• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

AudioQuest Wind High-end Cable Review

Lambda

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
841
Likes
656
and that's exactly what was tested by Amir. Just not calibrated what could be done (and more) in an EMC lab which Amir does not have.
And this was the only test able to show a real difference.
It dose not need to be calibrated but a little bit more reproducible would be nice.

That is a LOT of combinations.
Do you listen?
Just one measurement with a relativity High known resistor is sufficient to calculate the performance from there.
EDIT: one change mayor change to the setup now add 1K
o lower HF common mode currents in specific cases. It will do NOTHING for ground loops
Whats the return part for the current?
Its ground... so why you refuse to call it ground loop?

What the ferrite does in your case is increase the impedance for common mode but NOT for the signals traveling through that cable. A lower HF
It effectively is a common mode choke and thas what they do

(does nothing for mains leakage etc.)
Well It effectively is a common mode choke with a very small inductance. therefore its effect at mains frequency is negligibly small.

A ferrite is only filtering common mode. It increases the common mode impedance and not the differential mode (what is passing through the coax).
Yes i know that's what common mode chokes do

You could only change the common mode impedance of that cable and thus won't influence the FR.
And the ideal Connection would have:
High common mode impedance
Low differential impedance
and no influence on FR

Only specific ferrites (there are different types for different freq. bands)
I know. I have some education about soft magnetic materials.

only do something just outside of the audible band.
If you mean having high losses at audible band then yes only some.
But as long as you keep em from saturating there is no reason a ferrit would not work at audible frequency's.
But as mentioned the effect is very limited because of the low inductance.

So you do feel that the test was inconclusive because not a lot more tests were done under many extreme conditions
The conclusions that can be drawn from the test have limits and don't apply in all cases.
that's all.

To me it feels like your trying to attack me and and undermine my knowledge of the topic.

So i'm not sure if you actually interested discussing constructive ideas and maybe now concepts to streamline the testing and make the results more Conclusive.
In a way that they are not less Conclusive then they are now for this case.

1. the use of a defined as source impedance 1K
Why? Why not? the higher the better the captive cable influences show up. Same reason one would scale the y axis to +-1dB
Same reason we look at the distortion graph down to -140dB and not just cut it off at -115 and say its perfect. its nice to see

2. Replace the transform test with something like this.
s-l500.jpg

Play a Sine sweep at given volume. still not calibrated or linear but reproducible and comparable.
Also Rejection vs. frequency

also. Terminate the cable under test in something like this
10pcs-lot-Straight-RCA-Female-to-Female-Adapter-Screw-Mount-Gold-Plated-Dual-RCA-Coupler-Extender.jpg_350x350.jpg


Connect there grounds together so measured Loop impedance is only(mainly) cable impedance + contact impedance.


3. (Tahts an independent/extra test)
Connect one side to of the cable to the AP analyzer and short the other side with an end cap.
510W2rvVhyL._SX342_.jpg

Something like this but the other way around...

Then use a audio amplifier and a resistor to apply Commenmode Current to to the shorted end.
Play a sine sweep and you Have a common mode current picup/rejection over frequency.
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
10,123
Likes
22,268
Location
The Neverlands
Do you listen?
Just one measurement with a relativity High known resistor is sufficient to calculate the performance from there.
EDIT: one change mayor change to the setup now add 1K

Its not just 1 measurement is it ? It would be all measurements thus double the time. And then you only have 50 Ohm and 1k. People like you will complain why not higher, why not 2k or 600 Ohm.

Yes i know that's what common mode chokes do

It is not a common mode choke. A common mode choke filters signal lines (in common mode).
A ferrite only increases the impedance on the outside of the cable and does do anythingt to the signal inside the shield.

1. the use of a defined as source impedance 1K
Why? Why not? the higher the better the captive cable influences show up. Same reason one would scale the y axis to +-1dB
Same reason we look at the distortion graph down to -140dB and not just cut it off at -115 and say its perfect. its nice to see

Why 1k ? for which cable length ? Is it a standard test ? when using a 1k source what load should be used ?
Why not just measure capacitance per meter and you can calculate the FR at any source resistance you want ?
Upto which frequency should be measured ?
Only FR bit also distortion ? Test with and without magnetic or electric fields at which strength and why at a particular strength ?

That's the problem with 'adding' additional measurements... there will always be more to measure.

Just write a proposal with tests for Amir. Tests that make sense and are preferably standardized and ask if he is willing to buy a clamp and inject signals. What signals do you want. What fieldstrength and what bands ? What currents do you want injected in the shield or should Amir just connect a 1V trafo across the screen ? What resistance should that circuit have ? Only mains ? What magnetic fields should be used ?

2. Replace the transform test with something like this.
s-l500.jpg

Play a Sine sweep at given volume. still not calibrated or linear but reproducible and comparable.
Also Rejection vs. frequency

also. Terminate the cable under test in something like this
10pcs-lot-Straight-RCA-Female-to-Female-Adapter-Screw-Mount-Gold-Plated-Dual-RCA-Coupler-Extender.jpg_350x350.jpg


Connect there grounds together so measured Loop impedance is only(mainly) cable impedance + contact impedance.

Why ? what would this tell you ? Why not inject the proper way and calibrated using a clamp ?


3. (Tahts an independent/extra test)
Connect one side to of the cable to the AP analyzer and short the other side with an end cap.
510W2rvVhyL._SX342_.jpg

Something like this but the other way around...

Then use a audio amplifier and a resistor to apply Commenmode Current to to the shorted end.
Play a sine sweep and you Have a common mode current picup/rejection over frequency.

What would this test show you ? Why not inject common mode currents with a clamp ? At least then it is done the proper way and controlled ?
That's what EMC lab test equipment is for ?
What would be a real world situation ? Would the short also have to be replaced with say 50 Ohm, or your 1k ?



I get it you want more immunity tests. There are standardized tests for this with actual test fixtures and equipment. Why do any non calibrated and not controlled 'McGyver' tests.

As mentioned. Write a test protocol for Amir with all the (standardized) test protocols and needed equipment so Amir can evaluate your proposal and hope he has time and funds and is willing to implement this on his testing.

A simple test clamp and tone generator, clamped over a measured cord and Amir can inject certain common mode frequencies into the screen of a cable. Don't propose McGyver testing that is not repeatable and calibrated..
 

Lambda

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
841
Likes
656
People like you will complain why not higher, why not 2k or 600 Ohm.
No propel like me know it dose not relay meter as a long as it is sufficiently high and specified.

It is not a common mode choke. A common mode choke filters signal lines (in common mode).
A ferrite only increases the impedance on the outside of the cable and does do anythingt to the signal inside the shield.
Now im sure we are not talking about the sam thing, and you are wrong.
Screenshot_2021-02-14_21-10-25.png
How many turns till a ferrite bead magicly and suddenly turns into a coke :facepalm:
Actually its quite a common methode for HAMs to make "BALUNs"
https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio/frank_radio_baluns.htm

round number... i don't care as long as its specified and a view orders of magnitude bigger then all the other things we try to measure.


when using a 1k source what load should be used ?
not so Important but would nice to be specified.

Why not just measure capacitance per meter and you can calculate the FR at any source resistance you want
With an high source impedance you can accually calculate the capacitance per cable by Looking at the corner frequency in the FR
But i'm also fine with your suggestion.


Only FR bit also distortion
Why would there be an need to?

Test with and without magnetic or electric fields at which strength and why at a particular strength ?
:rolleyes:
All the measurement can be done Independently....

That's the problem with 'adding' additional measurements.
On, can just ignore that noise rejection is intresting porperty of a cable and that its dependent on its resistance
or that capacitance can meter.
But then the test is not very conclusive.

If the test is that way that a wet string (or realy) bad cable can pass the test without an notice
but the bad cable would cause practical problems then the test is not very revealing?

Maybe interesting as Emission test for VW ;)

Just write a proposal with tests for Amir.
Why not discuss it here in public first? so people can have an actual discussion about whats sensible and contribute there ideas.

amir just connect a 1V trafo across the screen
Don’t know if this is an actual proposal of idea?
Its not very practical to implement since the current would be undefined and limited by the cable resistance.
I don't think its a sirius suggestion (correct me if i'm mistaken) so i will not take the time explain why that's not a good ideal.

what would this tell you
Between cables comparable noise rejection.
Why not inject the proper way and calibrated using a clamp
because its not easy and not needed to compere cables. but if you/amir want to go trough the extra trouble.
I don't see an huge benefit an absolute numbers, relative is fine to me.

What would this test show you ?
Common mode current picup/rejection over frequency.

Why not inject common mode currents with a clamp ? At least then it is done the proper way and controlled ?
It's more easy to do and control but it should give the same result.
if it dose, of this method's is sufficient

What would be a real world situation
Commen mode current... you know "ground loops":p

Would the short also have to be replaced with say 50 Ohm, or your 1k ?
No, that's not need and would not give new information that can't be calculated.

Why do any non calibrated and not controlled 'McGyver' tests.
Because its cheaper and Possible to draw conclusion from non standards tests.

To remind you the only test able to show a difference between the cables was a McGyver test ;)
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
10,123
Likes
22,268
Location
The Neverlands
Now im sure we are not talking about the sam thing, and you are wrong.

I must be because you are telling me I am.

Now I am really sure you are just trolling.
Your lack of knowledge in this field is showing a bit too much.

When you know this all so well why don't you do the measurements you feel are lacking, so Amir can draw a more informed conclusion.
You seem to know how and know all the tricks and McGyvers.
I assume you are very experienced in this field and will show us your tests on various cables and make a nice article about it... for free.
I am sure you will tell us this cable is not worth the money and that it does not seem to sound any better than your run of the mill, and not freebee, interlink cable.

Looking forward to a good read of your peer reviewed article.
 
Last edited:

Lambda

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
841
Likes
656
Your lack of knowledge in this field is showing a bit too much.
Said the one claiming:
"ferrite only works on RF"
And
It is not a common mode choke. A common mode choke filters signal lines (in common mode).

The current-compensated choke or common mode choke (CMC for short) has several identical windings through which the working current flows in opposite directions, so that their magnetic fields cancel each other out in the core of the choke. CMCs are often used to attenuate interference emissions. Such interference currents usually occur in the same direction in the forward and return lines (common mode). The current-compensated choke forms a very high inductance for this common-mode interference, since these interference currents do not compensate each other in it. Current-compensated chokes are often found at the inputs and outputs of switched-mode power supplies and in line filters.

A particularly simple form of current-compensated chokes are toroidal cores pushed onto cables or so-called hinged ferrites

It is not a common mode choke. A common mode choke filters signal lines (in common mode).

Looks like your wrong or I'm
(and the Wikipedia)
and this https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/231563/understanding-ferrite-chokes

and also this
The ferrite core acts as a one-turn common-mode choke, and can be effective in reducing the conducted and/or radiated emission from the cable, as well as suppressing high-frequency pick-up in the cable.
 

Lambda

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
841
Likes
656
Fifteen seconds with the inductance equation will convince you that ferrite beads and donuts are for RF, i.e., “high-frequency.”

To quote myself

A ferrit bead adds like 4-8µH of inductance. if the cable is passed trough once.
Thats like 0.002Ohm at 60hz or
I think we can both agree that this is insignificantly small Compared to the cable resistance (maybe 0.2Ohm for high end cable?)
If we use 2 of then on both ends at 20kHz its ~2ohm.
so at this frequency its increasing the loop impedance by a factor of 10 and potentially decreasing current by the same factor.

At 200khz-1Mhz this feritte becomes more lossy and adds even more resistance in the order of 50-100Ohm.

TL;DR Yes you can say they are only effective at RF

I Have done the measurements before and i have done the Fifteen seconds with the inductance equation. (exact values don't' relay mater at this point)
I never denial its common mode Impedance is lower at low frequency's i even gave some examples and called it "insignificantly small"

Nevertheless it is common mode choke and it choke common modes.

It is not a common mode choke. A common mode choke filters signal lines (in common mode).
It's doing exactly this. (to some extend) the heiger the frequany the better. which is true for alle (ideal) common mode chokes.

A ferrite only increases the impedance on the outside of the cable and does do anything to the signal inside the shield.

And this is also what the (ideal) common mode choke dose by definition:
it only increases the common mode while not changing the differential mode Impedance i.e. the signal impedance.
 

noiseangel

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
112
Likes
164
Location
Perth, Western Australia
"One physical test is worth a thousand expert opinions". Amir has done the test. That satisfies me.
 

JSmith

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
1,283
Likes
2,262
Location
Algol Perseus
Hopefully this put the wind up Audioquest... or at least gave them some anyway. :cool:

I have no time for companies like this that build rubbish products and sell them at a massive markup whilst pretending to be the bastion for the audiophile.

Would love to see Wireworld's arse handed to them too.



JSmith
 

Angsty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
529
Likes
648
Location
Southeastern U.S.

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
3,884
Likes
8,727
Location
Hampshire
"Save wear and tear on your equipment with our cable break-in service. ... Each hour on our breakin machine equals one hour of normal listening in your system. " :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
"The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video recorder. Dishwashers washed tedious dishes for you, thus saving you the bother of washing them yourself, video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electric Monks believed things for you, thus saving you what was becoming an increasingly onerous task, that of believing all the things the world expected you to believe." -- Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 

tpaxadpom

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
42
Likes
24
This free cable is likely coaxial 75 Ohm cable. I never seen those included for free with DVT players. You must be really lucky. I would love to see multitone measurements of both cables and freebie twisted pair.
 

Jram

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
2
Likes
0
Extremely high price is a dead giveaway when it comes to the snake oil status of a product. How can anyone sane think that a product which costs less than $50 to make in materials and labour can justify this price? There is no proprietary engineering or secret know-how at play here. It is really shameful that a large company blatantly misrepresents their products like this and targets vulnerable enthusiasts.
The only use for a product like this is to serve as an EMI/RFI detector in phono preamplifiers where high gain amplification is the norm.
There is a method to the madness in the pricing. It is so out of the ballpark (like $500 canapes) of anyone who thinks about value/performance that these are purchased primarily by those for whom it is just folded into the price of a ultra-high-end (read very high price) system and never noticed. Nor are such people likely to complain publicly about how their $2k cables don't sound any different.

If priced at $200 or so level some more-money-than-sense "audiophiles" may actually buy this with their $15k amp and create a lot of bad publicity that they "don't do anything different".

Given some recent events, there might even be a money laundering scheme going on with these things with oligarch money, who the heck knows...
The more expensive they are the less chance someone will actually cut it up to investigate it. Objective technical tests like this likely to dismissed by AQ as having no correlation to ‘how it sounds’ so it’s in the realm of subjectivity, meaning the benefits of these high price cables are all imagined, snake oil.
 

Jram

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Messages
2
Likes
0
Is there a single Audioquest product that is both a) not overpriced and b) not snake oil or mediocre at best?
Their Berylium Copper banana plugs seem ok at $50 for 8. That’s about it. If anyone has a better recommendation I’m looking for some
 

Iglo

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
90
Likes
90
Interesting topic... I personally have very high standards for my cables. For starters, they should be long enough and then I pick the cheapest with decent build quality and ability to split left from right (no pesky connections between left/right). Never failed me and now backed-up by science ;)

take a look at KabelDirekt
 
Top Bottom