Using 5 wire component cable as interconnects?

neokeelo

Can I use a component video cable to carry audio? Will it sound different? I have a 5 cable set ( 3 component, and 2 for audio)
Are they basically the same thing?
I want to use them to hook up from my receiver to my amp but I want the signal strength and sound to be the same on all channels.

The connections and cables look exactly the same to me.

EndersShadow

I looked into this as well (Using 2 sets of Monster THX Certified Component cables) and honestly went and got analog interconnects from SignalCable eventually (had cheap Monoprice stuff but it literally tore parts off my gear).

Based on how much cash you have in your setup, why not just get a set of 5 Signal Cable Analog 2's? Heck I got my set of 5 3 footers (so I paid extra) for like 110, which isnt nearly that much. Also Frank (owner of Signal Cable) gives Polkies a discount

Those or Blue Jeans Cable interconnects would be my personal suggestion.

neokeelo

I paid $2.99 at Home Depot for these on clearance.

I plugged them in and used the component cables and I couldn't tell a difference using it and my regular RCA cables. I will check the resistance tomorrow at work with a mufti meter and see if there is any real difference.

neokeelo

Blue jean cables for a 6 channel cable 3 ft is $94, not that bad but im wondering if there is any real difference

EndersShadow

neokeelo wrote: »

Blue jean cables for a 6 channel cable 3 ft is $94, not that bad but im wondering if there is any real difference

Well here's how I think about it. I spent X amount on speakers, amps, source components, ect. I spend 10% of that amount on cables.

For most a nice set of Blue Jeans or Signal Cable interconnects are all you need. They are kinda the door to the rabbit hole.

Some folks would say for mostly HT they are as far as you need to go. For 2 channel some folks go farther with MIT, AudioQuest, ect.

I like my 5 SignalCable interconnects paired w/ my custom 14/4 Audioquest FLX wires for my front 3 for HT. The rears use Monoprice speaker wire.

For my 2 channel rig I plan to play with different cable flavors as I change speakers...but thats me.

Worst case buy em, you dont like em, you should be able to sell them off pretty quickly here for little to no loss in cost.

Joe08867

Well Put Ender, I agree 100%. I also believe the difference in type of listening makes a difference as well as the type of gear being used. You would be amazed at how much you can get out of cheaper components using real good interconnects. That being said it only makes sense that the better the equipment and interconnect the better the experience.

If what you have floats your boat than good for you. I have never thought of trying this idea and would rather use Blue Jeans or Signal Cables for the job. But if it sounds good who am I to judge?

ROHfan

neokeelo wrote: »

I paid $2.99 at Home Depot for these on clearance.

I plugged them in and used the component cables and I couldn't tell a difference using it and my regular RCA cables. I will check the resistance tomorrow at work with a mufti meter and see if there is any real difference.

Copper is copper, no matter what the price, as long as the impedance is low.

Joe08867

ROHfan wrote: »

Copper is copper, no matter what the price, as long as the impedance is low.

I am Sorry but no, thanks for playing.:biggrin:

tonyb

ROHfan wrote: »

Copper is copper, no matter what the price, as long as the impedance is low.

Best re-think that statement my friend. Kinda like saying a car tire is a car tire,all made out of rubber.

neokeelo

So, if I spend $200 on interconnects from my amp to receiver's pre outs, and then I hook up a cheap but shielded $15 cable, I would be able to tell a difference on the high frequency notes as I increase the volume?

I noticed no increased hum or interference when using a component video cable or audio cable.

tonyb

neokeelo wrote: »

So, if I spend $200 on interconnects from my amp to receiver's pre outs, and then I hook up a cheap but shielded $15 cable, I would be able to tell a difference on the high frequency notes as I increase the volume?

I noticed no increased hum or interference when using a component video cable or audio cable.

There's more to audio than just one piece of the puzzle. Use what you want, Neo. Would the majority here use it ? Probably not, but your still free to float your boat anyway you see fit.
Quality cables is just a part of the overall picture of good sound quality. We can't comment on what you may or maynot hear, obviously, but the journey in audio is experimenting, tayloring,to your own tastes. All we can do is give you the benefit of our collective experiences.

stuwee

tonyb wrote: »

There's more to audio than just one piece of the puzzle. Use what you want, Neo. Would the majority here use it ? Probably not, but your still free to float your boat anyway you see fit.
Quality cables is just a part of the overall picture of good sound quality. We can't comment on what you may or maynot hear, obviously, but the journey in audio is experimenting, tayloring,to your own tastes. All we can do is give you the benefit of our collective experiences.

Well said tonyb! I'm just now hearing what a decent IC can do, and I've used 5to2's and 3to2's with decent results. These newish Tara Lab Green's are rockin' my world now, and they aren't even high buck cables :eek:

heiney9

ROHfan wrote: »

Copper is copper, no matter what the price, as long as the impedance is low.

Wrong

nwohlford

I know I am going to get in trouble for saying this, but no science has backed up that expensive cables are better than decent cheap cables. Sure there are some minimum criteria (e.g., keep cables short, make sure they are shielded, relatively low resistance for speaker wire, and match impedances for interconnects), but these are easy to find in relatively cheap cables. Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of the skeptics' case and some good links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-end_audio_cable.

Now, I can definitely understand the feeling that I spent a few thousand on my speakers and components so why risk using cheap cables that could undermine everything. (I have the feeling myself.)

heiney9

I'm sure you get your investment and retirement planning from Wikipedia as well :rolleyes:

Cables matter, experiement and find out for yourself.......there is no other way to be sure if YOU hear a difference with YOUR gear in YOUR listening environment with YOUR listening habits and YOUR favorite music.

End of story

H9

EndersShadow

For me personally I have gotten past the "Well most people say this, so its got to be true" mantra. Does that mean I personally go nuts on cables...no.

You have to pick and choose what cables to spend more on than others. I have discovered that cables can make a difference and its not a ton to get a decent mid range set of cables for a HT. Hell I have a 500+ dollar amp, 800 dollar AVR, 1200 dollar TV... so why not spend 100 on a set of analog interconnects that shouldnt ever really go bad and that I can use for 10+ years?

Long after my AVR gets replaced with one that has better EQ and DAC's, or the caps on my AMP go bad, or the bulb in the DLP goes, those cables will still be chugging along and working......so why not just consider it an "investment" and less of a "purchase".

You will also find (like I did) that cables make a HUGE difference in 2 channel rigs. They do still make a difference in HT (which is why I bought them) and as I stated they are not really that expensive if you think about their lifespan.....

nwohlford

heiney9 wrote: »

I'm sure you get your investment and retirement planning from Wikipedia as well :rolleyes:

Cables matter, experiement and find out for yourself.......there is no other way to be sure if YOU hear a difference with YOUR gear in YOUR listening environment with YOUR listening habits and YOUR favorite music.

End of story

H9

I did say just that Wikipedia did a good job of laying out the skeptics' case. You are free to argue with the case. (I actually believe according to wikipedia's standards you could argue that the page is biased towards the skeptics' view.) I do believe that in general Wikipedia can be a good starting point to help you figure out where to go for more authoritative views whether finding terms that you can Google or who are the experts.
I must admit I am a very analytical person (statistician by trade), so I would only accept blind testing as proof. (I believe that there are too many biases otherwise.) I don't think there is anything wrong if it adds to a person's listening experience or that I am necessarily right, but I thought that it was worth pointing out the OP that there is a counter-view. Then the OP can decide for him/herself.

heiney9

nwohlford wrote: »

I must admit I am a very analytical person (statistician by trade), so I would only accept blind testing as proof. (I believe that there are too many biases otherwise.) I don't think there is anything wrong if it adds to a person's listening experience or that I am necessarily right, but I thought that it was worth pointing out the OP that there is a counter-view. Then the OP can decide for him/herself.

Would you believe your own ears, or do you need someone else to prove it to you statistically?

H9

Joe08867

nwohlford wrote: »

I did say just that Wikipedia did a good job of laying out the skeptics' case. You are free to argue with the case. (I actually believe according to wikipedia's standards you could argue that the page is biased towards the skeptics' view.) I do believe that in general Wikipedia can be a good starting point to help you figure out where to go for more authoritative views whether finding terms that you can Google or who are the experts.
I must admit I am a very analytical person (statistician by trade), so I would only accept blind testing as proof. (I believe that there are too many biases otherwise.) I don't think there is anything wrong if it adds to a person's listening experience or that I am necessarily right, but I thought that it was worth pointing out the OP that there is a counter-view. Then the OP can decide for him/herself.

nwohlford, so you have not tried this yourself but believe what you say is true. I try not to discredit others before I have tried something myself.

I am in the school of try it for yourself. I have heard different things from different types of cables, copper vs silver, gold plated not gold plated so on and so forth.

The only way to know for sure is to try it yourself. Have a friend come over and give you a demo of the cables you already have vs new cables by Blue Jeans or Signal. I bet you hear a difference.

inspiredsports

Joe08867 wrote: »

Well Put Ender, I agree 100%. I also believe the difference in type of listening makes a difference as well as the type of gear being used. You would be amazed at how much you can get out of cheaper components using real good interconnects. That being said it only makes sense that the better the equipment and interconnect the better the experience.

If what you have floats your boat than good for you. I have never thought of trying this idea and would rather use Blue Jeans or Signal Cables for the job. But if it sounds good who am I to judge?

Good points. The type of listening absolutely comes into play, and one important consideration is that sometimes better cables will reveal weaknesses of lesser components.

nwohlford

heiney9 wrote: »

Would you believe your own ears, or do you need someone else to prove it to you statistically?

H9

Admittedly, I often trust my ears, but usually these are in cases where I think the physics is clear. I don't need somebody else to tell me anything because in most cases they can't since they don't have my ears. I would like to do my own blind testing, but right now that is impractical for me. There are a few things that I own that I probably could not justify in terms of sonic improvement, but I just like them.
People like me are not that much fun. Luckily, there are not many of us; it means that the rest of you don't have to deal with us that much and provides me with incredible job security as a statistician.

heiney9

So if the "physics or measured specs" tells you that there is no difference, but you hear a difference, then you discount what you hear and go with whats on a piece of paper?

This makes a huge assumption that A) everything thing we hear and every interaction between components is measureable and can be correlated specifically to a consistent outcome. we all hear in the exact same manner.

Those two variables are infinite, so how can statistics and measurements dicatate how everyone with every possible combination of components and listening environments, biases, brain processing, etc, etc, etc can look at said specs, stats, etc and conclusively tell how something will or will not sound?

Answer: specs and stats can't.

H9

nwohlford

I agree that measure specs are only a small part of the picture. When I said physics, I meant more of a first principle kind of thing. While I never specialized in sound or electronics, my first entry in graduate school was in physics (more of a particle physics person). I may have forgotten a lot of the physics, but I like to think that I have maintained the arrogant belief that I can figure out anything with a little time.

I believe that any testing must be done with your own ears, and if you want to apply to current situation, your own equipment. Blind testing is always ideal.

Again, I am not sure that I am right, and I am always willing to be proven wrong. I just thought that I would present another opinion.

At the end of the day, I think that arguing cables is like arguing religion. You are likely never going to change anyone's mind, and it is not much fun if you are sober.

EndersShadow

nwohlford wrote: »

At the end of the day, I think that arguing cables is like arguing religion. You are likely never going to change anyone's mind, and it is not much fun if you are sober.

I think I might have a new signature line quote

Joe08867

That was most definitely sig worthy. Nice grab.

heiney9

nwohlford wrote: »

At the end of the day, I think that arguing cables is like arguing religion. You are likely never going to change anyone's mind, and it is not much fun if you are sober.

Lol- finally someone with a good sense of humor.

neokeelo

I tested the resistance of all 5 cables I want to use today with a multimeter and they all had the same value. The meter was reading .4 and I think it was set at 100 ohms so I guess they are all running at 40 ohms. Does this sound correct?

heiney9

It sounds correct, but has no correlation to how they will sound

nwohlford

heiney9 wrote: »

Lol- finally someone with a good sense of humor.

I definitely try. I figure since am genetically doomed to be an arrogant, know-it-all a$$ (thanks, dad), I might as well try to cut it with some humor so that it is at least tolerable for short amounts of time. My wife will tell you that it definitely wears thin over time, though.

Just to be clear, I am in no way advocating the second picture on this listing: http://cgi.ebay.com/ADCOM-GFA-5800-HIGH-CURRENT-POWER-AMPLIFIER-250x2-WATT-/260818205515?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb9f9fb4b.

Even if there is someway that set-up makes no difference soundwise, aesthetically that is so wrong. Which I guess brings us back to the original point of the thread, I say buy some halfway decent looking cables but don't go overboard. You will respect yourself for it and won't feel ashamed every time you look at the back of your gear, but that is just my opinion.

heiney9

heiney9 wrote: »

It sounds correct, but has no correlation to how they will sound

What I meant was there is no correlation in your measurement that will tell you how the cables will sound different from one another.

mantis

neokeelo wrote: »

Can I use a component video cable to carry audio? Will it sound different? I have a 5 cable set ( 3 component, and 2 for audio)
Are they basically the same thing?
I want to use them to hook up from my receiver to my amp but I want the signal strength and sound to be the same on all channels.

The connections and cables look exactly the same to me.

Yes you can and some companies actually believe that this design works well for audio transfer. Other companies will tell you this is the complete wrong way to send audio. Video works on a different wave then audio as so I'm told from so many different companies , it can make you head spin trying to figure out cables.

As suggested many times by others , give it a whirl and see what it sounds like. Yes it will work but will it sound as good as it can be? Thats the all mighty question.

Personally I have not favored Coax Design cables for Audio but some with lower stand counts and thicker conductors for the - seem to sound much better then the standard 75ohm design. Silver also seems to play a huge roll in how it sounds. Copper is not copper as the surface is different from grade to grade like long grain or perfect surface. Most Silver is plated copper but if done correctly sounds amazing.

I suggest as like others to experiment. It's worth it if you care about how your system performs.