What cables do you use in your systems?

[Speedskater]

There's no evidence that RCA cables matter unless under extreme circumstances.

For short (say 10 feet/3 meters) analog RCA interconnect cables they may not. That's if the interference level is low and everything is powered from the same AC outlet. But for longer RCA interconnects, Common Impedance Coupling Noise currents are a real problem. Bill Whitlock often writes about this problem.

 

[Veri]

For short (say 10 feet/3 meters) analog RCA interconnect cables they may not. That's if the interference level is low and everything is powered from the same AC outlet. But for longer RCA interconnects, Common Impedance Coupling Noise currents are a real problem. Bill Whitlock often writes about this problem.

For longer lengths one should ideally simply use XLR cables. As with most professional live performance set-ups, microphone runs, ...
For consumer gear a lot is RCA-only. Which makes a nice market for expensive RCA cables claiming to better the problems inherent to it..

 

[Speedskater]

For longer lengths one should ideally simply use XLR cables. As with most professional live performance set-ups, microphone runs, ...
For consumer gear a lot is RCA-only. Which makes a nice market for expensive RCA cables claiming to better the problems inherent to it..

Sure balanced XLR interconnects are the best plan, but some times for sub-woofer or home theater set-ups long RCA cables are the only choice.
All the best long RCA cables have a very heavy braided shield like the Blue Jeans Cable LC-1. About 2 Ohms per 1000 feet.

 

[StevenEleven]

Sure balanced XLR interconnects are the best plan, but some times for sub-woofer or home theater set-ups long RCA cables are the only choice.
All the best long RCA cables have a very heavy braided shield like the Blue Jeans Cable LC-1. About 2 Ohms per 1000 feet.

There is an argument that RCA cables will give you a technically cleaner signal than balanced cables for typical short runs (XLR comes into its own and is superior in a studio or live setting with low signals such as mic signals and tons of competing electronics running through dozens of feet, I believe), because balanced cables require the signal to go through more circuitry, which introduces some level of degradation. Either way it’s not audible but it’s an ironic way of looking at things. You can argue that for typical home use RCA cables will most often give you the cleanest possible signal.

 

[Speedskater]

There is an argument that RCA cables will give you a technically cleaner signal than balanced cables for typical short runs

Those arguments are incorrect. The best an RCA interconnect system can hope for is to come close to a balanced interconnect system. It's not a distortion question, it's about leakage currents causing noise.

 

[q3cpma]

I really like Thomann's pro snake line, often providing Amphenol plugs at a very honest price.

 

[Sal1950]

Sure balanced XLR interconnects are the best plan, but some times for sub-woofer or home theater set-ups long RCA cables are the only choice.
All the best long RCA cables have a very heavy braided shield like the Blue Jeans Cable LC-1. About 2 Ohms per 1000 feet.

For long RCA cables, SVS offers some really great single subwoofer runs at very reasonable prices. No pseudoscience or magic world claims, just good cable at real world prices. Heavy outer covering for durability, I have mine running under a rug in a high traffic area with no problems going on close to3 years. Right now a 12meter run is on sale for $44.99
https://www.svsound.com/collections/outlet-specials/products/outlet-soundpath-rca-interconnect-12m
"SVS SoundPath Interconnect Cables have a substantial feel thanks to their uncompromised design and build quality. They feature pure copper conductors, 24K gold plated brass connectors and a precision-engineered five-layer dielectric insulation system to reject all RF and electromagnetic interference. The cables offer ultra-high bandwidth and ultra-low capacitance for exceptional performance under any conditions and truthful rendering of audio signals, all for a value only SVS can offer. "

 

[zalive]

@solderdude
I wouldn't trust A/B unless I have an immediate (following) comparison. Impressions fluctuate, conditions fluctuate too, mindstate etc.
As for positions, no need to change those as long as it's not sighted, and well, if one wants to do a blind test for himself, he won't cheat. If cables are accidentally seen, then switch.

But then again, my proposal is the most sensitive for audibility. It completely kicks out recognition or analytics of sound. You just note if X and Y are the same sound/system or different. Simplicity to extremes. Now, if we can establish there is audibility of nuances after all, we have grounds to go from there.

As for the long(er) term memory sake, I had few DACs that, hand on heart, sounded pretty similar even sighted, and I more than once forgot which one was working or selector position, and I wouldn't know which one was I listening. Too similar. Anyway recognition wouldn't work based on memory for those small differences, and natural fluctuations of both objective and subjective circumstances has its influence too - I listen to the same unchanged system and it doesn't sound the same to me, so there can't be a reference how it should precisely side from no perspective, whether blind or sighted, if there's such fluctuation, regardless of what causes it.

Later in life I worked at a high-end store which also sold cables of course. I was repair/service guy. When the usual install guy was on vacation I had to take over his work.
Sometimes this involved installing new cables.
At our shop one could always return cables when not satisfied. In all the years NO one EVER returned any cable !!!!

Here where I am, it's different. After you buy it you can't return it, at least not as a new cable. But many shops offer listening trial at your home for a few days. I returned possibly three times more cables than I bought when I dealt with them in the past, because I wasn't satisfied with the improvement (or change) of sound I got with them. No matter on which basis subjective impressions emerge, I don't see why impressions should be one-sided. At this part of the world it isn't so and at least some people pay attention on what they spend money. I know some pretty selective subjectivist folks here (about any piece of audio equipment).

 

[Speedskater]

For long RCA cables, SVS offers some really great single subwoofer runs at very reasonable prices. No pseudoscience or magic world claims, just good cable at real world prices. Heavy outer covering for durability, I have mine running under a rug in a high traffic area with no problems going on close to3 years. Right now a 12meter run is on sale for $44.99
https://www.svsound.com/collections/outlet-specials/products/outlet-soundpath-rca-interconnect-12m
"SVS SoundPath Interconnect Cables have a substantial feel thanks to their uncompromised design and build quality. They feature pure copper conductors, 24K gold plated brass connectors and a precision-engineered five-layer dielectric insulation system to reject all RF and electromagnetic interference. The cables offer ultra-high bandwidth and ultra-low capacitance for exceptional performance under any conditions and truthful rendering of audio signals, all for a value only SVS can offer. "

It has a rather high shield resistance, so it would be a poor choice for a longer cable.

 

[Sal1950]

It has a rather high shield resistance, so it would be a poor choice for a longer cable.

Funny as that was what they were particularly designed for?

 

[StevenEleven]

Those arguments are incorrect. The best an RCA interconnect system can hope for is to come close to a balanced interconnect system. It's not a distortion question, it's about leakage currents causing noise.

Okay, help me out here. I don't have any horse in this race, these are not my ideas. I'm relating the ideas of things I have read and thought I learned elsewhere, and corroborated by reading a little on the Internet. I don't know your creds or where you are coming from. You can help me out from that perspective if you want. I'm trying to learn. I barely know how a light switch works (other than it completes the circuit).

Is it true that to convert a non-balanced signal into a balanced signal requires additional components and circuitry--at least a transformer or differential amp--and then to convert it back again requires even more additional circuitry? Circuit design drawings on the net seem to corroborate this.

 

[DonH56]

Okay, help me out here. I don't have any horse in this race, these are not my ideas. I'm relating the ideas of things I have read and thought I learned elsewhere, and corroborated by reading a little on the Internet. I don't know your creds or where you are coming from. You can help me out from that perspective if you want. I'm trying to learn. I barely know how a light switch works (other than it completes the circuit).

Is it true that to convert a non-balanced signal into a balanced signal requires additional components and circuitry--at least a transformer or differential amp--and then to convert it back again requires even more additional circuitry? Circuit design drawings on the net seem to corroborate this.

That's pretty much all you need to know about a light switch.

Yes, if you actually want to send a balanced signal over the wires. Just a resistor will do though offers very little in the way of improvement. A differential transmitter and receiver are required (which can be transformers or active circuitry).

Some pictures here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...d-balanced-unbalanced-and-all-that-jazz.1352/ -- never got back to fleshing it out in words.

I am not sure I have put my "creds" in a post; I could make them up and how would you verify? I am on LinkedIn but could have just as easily made a fake profile there. So if you believe it I have a BS in Electrical Engineering, BS in Computer Engineering, MS in Electrical Engineering (focus: circuits), and a few decades of experience as a design engineer doing mainly high-speed (RF/microwave) analog and mixed signal ICs (data converters and so forth). Past few years as a validation engineer for high-speed SerDes circuits. Gave up on a PhD halfway through the coursework as family became more important than school years ago. Played with audio now and then over the years (worked at several TV/hi-fi stores, worked as a live and studio sound engineer, etc.) and have what I consider a decent audio system though nowhere near what used to be called "esoteric" high-end. Oh, and of course participating on various Internet fora has (I am sure) earned me at least one more BS in BS.

FWIWFM - Don

 

[StevenEleven]

That's pretty much all you need to know about a light switch.

Yes, if you actually want to send a balanced signal over the wires. Just a resistor will do though offers very little in the way of improvement. A differential transmitter and receiver are required (which can be transformers or active circuitry).

Some pictures here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...d-balanced-unbalanced-and-all-that-jazz.1352/ -- never got back to fleshing it out in words.

I am not sure I have put my "creds" in a post; I could make them up and how would you verify? I am on LinkedIn but could have just as easily made a fake profile there. So if you believe it I have a BS in Electrical Engineering, BS in Computer Engineering, MS in Electrical Engineering (focus: circuits), and a few decades of experience as a design engineer doing mainly high-speed (RF/microwave) analog and mixed signal ICs (data converters and so forth). Past few years as a validation engineer for high-speed SerDes circuits. Gave up on a PhD halfway through the coursework as family became more important than school years ago. Played with audio now and then over the years (worked at several TV/hi-fi stores, worked as a live and studio sound engineer, etc.) and have what I consider a decent audio system though nowhere near what used to be called "esoteric" high-end. Oh, and of course participating on various Internet fora has (I am sure) earned me at least one more BS in BS.

FWIWFM - Don

I wasn't really referencing you but I appreciate your jumping in and answering my question. That's an interesting and impressive bio and I believe you. What you are saying is what I thought. Thanks.

Awesome diagrams by the way!

I have a follow-up question: will the differential transmitter and receiver and additional circuitry add any noise or distortion, however inaudible it might be?

 

[DonH56]

I wasn't really referencing you but I appreciate your jumping in and answering my question. That's an interesting and impressive bio and I believe you. What you are saying is what I thought. Thanks.

Awesome diagrams by the way!

I have a follow-up question: will the differential transmitter and receiver and additional circuitry add any noise or distortion, however inaudible it might be?

Thanks.

Anytime you add anything it adds noise and distortion, but in fact differential circuits reject common-mode (CM) noise and even harmonic distortion, plus as the signal level goes up by N noise rises by sqrt(N) so you get a 3 dB improvement in SNR (or 3 dB reduction in noise) by going to differential circuits in addition to their rejection of CM noise and even harmonic distortion. So, sonically it is a win, though as you imply might not be audible in most situations. The typically-cited trades (cons) are higher cost and power for a fully-differential design and need for balanced interconnects instead of cheaper RCA cables.

HTH - Don

 

[StevenEleven]

Thanks.

Anytime you add anything it adds noise and distortion, but in fact differential circuits reject common-mode (CM) noise and even harmonic distortion, plus as the signal level goes up by N noise rises by sqrt(N) so you get a 3 dB improvement in SNR or 3 dB reduction in noise) by going to differential circuits in addition to their rejection of CM noise and even harmonic distortion. So, sonically it is a win, though as you imply might not be audible in most situations. The typically-cited trades (cons) are higher cost and power for a fully-differential design and need for balanced interconnects instead of cheaper RCA cables.

HTH - Don

Thanks again. Okay, I think this is where we are going to depart from my prior understanding, and I think I will tend to believe you.

Is the only purpose of a balanced topology the rejection of external (common mode) noise/interference? This is what I had thought. It looks like you are saying that is not the case. Are you saying that balanced topology also improves the s/n ratio by 3 db and reduces harmonic distortion in addition to rejecting external common mode noise and interference? My reach exceeds my grasp here so I really appreciate your thoughts. I am comparing notes with what you are saying and what I have read from an expert in another field of expertise. It would make sense that you have an edge in understanding the electrical circuits.

 

[DonH56]

Thanks again. Okay, I think this is where we are going to depart from my prior understanding, and I think I will tend to believe you.

Is the only purpose of a balanced topology the rejection of external (common mode) noise/interference?

No. But that is the advantage most often quoted and probably the one that makes the biggest difference to most.

This is what I had thought. It looks like you are saying that is not the case. Are you saying that balanced topology also improves the s/n ratio by 3 db and reduces harmonic distortion in addition to rejecting external common mode noise and interference? My reach exceeds my grasp here so I really appreciate your thoughts. I am comparing notes with what you are saying and what I have read from an expert in another field of expertise. It would make sense that you have an edge in understanding the electrical circuits.

If properly implemented, yes.

It also provides the ability to break a ground loop to reduce hum.

 

[StevenEleven]

Re: Your balanced cables help. . .

No. But that is the advantage most often quoted and probably the one that makes the biggest difference to most.

If properly implemented, yes.

It also provides the ability to break a ground loop to reduce hum.

I just wanted to thank you so much for this. I checked back with the "expert in another field of expertise" and he wrote that you were right and that he was incorrect in a couple of respects (with the expected caveats and provisos that come with human nature). I didn't give any hint as to who you were or where you hung out, by the way. He went on to elaborate upon the whole thing a little more so now I have a much better, though still tenuous, understanding of balanced topology, if implemented correctly. Not that I have any use for it but it was something that really caught my interest, particularly since you see so many misunderstandings and arguments about it on the net. So thanks once again!

 

[Southall-1998]

Just simple basic Van Damme for me.

S.

 

[maty]

The speaker cables of my modded KEF Q100 5.25 " coaxial speakers are Kimber Kable 8 PR I bought at a very low price - € 7 by meter - in a professional Spanish audio store. I comment now after discovering that the very expensive Sony DMP-Z1 digital music player analyzed today in Stereophile uses KK inside.

https://www.kimber.com/products/8PR

https://www.sony.com/electronics/walkman/dmp-z1/specifications

https://www.stereophile.com/content/sony-dmp-z1-digital-music-player-measurements

Picture optimized from

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1132189741221392384

 

[maty]

Before buying those audiophile cables I had read:

https://www.audioholics.com/gadget-reviews/kimber-kable-8pr/kk4pr-8prmeasurements