (no pun) cables a few times. This is less of an issue when from the get-go
good connectors are used all around in a lower-Z circuit, but depending on the
environment and connection history might be worth a jiggle or two.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

True.
I had a friend who had a home brew RF receiver that he would take to
problem clients and it would make all kinds of noises where cables were
having problems with connectivity and causing RF to be generated.
Quite an interesting gadget.
The noise was almost always due to poor contacts.

[William Sommerwerck]

Probably the best deal in cables, though, is to have Markertek
make you up a set from Canare cable.

Comprehensive also makes Canare cables, and they're not horribly expensive.

[William Sommerwerck]

I had a friend who had a home brew RF receiver that he would
take to problem clients and it would make all kinds of noises
where cables were having problems with connectivity and causing
RF to be generated. Quite an interesting gadget.

Any chance you could point us to a schematic or description?


The noise was almost always due to poor contacts.

He might have gotten the idea from a "Carl & Jerry" story that mentioned a
severe case of interference caused by intermodulation produced by a rusted
crowbar hanging on a gutter!

[Eeyore]

Paul Stamler wrote:

Probably the best deal in cables, though, is to have Markertek make you up a
set from Canare cable.

And in the UK from VDC using Van Damme cable (or similar).

Graham

[Richard Crowley]

"Frank Stearns" wrote ...
Setting aside truly rotten cables, sometimes *any* modest cable will
"sound better"
because you knock loose the oxidation and other crud when you do the
change-over
from old to new, and whatever the "new" cable is it'll sound better.

In many settings you can do a "major sonic upgrade" just by
plugging/unplugging the
current (no pun) cables a few times. This is less of an issue when from
the get-go
good connectors are used all around in a lower-Z circuit, but depending on
the
environment and connection history might be worth a jiggle or two.

Indeed, this is likely the #1 cause of people perceiving "better"
performance from a "new" cable.

[Eeyore]

Frank Stearns wrote:

John Connors writes:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

One other point about the esoteric cables sounding different is that at
least at that time, the capacitance and reactance of these cables (speaker
cables mostly) often interfered with the output of the amp or the speakers
themselves causing things to sound *different*.
Not necessarily *better* but different.

Setting aside truly rotten cables, sometimes *any* modest cable will "sound better"
because you knock loose the oxidation and other crud when you do the change-over
from old to new, and whatever the "new" cable is it'll sound better.

Spot on !


In many settings you can do a "major sonic upgrade" just by plugging/unplugging the
current (no pun) cables a few times. This is less of an issue when from the get-go
good connectors are used all around in a lower-Z circuit, but depending on the
environment and connection history might be worth a jiggle or two.

If hi-fi's used XLRs (and they're hardly expensive now ex-China where most stuff is
made anyway) even that wouldn't be needed. Last time I looked you could get an XLR
chassis connector for 30-40c and that wasn't even in high volume.

The RCA / phono / Cinch connector has to be slimiest piece of crap ever thought of.

Graham

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:18:45 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:

If hi-fi's used XLRs (and they're hardly expensive now ex-China where most stuff is
made anyway) even that wouldn't be needed. Last time I looked you could get an XLR
chassis connector for 30-40c and that wasn't even in high volume.

The RCA / phono / Cinch connector has to be slimiest piece of crap ever thought of.

No - you're thinking of the 1/8 "stereo" jack or maybe the 4-pin
Firewire connector :-)

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi, even
audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's no real
benefit from using something more rugged.

If they could only extend that insight a little further.... :-)

[William Sommerwerck]

If hi-fi's used XLRs (and they're hardly expensive now ex-China
where most stuff is made anyway) even that wouldn't be needed.
Last time I looked you could get an XLR chassis connector for
30-40c and that wasn't even in high volume.

The problem isn't the cost of the connector. It's the amount of space
available on the back panel (which, even with huge controllers, isn't all
that much -- you only have room for the outputs and one (or at most two)
inputs), and more significntly, the cost of the circuitry to drive them. A
high-quality balanced driver is going to cost more.


The RCA / phono / Cinch connector has to be slimiest piece
of crap ever thought of.

It was never intended to be a "quality" connector. It was designed to attach
cheap phonos with ceramic pickups to table radios.

[William Sommerwerck]

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi,
even audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's
no real benefit from using something more rugged.

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better". Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to worry
about hum or ground loops.

More than 15 years ago, when I bought fancy stuff, and had to run a long
cable from my JVC hall synthesizer to the power amp, I was bothered by hum.
The solution turned out to be running a buss bar along the synthesizer's
output jacks' grounds, because this product did not have adequate grounding.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi,
even audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's
no real benefit from using something more rugged.

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better". Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to worry
about hum or ground loops.

Sure, so do I. But only when I need to, and I don't need to in a
domestic hi-fi system.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better". Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to worry
about hum or ground loops.

Stuff that is REALLY better doesn't admit any "maybe, maybe not"
discussion.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi,
even audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's
no real benefit from using something more rugged.

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better".
Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to
worry
about hum or ground loops.

Sure, so do I. But only when I need to, and I don't need to in a
domestic hi-fi system.

Try running a 20' unbalanced cable to a power amp, and see what happens,
particularly if the amp is on another circuit.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better".
Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to
worry
about hum or ground loops.

Stuff that is REALLY better doesn't admit any "maybe, maybe not"
discussion.

Can you give proof, one way or the other? No? Then don't object to people
raising the issue.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:39:23 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Sure, so do I. But only when I need to, and I don't need to in a
domestic hi-fi system.

Try running a 20' unbalanced cable to a power amp, and see what happens,
particularly if the amp is on another circuit.

Which is why at the theatre where I work the snake from mixer to stage
amps is of course balanced. And a technical power feed runs alongside
it.

But I wouldn't do anything so unnecessarily complicated at home. There
are simpler solutions that sound just as good.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:40:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Stuff that is REALLY better doesn't admit any "maybe, maybe not"
discussion.

Can you give proof, one way or the other? No? Then don't object to people
raising the issue.

That's an argument AGAINST your position, when you think about it :-)

I'll never make you give up your religion. But anyone who hasn't
succumbed, remember stuff that's real - whether in audio, religion,
alternative therapies, whatever - just work. Repeatably, reliably,
obviously. When faith is required, it just ain't so.

[Mike Rivers]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

Try running a 20' unbalanced cable to a power amp, and see what happens,
particularly if the amp is on another circuit.

Here's another "Not here" post. I have about 50 feet of cable running
from a computer in my office to the stereo receiver in the living room.
All unbalanced, but shielded (a piece of mic cable with one conductor
for left and the other for right). Maybe I'm just not fussy enough about
the fidelity given the purpose of this lashup - to listen to "the radio"
over the Internet when I'm in the living room, but hum is not a problem.
I think that the computer and receiver are on the same electrical
circuit, but the house is old enough so that the outlets in these rooms
don't have a safety ground pin. Maybe "ground lift" is what's keeping
the hum away.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[John Connors]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 05:15:15 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

I had a friend who had a home brew RF receiver that he would
take to problem clients and it would make all kinds of noises
where cables were having problems with connectivity and causing
RF to be generated. Quite an interesting gadget.

Any chance you could point us to a schematic or description?

Sadly he passed away several years ago, but i do remmeber it was basically
an AM Radio Kit from Radio Shack and the effect was like the crackling you
get when a lightning storm is in the area.

The noise was almost always due to poor contacts.

He might have gotten the idea from a "Carl & Jerry" story that mentioned a
severe case of interference caused by intermodulation produced by a rusted
crowbar hanging on a gutter!

Hahaha!
At times I wondered if it was his version of the divining rod.
You could hear it crackle though when he would wiggle cables on a system
that was playing music.
I always thought it was like the germanium/crystal diode effect due to dirt
and a poor connection that was generating a small amount of RF that the AM
radio was picking up.

[John Connors]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:25:13 +0100, Laurence Payne wrote:

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 14:18:45 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:

If hi-fi's used XLRs (and they're hardly expensive now ex-China where most stuff is
made anyway) even that wouldn't be needed. Last time I looked you could get an XLR
chassis connector for 30-40c and that wasn't even in high volume.

The RCA / phono / Cinch connector has to be slimiest piece of crap ever thought of.

No - you're thinking of the 1/8 "stereo" jack or maybe the 4-pin
Firewire connector :-)

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi, even
audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's no real
benefit from using something more rugged.

If they could only extend that insight a little further.... :-)

My vote goes for the 1/8 inch mini plug because many of them go bad just
from the weight of the cable hanging on them.

A well made RCA plug can last a long time if cared for.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:40:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Stuff that is REALLY better doesn't admit any "maybe, maybe not"
discussion.

Can you give proof, one way or the other? No? Then don't object to people
raising the issue.

That's an argument AGAINST your position, when you think about it :-)

I'll never make you give up your religion. But anyone who hasn't
succumbed, remember stuff that's real - whether in audio, religion,
alternative therapies, whatever - just work. Repeatably, reliably,
obviously. When faith is required, it just ain't so.

In this case, it's not an issue of "faith". I simply don't like owning
cheaply made stuff. And when I can buy something not-horribly-expensive that
meets what I consider the minimum requirements for good performance, I will
do so.

My only "religion" is the truth, whatever it might be.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
William Sommerwerck wrote:

Try running a 20' unbalanced cable to a power amp, and see what happens,
particularly if the amp is on another circuit.

Here's another "Not here" post. I have about 50 feet of cable running
from a computer in my office to the stereo receiver in the living room.
All unbalanced, but shielded (a piece of mic cable with one conductor
for left and the other for right). Maybe I'm just not fussy enough about
the fidelity given the purpose of this lashup - to listen to "the radio"
over the Internet when I'm in the living room, but hum is not a problem.
I think that the computer and receiver are on the same electrical
circuit, but the house is old enough so that the outlets in these rooms
don't have a safety ground pin. Maybe "ground lift" is what's keeping
the hum away.

I was overstating the case. I suspect that many people could "get away" with
a setup such as yours, without significant hum. It's simply that balanced
connections pretty much eliminate the problem at its source.

I can turn up the volume all the way to 11, on any source except phono, and
there is simply no hum. (There's a bit on phono. I may some day dress the
cables to see if there's any improvement.)

[Scott Dorsey]

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi,
even audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's
no real benefit from using something more rugged.

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better". Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to worry
about hum or ground loops.

Sure, so do I. But only when I need to, and I don't need to in a
domestic hi-fi system.

Clearly you don't have a cable TV system hooked up to the hi-fi. It didn't
used to be a problem at all... and high-Z interconnections weren't a problem
either. Cable lengths were low, and the hi-fi system was pretty much
standalone. In the modern age of video system integration and whole-house
audio systems, ground configurations are becoming serious issues and most
of the hi-fi installers don't have a clue what to do about the problems.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better". Maybe,
maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having to worry
about hum or ground loops.

Stuff that is REALLY better doesn't admit any "maybe, maybe not"
discussion.

XLR connectors don't fall out when you move the equipment around, like
RCA connectors do. Having both channels working is almost always "better
sound" than having only one.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

Clearly you don't have a cable TV system hooked up to the hi-fi. It didn't
used to be a problem at all... and high-Z interconnections weren't a
problem
either. Cable lengths were low [sic], and the hi-fi system was pretty much
standalone. In the modern age of video system integration and whole-house
audio systems, ground configurations are becoming serious issues and most
of the hi-fi installers don't have a clue what to do about the problems.

More than 20 years ago I ran into this problem, without knowing what it was.
I had this crazy hum which did not go away until I used long interconnects
and spread them in odd positions.

Not long after, I realized it must be due to a ground loop between my sound
system and the cable system (specifically, connecting my Sony hi-fi VCR to
the preamp to listen to stereo TV shows). When I put together a back-to-back
balun (to isolate the common), it went away.

[philicorda[_6_]]

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:09:34 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

But even they generally work, if not abused. And domestic hi-fi, even
audiophile stuff, continues to use RCAs because there's no real benefit
from using something more rugged.

Some people feel balanced XLR circuitry inherently "sounds better".
Maybe, maybe not. But I like being able to run long leads without having
to worry about hum or ground loops.

Balanced circuitry should sound worse, shouldn't it?
Virtually all audio equipment is unbalanced internally, so having
balanced cables means extra electronics and/or transformers=distortion
+noise. For short cable runs, unbalanced should be higher fidelity.

I think I saw a mic pre schematic that really was symmetric from end to
end once. My Altec 436C is balanced internally too, though that is
because there is no other way it could work.


More than 15 years ago, when I bought fancy stuff, and had to run a long
cable from my JVC hall synthesizer to the power amp, I was bothered by
hum. The solution turned out to be running a buss bar along the
synthesizer's output jacks' grounds, because this product did not have
adequate grounding.