Re: Cables again. For Arny, et al.

On Mar 7, 7:46 pm, "Arny Krueger" <ar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "nebulax" <nebu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:fqpq7l0prp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > BTW, please don't take my arguments to indicate that I'm
> > advocating spending $500+ a meter on cables, because I'm
> > truly not, and I couldn't afford to spend that much even
> > if I wanted to. One of the folks who I quoted, Roger
> > Sanders, is selling interconnects that he makes from
> > Belden video coax, and he's only charging $59 for a 5ft
> > pair, but even THAT is too expensive for me (right now
> > anyway). I wish the whole cable/sound issue wasn't even
> > an issue, but to my ears it is, and so I'm trying to find
> > the most economical way to sonic neutrality, that's all.
>
> As a rule, the worst thing about the give-away interconnects that come
with
> audio gear is the connectors, not the cable.  The cable itself is
inherently
> sonically neutral when used in reasonable lengths, and with almost any
piece
> of audio gear.
>
> Coax can be used to make some very techhy-looking cables, especially
with
> the right connectors. All that has nothing to do with sound, its all
about
> appearances.

Yeah, the connectors can really suck on cheap cables. It's bad enough
that the norm for hi-fi connections are RCA jacks, much less poorly
made ones. I've read info from Mogami and Canare that state that the
quality of the connector can affect the ohm rating of the whole
assembly, with a bad jack design making a cable unsuitable for
transferring digital S-PDIF information. A mismatch of ohms in a
electrical circuit can be quite audible, and well as visual (in the
case of video signal).

I think that coax would give more predictable results than something
like say, Hosa cable, and the ****elding would be better, too. If
nothing else, better ****elding = less noise+interference = better
sound.

-Neb