Not too impressed with my Signal Cables

RuSsMaN

Well butter my butt and call me a biscuit, a wire shootout with powered towers!!!

What receiver and cd player will you use? A Pioneer? This should be a worthwhile test. Nutty? Nah, we moved WAY past nutty a long time ago.....

Cheers,
Russ

nascarmann

Will there be an admission price to this one?

Steve@3dai

Looked last night and I'm using coax from my DVD player. Monster coax. Hell, I can't even remember what I am using.

I am using AR (best buy stuff) optical from my XBox, but optical is the only connection for Dolby Digital that is available. So don't have much of a choice.

- Steven

Lee Bailey

Originally posted by Ron-P
Oh yeah, let me also add that the ground loop isolater from Radio Shack did nothing except for create a humming sound.


Peace Out~:D

But Ron, could it carry a tune?:D

HBombToo

I have been following this post pretty close and would like to add a small piece. I am new to the home HT stuff and would never claim to be an authority by any stretch. I'm just adding a portion of what I've been educated on regarding uWave and optics, but the principals apply.

In any interconnect and transmission medium the signal propagation is impacted by the geometrical and chemical properties of the transmission medium. If we consider the data rate's involved, I believe @ 96kbits, the transmission mediam will have intrinsic modes based off the cable type. These modes are the noise present over the transmission medium. In short what I want too say is that their is less potential for moding over an optical link verse a coaxial link which reduces noise.

I believe that when you guys compare coax to coax, a higher quality cable should reduce the impact of moding of the transmission medium. When we compare moding properties between a single mode fiber verse say a step index fiber the step index is designed to eliminate certain modes which will reduce the overall SNR of the system, hence a cleaner reproduction.


Just a thought and if you guys want to kick my **** I don't blame ya.

Henry

Ron-P

Well, I'm not going to kick any ****. I'm not one for all that techo mumbo-jumbo.

All I know is the more I listen, the more I really, really like. These are some amazing cables. Watched U-571 last night and all the little pings, creeks and noises were friggen awesome. Had no where near this kind of detail with just the Marantz. The mid-bass increase I got with these Signal Cables is fairly strong, I need to re-calibrate believe it or not.

Got my order on for a digital coax from Frank. Shipping him a check next week. Will it stop there? Nope, I'm hooked.

So, how's Franks speaker wire (like I need to ask), has anyone bought and used it? I might just dump my Monster and re-wire the rig.


Peace Out~:D

madmax

I totally agree with the properties of the optical cable. BUT, that is not where the problem lies. The RF signal (headed out of the coax jack) is run through another circuit to change to optical, run the fiber then run through yet another circuit to change back to RF on the other end. That is two more changes to the signal path than if you went straight through using the coax. Every time you run the signal through another semiconductor the performance is degraded.

RF Output signal >>> optical circuit >>> optical cable >>> optical circuit >>> RF input signal
verses
RF output signal >>> Coax >>> RF input signal

madmax

Ron-P

Did not know that, thanks Mad.


Peace Out~:D

hoosier21

Ron is all this improvement just with the cable change? Or is this all the changes? amps + cables + bi-wiring (I think you were using a single wire before the adcom amps)

Ron-P

I was bi-wiring before. Now I am bi-amping.

All this change includes the amps and interconnects. I noticed improvement with just the amps and now even more of an improvement with the interconnects.


Peace Out~:D

HBombToo

You are absolutely correct Madmax001, but you are assuming the the lasers and receivers degrade/lose the information that is contained by the signal.

PCM by the laser, mod/demod, is very well understood by now and very accurate. I have seen mentioned in other posts that for longer runs use optical which is a direct reflection of noise reduction between components. Point in case, if we look at the cable companies across the States, they are all going to optical transport because of the increased bandwidth associated, accuracy of mod/demod and Noise reduction over the transport.

As the bandwidth/data increases in our HT systems the thermal noise increases by ~kBT. k is Boltsman constant, B is Bandwidth and T is temp in Kelvin. We are better off at this point sending light bits than analogue because there is no coupling between our separates such as amplifiers. Remember if we stay analogue all the way through we have to add the noise contribution of each unit, probably by the equation ~10Log(N) where N is the number of units in the system. By light out of the processor we reduce the noie by N-1.

OucH! this is getting messy.

Now Ron, Do you want to kick my ****:) I might deserve it.... LOL

hoosier21

Hell I might

I didn't know we had anyone on here that knew anything, this forum is only for those with two digit IQ's and ****-talking knowitalls.

HBombToo

Don't give me tooo much credit??? My IQ starts in the 2 thirty pack range and is reduced incrementally by eah and every beer I drink. The final outcome is a total TARD, but i have fun.

Steve@3dai

Oh man, if my **** could talk, I wonder what it would say.

I'm more of a fan of optical, because of the less risk of interferrence. But that's because it just makes more sense to me.

madmax

Some of the key items are that the average distance is normally less than 1 meter, we are only connecting two devices, the bandwidth required is far below what the RF cable can support, the signal only goes as far as the preamp via optical or RF and the coupling is based on ground differences which are minimal given a common sense power connection scheme. Don't go too far away from the system you are dealing with because the specifics will make or break you. Try some long runs, separate supply circuits and high ambient noise and you have a point. Given the average audio system you only have the added noise from two additional signal conversions.
madmax

danger boy

i got here late.. as usual.. but i read all the posts. i just want to add.. that there are other interconnect cables out there than just the obvious moster cables. I'm not a fan of monster.. but everyone has their own likes. it's cool. I just recently added Silvercats cables to run from the preouts of my Marantz receiver to the 5 mono block amps (also Marantz) and using these Catcables. the sound is fantastic. I believe that using the same receiver pre outs and well as the same brand of amps DOES make a difference in my opinion. check out catcable.com for more about the silvercats cables.
the cables i use from the DVD audio player the the receiver are IXOS cables. I used IXOS because no one else makes a cable with 6 RCA to 6 RCA connectors all in one. reasonable price and the same high constrution design as monster.

mantis

So is what your saying you can't do a wire shootout with powered towers?I think you can, and who said thats where I was going to do my testing,I have a world of gear to test this on.
Pioneer Elite gear isn't good enough??Damn I thought if I used my DVD player The DV47a, it would be ok,guess I will have to go to work and use the Krell,Mines to low speed.As far as a cd player I thought about my Pioneer Elite pdf19 or my Sony CDP-AX1ES.But I guess they aren't good enough.I will have to do the test at work, I don't own any worthy gear to do this tyoe of shootout.
Russman,
where are you going with this???
You better do the test for me, you got better stuff,Post back your results,and I'll take your word for it.