Re: Cables again. For Arny, et al.

"nebulax" <nebulax@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fqpq3q0pq0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 5, 9:55 pm, "Arny Krueger" <ar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:

>> "nebulax" <nebu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:fqks0d0v21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Here's a quote:
>
>>> "The second requirement is that the interconnect have
>>> low impedance.
>>> High impedance can cause loss of output at both high and
>>> low
>>> frequencies depending on the loads presented by the
>>> components
>>> connected to the interconnect. And when the frequency
>>> response is
>>> restricted in this way, the effects are indeed
>>> audible.".

>> The bandwidth of a typical consumer audio interconnect
>> cable is probably around 1,000 MHz. Seems like it would
>> be hard to justify going further.

> If the cable had flat response out to 1,000 MHz, fine,
> but if the load and impedance cause frequencies to roll
> off in the audible range, it will affect the sound of the
> signal going thru it.

With almost all regular consumer audio gear, and with the cable lengths 
typical of home audio systems, such roll offs will simply never happen.

Furthermore, low frequency roll-offs due to cable are all but totally 
impossible. High frequency roll-offs in the audio range can't happen with 
well-designed equipment and reasonable cable lengths.