Wow check out these fancy cables! (Uhh...) (1 Viewer)

[Brett DiMichele]

"****** ****** packs an amazing degree of advanced technology in this interconnect. Golden Cross features patented ****** "Golden Section," multi-gauge stranding in helical hex array of golden ratio, constant "Q" conductors.It boasts 752 discrete pure copper conductors (for a 5.5 awg.) ensuring full-spectrum signal transfer for unbeatable performance."

* = Name Omitted

I ran this through the Babelfish Cable Jibberish to English
Translator and this is what it came up with.

"Our cables are round and transmit a signal, Yeah definatlu
yeah."

*Shakes Head*

What the heck is a Constant-Q Conductor? I have heard of
Constant-Q Filters but never in a conductor.. Hurmph!

 

[Dan Kaps]

Here's another from the same manufacturer about their speaker cables:

"****** ******** features patented ****** "Golden Section," multi-gauge stranding in a symmetrical, 12 conductor helical tri-axial design of quad-axial planetary arrays of golden ratio, constant "Q" conductors."

This partial description was for a 3 meter pair of speaker cables that was priced at just under $2,400.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Dan,

Damn ya beat me to it.. that was the one I wanted to post
but couldn't find the description on..

Damn them Planetary Array's... Loookin out there for dem
extra teeerestrials..

 

[Lee Scoggins]

What the heck is a Constant-Q Conductor?

Brett,

You need to open up your mind. I use Cardas Golden Reference and believe me the golden stranding makes a difference. I tried over two dozen pairs of interconnect in my system before settling on Cardas top of the line. I like Nordost too but I'm not that rich yet.

Many consider Cardas to be among the best cable you can buy. Telarc and Chesky Records have used and praised Cardas cable in the past as well as have many recording studios in US and Europe.

As for Golden Ratio, you need to visit: www.cardas.com which explains both the math (which whole books have been written on) and the technology behind the cable. Constant Q is explained very well on the site also.

If you want something less expensive check out the $20 interconnect that Sam Tellig mentions in this month's Stereophile, but don't make a drive-by attack on Cardas unless you understand and experience the technology.

 

[Chu Gai]

You may need this after you've opened your head up.

Make sure you drink the contents before using though.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Lee okay what's a Quasi Planetary Array?

So let me get this straight, I am closed minded because my
belief that Cable Alchemy is a farce differs from your
belief that quasi planetary array's make you hear things in
your music you never heard before?

I am allowed to not believe and I am sorry but no amount
of convincing even from the creator would change my view.
I believe blindly in a god, but speaker cables are not
something I need to have faith in.

Yes I am closed minded because when I open my mind all that
cold air hitting my brain causes headaches!

If you enjoy your Constant-Q Quasi Planetary Array's in the
Golden Ratio then by golly I am happy for ya! I am glad that
for $2400.00 you are happy!

 

[Mat_M]

I visited the US patent office to read the patents Cardas has. I am in the second year of the Master's Degree in EE with emphasis on electromagnetics, so I claim to understand the technology. Just a few interesting points:

"The cable strands are commonly twisted about the longitudinal centerline of the cable and encased within an insulating sheath which confines the body of strands radially of the cable. For reasons which are well understood in the electrical art and need not be explained in this disclosure, such multi-strand cables are characterized by enhanced electrical and mechanical properties relative to a single conductor cable. Among the foremost of these enhanced properties are improved fidelity and phase coherence in the case of audio and data signal transmission cables, and reduced electrical power losses and increased cable strength-to-weight ratio in the case of electrical power transmission cables or lines."

Really? The purpose of multistranded cabling is to reduce skin effect. Skin effect DOES NOT happen in audio frequencies. As an example, at 1GHz, the skin depth in copper is 0.000082 inches (http://signalintegrity.com/pubs/news/skineffect.htm).

"Fluctuations in the current flow through the cable strands produces corresponding fluctuations in the strand charges and thereby in the repulsion forces between adjacent strands. These fluctuations in the repulsion forces interact, in effect, with the resilient resisting forces on the strands in a manner which tends to cause relative back and forth lateral motion, that is, vibration, of the strands. The resulting relative vibratory movements or displacements of the cable strands vary their reactances and thereby introduce additional fluctuations and frequency components into the current flow through the cable."

Wow...really...this happens with power lines. We *might* (and that's a BIG might) be seeing this phenomenon in interconnects with lateral values in the NANOmeters. Ever see your speaker cables vibrate? Didn't think so. Think it does in interconnects? Very unlikely.

"The basic purpose of this invention is to reduce or substantially eliminate resonance in a multi-strand electrical cable having conductive wire strands of differing sizes (i.e.cross-sections)and thereby avoid the above-noted and other adverse consequences of such resonance." Anyone know what the resonance of an audio cable is (3ft-10ft)? Yep, it's in the megaHertz.

"In all of the disclosed embodiments, the cable strands are arranged in such a way that larger strands are located radially outward of smaller strands to stabilize the smaller strands against resonant vibration."

Why do the inner/smaller strands need to be 'stabalized'? The outer ones don't need to be? Do any of them 'really' need to be 'stabalized'? So current only flows through the inner strands? We are talking about micro and milliamps here. NOT 69kV lines as the patent tries to relate to.

My guess would be that the $2400 goes to pay for braiding the strands.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Mat,

It's nice to hear from the science side of things
While talking to an EE friend of mine he also reinforced
that Skin Effect isn't even an issue in the audible spectrum
at all.

He read some of this cable alchemy and he thanked me for the
laughs he was belly rolling all day long

My guess is the cost comes from that whole Golden Ratio
Braiding.. It must take fancy equipment to do..

What's really funny to me is that if I don't "believe" a
cable makes a difference then I must be a Tin Eared Noob
and certainly not an Audiophile since I can not distinguish
between a piece of 99.99% OFC 12AWG and a pair of "High End"
cables.

Wanna impress me? Make a speaker cable with 939 strands of
pure cryo treated copper and have each little strand indi-
vidialy coated with teflon and then have the whole deal
encased in unobtainum with gold pressed latinum connectors.

 

[Mat_M]

 

[alan halvorson]

Here's my guess at the price breakdown of this $2400 cable: Dealer profit = $1200, manufacturer profit = $1100, cost to manufacture + overhead = $100. The later is probably high.

 

[John Sully]

You forgot the "happy home". Fix your .sig.

But seriously the only real problem I've had with cables is that pack-in's (you know, the really cheap stuff) can sometimes pick up CB or AM radio stations. Replacing them with decent quality (and I don't mean anything that costs more than $10 or $15) has always fixed this.

Beyond this I can see no reason to spend big bucks on fat cables.

 

[Brian OK]

Boy,

I have been away from this forum for a month or so. Other things going on....
Reading this troll thread is very disheartening, as it is solely based upon an agenda which does not move the hobby forward at all. Not a positive thing.

Use the cheaper wire, or use the costlier wire ? It comes down to the individuals priorities, experience, budget, level of hardware resolution, and personal goals.

This thread simply preys on a newbies apprehension and lack of experience when it come to choosing wire, speaker or interconnect.

How about actual user experience of any particular wire before one launches into some lame diatribe about his latent, yet very firm, prejudicial statements about any wire that costs more than entry level AR, Monster... etc

Move the hobby forward..... the Bose type of rant when wires are discussed just smacks of trolling.


BOK

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Brian,

If you don't like the post you don't have to read it nor
respond to it either. This post doesn't prey on anyone nor
has it caused anyone any harm and it's doubtful that is
cost George Cardas any money from his wallet either (I never
even mention "names" that was all Lee's job..)

I am entitled to my opinion and I am also entitled to
discuss that opinion with others that agree or disagree
with me in a civil manner which we have done. Sure there has
been some jocularity over it but at the end of the day we
are still all in the same hobby and on the same side.

I never once said you shouldn't buy expensive cables. I just
don't particularly care for false advertisement by companies
and I wish someone (FCC?) would hold them liable for thier
statements. Perhaps then we would see less BS and more truth
in advertising (wishful thinking, I know.. Since there are
more guilty parties than not..)

Want another example of someone opinion? I just bought tube
amps.. There are those of us out there that would say S.S is
the clear winner so why bother with tubes, yadda yadda. Did
that influence my decision to buy tube amps? Hardly..

There is more than enough room in the world for those of us
that don't belive in Majic Speaker Cable Pixie Dust, and
those of us who do belive!

It's all good.

 

[Chu Gai]

Hope you've been well Brian, truly
However when you state...

This thread simply preys on a newbies apprehension and lack of experience when it come to choosing wire, speaker or interconnect.

I'd ammend that by saying it is more so that the cable mongers are the one's that are doing the preying. Anecdotal evidence, without the benefit of controls and methodical approaches, advance nothing but the gilding of pockets of the mongers. It's well known, and has been demonstrated innumerable times, that when levels are matched and the identity of the cables under comparison is kept secret from the person doing the evaluation, the ability to distinguish one from another is reduced to chance...the flipping of a coin. Largley this translates to given similar gauges and similar lengths one cannot reliably distinguish between two wires. It doesn't matter as to whose amp you use, whose speaker, etc. Generally one finds the reasons for people gravitating towards more esoteric (i.e. expensive), apart from either ignorance of the facts available or an unwillingness to accept the evidence, have to do with discretionary income or perhaps a preference for certain reasons such as appearance, electrical characteristics, status, etc.
All it takes is one legitimate positive result that can be reproduced. After all, we wouldn't want this to be like cold fusion would we? The world is waiting. Maybe one day we'll put Cardas, Lee, and some others together in a controlled environment. Think they'll be able to pick their wires out?

 

[Chris Tsutsui]

Threads like this help rehabilitate geniuses with audiophilia nervosa like myself. That way I don't have to look dumb when I'm adjusting the sand bags under and top of my wires to prevent them from resonating.

Pretty soon I won't have to change interconnects depending on the tracks that I demo for people and not apply analgesic cream to my wire insulation to keep the jacket healthy.

Just playing.

I heard the skin effect is because copper has higher densitiy on the perimeter of the strand which has more conductivity. This means that surface conditions for the wire are important in terms of crystalline integrity, freedom from contaminants, including silver or other platings. It also means that "strand jumping" in stranded wires is a possibility, and not for just 20kHz freqs.

The push of current to the perimeter of wire and the fact that wires do not stay in perfect order lead to the signal current jumping from one strand to the next as that strand "dives" back into the center of the wire bundle.

Manufacturers have helped solve this by using consistant and clean copper at a microscopic level and/or by using variations in the copper strand diameters/arrangement. This allows me to sleep at night knowing the "skin effect" won't be waiting for me when I listen to music next.

However, physical movement upon the cables/wire from the speakers has not been fully solved despite the introduction of terminal/input/output shock suspension devices. This is yet another reason why you should have a combination of cable grounding weights to prevent vibrations and perpetual movement devices to variate the distortions to prevent a sonic signature.

Alas, if you're poor you can achieve similar benefits should you shake your cables with your hands and step on them as you listen.



(Still.. to be honest, all the technical complexity can be quite fascinating.)

 

[Chu Gai]

well you know what they say Chris, 'no matter how you shake, wiggle, and dance, the last electron still stays in your amps'

 

[Grant B]

can sometimes pick up CB or AM radio stations

They should charge extra and call them audio and CB interface cables
What's a Breaker breaker good buddy amongest friends?

 

[Philip Hamm]

Funny.

A few months ago I tried a little experiment.

My Technics DVD-A10 is connected to my pre/pro using the best AudioQuest cables I have, about $50/pair - nowhere near High-end but a step up from pack-ins, right?

I hooked the second pair of outputs from my Technics DVD-A10 to another input on the pre/pro using the absolute flimsiest pack-ins that I could find in my box of old crappy cables. I mean these things were like a piece of thread they were so thin.

I A/Bed them with a 96/24 DAD and could barely tell the difference. It was slight enough that I couldn't tell you that it wasn't in my head. Taught me a lesson.