Main IC Cables. Advice please.

BeeBop · « **on:** 2 Apr 2005, 12:32 pm »

I have a BP25/3BSST and am looking at upgrading the interconnect between the pre and the amp. I would like to use a 2 meter cable, which lets me keep my speaker wires short. My amp and pre are in the same cabinet as my crt color television, vcr and dvd player. Should I go for balanced XLR or will RCA be good enough? I recall seeing a post from James saying that there is a very small difference in performance because the balanced inputs and outputs require additional processing.

Tweaker · « **Reply #1 on:** 2 Apr 2005, 01:06 pm »

If you decide on rca I am using JPS Labs Ultraconductor 2 meter interconects between preamp and amp (actually throughout) as I also wanted to keep the speaker wire runs short. Excellent sounding cable (and speaker wire) from top to bottom. Used to be able to buy them direct from JPS labs but I don't think thats the case anymore. Anyway, highly recommended.

http://www.jpslabs.com/index.shtml

Eric · « **Reply #2 on:** 3 Apr 2005, 09:52 pm »

I am auditioning Sonoran Plauteau interconnects and find they have great synergy with the Bryston equipment. I also enjoy the cables from SAS audio labs

BeeBop · « **Reply #3 on:** 3 Apr 2005, 11:09 pm »

XLR or RCA?

KJ · « **Reply #4 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 01:56 am »

Beebop,

Might want to consider these if they are long enough:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=18037

VH Audio's ICs have been well received by numerous AC members. I own one of their digital cables, and it has been fantastic. You'll get every ounce of detail out of your Bryston components with them.

-KJ

nicolasb · « **Reply #5 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 10:08 am »

I think I'm right in saying that Bryston amplifiers have a slightly lower noise floor when you use the balanced inputs. But there's usually no reason not to use balanced connections if they are available. The combination of screening out interference far more effectively and eliminating (or almost eliminating) the possiblity of ground loops is very handy.

XLR connectors are nicer too.

They're usually more solid, designed to lock into place, etc.

Eric · « **Reply #6 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 01:17 am »

Mine are RCA

yyz · « **Reply #7 on:** 21 Apr 2005, 06:30 pm »

I should be getting the Audience Au24 XLR interconnects today in the mail. Did some online research and came to the conclusion that they could be a good match for my Sony SCD-1, BP-25 (MPS-1), 7B-SST.

I am going to do the 30 day trial and will keep them if they are better sounding than my current Bryston XLR interconnects (3m).

BeeBop · « **Reply #8 on:** 22 Apr 2005, 06:49 pm »

I am interested hearing how they compare yyz - would you be looking to sell your 3m Bryston XLRs if you keep the AU24s ?

yyz · « **Reply #9 on:** 22 Apr 2005, 07:31 pm »

Sure I could sell them. My Bryston cables are in great shape. I am listed on A'gon with same ID.

yyz · « **Reply #10 on:** 29 Apr 2005, 08:50 pm »

I have listen to the Au24 XLR's for about 15 hours now and they are starting to come to life. As of this moment I can definitely say that these cables are much smother (less harsh) and clearer than my Bryston cables. I thought the Brystons were more dynamic or exciting at first but as the Au24 get more hours through them I feel they are just as dynamic as the Brystons.

The Au24 definitely have more seperation between the various components in the music. The soundstage is also wider and further out. There is also more detail in the music. The most obvious thing I noticed is how relaxed and clear the sound is. I think I could listen to my system longer and louder with these cables than the Bryston XLR's.

The music I have played to compare the cables sounds better through the Au24. I know these tracks very well. For example, Bob Marley's Kinky Reggae track was so beautiful through the Au24. It sounded so coherent and life like and I heard more detail then ever before. The I3's have never sounded so good singing backup. I listen to tons of Bob Marley and his disks have never sound this good.

Another disk that sounds better than ever is Moving Pictures (Rush). I have been listening to this cassette, LP, disk regularly since 1980 and yesterday it was the best I have ever heard. I don' think it is a great sonic recording but for me the music is timeless. The sound stage was much larger with the Au24. The drumming was more coherent and the bass was coming out like a force field. Pretty impressive.

I have had the Bryston cables since 1998 so I am very familiar with the sound they reproduce. The Au24 is very expensive (for me) but I will keep these for the long haul and forget about cables. My system is now more than good enough without that "weakest link" that I knew was lurking around.

System:
Sony SCD-1 (Allen Wright Mod Level 4.5)
BP 25 (MPS-1)
7B-SST monoblocks
Tuner
Revel Salons Speakers
Virtual Dynamics Nite and Signiture PC's
Au24 interconnects
AudioQuest Volcano speaker cable

I use the VD Signiture PC on the Bryston amps but I think that money was wasted.

Fife12 · « **Reply #11 on:** 29 Apr 2005, 09:47 pm »

Nice to hear about your Au24 comments. I too feel that they are quite a well rounded cable but the main thing I noticed was the bass.

I too have found no difference in PC for Bryston Amps. They seem insensitive to Powercord changes.

Maybe just get a cheap aftermarket one and dump your expensive VD ones for AU24 speaker cables.

YYZ, btw you have a nice system.

ScottMayo · « **Reply #12 on:** 2 May 2005, 07:04 pm »

Quote from: KJ

Beebop,

Might want to consider these if they are long enough:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=18037

VH Audio's ICs have been well received by numerous AC members. I own one of their digital cables, and it has been fantastic. You'll get every ounce of detail out of your Bryston components with them.

-KJ

Just a note: digital cable isn't a good way to evaluate a cable manufacturer. This is because digital signals are kind of simple: they are either an On or an Off, and any reasonable wire, from gold-plated time-aligned kryptonite, down to a bent coat hanger, will carry a digital signal accurately. A wire that doesn't carry digitized audio accurately is a very bad wire. About the only thing you can add to a cable to make it better for digital signalling is shielding, and that only makes a difference in electrically noisy environments.

Look at a piece of Cat 6 cable at some point - it's thin, twisted pairs of copper. It's not fancy. It's not real pricey. And it carries data at rates that exceed anything you need for music.

Use a cable with reasonable shielding and gold connectors, and the wire is as good as it can get. And if you needed the shielding, see if you can use an optical cable instead.

nicolasb · « **Reply #13 on:** 3 May 2005, 08:58 am »

Quote from: ScottMayo

Just a note: digital cable isn't a good way to evaluate a cable manufacturer. This is because digital signals are kind of simple: they are either an On or an Off, and any reasonable wire, from gold-plated time-aligned kryptonite, down to a bent coat hanger, will carry a digital signal accurately.

I wouldn't go that far. The reason why (for example) a high-grade CD transport can sound better than a low-grade one has nothing to do with accurate ones and zeroes - both devices do that fine. The difference is in the jitter level.

ScottMayo · « **Reply #14 on:** 3 May 2005, 02:24 pm »

Quote from: nicolasb

Quote from: ScottMayo
Just a note: digital cable isn't a good way to evaluate a cable manufacturer. This is because digital signals are kind of simple: they are either an On or an Off, and any reasonable wire, from gold-plated time-aligned kryptonite, down to a bent coat hanger, will carry a digital signal accurately.

I wouldn't go that far. The reason why (for example) a high-grade CD transport can sound better than a low-grade one has nothing to do with accurate ones and zeroes - both devices do that fine. The difference is in the jitter level.

Wires don't introduce jitter. Oscillators introduce jitter. All a wire can do to a digital signal is introduce external noise, reflections or db loss, and any halfway decent wire won't experience *any* problems with these, in the lengths that audiophiles use. Now, if you are running three hundred feet of unshielded wire, as happens in computer networks, then you have to start thinking about db loss and noise, but ten feet of decent copper with even minimial shielding and good connectors, gives you an error rate of 0. The whole point of digital is that it's possible to pump it through a wire - and not even very expensive wire - with no loss of precision whatsoever. That's not true of analog signals.

Of course, after the digital signal crosses a wire, there's lots of ways it can get into trouble, which is why there are good DACs and bad DACs. But that's a different story.

Never trust a cable company that talks about how their cable improves digital transmission. That's crap. You can't improve beyond an error rate of 0 and if you aren't getting an error rate of 0 already, it's time to replace the coat hangers with less rusty ones.

(One caveat to all this: Loose or dirty connectors. They can introduce a capacitor effect, which screws up both digital and analog signals, especially long strings of 1's. Never use cheap connectors on any signal you care about, musical, network or otherwise.)

Look inside any quality hardware - Bryston is a fine example. Is that time-aligned, silver/irdinium alloy, unobtanium-coated micrograined wire they use in there? Nope. They use copper. And they wouldn't, if something else was better.

nicolasb · « **Reply #15 on:** 3 May 2005, 03:48 pm »

I'd like to believe you, but there are simply too many sensible people who are prepared to swear how much difference to the sound a digital interconnect can make. (The same people will agree that there is no point in faffing about with expensive analogue line-level interconnects in any way that isn't related to shielding and stray capacitance).

Digital pulses travelling along a cable aren't perfectly square. They ought to be - but because the cable has limited bandwidth, in fact the leading and trailing edges of the pulses will slope, they're not vertical. So the problem then is not "is this a pulse or is it not a pulse?" Instead the problem is "at exactly which moment in time does the leading edge of this pulse arrive?" As it isn't vertical, there's no definitive answer to this. There may, for example, be a threshold voltage above which the signal voltage has to rise before the pulse is acknowledged by the receiver as having got there.

Relatively minor fluctuations in the signal might cause the shape of the pulse's leading edge to change slightly (for example, if a previous pulse reflects back down the cable, and then reflects again). This error is nowhere near enough to change a 0 into a 1 (and thus there will not be a detected bit error) but it might still be enough to slightly change the time at which the signal level crosses the threshold voltage on the way up, and hence the timing of the signal.

A cable with superior bandwidth might also help to keep the pulses relatively square. A perfect square wave requires infinitely high harmonics - filtering out harmonics in the tens or hundreds of MHz (or not) would therefore (while not introducing errors) have an influence on pulse shape, and affect the ambiguity of where the pulse edge actually is.

elcaptain88 · « **Reply #16 on:** 3 May 2005, 04:20 pm »

I use a $5 Dayton Audio digital cable from my Marantz CD to my Bryston B60DA - its as good as it gets. At one point I borrowed an expensive Nordost & Kimber to see if I could tell any differences - absolutely none. I had a friend swap them out w/o telling me which ones were in use. I listened through speakers & Senn HD650's.

I'm putting my money toward room treatments in the future - in contrast to cables, acoustic treatment can make a world of difference.

ScottMayo · « **Reply #17 on:** 3 May 2005, 05:41 pm »

Quote from: nicolasb

Relatively minor fluctuations in the signal might cause the shape of the pulse's leading edge to change slightly (for example, if a previous pulse reflects back down the cable, and then reflects again). This error is nowhere near enough to change a 0 into a 1 (and thus there will not be a detected bit error) but it might still be enough to slightly change the time at which the signal level crosses the threshold voltage on the way up, and hence the timing of the signal. ...

I expect DACs sample from the stable part of the pulse (near the center), on a fixed clock. It's hard to imagine they'd take timing from the leading or trailing edge, which is the noisest part of the pulse...!

Any electrical engineers gurus want to take a stab at this? If edge effects are a measurable factor in digital transmission (and they don't seem to cause ethernet any problem, so I'm skeptical), audiophiles should be screaming for purely optical interconnects...

ctviggen · « **Reply #18 on:** 3 May 2005, 07:04 pm »

Well, they have to be able to figure out where the edges are. Let's say that your transport has a 44.1kHz clock and your DAC has a 44.1kHz clock (assume one channel for now). The DAC has to somehow align its sampling with the clock from the transport. If this doesn't happen, the DAC could sample at edges, which would mean inconsistent results. In other words, if you want to sample away from the edges, you have to know where the edges are.

Here's some info:

http://www.answers.com/topic/s-pdif

Interesting -- there's a parity bit, which provides some level of error indication (though not correction). Apparently, they use a word clock for timing, and they use transitions to define bits. In other words, a "one" might be defined as "high to low". Hmm...I'll have to read more about this.

ScottMayo · « **Reply #19 on:** 3 May 2005, 08:42 pm »

Quote from: ctviggen

Well, they have to be able to figure out where the edges are. Let's say that your transport has a 44.1kHz clock and your DAC has a 44.1kHz clock (assume one channel for now). The DAC has to somehow align its sampling with the clock from the transport. If this doesn't happen, the DAC could sample at edges, which would mean inconsistent results. In other words, if you want to sample away from the edges, you have to know where the edges are.

Right. That's what a PLL is for.... you can run your own clock and still steer taking your sample at the center of a pulse, where it's going to be safest. I just don't believe this is a problem. 1 Gig ethernet cable carries data rates higher than this, and they get accurate sampling, on time every time, through huge runs of plain old copper twisted pair.

So I still maintain that no reasonable cable is going to skew digital audio data. I worry more about the stability of the original DAC and ADC. I know I get a lot of difference when I play using a CD player's DAC and the DAC in Bryston's SP1.7, whether using an optical cable or a coax one...