Cable Break-in/adjustment period

comfortablycurt

lightman1 wrote: »

My stars say you all suck. Born in '68 and can hear a difference as well. Atta boy Curt! Stand up for us evens!
Mike is a freak and Ben told me Joe only has a Coby boombox for system.
I believe what my ears tell my emotions when the music plays.
Science or no science.

Hacks.

Evens rule!!





Nice Pie Mike! That's what this thread needs.;)

NJPOLKER

I'd like to burn in everyone of the women, except one However if I had to burn them all in to get them all I guess I'd bite the bullet.

lightman1

Dat's one BIG cable Monster's got there!
Inversely propotionate to The MIT's, I see.

SolidSqual

Here's some of the accompanying documentation that came with the Shotgun S3s.


The product literature is deceiving on its face and might lead one to believe that the Shotgun S1 is the lower tier product given its cover here:

Montoya

I for one am a firm beleiver in using quality cables. But the one thing I think happens with cables is they seem to have a sonic signature of there own depending on what equipment they are connected to. I'm sure this makes sense to those that have done comparisons finding a truly neautral cable is next to impossible given this issue but it does let you hone your music presentation. I have had nay sayers come over to the house for comparisons and they became believers. This goes hand in hand with cable burn in it is not a myth.

NJPOLKER

Keiko wrote: »

I like you. You can come over to my house and boink my sister.

I am a believer too. Can I come over too?

kevhed72

I just purchased a pair of Signal Analog 2's for a whopping 61.00 with shipping. I want to run a comparison with my AQ Sidewinders and generic Radio Shack ICs when they arrive and post a review here. This should push the thread count on this subject to about 800 or so....I'll try to keep the test as "scientific" as possible.

Cpyder

kevhed72 wrote: »

I just purchased a pair of Signal Analog 2's for a whopping 61.00 with shipping. I want to run a comparison with my AQ Sidewinders and generic Radio Shack ICs when they arrive and post a review here. This should push the thread count on this subject to about 800 or so....I'll try to keep the test as "scientific" as possible.

Looking forward to it! If you know it, you should post the resistence, inductance, and capacitance of each wire.

Montoya

Does anyone here play guitar? If you do take note that although electric guitar strings produce the same note some sound more bright or warmer than others. Altough when tuning they register on a meter as follows below but even with this fact my child can tell the difference in just a simple string change. I guess it's all in our heads though because the tuning meter registers it exactly the same no matter the string brand or type once it is tuned.

String Scientific pitch Helmholtz pitch Interval from middle C Frequency
first E4 e' major third above 329.63 Hz
second B3 b minor second below 246.94 Hz
third G3 g perfect fourth below 196.00 Hz
fourth D3 d minor seventh below 146.83 Hz
fifth A2 A minor tenth below 110 Hz
sixth E2 E minor thirteenth below 82.41 Hz

NJPOLKER

Cpyder wrote: »

Looking forward to it! If you know it, you should post the resistence, inductance, and capacitance of each wire.

WHY? That a pretty dumb thing to ask. I just want to hear about the sound quality after break-in. For most of us that's what really counts.

WilliamM2

kevhed72

Cpyder wrote: »

Looking forward to it! If you know it, you should post the resistence, inductance, and capacitance of each wire.

I believe I can look up for both the AQs and Signals, (after I go out and purchase a pocket-pen protector, white lab coat, and thick glasses) but probably not the Radio Shack ICs due they are about 15 years old...as well as post the sound-quality differences between the 3.

I also did fire up some music when I got home today, and honestly did hear a "better" quality of sound the longer I played music. The first couple of tracks seemed (yes, objective) a bit harsh, distorted, and unorganized to me. As time progressed and I went from CDs to an LP, the sound did "warm" and become clearer w/ more detail. Cpyder, have you ever tried / noticed this?

Cpyder

NJPOLKER wrote: »

WHY? That a pretty dumb thing to ask. I just want to hear about the sound quality after break-in. For most of us that's what really counts.

Possibly because these are the ONLY parameters that affect an audio signal.

NJPolker - Please, inform us all as to what level of education you have obtained. GED, High School Diploma, BS, BA, etc...

Ricardo

Yawn...

F1nut

Cpyder wrote: »

Possibly because these are the ONLY parameters that affect an audio signal.

Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance on the matter.

Face

Here you go William:
http://www.ehow.com/video_4410061_trim-ear-hair.html

Ricardo

Face wrote: »

Here you go William:
http://www.ehow.com/video_4410061_trim-ear-hair.html

That post right there already makes this thread priceless!

hearingimpared

Ricardo wrote: »

That post right there already makes this thread priceless!

I guess he now knows what that rustling sound was when comparing cables.:D

cnh

That ear hair demo would have been hilarious if it weren't so close to 'home'? And let me tell you that guy would not have had so easy a time with my ears! He'd need a bit more than a trimmer!

cnh

DarqueKnight

I sometimes wonder if the gross parameters of inductance, capacitance and resistance are largely inadequate to describe the behavior of an audio signal conductor.

When you think about it, an audio signal is primarily a stream (flow) of electrons interacting with the atoms in a conductor. Since electrons are subatomic particles that interact with the conductor material at the atomic and subatomic level, I wonder if we need to start thinking about signal integrity from an atomic and subatomic (quantum) standpoint. The US Navy and AT&T Bell Laboratories conducted some research into quantum noise and quantum noise filtering for communications signals. Fortunately, some of that research has filtered down to consumer audio products.

When we get down to the quantum level, are such parameters as L, C and R the main determinants of signal/conductor interaction? Looking at the math, I don't think so. Even more than this, listening to the effects of "quantum filtering" devices in my audio and home theater systems indicates to me that there is a lot more going on between an audio signal and a conductor than that which can be measured with voltage, current and LCR meters and oscilloscopes.

What do you guys think?

AudioGenics

are you referring to "Shot Noise" ?
relevant to optical devices such as lasers.

DarqueKnight

No.:)



Such good sound.;)

kawizx9r

http://www.firstwatt.com/downloads/spkrcabl.pdf - interesting read. (Speaker cable)

Btw, I'm a believer! Bought some IC's myself from forum members here, and received free speaker wire from another member

Cpyder

kawizx9r wrote: »

http://www.firstwatt.com/downloads/spkrcabl.pdf - interesting read. (Speaker cable)

Btw, I'm a believer! Bought some IC's myself from forum members here, and received free speaker wire from another member

Good post! Very educational!

heiney9

kawizx9r wrote: »

http://www.firstwatt.com/downloads/spkrcabl.pdf - interesting read. (Speaker cable)

Btw, I'm a believer! Bought some IC's myself from forum members here, and received free speaker wire from another member

I've posted that link several times before and it is an interesting read. Do realize it's from 1980, some things have changed, but the article was written right as audio consumers demanded better cables. And it is an attempt to show how cables measure different. It doesn't really correlate how we hear those differences but obviously not all cable is equal in it's properties or how it interacts with the audio signal and amp/speakers/source material.

I am probably the biggest Nelson Pass fan around. He never really makes a stance on cables and he states the cables shouldn't cost more than the equipment.

H9

I'm a huge believer in cables as I have heard many, many differences and not always positive.

NJPOLKER

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I sometimes wonder if the gross parameters of inductance, capacitance and resistance are largely inadequate to describe the behavior of an audio signal conductor.

When you think about it, an audio signal is primarily a stream (flow) of electrons interacting with the atoms in a conductor. Since electrons are subatomic particles that interact with the conductor material at the atomic and subatomic level, I wonder if we need to start thinking about signal integrity from an atomic and subatomic (quantum) standpoint. The US Navy and AT&T Bell Laboratories conducted some research into quantum noise and quantum noise filtering for communications signals. Fortunately, some of that research has filtered down to consumer audio products.

When we get down to the quantum level, are such parameters as L, C and R the main determinants of signal/conductor interaction? Looking at the math, I don't think so. Even more than this, listening to the effects of "quantum filtering" devices in my audio and home theater systems indicates to me that there is a lot more going on between an audio signal and a conductor than that which can be measured with voltage, current and LCR meters and oscilloscopes.

What do you guys think?

DK
I'll tell you what I think!!
I think my system sounds awesome and thanks go to most of the members here who have helped me out greatly :cool:
I realized the other day I do not have nearly the hours need to have all the caps, resistors and cables properly burned-in/adjustment period. So I have been letting it run for a few days. It takes a long long long time to get 200+ hours on a system when you only listen for a hour or so a few days a week :eek:

cnh

heiney9 wrote: »

I've posted that link several times before and it is an interesting read. Do realize it's from 1980, some things have changed, but the article was written right as audio consumers demanded better cables. And it is an attempt to show how cables measure different. It doesn't really correlate how we hear those differences but obviously not all cable is equal in it's properties or how it interacts with the audio signal and amp/speakers/source material.

I am probably the biggest Nelson Pass fan around. He never really makes a stance on cables and he states the cables shouldn't cost more than the equipment.

H9

I'm a huge believer in cables as I have heard many, many differences and not always positive.

There is a wise man! Cable to equipment price ratio...honest and good common sense.

I do not have a vested interest in this argument...I use what I can...and have heard 'differences' but I think Nelson has hit the nail on the head with that statement above!

cnh

Montoya

I don't understand how some people can buy speakers for 1,000-3,000 dollars or more and other equipment and go cheap on the cables. It makes no sense at least pay 20-30% of what you paid for all your equipment on cables. It's just like the guy that buys an awesome sports car and when it comes time to buy tires he buys the cheapest ones he can find because he thinks a tire is a tire.

DarqueKnight

Sometimes a picture is instructive. The diagram below shows the retail prices of components in a hypothetical, yet reasonable, high quality, high resolution, high end audio system.

Assuming we are only going to consider well engineered cables whose prices truthfully reflect the design, engineering and manufacturing effort expended on them, what would you consider to be a reasonable amount to spend on cables that will preserve the signal integrity of these components?

A block diagram of a modest high end audio system (MSRP $ amounts).

hearingimpared

Buying used cables or MITs from Joe Abrams you could get away with < $1000 in that example. New prices would be much higher.