This audio cable business is getting out of hand...

[Veri]

If your test method was valid then one or both cables is poorly designed, faulty or a deliberate filter compared to a High Fidelity cable.

One thing I have gathered from the many headphone threads on this forum is the varied opinions, often contradictory, on what is a good headphone. A very personal/subjective subject, it seems.

Indeed. See for example this deliberate "cable tuning" of audioquest nighthawk.
https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/audio-quest/

 

[JohnYang1997]

The subjective part is very true. In this instance, i prefer focal stellia with stock cable being more open while my friend prefers the cardas cable due to smoother highs. But the problem is we don't have database of audio cables. And it's certainly a more differentiated factor than DACs. Do we need to pay a bit more attention to cables? Probably, while it's hard to get me to think of this. I only remember a set of measurements from passlab or somewhere of speakers cable. Good sources of cables? We can't control the cables come with the headphones do we?

 

[THW]

the other thing is even if there are changes to the sound due to the cable, there is generally a proper explanation for it and certainly does not work based on unknowable voodoo.

 

[graz_lag]

'Filter' is the correct noun to define all this as indicated by @Wombat.
Finding the right compromise between 'filtering (coloring) action' and 'cable cost' that is a totally subjective matter.

 

[Wombat]

'Filter' is the correct noun to define all this as indicated by @Wombat.
Finding the right compromise between 'filtering (coloring) action' and 'cable cost' that is a totally subjective matter.

Cheaper cables tend not to filter. Construction and shielding quality may or may not be an issue. Then this can be true of more expensive products.

 

[graz_lag]

Cheaper cables tend not to filter. Construction and shielding quality may or may not be an issue. Then this can be true of more expensive products.

Right, because I have the QED Silver Anniversary speaker cables in one of my setup, I have filed this article, which takes them into comparison.
'Is it worth to invest $5,000 just to get a + 0.20dB boost?' when the writer takes the Shunyata cable into comparison ...
https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-3134902

 

[Blumlein 88]

Speaking of ground loops, I encountered a one several years ago that I solved but never understood why it worked.

I built a stepped attenuator "preamp" using a pair (1 per channel) of Goldpoint 24-position switches loaded with metal film resistors. Resistor values selected so that every position had a 10 kOhm load to the source, and they were 2 dB apart. All standard unbalanced RCA. It worked great, but there was a low level hum. Long story short, I changed the wiring so that one channel (the left, but it shouldn't matter which) had its signal ground wired to the frame. As originally built, I wired both + and - for each channel straight through, both isolated from the metal frame of the attenuator. I only guessed at the solution of asymmetric grounding, connecting 1 but not both to the frame. It worked (eliminated the hum), though I never knew exactly why. Later when I built a phono headamp from the DACT CT-100 (powered by 12 V batteries, not connected to the wall), I encountered the same problem and the same technique (applied to the high level output, not the low level input) fixed it. Then, in a different house, I encountered a low level hum from the phono amp that was fixed by doing the opposite: connecting the grounds to each other so both were latched to frame.

In years past, I spent lots of time with stepped attenuators of various configurations. I've also run into this with the same solution. Grounding only one frame.

Now I found using a small copper covered PC board that was grounded just in the general area could make the hum go away or nearly so depending upon where you placed it. I decided the grounding of one frame was having a similar effect. It was a larger area that was grounded so it was "soaking up" the hum field so to speak. I stopped using rotary switches shortly after that so didn't pursue it any longer. I did make some for friends and would put the copper covered PC board between the rotary switches and ground it to whichever channel was convenient.

 

[PierreV]

Right, because I have the QED Silver Anniversary speaker cables in one of my setup, I have filed this article, which takes them into comparison.
'Is it worth to invest $5,000 just to get a + 0.20dB boost?' when the writer takes the Shunyata cable into comparison ...
https://www.lifewire.com/speaker-cables-make-a-difference-3134902

Indeed. AFAIC - but it is hard to be 100% sure without seeing the raw data and having complete information about the testing protocol - the data doesn't even seem to show response differences. As far as what seems to be the overall level difference, there are so many possible confounding factors (as everybody who averages multiple measurements without changing anything to the system already knows).

Now, even if one assumes everything in the test is perfect, turn the level up a tiny, tiny bit and save $5000

 

[Soniclife]

It was a double blind test

How was it double blind?

 

[pozz]

https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/ctdbm9

and a related question about the below.

The subjective part is very true. In this instance, i prefer focal stellia with stock cable being more open while my friend prefers the cardas cable due to smoother highs. But the problem is we don't have database of audio cables. And it's certainly a more differentiated factor than DACs. Do we need to pay a bit more attention to cables? Probably, while it's hard to get me to think of this. I only remember a set of measurements from passlab or somewhere of speakers cable. Good sources of cables? We can't control the cables come with the headphones do we?

High-precision RLC measurements, some math and some modelling of the effects would probably be all that's necessary. To show that RLC parameters are the only ones that matter the reviewer could first demonstrate the values of standard copper cables of different lengths and gauges.

One thing I found very unsettling is when Bobby Owsinski, a engineer who's written books on recording techniques, studio construction and mixing, started recommending the Wireworld "pro" XLR line that they advertise for studios. This is an otherwise knowledgeable and practical person.

Here's the link to his blog/interview with a rep from Wireworld: http://bobbyowsinski.blogspot.com/2014_07_06_archive.html?m=1
And another where he's recommending it: https://podcastengineeringschool.com/bobby-owsinski-audio-engineer-and-author-pes-111/

If we could measure those things and get him to join the discussion, it would be very impactful.

 

[solderdude]

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1770-pro/

Scroll down to the cable part for actual measurements of cables

 

[graz_lag]

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1770-pro/

Scroll down to the cable part for actual measurements of cables

You're the man, Frans!

 

[Veri]

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1770-pro/

There is absolutely no difference between these cables as the purple trace of the original cable is fully overlayed with the teal trace.
Take this for what it is…

Will do! Thanks @solderdude

 

[MRC01]

...
It was a double blind test. Being,
1, I can't see which is which
2, I can't know whether he switched cable or not.
...

I believe "double blind" means the person conducting the test is isolated from the test subjects, so they can't suggest answers or otherwise bias the test results to the people taking the test. Even with a well-intentioned test conductor, this can happen subconsciously through "tells" or mistakes.

If your test method was valid then one or both cables is poorly designed, faulty or a deliberate filter compared to a High Fidelity cable.
...

Perhaps the Cardas had higher capacitance, leaking the highs to ground and acting as a tone control reducing treble. If so, it's poorly designed. Cables with transparently low reactance are readily available and not expensive. And they will be indistinguishable in blind tests.

 

[scott wurcer]

and a related question about the below.

If we could measure those things and get him to join the discussion, it would be very impactful.

A recording engineer who had input into the Neutrik XLR's with built in RFI used to post in a forum. The improvement was easy to measure. IME most folks with extraordinary claims say things are unmeasurable when they have not even tried.

 

[MRC01]

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-a-i/dt-1770-pro/
Scroll down to the cable part for actual measurements of cables

Excellent reference. Since Tyll left InnerFidelity I've been looking for another source of headphone info like this.

 

[Speedskater]

While a completed cable assembly can be directional by have each end connector attached differently, the bulk cable itself can not be directional to AC signals. If the bulk cable were directional, it would result in high harmonic distortion on half of each sine wave.

 

[scott wurcer]

If the bulk cable were directional, it would result in high harmonic distortion on half of each sine wave.

It would also require new physics.

 

[Speedskater]

It would also require new physics.

That's no problem for an audiophile equipment marketing department. They do it all the time.

 

[MRC01]

While a completed cable assembly can be directional by have each end connector attached differently, the bulk cable itself can not be directional to AC signals. If the bulk cable were directional, it would result in high harmonic distortion on half of each sine wave.

We're talking about shielding the ground asymmetrically. Of course the signal (both + and -) are connected on both sides and the cable passes a signal in both directions!