Mixing different speaker cables

[james.miller]

of electricity, dont be childish. I dont advocate what these companies do to sell these cables - i never have. But like i said, if it were fraud they wouldnt be doing it.

If you know better then dont buy them, its that simple.

here's a good example:

http://www.usa.denon.com/productdetails/3429.asp

yes, its just an ethernet cable. They are....well, its laughable, but are they actually lying about anything? no they arent.

 

[oli collett]

speaker cable can make a profound difference, but thats when you're driving speakers with very difficult loads - think electrostats. people who say there is no difference whatsoever are flat out wrong, sorry. With average speakers driven by an av amp, you'll be hard pressed to hear many differences.

James,

I don't think i've posted this before but there is a very good article on speaker cables here:
http://theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_16_r.pdf



Page 51 (Pdf 39) Including frequency response curves of various cables. Note the scale of the curves!

For those that don't want to read all of that, the conclusions are roughly that no speaker cable is entirely accurate, metallurgy is irrelevant to accuracy, those with lower series inductance are more accurate than those with higher series inductance and that price is irrelevant except for the fact that very low inductance cable is never going to be cheap. Also note the affect of different amplifier signals in the diagram and that at short lengths, it doesn't matter anyway.

But anyway, have a read if you haven't already

 

[james.miller]

thats right. the only important think to note really is that there wont be many people in the situation where they can get away with 1m lengths of speaker cable. i think i use about 2.5m which still isnt a lot tbh, but anyway yes speaker cable does have an affect. Rod Elliot who himself is firmly in the in the same line of thinking found very similar results when testing cables:

Difficult Loads
While it is true that reasonable quality twin cables (figure eight or zip cord) are adequate for nominal 8 ohm loads over short distances, there are a number of popular loudspeakers that are anything but nominal at high frequencies. Two that a reader advised me about are the AR11 and the Quad ESL (old model). Both of these drop below 2 ohms in the treble frequencies. The AR bottoming out at 5kHz and the Quad at 18Khz (although anything from 15kHz to 18kHz is common). The dips are fairly sharp and so the load impedance is highly capacitive on the way down and inductive on the way up. The frequencies are high enough to not worry good amplifiers but what about the response at these dip frequencies?
Twin wire cables all have significant inductance which increases in proportion to length. With 10 amp rated twin flex over only 5 metres the response was down by 2.5 dB into one Quad ESL at 18 Khz, and 3.5 dB into the other speaker which had 8 metres. This was audible and unacceptable.

Summary
Essentially, the main offenders in speaker leads are resistance and inductance. Of these, inductance is the hardest to minimise, and although usually small, it may still cause problems with some loads (see update, below). Many construction methods have been used, from multiple CAT-5 data cables, with the wires interconnected (usually all the coloured leads are deemed the +ve conductor, and all the white wires - the "mates" - are used as the negative). Because of the tight twist, the inductance is minimised, but at the expense of capacitance. In some cases, the capacitance may be high enough to cause instability in the amplifier, which not only does awful things to the sound, but can damage the amp.
Another popular method of minimising inductance is to use a pair of coaxial leads (e.g.75 Ohm TV/video coax or similar). The inner conductor of one and the outer conductor of the other are joined to make the +ve lead, and vice-versa for the negative. A good quality coax has a relatively low capacitance, and by interconnecting in this way, inductance is also reduced by a very worthwhile margin.
It is widely held that with difficult loudspeaker loads - as presented by many modern speaker systems with complex crossover networks - that reducing inductance can be very beneficial. This is especially true where the crossover causes significant drops in impedance at some frequencies. This also places unusually high demands on the amplifier - one of the reasons that some amplifiers just don't "cut it" with some speakers.
These problems can be reduced or even eliminated entirely by biamping or triamping [3], allowing the use of good quality but not extravagant speaker leads.
Resistance, which is easy to eliminate, reduces the damping factor and wastes power. With even reasonably robust leads, this should not be an issue

http://sound.westhost.com/cables-p2.htm#spkr-leads

 

[iraiguana]

Ok, my post was in reference to this guys set-up. If you had mega bucks to spend on good stereo equipment then yes you should get decent cables to maximise other the length you are using. In this case he will see minimal if any difference.

 

[Reality Bites]

It's not possible. Generally, because people know there is a difference, they will hear/perceive a difference.

The silver isn't letting 'more quality' pass through it. You're forgetting the fact that the speaker terminals won't be silver, and the amp's terminals won't be silver either, so there's no difference between them really.

i'm sorry, but that's ****. Please do not call me a liar. I appreciate most of these things are subective, but to my ears there is a difference and i personally do not see the point in paying £600+ for a very nice amp and then mixing and matching speaker cable.

I wasn't making a point about the silver cable being better, i was simply saying that different materials and make-up of the cable will make the current and hence the sound different

 

[9designs2]

What a load of old BS !!! Speaker cables (nothing to do with cost) can have a big effect on the sound and how it is presented, brighter, more or less bass effect.
Simple problem is people haven't worked out how to measure what we hear....
I am amazed how people have so little faith in their own ability and senses, except their eyes, then "everyone" can tell how one screen looks better than another.... oh really !!!
.......

 

[Reality Bites]

Ok, my post was in reference to this guys set-up. If you had mega bucks to spend on good stereo equipment then yes you should get decent cables to maximise other the length you are using. In this case he will see minimal if any difference.

if you read the OP, it was a question about mixing cables, not a comparison of cheap/expensive cables.

To a large percentage of people in this country, an £800-£1000 amp is very high spec and not exactly budget!

 

[kylew]

i'm sorry, but that's ****. Please do not call me a liar. I appreciate most of these things are subective, but to my ears there is a difference and i personally do not see the point in paying £600+ for a very nice amp and then mixing and matching speaker cable.

I wasn't making a point about the silver cable being better, i was simply saying that different materials and make-up of the cable will make the current and hence the sound different

You're obviously not sorry, but I didn't call you a liar. If you think it's true, how is it a lie?

What I did say is that how can a silver cable make any difference when the contact points on the speakers and amp aren't going to be silver? Most likely brass or something.

 

[kidloco]

cables always open up a can of worms. you will always get some people that say they are just a rip off, bell wire sounds exactly the same, iv read it on a web site.

People who have tried various cables and say they dont have any noticeable impact on sound quality need to upgrade their equipment or clean their ears.

Granted on cheap n cheerful and even most budget stuff you will be hard pushed to notice the difference between some cheap 79 strand copper cable and Chord Odessy for example. But the better quality source, amplification and speakers you have the impact a change of cable makes.

Iv used the same hi-fi shop for over 15 years and they are very accommodating. when I bought new speakers, they let me borrow several types of cable for me test at home, no pressure, just bring back what you dont want to buy. The cable range from £2.50 to £20 a metre. each cable had its own sonic signature if you will, some sounded thined and hardened the sound, others dulled the sparkle but added a bit of warmth. They wernt huge changes but they were there. The missus was sat while I was testing them and even she could tell the differences. and this was what I would class as a fairly modest setup.

Royksan Kandy III amp
Marantz CD63 KI sig cdp
Moniitor Audio GS10 speakers

I ended up buying Chord Rumour II, which was £10 a metre but suited my listening sytle the most. On far more revealing equipment it would only show up the differences in the cable all the more.

ill stop ranting now, if people cant hear any difference then feel free to hook up you equipment with bell wire if you want, but if you want to pay a bit more for something that you feel is worth the extra, go for it. just listen to the stuff first before you splash the cash. don't listen to magazines and hear say. trust your OWN ears.

 

[Simon]

CAT5 network cable is meant to be good speaker cable.

Sounds fine running to my rears

 

[Kreeeee]

CAT5 network cable is meant to be good speaker cable.

Sounds fine running to my rears

CAT5e isn't it?

 

[Simon]

Dunno, what's the diff

 

[-Ad-]

Dunno, what's the diff

Cat5e - Cat5 = e

 

[-Ad-]

Royksan Kandy III amp
Marantz CD63 KI sig cdp
Moniitor Audio GS10 speakers

Ahh bet that setup is lovely and would love to compare it to mine as I considered the GS10s as I had the BR2s, but ATCs took my fancy.

Agree with what you have said, have a listen and see. I will eventually get around to buying my enamelled copper and trying out some solid core cable vs my stranded ixos stuff that cost £2.50 p/m. I doubt that I will ever hear an expensive cable unless there is a test done at someones house or someone brings a £££ cable over to mine.

Im in the camp that if I hear a big difference, perceived or not, then it might be worth buying it. But the last time I switched between interconnects I got bored and just got on with listening to the music. i still haven't compared my mark grant canare based IC to my home brew 99.999elevnty % silver homebrew cable. Both cost about £25 so it would be nice to hear a difference. Only testing will tell.

 

[wolvers]

of electricity, dont be childish

I think he's on about this James, bit of a mix up there.

Let me ask a question, what would be a higher quality cable? A normal toslink, or a gold plated one?

Gold has better conductivity of light? Pull the other one.

 

[kylew]

I think he's on about this James, bit of a mix up there.

It wasn't meant as a serious question. What I was trying to highlight is the lengths cable manufacturers go to to try and create grades of cables.

The fact that a gold plated optical cable even exists shows this. There is no way a cable manufacturer innocently makes gold plated optical cables with the consumer in mind.

They make them so they can fool the people who just follow without thought. Most people who don't have a clue, when buying their AV equipment, will be easily fooled in to thinking any cable, no matter what type, will benefit from being gold plated.

With an optical cable, you don't get good and bad quality when it comes to the signal it's passing. Just the same as HDMI. Where a good quality cable can make a difference is in durability. I have an old cheap optical cable made from somewhat rigid fiberoptic plastic.

This cable is now broke because it doesn't pass enough light for the receiver to get the audio. Where as I've got a more robust cable made from more flexible plastic with heavier metal grips on the ends. This had made the cable withstand being bumped and moved around a lot.

Though the ends them selves aren't gold plated, they're plastic. Just the grips are metal to stop the cable from breaking if it bends at the connection point.

This really is the only situation where a more expensive digital cable is better. The performance is exactly the same, and you'd be mad to try and imply there would ever be any difference in performance, but the durability of the cable is far better. Same with some HDMI, if the cable is cheap, the picture will be the same, but the cable might deteriorate very quickly.

Anyway, my point is that the manufacturers are blantantly using things like gold plating as a way of increasing the profit they make on their cables, while trying to fool people in to thinking it made a difference.

Also, there may be a difference in the sound that comes from a cable, but it's ridiculous to just assume that the difference means it's better, which a lot of people are guilty of.

I am very aware that analogue signals can improve and get worse depending on the type of cable it's run through, but, things like gold plating and silver plating is rubish. How can it be any different when the terminals on both the speakers and amp are made of a lesser metal?

It's like having a single lane leading up to a 20 lane motor way, which then tapers back in to a single lane. Sure you're gonna get there faster between both single lanes, but ultimately only one car at a time is getting in one end and out the other. No matter how many lanes are in between you'll still get the same volume coming as goes out.

 

[oli collett]

It wasn't meant as a serious question. What I was trying to highlight is the lengths cable manufacturers go to to try and create grades of cables.

The fact that a gold plated optical cable even exists shows this. There is no way a cable manufacturer innocently makes gold plated optical cables with the consumer in mind.

Quite - and i think we are all quite acutely aware on here that the hi-fi industry is not driven by sound engineering practices but instead by marketing folk.

Kidloco - Whilst i appreciate that different speaker cables can make a difference - at least at reasonable cable lengths and so on - i still, and never will buy the "trust your own ears" argument. This logic is the same used by the expensive HDMI cable peddlers and various other fraudsters. It's no different to the logic used in the alternative medicine market or any other such practices. If you don't take at least a partially objective viewpoint to this stuff you end up with people selling snake oil, and there's certainly been a lot of that over the years!

 

[kylew]

Quite - and i think we are all quite acutely aware on here that the hi-fi industry is not driven by sound engineering practices but instead by marketing folk.

Kidloco - Whilst i appreciate that different speaker cables can make a difference - at least at reasonable cable lengths and so on - i still, and never will buy the "trust your own ears" argument. This logic is the same used by the expensive HDMI cable peddlers and various other fraudsters. It's no different to the logic used in the alternative medicine market or any other such practices. If you don't take at least a partially objective viewpoint to this stuff you end up with people selling snake oil, and there's certainly been a lot of that over the years!

That's pretty much what I think, though be careful, you may be accused of calling other people liars.

I really, really, really, can't understand how some one can seriously claim that one digital cable can produce a better image than another digital cable.

If you said the same about an optical cable, it would be absurd to nearly everyone, yet it's not when it's about HDMI?

I fail to see the difference between HDMI and an optical cable. Ok, I know one is for audio, and the other does both, but, they're digital cables. They just pass through 1s and 0s, having gold plated silver, spiral wrapped and shielded with 10mm of lead isn't going to make those 1s and 0s better quality.

Oh, and yes, I do know there is a use in sheilding of cables, it's to stop the signal breaking up due to interference, not to improve picture quality, atleast when you're talking about digital cabling anyway.

I have tested a £50 cable, against a cheapo £3 cable I bought online, and guess what? The image was the same, this isn't a cable I bought of course, a friend's parent got duped in to buying one a long with a laptop that had a HDMI port.

 

[Reality Bites]

With an optical cable, you don't get good and bad quality when it comes to the signal it's passing. Just the same as HDMI. Where a good quality cable can make a difference is in durability. I have an old cheap optical cable made from somewhat rigid fiberoptic plastic.

This cable is now broke because it doesn't pass enough light for the receiver to get the audio. Where as I've got a more robust cable made from more flexible plastic with heavier metal grips on the ends. This had made the cable withstand being bumped and moved around a lot.

.

Haven't you just fought your own argument? You've just said that a more expensive cable was better?

Also, i disagree with your first statement. A badly formed optical cable could cause a certain part of the signal to be lost and hence affect the sound. Just because you've never had this happen, doesn't mean it never has

 

[Reality Bites]

Also, there may be a difference in the sound that comes from a cable, but it's ridiculous to just assume that the difference means it's better, which a lot of people are guilty of.

I am very aware that analogue signals can improve and get worse depending on the type of cable it's run through, but, things like gold plating and silver plating is rubish. How can it be any different when the terminals on both the speakers and amp are made of a lesser metal?

.

Again, you've fought your own argument saying that the signal is affected by the cable used?!