Need help identifying old interconnects

[Briank]

I forgot the lesson again here. Ignoring is the best advice.

I believe when it comes to advice; "Don't take advice; A wise man doesn't need it and a fool won't heed it. Lucky for me, advice isn't what I was seeking.

 

[Briank]

So pointless. Two religions at war with each other and as per usual there will be no winner.

Seriously though! And I've been trying to get away from it and just going back to why I'm initially here but the mob mentality won't have it.

 

[GaryY]

Interesting, I was certain you were picking up on my banter. Apparently you didn't. I most certainly thought you were kidding around, I hope you didn't take my last few replies seriously.

Regarding my comment on the most recent science being wrong, I was serious there. Call it trolling if you want, but is actually science.

Maxwell's equations are not the most recent science. Please prove in which text you were talking about the most recent science.

 

[DonH56]

So there's really no consequence or benefit in using a 100 ohm microphone cable for rca interconnects, as it pertains to impedance?

Correct. The (characteristic) impedance is for RF signals, not audio, which is essentially "DC" as far as the cables are concerned. And impedance matching is not a thing for analog audio signals, which are usually driven from a low-impedance source (BD player, DAC, preamp output) into a high-impedance input (preamp input, amplifier input). Cable resistance is deep, deep in the mud for audio interconnects. At RF frequencies loss is much higher and the causes much more complicated.

Since RCA connections are single-ended, you could tie one inner conductor and the outer shield at one end of the cable, connecting the two inner conductors at the other end, to provide a modest improvement in shielding. The main purpose for twinaxial coax is to route differential signals (balanced, XLR) so it is overkill (and a waste of money) for single-ended (RCA) connections. There are variants of twinax that are not twisted pairs but true dual coaxial cables in a common shield -- some high-speed (10~100+ Gb/s) serial links use those cables.

So basically you're saying for one meter, silvers 6% less resistive properties is minuscule.

Correct. Either is a very tiny number compared to all the other resistances and impedances in the circuit.

I agree. Tho I have seen double blinds where people did pick out the differences. It's all very personal. I don't really want to get too much into it but I was cable testing the other day with my streamer and two different interconnects. One on the left, different on the right at the same time. After so much switching behind my amp, blindly, I was thoroughly confused as to which cable was on which channel and at one point I was crossing the cables instead of switching both ends. Anyway, In this way I could use my streamer app to very quickly slide the balance from left to right channel within one second to make comparisons. All I will say is one did sound brighter to me. It happened to be the silver plated Kimber PBJ. Does it matter? Not really, it's just what I preferred at the time...perhaps with a little help from some single barrel barrel proof rye from Mr. Jack Daniels. Could I reproduce the same results? I don't know but it'd be cool to find out.

Proper testing is a huge PITA. The biggest component variable is level matching, wherein a very tiny (0.1 dB or less) mismatch is enough to make the louder channel sound better, and many components have channel imbalance similar or greater than that (a quick search shows 0.1~0.5 dB difference in level is not uncommon). Listening to speakers, a tiny movement of your head/listening position is enough to affect the result, and of course emotion/mood and physical condition (how much Jack? ) is also a huge player. In your test, there is also the source content, which could vary between channels and mask any differences in the cables. Switching to mono might help. Better yet, get a friend to squat behind things (hidden from you) and swap cables, using one cable for one channel and the other for the second channel, and randomly swap connections. Mute or power off first before changing connections! Do 10~20 times or so and see if the difference is real (statistically significant).

Note auditory memory is very short, ~6 seconds IIRC, so even with fairly rapid swapping it may be hard to remember what you just heard. That is why controlled listening tests usually perform rapid switching.

DBTs have exhibited differences among components, but less so if ever among interconnects unless something was broken or the interconnects very long.

Measurement devices are far (orders of magnitude) more resolving than our ears and are repeatable(*). Any audible differences should be easy to measure, at least for cables, and for most components. Even things like imaging and such are readily measurable using vector analyzers, along with speaker dispersion and such. People insist our ears are better than the best test equipment and it just ain't so.

FWIWFM - Don

(*) As long as the person doing the tests is consistent... In my world, failing to properly torque an RF connector to spec will trash the results, as will changing the position of the cables during testing. Teflon is notoriously sensitive to movement (e.g. triboelectric effects) as @SIY said and so is a reason to avoid it. Had I a dime for every time I had to repeat a test due to a seemingly trivial change in the test setup I could have retired years ago.

 

[DonH56]

If you're going to throw out Maxwell's Equations, Ohm's Law, and all the rest of the science pertaining to audio cables and invent something new let us know when the paper is published. When decades, hundreds of years of experiments and analysis have proven the theorems, it may be challenging to supplant them with something new.

 

[Briank]

Maxwell's equations are not the most recent science. Please prove in which text you were talking about the most recent science.

The covid vaccine Gary lol. I was really just messing around with you. The FIRST time I was messing around in this thread, contrary to popular belief.

 

[GaryY]

The covid vaccine Gary lol. I was really just messing around with you. The FIRST time I was messing around in this thread, contrary to popular belief.

Cable doesn't get Covid. To introduce covid for cable discussion, please prove copper or silver is better for avoiding infection when you are testing cable.

 

[sam_adams]

So after all the back-and-forthing, Vampire went out of business a few years back. RIP. The Canadian parts house, Parts Connexion, bought the rights—lock, stock, and barrel—to the Vampire brand of connectors.

The cable that's in the OPs first post looks like a work-alike for Belden 89207 TwinAx. So the connectors and cable can still be purchased and new interconnects made that would function like the originals. Even if the OP has NASA-grade soldering skills, expect no miracles from this connector/cable combination.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Cable doesn't get Covid. To introduce covid for cable discussion, please prove copper or silver is better for avoiding infection when you are testing cable.

Copper has anti-biotic properties I think. Maybe anti-covid as well.

Antiviral properties of copper and its alloys to inactivate covid-19 virus: a review

Copper (Cu) and its alloys are prospective materials in fighting covid-19 virus and several microbial pandemics, due to its excellent antiviral as well as antimicrobial properties. Even though many studies have proved that copper and its alloys exhibit ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[GaryY]

Copper has anti-biotic properties I think. Maybe anti-covid as well.

Antiviral properties of copper and its alloys to inactivate covid-19 virus: a review

Copper (Cu) and its alloys are prospective materials in fighting covid-19 virus and several microbial pandemics, due to its excellent antiviral as well as antimicrobial properties. Even though many studies have proved that copper and its alloys exhibit ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Thanks!. That's exactly why I prefer copper cable.

 

[DonH56]

Cable doesn't get Covid. To introduce covid for cable discussion, please prove copper or silver is better for avoiding infection when you are testing cable.

Doesn't colloidal silver help block infection? Dunno' if the same is true for copper, think so, but people react more to copper... But be nice to know if there's a valid reason to use silver cables.

Locking thread in 3... 2... 1...

 

[Briank]

Correct. The (characteristic) impedance is for RF signals, not audio, which is essentially "DC" as far as the cables are concerned. And impedance matching is not a thing for analog audio signals, which are usually driven from a low-impedance source (BD player, DAC, preamp output) into a high-impedance input (preamp input, amplifier input). Cable resistance is deep, deep in the mud for audio interconnects. At RF frequencies loss is much higher and the causes much more complicated.

Since RCA connections are single-ended, you could tie one inner conductor and the outer shield at one end of the cable, connecting the two inner conductors at the other end, to provide a modest improvement in shielding. The main purpose for twinaxial coax is to route differential signals (balanced, XLR) so it is overkill (and a waste of money) for single-ended (RCA) connections. There are variants of twinax that are not twisted pairs but true dual coaxial cables in a common shield -- some high-speed (10~100+ Gb/s) serial links use those cables.


Correct. Either is a very tiny number compared to all the other resistances and impedances in the circuit.


Proper testing is a huge PITA. The biggest component variable is level matching, wherein a very tiny (0.1 dB or less) mismatch is enough to make the louder channel sound better, and many components have channel imbalance similar or greater than that (a quick search shows 0.1~0.5 dB difference in level is not uncommon). Listening to speakers, a tiny movement of your head/listening position is enough to affect the result, and of course emotion/mood and physical condition (how much Jack? ) is also a huge player. In your test, there is also the source content, which could vary between channels and mask any differences in the cables. Switching to mono might help. Better yet, get a friend to squat behind things (hidden from you) and swap cables, using one cable for one channel and the other for the second channel, and randomly swap connections. Mute or power off first before changing connections! Do 10~20 times or so and see if the difference is real (statistically significant).

Note auditory memory is very short, ~6 seconds IIRC, so even with fairly rapid swapping it may be hard to remember what you just heard. That is why controlled listening tests usually perform rapid switching.

DBTs have exhibited differences among components, but less so if ever among interconnects unless something was broken or the interconnects very long.

Measurement devices are far (orders of magnitude) more resolving than our ears and are repeatable(*). Any audible differences should be easy to measure, at least for cables, and for most components. Even things like imaging and such are readily measurable using vector analyzers, along with speaker dispersion and such. People insist our ears are better than the best test equipment and it just ain't so.

FWIWFM - Don

(*) As long as the person doing the tests is consistent... In my world, failing to properly torque an RF connector to spec will trash the results, as will changing the position of the cables during testing. Teflon is notoriously sensitive to movement (e.g. triboelectric effects) as @SIY said and so is a reason to avoid it. Had I a dime for every time I had to repeat a test due to a seemingly trivial change in the test setup I could have retired years ago.

Your first two paragraphs are exactly the info I'm looking for, and answers a couple of my original questions. The rest is a welcome bonus. I genuinely didn't know if there was a benefit electrically, or as far as the components are concerned, in configuring that particular cable, in that particular way.

 

[Blumlein 88]

So after all the back-and-forthing, Vampire went out of business a few years back. RIP. The Canadian parts house, Parts Connexion, bought the rights—lock, stock, and barrel—to the Vampire brand of connectors.

The cable that's in the OPs first post looks like a work-alike for Belden 89207 TwinAx. So the connectors and cable can still be purchased and new interconnects made that would function like the originals. Even if the OP has NASA-grade soldering skills, expect no miracles from this connector/cable combination.

+100 on this post.

Not sure what the OP wants. If it is to replace or recreate the old cable you just gave the information to do that. If he objects to whether that old cable has special sonic properties that is another discussion which the OP apparently does and does not want. In any case, his question in the first post is now answered.

 

[Briank]

If you're going to throw out Maxwell's Equations, Ohm's Law, and all the rest of the science pertaining to audio cables and invent something new let us know when the paper is published. When decades, hundreds of years of experiments and analysis have proven the theorems, it may be challenging to supplant them with something new.

haha, I'm definitely not.

 

[DonH56]

haha, I'm definitely not.

Well, crud, that blows my only reason for staying in this thread... I used to help review papers for the IEEE JSSC and was looking forward to something different.

 

[GaryY]

Doesn't colloidal silver help block infection? Dunno' if the same is true for copper, think so, but people react more to copper... But be nice to know if there's a valid reason to use silver cables.

Locking thread in 3... 2... 1...

(Even before Covid, it was known that 1 cent coin in shoes reduce....(s m e l l s...)...sorry.

 

[Briank]

Cable doesn't get Covid. To introduce covid for cable discussion, please prove copper or silver is better for avoiding infection when you are testing cable.

lol. Ok ok, fine

 

[Briank]

So after all the back-and-forthing, Vampire went out of business a few years back. RIP. The Canadian parts house, Parts Connexion, bought the rights—lock, stock, and barrel—to the Vampire brand of connectors.

The cable that's in the OPs first post looks like a work-alike for Belden 89207 TwinAx. So the connectors and cable can still be purchased and new interconnects made that would function like the originals. Even if the OP has NASA-grade soldering skills, expect no miracles from this connector/cable combination.

Yes, thank you, as well as for the links!

 

[DonH56]

(Even before Covid, it was known that 1 cent coin in shoes reduce....(s m e l l s...)...sorry.

Many years ago, near the beginning of my career, I worked with a very bright guy who bathed very infrequently. He was incredibly intelligent, I had to work with him on device physics and characterization, but one of my office mates commented after a meeting that if he stepped into a pair of odor eaters he'd disappear...

 

[Briank]

+100 on this post.

Not sure what the OP wants. If it is to replace or recreate the old cable you just gave the information to do that. If he objects to whether that old cable has special sonic properties that is another discussion which the OP apparently does and does not want. In any case, his question in the first post is now answered.

haha, this deductive reasoning is refreshing. No, I'm not trolling. I do like having the option to replace the cables to the same spec, for reasons that do not matter to this thread. I did want to know if the configuration of this cable made it different one way or another to any other rca interconnect. Now I know it doesn't, electrically. Whether or not the end user thinks so is not something I'm concerned with, nor do I want to discuss it. However everyone seems to want to.