| JS |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #1 | Hello -- I am building the CF amp from plans. I am having problems finding a source for the shielded twisted pair wiring for the inputs. I can find it, but most places will only sell it in large quantities, and I only need a few feet. I found some surplus cable marked "neglex 2534 microphone cable." It has four twisted conductors shielded with copper braiding. Will this work OK running two sections of cable and just using two of the conductors per input? I'm assuming yes, but just want to make sure.
I've built a few projects, but still consider myself a newbie in all this.
|
| Loading... | | |
| PAUL |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #2 | I have used the neglex mic cable for years for my long runs between preamp and power amps. This cable (IMO) suits me by being a bit laid back and not very hot on the top end. The cable usually has four conductors inside the shield that are in twisted pairs and I use one twisted pair for the hot and other twisted pair for the return and I connect the shield to the return only on the input side. Again this is just how I use it and I am not stating that it is the best way to use it nor am I saying that its the best sounding cable out there, so boys turn your flamers down before you respond |
| Loading... | | |
| RayO |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #3 | Parts Express has a couple different twisted pair Mic cables sold by the foot...
|
| Loading... | | |
| Brenton |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #4 | Of course, the proprietary, top-secret research done by the good people at HyperboleTronics would hasten to point out that such use of un-annointed wire results in unacceptable skin and transmission line effects. It's further complicated by the excess oxygen since, as EVERYone knows, electricity moves more freely in free space, and without oxygen free copper, well, you aint got "free space".
Fortunately a solution has been found -- a partial work around at best, if you really are too cheap to spring $1300/foot for the good stuff. Boidae Audio has a unique liquid solution you apply to the bare wire ends, before soldering. Be warned, however, that ordinary lead solder won't take. Only silver.
There are some anecdotal reports on the boards, by overzealous users I think, that if Boidae oil is rubbed on the entire length of the wire (yes, the outer insulation), that there is some incremental gain in shedding skin effects.
Sorry I can't provide links for you. I hope this is helpful. |
| Loading... | | |
| gw |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #5 | You just can't go wrong with the low cost, high performance cat6 computer network cable. Low noise, high S/N, good to 200 Mbps....I think it will handle your audio signals just fine. Also, you can pick up 8' lengths of this cable anywhere computer parts are sold, real cheap. Don't be fooled by the hype surrounding boutique cables? |
| Loading... | | |
| JS | |
| PAUL |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #7 | I agree that there is a lot of smoke and mirrors(and sophomoric marketing). Yes different cables sound different but do they better? One can tune their system with cables. If you have a dull sounding system try silver tinned copper, if its hot try the neglex, this is the fun part of the hobby |
| Loading... | | |
| gw |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #8 | To elaborate on my previous comment, years ago I designed and constructed my scratch-built GG, and using a short piece of cat5 cable to connect four input connectors to the input selector. I was so impressed with the finished product, I wanted to experiment with the cat5 cable. I have since built all my interconnects and speaker cables using cat5. Years later I'm so delighted with my sound system I've never looked back. Furthermore, I can't imagine ever requiring upgrades....I'm totally satisfied. That's saying a lot given I am a tough customer who demands nothing but the finest sound quality. Not only am I an audio enthusiast, but I'm also an electrical engineer. I can assure you that boutique parts only alter an otherwise flat frequency response, if having any effect at all. Personally, I strive for accurate sound reproduction and therefore have no use for tone controls. |
| Loading... | | |
| Brenton |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #9 | GW,
One almost has to have training like yours to evaluate some of the claims made...well, I guess audio is not the only area frought with snake oilsmanship.
I'd been believing (much of) the hype, but I'm glad I was steered to some skeptical information via some of the forums. I might have spent $1k on speaker cables, and I think I'm glad I didn't.
Maybe the skeptics are too disbelieving, but it was sobering to read assertions that many fancy claims (about fancy speaker cables) amount to solutions for problems that are inaudible, if they exist at all, in home audio applications.
On the other hand, serious minded, sober-type people (like you, I think) report being able to hear differences. This holds more water for me than, say, you know the type who rave in the most flamboyant of vague terminology: "Like a veil that was not just lifted, it was swept away from right to left on an upward diagonal slope, revealing melifluous highs, lemon yellows, sphincter-puckering bass, and timbers so tonally balanced it would make a pirate hop for joy on his wooden leg." You know what I mean. |
| Loading... | | |
| Gary Kemp |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #10 | On the other hand, one should not infer from 'it makes no audible difference' that the thing is not worthwhile. Perceptual indiscriminibility is not transitive; if X in indiscriminible from Y, and Y is indiscriminible from Z, it does not follow that X is indiscriminible from Z. This obvious in say volume; take the smallest difference that you can hear as X and Z, then take Y as the mid-point between them. So many such changes might amount to big change overall, despite the fact that no one change makes an audible difference. This perhaps provides a glimmer of hope for cable-mongers in the face of simple DBT testing (which they of course avoid). But personally I am totally convinced by the skeptical side of the argument. |
| Loading... | | |
| Brenton |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #11 | These are good points, Gary.
It calls something to mind. When I upgraded my stereo over the past year, the overall impact, I think, was quite huge, yet some things that are obvious are also hard to isolate and point out. Even harder, since changes were made, more or less, one component at a time.
I suppose if I set up the old equipment as it was last November, and made side by side comparisons it'd be easier to make note of some specifics. But as things stand, I can really only say "Wow, big difference in the new gear -- don't ask me to tell you in what ways, though." |
| Loading... | | |
| Gary Kemp |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #12 | And course, no one can really be bothered to figure out exactly what change did what to the sound. The best way is to find someone you trust, and do what he says ... |
| Loading... | | |
| gw |
|
| |
Reply with quote | #13 |
Quote: Originally Posted by Gary Kemp And course, no one can really be bothered to figure out exactly what change did what to the sound. The best way is to find someone you trust, and do what he says ...
You mean follow Bruce Rozenblit's Audio Reality? Gee I think that's a great idea. THANKS! |
| Loading... | | |