On April 28, 2006 at 17:21, core_techx said...
From the Preeminent Lurker
I'm not getting into the debate of what one person
hears versus another but......
Devils advocate time:
For those who say hi-end cable manufacturers are
all snake oil sales and no science consider this.
We "KNOW" that cat5/cat6 has to be run and teminated
a certain way. We also know that the different
twists within the cable are for particular "performance"
reasons. The data traveling down a cat5/6 "requires"
that the cable be run and terminated a certain
way to ensure "optimum" performance related to
data transmission accuracy,data transmission speeds,
rf interference, electro-magnetic and a few other
factors. There ARE differences in the performance
characteristics of different data cable manufacturers
regardless of printed specs (minimum cable performance
- hopefully).
Why then do we say that wire is wire when it come
to interconnects and speaker wire. Is that information
not data? Wouldn't the same (or similar) laws
of physics, electrical signals, cable construction,
termination apply! Even more so since the amount
and variety of "data" is extreme for music and
movies in comparison to the bits and bytes of
network communications (within a typical residence).
If we're talking about audio cables, the bandwidth is only from about 20Hz to 20,000Hz. Another was to say that is the bandwidth is from 0.00002MHz to 0.02MHz. These frequencies are incredibly low, and the reason that cabling issues are really a DC issue for amplified audio. A network's bandwidth requirements are huge in comparison. 100Mbps network connections are easily achieved. The signal bandwidth is at least 100MHz. Note that this is almost 10 orders of magnitude higher in frequency than audio. You've got it way backwards thinking audio is higher bandwidth than a network.
Video in uncompressed form contains way to much data for a 100Mbps network. But we don't deal with uncompressed video over cables unless we deal with component video, and a component video connection uses coaxial connections, and the same types of electrical cabling issues that network cables do.
The direction of signal flow isn't important along
with the cable material/construction?
There is do direction for extruded copper. Electon flow is neiter faster or slower in one direction or another. The cable material and construction can be important. If amplified audio cables are of equivalent wire gauges, and have the same impedance per foot (They're made of the same material), and the same length, they'll have the same performance.
If there was increased bandwidth to be had by using some specific metallurgy of copper, there would be applications using it. There are applications where the importance of getting more bandwidth over a single cable is so important, that such characteristics would be used by electrical engineers if available.
Ex. Your driving (data) along the highway and
there is a pothole (impurity in metallurgy/cable
composition), you swerve to avoid damaging your
car - didn't your speed and direction change and
affect how (theoretically) and when you arrived
at your final destination?
Ex. 2 (another car/cable construction analogy)
our arguments are like saying that a tire is just
a tire. Why pay $200 plus for hi-end Michelin
or Bridgestone when you can get some crappy tire
from the local auto parts store for $29.00 each!
They'll get you (signal) there just as well regardless
of the construction of the road you're travelling
on! Right Ha!
But we do have wire specs that tell us how good the road is... it's ohms/ft! The lower, the better the road. The stuff traveling on the road are electrons, and I don't know where you get yours, but mine usually are supplied by the power company. Last I checked they didn't offer special "Hi-Fi Tweaker Electrons"!
What about the interaction of the chemical properties
of the choice of metal/s, jacketing, oxygen,temperature,
and sunlight etc. on overall cable performance
over time?
If the cable oxidizes, and that causes it's resistance to increase, it will effect performance, otherwise it's a non-issue.
How come very few of us complain with the same
voracity about the "Snake Oil" electronics manufactures
use (insert manufactures name for technological
BS here..............good or bad).
Have you not watched this board long? How many "I hate BOSE" threads does a search turn up.
Regardless
of whether equipment is being compared apples
to apples when was the last time any spec EVER
told you how a monitor looked or how an amplifier
or speaker sounds. Sometimes I wish there were
NO published specs at all. Maybe then SOME of
our customers would actually LISTEN and WATCH
to make their decisions (assuming you know how
to set up and properly demo gear) instead of uneducated
guesses and consumer reports dung beetles!
If you look at the correct specs, they will indeed tell you more about the equipment in minutes than you could tell by watching / listening for days. The issue is that such tests take a degree in engineering to understand.
Another issue is that often customers will choose not based on what will look best in their home, but by what looks best in the store. Take display brightness for example. Customers will almost universally choose a brighter CRT display, even if that display is overdriven, and blooming. If they are watching in a normal room during the evening, such brightness is totally unnecessary, and actually compromises the display. There are tests to show this, but the manufacturers instead all choose to compete with each other by overdriving their displays in the default configuration.
Food for Thought!
Flame On!
Have a great Weekend!
sorry for the long post
