Recoton RCA Cable Review (Ultra Cheap Cable)

[FrantzM]

Here's what's going to happen: Some cable manufacturer is going to buy all the remaining samples of this cable.. from eBay Dress it with nice sheathing and ... things. Put their logo and brand name on it, send it to famous subjective and various YouTube reviewers, while declaring: :

The basic material of the cable was tested by a famous, reviewer one of the rare, if not the sole to have an Emmy awards. His credentials are unmatched. One of the most advanced Audio Analyzer was used during the tests. It was proven that our cable material was transparent. No adverb necessary, up to 1 MHz... The signal from our cable was thes exact same as that of the Analyzer in loopback. We went further and cryo-treated the copper in our cable and used an advanced sheathing and jacket material to dampen all micro-vibration that would cause time-smear and audio-jitter...

Due to the difficulty of making this cable, we can only offer a special run of 250 units pairs for $10,000.oo each. Only 250 were made becasue we could no onger procure the material to make it. No other cable can claim they have been analyzed and measured so correctly.

Yes! They would

Peace

 

[Deleted member 46664]

IMHO a great (golfing panther) cable should have perfect (Neutrik/Rean?) plugs and good materials, so one can bend it as many times as needed with absolute confidence. Quoting amir:

From usability point of view, the connectors are a bit loose for my taste (

One thing about RCA connectors that is not well known is that they are designed to be supported by the centre pin... not the shield ring.

I've done service calls for "locking RCA connectors" on massively heavy cables that have broken the jacks on the back of some very expensive equipment.

 

[Katji]

...Then you get the heavy/stiff ones that...unbalance the DAC, make the front of it lift up.

 

[xaviescacs]

One thing about RCA connectors that is not well known is that they are designed to be supported by the centre pin... not the shield ring.

I've done service calls for "locking RCA connectors" on massively heavy cables that have broken the jacks on the back of some very expensive equipment.

My experience is that the pieces of the shield rig of this connectors are too flimsy, and eventually they just break, and I guess, haven't tried, that if all of them break, the cable would no longer work. I haven't seen that problem yet in Rean connectors, which are quite sturdy. So to me they are fine (the connectors alone, poor, I would say) but not great.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

My experience is that the pieces of the shield rig of this connectors are too flimsy, and eventually they just break, and I guess, haven't tried, that if all of them break, the cable would no longer work. I haven't seen that problem yet in Rean connectors, which are quite sturdy. So to me they are fine (the connectors alone, poor, I would say) but not great.

The cable is to be supported by the centre pin. The ring merely needs to make contact and should not bear any stress at all.

That said... yes quality connectors are a good idea. But there's no reason they need to cost a fortune. Amazon basics cables serve me very well. The only qualifier is that the left and right cable in a stereo pair (like above) should be in separate shields to minimize crosstalk.

 

[xaviescacs]

But there's no reason they need to cost a fortune.

https://www.thomann.de/de/search_GK_kasaci_BF_rean.html 2.60 €

make contact and should not bear any stress at all

There is a balance between these two requirements, isn't it? Good and reliable contact requires some amount of pressure AFAIK.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

https://www.thomann.de/de/search_GK_kasaci_BF_rean.html 2.60 €

I get mine in bags of 50 for about $30.00 cdn.

There is a balance between these two requirements, isn't it? Good and reliable contact requires some amount of pressure AFAIK.

Yes there needs to be some friction with the outer ring ... but it should not be holding the cable in place.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

Here we go .... just what the doctor ordered ....

AudioQuest - Wolf Subwoofer Cable with RCA Interconnect - 20M : Amazon.ca: Electronics

AudioQuest - Wolf Subwoofer Cable with RCA Interconnect - 20M : Amazon.ca: Electronics

www.amazon.ca

 

[solderdude]

If you are responding to me... please use the Reply button ...

Anyway as I noted in the test ... at 2mhz, the cable capacitance was actually loading my signal generator.
But no audio cable ever gets used at those frequencies (at least not by sane people).

I am quite sure you mean MHz (Mega Hertz) and not mhz (milli hertz ?)
The same error is in the article (yours ?).
The problem is not bandwidth of the cable or scope but bandwidth of the source signal, time base and bit depth of the scope settings that make it appear nulling is perfect.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

I am quite sure you mean MHz (Mega Hertz) and not mhz (milli hertz ?)
The same error is in the article (yours ?).
The problem is not bandwidth of the cable or scope but bandwidth of the source signal, time base and bit depth of the scope settings that make it appear nulling is perfect.

Oh my gawd ... the world is ending, the moon will spin off it's axis and life as we know it is over...

I used an "m" instead of an "M" .... total destruction is imminent.

Really, dude...????

 

[Angsty]

I admittedly use a 5 ft cable just like this one for my office subwoofer. Used it as a quick test just to get it up and running initially. Planned to swap it out for BJC later, but never did because it worked just fine. Not sorry.

 

[solderdude]

Oh my gawd ... the world is ending, the moon will spin off it's axis and life as we know it is over...

I used an "m" instead of an "M" .... total destruction is imminent.

Really, dude...????

Howzabout addressing the actual issues I mentioned with the (your) test ?

We all know even cheap interlinks have no issues with 1MHz and even square-waves might still look good on a scope plot.

B.t.w. You could have said... oh.. typo... thanks for noticing I'll correct it. After all we are at AudioScienceReview. M and m mean something very different. We all make typos. English not being my native language even means besides spelling errors there are also grammar and vocabulary issues. I always want them to be pointed out to me so I can correct. People often do and is appreciated. Certainly when it is in a 'paper'.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

Howzabout addressing the actual issues I mentioned with the (your) test ?

We all know even cheap interlinks have no issues with 1MHz and even square-waves might still look good on a scope plot.

How about responding conversationally instead of nit picking people to death?

For your concerns about phase (over a 6 foot cord ROFL) take a look at the null test explanation ... I clearly showed that even slight phase changes would produce a strong difference signal before I even did the tests.

Maybe try actually reading the page before pointlessly objecting to it.

 

[solderdude]

How about responding conversationally instead of nit picking people to death?

Why not react to my comments about (your ?) test and the timing issue (and scope as well as tone generator) of the test instead of playing it on a person ?
I thought the conversation was about nulling and the issues of longer cable runs being nulled.
Also the test done by Amir (and you ?) do not address some issues cheap cables can actually have which are not tested or shown in the tests.
Only some basic electrical tests under normal lab conditions have been done.

For one thing the RCA plug quality you mentioned. Also I don't think we disagree about cables at all. I just mentioned null testing (have experience in particularly audio nulling in audio).

 

[Angsty]

If you are buying jewelery and you know you are buying jewelery ... hey it's your money.

The problem is all these guys who actually think it matters.

I bought my first BJC LC-1 cable for the guaranteed low capacitance to my phonostage. I bought the rest because they make nice costume jewelry for the rest of my system. Like the bling, love the construction, okay with the price. Also not sorry.

 

[Deleted member 46664]

Why not react to my comments about (your ?) test and the timing issue (and scope as well as tone generator) of the test instead of playing it on a person ?

You're the one who started nit picking ... I checked that page and the error you were so hyped up about appeared exactly once. That's one character out of a 10k file.

I thought the conversation was about nulling and the issues of longer cable runs being nulled.

No... the conversation is about Amir's review of a dirt cheap cable and my own similar tests from my website.

ALL the rest of this you wrote in yourself ... and probably for the sole reason of raising objection. This ain't my first rodeo... and it certainly isn't the first time some fool has come up with "Your entire point is invalid because you misspelled a word on page 43".

 

[solderdude]

ALL the rest of this you wrote in yourself ... and probably for the sole reason of raising objection.

Nope was just trying to point out issues with nulling.

This ain't my first rodeo... and it certainly isn't the first time some fool has come up with "Your entire point is invalid because you misspelled a word on page 43".

I never called you a fool did I ?

Howzabout addressing the issues of time delay and nulling other than using a scope with limits in display pixels, samples and bit depth and using a square-wave that is rather band limited to begin with ?

 

[Deleted member 46664]

Howzabout addressing the issues of time delay and nulling other than using a scope with limits in display pixels, samples and bit depth and using a square-wave that is rather band limited to begin with ?

Conversation is not combat. I'm not going to play this game.

You have both published results ... Amir said his part. I said mine. Accept it and (please) move on.

 

[JSmith]

I used an "m" instead of an "M"

It is important, especially with the written word that these things are correct, as there are definitions and standards for a reason. Of course I understand it's just a small typo on one page too, so certainly not the end of the world either. From my reading it seemed Solderdude was just politely pointing this out so it could be corrected, as in for your benefit.

It certainly bugs me though when people use Mbps when referring MBps and vice versa for example or when ISP's redefine what a GB is when convenient. Don't forget NASA lost a $125000000 Mars orbiter due to incorrect interpretation of imperial vs metric measurements.

You could have said... oh.. typo... thanks for noticing I'll correct it.

That is more the response I would have expected too... one can only assume days are long and work is hard.


JSmith

 

[solderdude]

Conversation is not combat. I'm not going to play this game.

You have both published results ... Amir said his part. I said mine. Accept it and (please) move on.

What's funny is that most people are fine pointing out flaws in the measurements or methodology of others (especially when they are made by Amir) but do not want to defend some questions that were raised about their own tests.
I have no comments about Amirs test other than not all important aspects of an RCA cable are fully tested but doing such tests requires EMC test labs and equipment and cutting the cable to explore what's inside and doing some capacitance and inductance tests and posting benchmarks.

Please accept that and move on.