Killer Interconnects, a MUST BUY

RuSsMaN

I came across an ad at Audiogon, for a home-made, 2ft pair of RCA cables. I spoke at length with the seller and manufacturer, Frank Dai. I ordered a pair.

This is the best bang for buck upgrade I have EVER purchased. I tested these cables on my Nad system with both Polk R10 and B&W 601s2 shelf speakers.

They blew away the Monster 850i's, and Audioquest Copperheads (and those are GOOD cables!!!). I mean, night and day difference. Very open, very transparent. I could not believe the R10's actually came 'alive'. I am still in awe, and after 5hrs burn in, they seemed to sound even better.

$26 a pair, (2ft), and they are stunning to look at also. Frank uses WBT Silver Solder, which has the highest pure silver content on the market. The cables are heavy, and BEAUTIFUL, and WORK.....

This isn't a big risk guys, I suggest you take the plunge, and do it soon. He is developing his own company 'signal cable', and also offers digital, speaker, and power cables also......

His email is fdai@signalcable.com, I spoke with him last night, and he will be happy to talk with anyone on this forum. (Make sure to tell him you are from 'Club Polk')

I tried to arrange a group purchase at a discount, but as of now, this is still a hobby, not full time work, as each cable is assembled by hand, and made to order. Custom lengths are available also.

Pic below does not do justice, and the heat shrink is now black/white, but you get a general idea. Trust me on this one, its a minimal risk, and if you are HALF as pleased as I am, it will be worth it. I am going to change over EVERY pair of interconnects in my house. Sonically AMAZING.

Signal Cable

(yes, you can spend much, much more, but I think this cable will match or lay waste to ANYTHING under $100)

Cheers,
Russ

hoosier21

Thanks for the info Russ, I emailed him for a quote.

RuSsMaN

Good deal, he is a perfect gentleman, and I truely believe he offers one of the best kept 'secrets' around.

Isn't there something to be said about craftsmanship, hand made items? I love it. Not your standard, off the shelf item, that everyone has? At least for some things.

Cheers,
Russ

juice21

russman, what's your NAD system consist of? i am pondering a c541 & c350/370.

RuSsMaN

The small Nad system consists of a monitor cd player, and 7220PE. 20wpc, almost 3.3db dynamic headroom. Not a whole lot to look at, but a whole lot of sound.

I like Nad alot, I don't think you can go wrong with your choice.

Juice, I know you can use at the minimum, and 'extra' set of cables....place an order brotha, I want to hear other opinions on these bad boys....

Cheers,
Russ

juice21

just shot him an email...

pdebaum

Cable "burn-in" ?

Ok, I confess I am somehow uneducated in most audio tweaks but I have a background in E.E. and I am somehow skeptical on cable "burn-in". What exactly are we talking about with cable "burn-in"? What are the physics behind it and the impact on speaker listening ?
Thanks.

RuSsMaN

Just a break in period, ie, they will sound thier best, after a certain amount of use....

Cheers,
Russ

pdebaum

Hmmm. Break-in, burn-in, I think we need some clear definition here. No doubt you've guessed that I am just very skeptical of the so called cable burn-in or break-in, and hopefully you won't mind my hijacking of your thread by presenting a short opinion on that subject. Please do not be offended it I sound condescending or any other unsavory behavior; that would not be my intent.
On with my views :

Break-in, as I understand it, is a process to ease a device from the "rigidness" or sterility of its construction to its optimal intended functionality. This implies some sort of mechanical flex which improves over use. Keeping to our beloved audio field, one can understand for example how a speaker can break-in, since it involves a moving part, the driver cone, which must transition from a solid original rigid state (maybe the new glue at construction) to a well smooth movement when it is excited by the audio signal. The merit of break-in has always at least some physical validity. Note it's slightly different than what we call a warm-up. This rather implies a system which falls back to its original state. Something broken-in does not revert to its original first state. Once it's broken-in, it has changed forever from it original characteristics.

Burn-in, on the other hand is a reliability term, and describes a process to accelerate aging of a device to weed out early failures (also called infant mortality) due to construction glitches that might not be detectable in a simple one-shot static test. For example, in the semiconductor industry (which I am most familiar with), we burn-in components at overstressed conditions (temperature, voltage or current density) to force an original "weak" device to fail earlier rather than in the field, so we can insure a certain quality level before shipping to customers. Burn-in is intended to sort out failures inherent to the complexity of the construction, not to improve a device over its function, like break-in.

That's why I was a bit surprised to see "burn-in" referenced to an audio cable. Its function is too simple, i.e. to carry a small signal current along a short piece of wire. It doesn't need burn-in because its construction does not present obvious reliability issues (that is, besides gross construciton problems creating bad contacting).
Now the more interesting and valid term would be break-in. How can an audio cable improve over time after its construction ? What in its composition and physics warrants change in its function over time ? My answer based on my knowledge of physics and electrical engineering : NONE. Oh sure, excessive operating conditions, such as very high temperature that could melt the metal, or such high current that you have electro-migration, or excessive humidity that corrodes the contacts... etc. You see my point, these are obvious excessive environmental issues. No way it applies to the narrow function of transporting a small voltage signal over a very short distance. A cable doesn't need break-in nor burn-in for its function.

More power to the people who believe they hear audio changes the longer they "break-in" their cable. I believe its either psychological or they hear a change not related to the cable.

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers

F1nut

pdebaum

Excellent post!

I have nothing but logic & a basic knowledge of electricity to go on, but I agree with you. Years ago this "burn-in/break-in" stuff was nonexistent. I have MIT cables & I swear by them, but they sound the same now as when I first hooked them up. I think they call it marketing.

gidrah

While usually referenced in speakers is very real in interconnects. The difference in speakers is in that they are mechanical an electrical. The mechanical takes a time to soften and settle in. The electrical is based on the fact that current flows from A-B (neg-pos). In the initial burn-in all electrons (-ion transmitters) are aligned as they would normally be in any conductor. They realign according to the path of least resistance over time. This is why some cables have a little arrow from source-to-material.

I'll probably shoot him an E-mail for some .5 meters.

madmax

Hi pdebaum,
This has been a heated debate and most people on the EE end have come across as trying to be the authority without having any real knowledge in this area. Most are probably pretty knowledgable in their field but cannot accept anything past what they have experienced for themselves or can explain with basic theory. (most are far beyond basic theory in their own areas)
"A wire is a wire, carries electrons, cannot make a difference, effects cannot be seen on a scope therefore cannot make a difference, etc, etc..."
As an EE myself I have come to accept that there are differences I cannot fully explain. They are not black magic once you start looking into it. 20 years of dealing with low voltage signals (0.5 to 5 microvolt signals through 10 to 500 feet of cable) has shown me a few things. Capacitance, inductance and resistance of the cable only scratches the surface of the complexity. Shielding, wrap consistency, insulation, frequency interaction and such go a little further. Other engineers I have worked with have designed great systems just to have a little piece of cable ruin the results. Just remain open when dealing with subjects of this type. (not that you are not)
So, does lining up the electrons in a cable and running a particular group of signals through a cable for x amount of hours make any sense whatsoever? Maybe not. At least not to me. What does make sense is that if your open to it and your system permits it you may or may not hear a difference. If you are closed to the idea and know a piece of wire cannot make a difference, you will definitly not hear any difference no matter how big it is. Where is Keith when you need him.
madmax

gidrah

I'm sorry for not addressing your post in my original reply. I agree with you to a degree. It just doesn't make sense in that a conductor is a conductor, but you have to admit to the logic. As to whether or not it's hogwash, I couldn't tell you.

RuSsMaN

Nice posts guys, good opinions on both sides. I agree, Placebo effect is very high, especially with something like new cables/wire, etc etc.

I tried to be as subjective as possible. I had a $26 pair of interconnects, so they weren't that big a deal. I could use them somewhere if I found they were nothing more than ordinary. What I'm trying to say, is I did not gear myself up to be 'blown away'.


I did notice a difference after 5+ hrs, of just leaving the system on. Maybe the temperature in my house had changed, or a belly full of redmeat opened my ears a little more, or traffic outside had slowed..... I'm still skeptical on some wire/cable issues, like burn in, and whether or not it CAN actually happen. I seemed to though.....

I'm no EE, and would love to hear the EE's thoughts out there on this:

Does a system not 'settle' in over time? Even after just moving, unpacking, or re-setting up your gear, doesn't it need **** length of time to settle in (be at its best), maybe I am using a bad term, I hope this comes across as I intend.

Cheers,
Russ

nascarmann

Interesting! We all can agree that a quality cable will transfer signal better. We all "should" agree that sometimes we here what we want to here, or here what we don't want to here even if it's not really there! I have purchased a new CD and went home and listened by myself and it sounded great. A freind comes over to listen and he thinks it sounds great, but to me it's not as good as when I heard it the first time or by myself? What the hell happend? There is a since of expectation we have and the brain is always making us do and think and here thing differently? Maybe that's why we are never satisfied with our stereo equipment? What i'm trying to say is, maybe there is not "real" burn-in, but it's not to say that some do not here it, or at least think they do! The brain is "our" processor!

kanicker

Recalling my engineering coursework... electrons always follow the path of least resistence... they dont need time to do so.
Properties of a conductor can change, thus altering the path... but I doubt the properties of the copper wire would change very much in Home Audio, unless there is fluxuating interference or severe enviromental conditions.

I do believe that different conudctors produce different "sonic results" after the signal is converted... meaning the wavelengths have been altered.

It seems to me though that humidity, temp, changing visual cues, (and lets not forget speaker placement and room acoustics) will make a difference that is much easier to detect than $200 cable vs. $30 cable.

But, once all that is taken care of... the tweaker looks for what else he can tweak.... making sure that all that can be improved, in whatever small way... is improved.

This might provide piece of mind to the tweaker, but it can work the other way... I'd rather have fewer "components" in my audio chain making any impact on my music. In other words, I dont want interconnects to color my music, I want them to simply pass the signal. The audiophile's I know talk about the sonic properties of this cable and that cable... like they are colors of lipsticks or something. I've spent enough time looking for a speaker sound I liked... and I'm not even entirely sure that it's all that easy to hear these differences in cables.

If there is a difference... I fear the high end interconnect rather than crave it.

pdebaum

Interesting points from all. Thanks for sharing. Madmax001 points are right on cue (except the electron "alignment" stuff; that's way too wild for this semiconductor veteran

I am most certainly open to new ways to improve my listening and I believe that urge is in all of us. I want to believe too, to paraphrase that most single-minded FBI individual in the TV series X-Files For some people, that quest of the audio holy grail can go deeper than reason or logic, especially if real information is scarce and hopes are high.

To go back to audio cables "break-in" and my own personal quest, and if I were to make a list of things to look to improve my audio system, that would be the last item on the list, and I would only consider quality of construction for reliability.

I don't want to give the impression I have authority in this matter. Suffice to say I have confidence in my understanding of electrical properties. I know all too well how easy it is to get cocky and close-minded when one thinks he/she understands something. I acknowledge science and its intent to model the universe, but I do leave an open door to not yet discovered behaviours and theories.

But for modeling electrical properties of a conductor, I do believe that modern material science cannot discover much more or anything at all. Furthermore, given the context of the transport of a small signal with audio frequencies over short distances, there's even less wiggling room for unexplained or undiscovered behaviour. Most experts would agree in this.

I don't want to get in the technical side of conductor properties, madmax001 gave a a good low-down of it. Most people's eyes would glaze over real quick anyway, and moreover, details will be picked on and focused at, and experts would throw balls back and forth all over the place, losing the larger crowd of non-technical people real fast.
I have faith a cable function is fairly fixed for its intended use and possible variations are minimal, and only excessive deviations from its quality of construction and from its intended environment can have non-negligible effects on it. That is my whole premise on the subject.

So suffice to say that in my particular case, I would pick an audio cable not for some wild or esoteric claims (and I put electron alignment right there, no offense intended), but for its quality on well known and understood effects, such as good shielding, quality of joints, gauge, etc. I would put more my money on electronic components, especially in something so complex as an amplifier, where one can understand that important variations may result from the smallest variation of quality or design.

Cheers!

Aaron

Q. Do AudioQuest cables require a break-in period?

A. Yes. In fact, all cables require a break-in period - even so-called "lampcord" cables that are often supplied with speakers. "Break in" is a misnomer. What's really happening is that the insulation (or dielectric to give it its proper name) is being "formed". This "forming" is caused by the dielectric absorbing energy from the conductor when a signal is present (i.e. when current is flowing). Every cable requires something to separate the negative conductors from the positive conductors - a dielectric. However, because the dielectric is in direct contact with the conductor, it will interact with the conductor whenever a current flows, absorbing energy from the conductor. What the dielectric does with that energy once absorbed depends upon its quality. PVC releases the energy back into the conductor a split second later, causing a kind of "smearing" of the signal. In contrast, Teflon absorbs significantly less energy in the first place, turns most of the energy into heat, and whatever energy remains is released back into the conductor virtually instantaneously. This causes significantly less damage to the signal which is why - all things being equal - a cable with Teflon insulation will sound better than the same cable using a lesser dielectric. This absorption of energy causes the molecules in the dielectric to be rearranged from a random order into a uniform order. Once the molecules are fully rearranged, the cable is said to be "broken in". The dielectric will now absorb less energy from the conductor, causing less harm, and improving performance. To ensure that the cable stays "broken-in", there must be a signal present in the cable at all times. It's obviously not practical to have your system playing 24 hours a day every day, but you can at least leave the components switched on. Even when there is no music playing (i.e. there is no current flowing down the cable), there is a potential present. This will ensure that your cables (as well as your components) remain at the peak of their performance. However - and this is the important bit - if there is no signal present in the cable at all (i.e. if the all the components are switched off, or if the cable is disconnected), the molecules will rearrange themselves back into their random order. In other words, the cable is almost like new again!

pdebaum

Thanks for that gem, Aaron! Am I the only one feeling bewildered, even slightly sick, by the outrageous claims of this article while in awe of the marketing genius of the writer ? I think I only heard more believable techno-babble only during a Star Trek episode.
Entertaining though...

RuSsMaN

I don't know brothas, I'm just sitting here with my mouth agape, feeling dumber by the second.

I do know one thing, I like my cables, price, build and sound.

Leave the gear on? Oh I don't think so.....

Cheers,
Russ

I think Monster offering some entertaining 'ramblings' also....

Aaron

I don't know, guys. I've had my fair share of electrical engineering courses and even one materials science course, but none of them got into this stuff. It might be interesting to read through the technicals papers other cable companies' web sites like MIT, Monster, Kimber, Transparent, etc. and see if there are any common denominators regarding break-in, cable performance/problems, etc.

Aaron

pdebaum

Russ, that's the spirit, more power to you if you appreciate your cables. If you feel they are worth the money you paid for, then you are a winner.
This is different from people who slowly bury themselves in denial because of the fear of the justification of a questionable purchase. This is all too human though, even I felt that most painful emotion a few times in my life. Even audio related; loathe me now people for I bought Bose once in another lifetime

Anyway, people, just remember that we don't live in a very honest world and that there are sharks out there only willing to misled us or take advantage of our ignorance. Remember your law of diminishing returns and hold fast to that inner good sense we all have to a certain degree. Knowledge is power.

madmax

Ok, so I woke up at 4:00 am this morning and replied earlier. That put me back to sleep. Let's let sleeping cables lie.

A very well controlled experiment I did the other day pointed out something very important to me. I recently got a couple of tube amps with the tubes exposed. They look awesome. The test was to play the same section of a song over and over. The first few times I tried to pick out all the little sounds to form an overall feeling of what it sounded like. I then set a piece of cardboard in front of the amps so I couldn't see them. The sound got sort of uncontrolled and unfocused. I then removed the cardboard and that glorious sound was back. Being a technical person I tried it both ways several times. (yea, no social life).

Conclusion: The sound was much better every time when I could see the equipment.

So what does that mean? I don't care because it sounded better. You might think I'm taking pdebaum's side but I'm not. In fact quite the opposite. I know that visual queue's can impact how you perceive the sound. If I truely thought visuals did not affect the sound I probably would not have heard any difference.
madmax

RuSsMaN

I agree max, long long ago, when I upgraded from a 19" tv to a 27" inch tv, I could swear my entire HT system sounded better......

Cheers,
Russ

madmax

pdebaum,
Where does this come from:

"This is different from people who slowly bury themselves in denial because of the fear of the justification of a questionable purchase."

Justification of questionable purchases? Bose? Married?

pdebaum

You have me there madmax001 I didn't do my homework 7 years ago when I bought the Bose cubes. The internet was such a jungle at that time. :: sigh :: Wife and I wanted small speakers and we were total newbies in all audio stuff. Now I have rescinded my sinful ways and moved to the RT2000i tanks Talk of a mammoth change! Both in size and quality. LoL

tonyv1

Here's George Cardas' response:

Cable Break-In
by George Cardas

There are many factors that make cable break-in necessary and many reasons why the results vary. If you measure a new cable with a voltmeter you will see a standing voltage because good dielectrics make poor conductors. They hold a charge much like a rubbed cat’s fur on a dry day. It takes a while for this charge to equalize in the cable. Better cables often take longer to break-in. The best "air dielectric" techniques, such as Teflon tube construction, have large non-conductive surfaces to hold charge, much like the cat on a dry day.

Cables that do not have time to settle, such as musical instrument and microphone cables, often use conductive dielectrics like rubber or carbonized cotton to get around the problem. This dramatically reduces microphonics and settling time, but the other dielectric characteristics of these insulators are poor and they do not qualify sonically for high-end cables. Developing non-destructive techniques for reducing and equalizing the charge in excellent dielectric is a challenge in high end cables.

The high input impedance necessary in audio equipment makes uneven dielectric charge a factor. One reason settling time takes so long is we are linking the charge with mechanical stress/strain relationships. The physical make up of a cable is changed slightly by the charge and visa versa. It is like electrically charging the cat. The physical make up of the cat is changed by the charge. It is "frizzed" and the charge makes it's hair stand on end. "Teflon Cats", cables and their dielectric, take longer to loose this charge and reach physical homeostasis.

The better the dielectric's insulation, the longer it takes to settle. A charge can come from simply moving the cable (Piezoelectric effect and simple friction), high voltage testing during manufacture, etc. Cable that has a standing charge is measurably more microphonic and an uneven distribution of the charge causes something akin to structural return loss in a rising impedance system. When I took steps to eliminate these problems, break-in time was reduced and the cable sounded generally better. I know Bill Low at Audioquest has also taken steps to minimize this problem.

Mechanical stress is the root of a lot of the break-in phenomenon and it is not just a factor with cables. As a rule, companies set up audition rooms at high end audio shows a couple of days ahead of time to let them break in. The first day the sound is usually bad and it is very stressful. The last day sounds great. Mechanical stress in speaker cables, speaker cabinets, even the walls of the room, must be relaxed in order for the system to sound its best. This is the same phenomenon we experience in musical instruments. They sound much better after they have been played. Many musicians leave their instruments in front of a stereo that is playing to get them to warm up. This is very effective with a new guitar. Pianos are a stress and strain nightmare. Any change, even in temperature or humidity, will degrade their sound. A precisely tuned stereo system is similar.

You never really get all the way there, you sort of keep halving the distance to zero. Some charge is always retained. It is generally in the MV range in a well settled cable. Triboelectric noise in a cable is a function of stress and retained charge, which a good cable will release with both time and use. How much time and use is dependent on the design of the cable, materials used, treatment of the conductors during manufacture, etc.

There are many small tricks and ways of dealing with the problem. Years ago, I began using Teflon tube "air dielectric" construction and the charge on the surface of the tubes became a real issue. I developed a fluid that adds a very slight conductivity to the surface of the dielectric. Treated cables actually have a better measured dissipation factor and the sound of the cables improved substantially. It had been observed in mid eighties that many cables could be improved by wiping them with a anti-static cloth. Getting something to stick to Teflon was the real challenge. We now use an anti-static fluid in all our cables and anti-static additives in the final jacketing material. This attention to charge has reduced break-in time and in general made the cable sound substantially better. This is due to the reduction of overall charge in the cable and the equalization of the distributed charge on the surface of conductor jacket.

It seems there are many infinitesimal factors that add up. Overtime you find one leads down a path to another. In short, if a dielectric surface in a cable has a high or uneven charge which dissipates with time or use, triboelectric and other noise in the cable will also reduce with time and use. This is the essence of break-in

A note of caution. Moving a cable will, to some degree, traumatize it. The amount of disturbance is relative to the materials used, the cable's design and the amount of disturbance. Keeping a very low level signal in the cable at all times helps. At a show, where time is short, you never turn the system off. I also believe the use of degaussing sweeps, such as on the Cardas Frequency Sweep and Burn-In Record (side 1, cut 2a) helps.

A small amount of energy is retained in the stored mechanical stress of the cable. As the cable relaxes, a certain amount of the charge is released, like in an electroscope. This is the electromechanical connection.

Many factors relating to a cable's break-in are found in the sonic character or signature of a cable. If we look closely at dielectrics we find a similar situation. The dielectric actually changes slightly as it charges and its dissipation factor is linked to its hardness. In part these changes are evidenced in the standing charge of the cable. A new cable, out of the bag, will have a standing charge when uncoiled. It can have as much as several hundred millivolts. If the cable is left at rest it will soon drop to under one hundred, but it will takes days of use in the system to fall to the teens and it never quite reaches zero. These standing charges appear particularly significant in low level interconnects to preamps with high impedance inputs.

The interaction of mechanical and electrical stress/strain variables in a cable are integral with the break-in, as well as the resonance of the cable. Many of the variables are lumped into a general category called triboelectric noise. Noise is generated in a cable as a function of the variations between the components of the cable. If a cable is flexed, moved, charged, or changed in any way, it will be a while before it is relaxed again. The symmetry of the cable's construction is a big factor here. Very careful design and execution by the manufacturer helps a lot. Very straight forward designs can be greatly improved with the careful choice of materials and symmetrical construction. Audioquest has built a large and successful high-end cable company around these principals.

The basic rules for the interaction of mechanical and electrical stress/strain variables holds true, regardless of scale or medium. Cables, cats, pianos and rooms all need to relax in order to be at their best. Constant attention to physical and environmental conditions, frequent use and the degaussing of a system help it achieve and maintain a relaxed state.

A note on breaking in box speakers, a process which seems to take forever. When I want to speed up the break-in process, I place the speakers face to face, with one speaker wired out of phase and play a surf CD through them. After about a week, I place them in their normal listening position and continue the process for three more days. After that, I play a degaussing sweep a few times. Then it is just a matter of playing music and giving them time.

wangotango68

the magic of cut and paste.


scott:D

pdebaum

tonyv1, thanks for pasting that article.

Again, I am utterly dumbfounded by the worse techno babble than in the AudioQuest Q&A article that Aaron posted. Frankly, who can make sense of something like :

Cable that has a standing charge is measurably more microphonic and an uneven distribution of the charge causes something akin to structural return loss in a rising impedance system

?
I can't and while not a real expert in material science (my expertise is building semiconductors), I don't consider myself completely uneducated.

So it appears that cable break-in proponents are blaming our good ol' friend : static electricity. I find the idea, though ingenious, totally ludicrous. I don't want to go technical, but even if significant charges accumulate over insulated parts of a cable, they will build-up over the surface and will naturally want to escape to some lower potential. As soon as you connect a cable to a system or just handle it, you give plenty of opportunities for the charges to instantly escape through electro-static discharge. This is not a slow process over time that can explain break-in. Moreover, static charge build-ups represent VERY small quantities of energy, especially on something as physically small as the surface of a cable insulator! Waving around MegaVolts instead of the proper charge unit, the Coulomb is also very misleading. Actually I find the whole article completely confusing and misleading.
But that's just me of course.

rnoseworthy

I know I have often wondered if my system would sound better with 12ga speaker wire versus the 14ga wire I have now. Then I ask myself what of the speaker wire inside the speakers? If that wiring is not of the same quality as my other cables, I am wasting time and money. If I remember correctly the manual for all my Polk speakers state to use 16ga or larger, which would lead me to believe the speakers use 16ga wires. Just a thought.

madmax

Actually the small wire in the speaker has little to do with it. Lets say you want to pass a lot of current through a long cable. You need a larger cable than if it were a short span. The large cable has lower voltage loss than a short one. Keep in mind that the cable in the speaker is a short span and has little voltage loss. What really matters is that the majority of the cable is an adequate guage given the length and amount of current you want to pass through it. Think of a fuse. The wire in the fuse is hair thin. How does it pass enough current without a large voltage drop? Because it is so short.

pedebaum,
I knew you were married and have other responsibilities given some of your responses.

So tell me what you know about the microphonics given static and such. Where I work we have problems with microphonics with the very small signals I mentioned way above in a previous post. Walk by one of our sensors and bang, big noise spikes. Step on a cable and forget reading anything of any reasonable accuracy. I have been assuming an inductive charge released in the cable due to changing position of the wires but this static thing has me wondering.

madmax