Ricardus
Addicted to Fun and Learning
But his are PERFECT WAVES. So I mean, that's GOTTA be awesome, right?That's true -- I edited my comment for clarity: McGowan says the Audioquest snake oil is better than his.
But his are PERFECT WAVES. So I mean, that's GOTTA be awesome, right?That's true -- I edited my comment for clarity: McGowan says the Audioquest snake oil is better than his.
But his are PERFECT WAVES. So I mean, that's GOTTA be awesome, right?
In an RCA both ends cable? No, because the "return" inner connector must still be connected to the earthed side of the RCA at both ends. Ground loop still exists (if ground loop is the problem), and it is still used as the signal return path.Is there any noise (EMI, hum, etc.) suppression advantage in using RCA cables with two inner conductors that complete the actual circuit and a separate shield that's only connected to the "return" inner conductor (and chassis ground) at one end?
In an RCA both ends cable? No, because the "return" inner connector must still be connected to the earthed side of the RCA at both ends. Ground loop still exists (if ground loop is the problem), and it is still used as the signal return path.
Even in this case I don't think you have a benefit. The screen is electrically connected to the return signal and is only connected to one end. So the effectiveness of the screen is reduced, but you've also put any interference picked up by the screen in close proximity to the second conductor.I wasn't referring to ground loops specifically -- you're clearly correct about that -- but rather to overall susceptibility to noise stemming from outside interference. Thanks for responding.
And I would contend they aren't, you just haven't performed the right testing to show it.
For fun I just plugged in one of these freebie cables into my headphone amp, not much difference in apparent quality of what you reviewed (heck, mine has gold plating), and is a class of cable that is part of your generalization.
View attachment 203217
Wow, just wow. 60 Hz hum galore, nearly as loud as the music playing itself, and the cable is nowhere near a power line. I didn't expect it to be this bad (was expecting a quiet background hum), but these were atrocious. Then I plugged in a (inexpensive) shielded cable of the similar type, no more hum. Would you like me to ship this cable to you for more extensive testing? I unfortunately do not have a precision audio analyzer sitting around.
quantification of human hearing
I meant terminated on Amazon.
That's been one of my primary reasons for sticking with BJC for audio cables. Quality materials, quality workmanship and quality assurance. They may not be as good an option worldwide as they are in the US; I don't know if World's Best Cables has the same level of QA or not.That's why i keep on saying that manufacturing and QA is what matters. And that implies welded or crimped joints done by machine, accurate control.
It is silliness in the Audio Precision UI. Sadly it has no option to round those values to something more sensible especially since the last digits jump all over the place. It needs to have an averaging function and resolution setting (it has this in graphing but not the dashboard).No point in going to 3 'dismal' places when reporting a dB value.
Don’t do that! Someone will believe it!The reason why the apx loop back test matches a cheap cable is obvious, its wired with cheap cable inside.. super obs.