Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin!
Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, but I can't quite puzzle it out in my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? ON a related question, does anyone have opinions about good RCA connectors? Ideally I'd like a split pin, a locking ground cuff, and HEAVY gold plating or maybe rhodium. As far as I can see though, Cardas is the only company that makes rhodium plated plugs, and they have neither the split pin or the locking collars. Thanks, Colin |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
as for rca's check out either the wbt-0101's or 0108's
and the eichman bullet plug. "Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, but I can't quite puzzle it out in my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? ON a related question, does anyone have opinions about good RCA connectors? Ideally I'd like a split pin, a locking ground cuff, and HEAVY gold plating or maybe rhodium. As far as I can see though, Cardas is the only company that makes rhodium plated plugs, and they have neither the split pin or the locking collars. Thanks, Colin |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
as for rca's check out either the wbt-0101's or 0108's
and the eichman bullet plug. "Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, but I can't quite puzzle it out in my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? ON a related question, does anyone have opinions about good RCA connectors? Ideally I'd like a split pin, a locking ground cuff, and HEAVY gold plating or maybe rhodium. As far as I can see though, Cardas is the only company that makes rhodium plated plugs, and they have neither the split pin or the locking collars. Thanks, Colin |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
as for rca's check out either the wbt-0101's or 0108's
and the eichman bullet plug. "Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, but I can't quite puzzle it out in my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? ON a related question, does anyone have opinions about good RCA connectors? Ideally I'd like a split pin, a locking ground cuff, and HEAVY gold plating or maybe rhodium. As far as I can see though, Cardas is the only company that makes rhodium plated plugs, and they have neither the split pin or the locking collars. Thanks, Colin |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. geoff Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? geoff |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. geoff Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? geoff |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. geoff Now I'm thinking here that I've got a twisted pair for induced-noise cancellation plus a 100% coverage foil shield, and a fairly low capacitance value (something like 25pF/m). Should be pretty good, right? However, am I in any danger of causing problems by having both centre conductor and shield tied to ground? I _think_ that having all of the shield-attached ends on the same component should avoid ground loops, You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. my head. One question that comes to mind is why do almost all except the most extreme (weird) high-end commercial interconnects use either coax or at least single-conductor-with-shield geometries? Another one is am I mucking up the low impedance factor by wiring it up this way? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? geoff |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message ...
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. I'm not really expecting any audible benefit, but I'd like to do things 'ideally.' You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? For that matter, what would happen (electrically) if the shield was unattached at either end? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. Yes, I realise this. That's why I said "either...or..." I know that there are at least a few companies using coax for interconnects, but 90+% use regular shielded cable. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed intercoonect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? Well it boils down to three salient points: 1) I need new interconnects. 2) I'd just as soon make them as buy them. 3) I'm a firm believer in engineering. Preferably massive overengineering So if I'm going to make these things, I want to make 'em capable of staying flat, clean, and noise-free across as wide of a bandwidth as possible with the worst possible source and load; and then attach them to the best possible source and load I can. :-) Colin |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message ...
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. I'm not really expecting any audible benefit, but I'd like to do things 'ideally.' You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? For that matter, what would happen (electrically) if the shield was unattached at either end? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. Yes, I realise this. That's why I said "either...or..." I know that there are at least a few companies using coax for interconnects, but 90+% use regular shielded cable. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed intercoonect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? Well it boils down to three salient points: 1) I need new interconnects. 2) I'd just as soon make them as buy them. 3) I'm a firm believer in engineering. Preferably massive overengineering So if I'm going to make these things, I want to make 'em capable of staying flat, clean, and noise-free across as wide of a bandwidth as possible with the worst possible source and load; and then attach them to the best possible source and load I can. :-) Colin |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message ...
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... Oh yes, more cable questions! Let the flaming begin! Seriously folks, I've been planning on making some more cables (have done so in the past), and was wondering about the relative technical merits of shielded two-conductor cables vs. shielded single conductor (esp. coax), for unbalanced runs. What I did in the past (with Belden 8761, I vaguely recall) was run signal and ground along the two conductors, and connect the (foil) shield to the ground at one end only. This 'shield-attached' end was plugged into the (integrated) amplifier for all components. No problem, as long as you only connect the sheild at one end. Matter of experimentationas to which way around better, if any effect. As to whether or not any audible benefit suck it and see, but I doubt it's worth the effort. I'm not really expecting any audible benefit, but I'd like to do things 'ideally.' You'll have ground loops with each additional cable through the siganl ground conductor. Connect the sheild at both ends and you'll have an extra one per cable. So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? For that matter, what would happen (electrically) if the shield was unattached at either end? Sheilded cable, not coax. They are different things. Yes, I realise this. That's why I said "either...or..." I know that there are at least a few companies using coax for interconnects, but 90+% use regular shielded cable. No, you won't be mucking up impedences. They are pretty irrelevant at those frequencies and lengths anyway. Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed intercoonect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Do you have a problem with 'reguar' interconnects, or just experimenting ? Well it boils down to three salient points: 1) I need new interconnects. 2) I'd just as soon make them as buy them. 3) I'm a firm believer in engineering. Preferably massive overengineering So if I'm going to make these things, I want to make 'em capable of staying flat, clean, and noise-free across as wide of a bandwidth as possible with the worst possible source and load; and then attach them to the best possible source and load I can. :-) Colin |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? You have an instant groud-loop the length of the cable ! Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, A better approach would be to not use badly-designed preamps. geoff |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? You have an instant groud-loop the length of the cable ! Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, A better approach would be to not use badly-designed preamps. geoff |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message So what is the problem with connecting the shield at both ends of the cable then? Is it the possibility of inducing a current in the shield that's not present in the ground, or...? You have an instant groud-loop the length of the cable ! Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, A better approach would be to not use badly-designed preamps. geoff |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message
om Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. Strikes me that he's made up a straw man preamp, and used it to justify exotic cables. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message
om Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. Strikes me that he's made up a straw man preamp, and used it to justify exotic cables. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message
om Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. Strikes me that he's made up a straw man preamp, and used it to justify exotic cables. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:52:17 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "Colin Bigam" wrote in message . com Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. But of course! Kal |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:52:17 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "Colin Bigam" wrote in message . com Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. But of course! Kal |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:52:17 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "Colin Bigam" wrote in message . com Well much of my planning is based on a pair of articles by Jim Heyward in Audio Ideas Guide. He pointed out that with a badly designed preamp (specifically he talks about one where the output feed is taken directly from the wiper of a 250kohm volume pot, so the output impedance is not only outrageously high but varies with volume) and a badly designed interconnect, you can have a 3dB cutoff at below 3kHz!!! Using the same (bad) cable on low output impedance preamp lead to a cutoff of about 1.5MHz. Did I miss the part where he provided a real world example of this? I've perused the schematics of more than 100 preamps and never seen anything as ludicrous as a preamp with the output taken from the wiper of a 250 K pot. There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. If there ever was a preamp this badly designed, it seems like switching over to one of the zillions that was well designed would be the superior approach. But of course! Kal |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... geoff |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... geoff |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... geoff |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... (N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... 4) you havent figured that the idea with money is to get something of some function and value when you hand it over. Fools and their money are soon parted. I'm afraid you've lost me here. I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? And also, which connectors are good? Generic sheilded single conductor (not little skinny junk stuff) with good quality generic RCAs is fine. People will suggest all sorts of other stuff (specific tcable types, etc) , but the major difference will be purely psychological. geoff |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... (N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... 4) you havent figured that the idea with money is to get something of some function and value when you hand it over. Fools and their money are soon parted. I'm afraid you've lost me here. I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? And also, which connectors are good? Generic sheilded single conductor (not little skinny junk stuff) with good quality generic RCAs is fine. People will suggest all sorts of other stuff (specific tcable types, etc) , but the major difference will be purely psychological. geoff |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
"Colin Bigam" wrote in message m... (N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... 4) you havent figured that the idea with money is to get something of some function and value when you hand it over. Fools and their money are soon parted. I'm afraid you've lost me here. I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? And also, which connectors are good? Generic sheilded single conductor (not little skinny junk stuff) with good quality generic RCAs is fine. People will suggest all sorts of other stuff (specific tcable types, etc) , but the major difference will be purely psychological. geoff |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:54:01 +1300, "Geoff Wood"
-nospam wrote: "Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... Should be. OTOH, several come with optional choices for the pot impedance. Not every one chooses wisely. Kal |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:54:01 +1300, "Geoff Wood"
-nospam wrote: "Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... Should be. OTOH, several come with optional choices for the pot impedance. Not every one chooses wisely. Kal |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:54:01 +1300, "Geoff Wood"
-nospam wrote: "Kalman Rubinson" wrote in message There are a number of so-called passive preamps which are nothing more than a switch and a pot. Could fit this example. 47K should be about the max you'd ever encounter there .... Should be. OTOH, several come with optional choices for the pot impedance. Not every one chooses wisely. Kal |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
I would suggest that the Cable forum at AudioAsylum would be a
far better place to ask these kinds of questions simply because there are so many DIY cable folks there that someone may well have already tried and experimented with the very configurations that you are asking about. Have a look and see what you think. http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/cables/bbs.html - Jeff Colin Bigam wrote: (N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... 4) you havent figured that the idea with money is to get something of some function and value when you hand it over. Fools and their money are soon parted. I'm afraid you've lost me here. I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? And also, which connectors are good? Now am I falling victim to the horrible evil cable hucksters by needing new cables and wanting them to be solidly overengineered (at effectively the same price)? Am I a brainless moron for wanting to better understand the electronics behind it all? Pure audio performance isn't always the only measure of value in audio equipment anyways. Construction quality, (visual) aesthetics, reliability, and personal satisfaction all play a part. I don't see why you're so quick to jump on my for that. As an aside, I'm pondering Belden 1800B cable here for these things. Anyone have some opinions on me throwing away my money like this? :-) Colin |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
I would suggest that the Cable forum at AudioAsylum would be a
far better place to ask these kinds of questions simply because there are so many DIY cable folks there that someone may well have already tried and experimented with the very configurations that you are asking about. Have a look and see what you think. http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/cables/bbs.html - Jeff Colin Bigam wrote: (N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... 4) you havent figured that the idea with money is to get something of some function and value when you hand it over. Fools and their money are soon parted. I'm afraid you've lost me here. I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? And also, which connectors are good? Now am I falling victim to the horrible evil cable hucksters by needing new cables and wanting them to be solidly overengineered (at effectively the same price)? Am I a brainless moron for wanting to better understand the electronics behind it all? Pure audio performance isn't always the only measure of value in audio equipment anyways. Construction quality, (visual) aesthetics, reliability, and personal satisfaction all play a part. I don't see why you're so quick to jump on my for that. As an aside, I'm pondering Belden 1800B cable here for these things. Anyone have some opinions on me throwing away my money like this? :-) Colin |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
(Colin Bigam) wrote in message om...
(N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. that much is good and sound, I'm fairly sure we'll agree. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? co-ax. And also, which connectors are good? ones that fit, will take the size of cable used, have a working cable cord grip, and are robust enough not to fall apart. Spring or plastic moulding extending out from the plug will also maximise cable reliability and life. If you are in a damp building with mould or corrosion problems then I would also add gold plated. Now am I falling victim to the horrible evil cable hucksters maybe, depends what you settle on by needing new cables and wanting them to be solidly overengineered (at effectively the same price)? no, you're considering options that offer features that arent relevant. That's no problem if you dont decide on them. Am I a brainless moron for wanting to better understand the electronics behind it all? We both know thats a no. Pure audio performance isn't always the only measure of value in audio equipment anyways. Construction quality, (visual) aesthetics, reliability, and personal satisfaction all play a part. I don't see why you're so quick to jump on my for that. Its not that, I see you understand the questions. The issue for me is in your suggestion to do a number of things that have no real world benefit. As an aside, I'm pondering Belden 1800B cable here for these things. Anyone have some opinions on me throwing away my money like this? :-) At $60 for 250 ft, around 80m, 75c/m its overpriced for whats needed. In terms of specs, whats wanted is coax thats robust. 50 ohm rf coax or 75 ohm flexible UK TV coax both fill this requirement happily. 1800b offers features that arent relevant to your app. You stated the principles well, the problem is that youre then discussing items that are either of the audiophool nature or not suited to the app. I would recommend crossposting to sci.electronics.design for more informed qualified input. Regards, NT |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
(Colin Bigam) wrote in message om...
(N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. that much is good and sound, I'm fairly sure we'll agree. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? co-ax. And also, which connectors are good? ones that fit, will take the size of cable used, have a working cable cord grip, and are robust enough not to fall apart. Spring or plastic moulding extending out from the plug will also maximise cable reliability and life. If you are in a damp building with mould or corrosion problems then I would also add gold plated. Now am I falling victim to the horrible evil cable hucksters maybe, depends what you settle on by needing new cables and wanting them to be solidly overengineered (at effectively the same price)? no, you're considering options that offer features that arent relevant. That's no problem if you dont decide on them. Am I a brainless moron for wanting to better understand the electronics behind it all? We both know thats a no. Pure audio performance isn't always the only measure of value in audio equipment anyways. Construction quality, (visual) aesthetics, reliability, and personal satisfaction all play a part. I don't see why you're so quick to jump on my for that. Its not that, I see you understand the questions. The issue for me is in your suggestion to do a number of things that have no real world benefit. As an aside, I'm pondering Belden 1800B cable here for these things. Anyone have some opinions on me throwing away my money like this? :-) At $60 for 250 ft, around 80m, 75c/m its overpriced for whats needed. In terms of specs, whats wanted is coax thats robust. 50 ohm rf coax or 75 ohm flexible UK TV coax both fill this requirement happily. 1800b offers features that arent relevant to your app. You stated the principles well, the problem is that youre then discussing items that are either of the audiophool nature or not suited to the app. I would recommend crossposting to sci.electronics.design for more informed qualified input. Regards, NT |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
DIY Interconnect questions
(Colin Bigam) wrote in message om...
(N. Thornton) wrote in message . com... I NEED new interconnects. I cannot hook up my system without them. I have decided that I want to make them, because I do. So given those points, I'm asking which way to best build these cables, from an engineering perspective. that much is good and sound, I'm fairly sure we'll agree. shielded single conductor, shielded twisted pair, or unshielded twisted pair? co-ax. And also, which connectors are good? ones that fit, will take the size of cable used, have a working cable cord grip, and are robust enough not to fall apart. Spring or plastic moulding extending out from the plug will also maximise cable reliability and life. If you are in a damp building with mould or corrosion problems then I would also add gold plated. Now am I falling victim to the horrible evil cable hucksters maybe, depends what you settle on by needing new cables and wanting them to be solidly overengineered (at effectively the same price)? no, you're considering options that offer features that arent relevant. That's no problem if you dont decide on them. Am I a brainless moron for wanting to better understand the electronics behind it all? We both know thats a no. Pure audio performance isn't always the only measure of value in audio equipment anyways. Construction quality, (visual) aesthetics, reliability, and personal satisfaction all play a part. I don't see why you're so quick to jump on my for that. Its not that, I see you understand the questions. The issue for me is in your suggestion to do a number of things that have no real world benefit. As an aside, I'm pondering Belden 1800B cable here for these things. Anyone have some opinions on me throwing away my money like this? :-) At $60 for 250 ft, around 80m, 75c/m its overpriced for whats needed. In terms of specs, whats wanted is coax thats robust. 50 ohm rf coax or 75 ohm flexible UK TV coax both fill this requirement happily. 1800b offers features that arent relevant to your app. You stated the principles well, the problem is that youre then discussing items that are either of the audiophool nature or not suited to the app. I would recommend crossposting to sci.electronics.design for more informed qualified input. Regards, NT |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Questions, questions, questions | Audio Opinions | |||
REQ: update on DAW PC questions (long) | Pro Audio | |||
update on DAW PC questions (long) | Tech | |||
Seven Questions + | Audio Opinions |