Is the best interconnect......... no interconnect?

tmd · « **on:** 29 Aug 2003, 01:06 pm »

I had been wondering about this for a long time now but had never asked before. JohnR just asked this in another thread here and it prompted me.
Paraphrasing him, why pay $8k for an interconnect when someone could probalby be paid to integrate the two units for less than that with a better result? That is of course if the answer is that no interconnect is better than the best one out there.
More relevant though is in design. I know the advantages of separates but why aren't there any totally integrated systems? (at least I don't know of any)
Wouldn't there be other economies of scale with something that has say a DAC, preamp and power amps and is 'high end'? The only interconnect then would be a digital from a transport.

Carlman · « **Reply #1 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 01:23 pm »

A CD player has no interconnect from its internal transport to DAC. Some pre-amps have a power supply built-in and others are separate... while passive's have no power supply. There are plenty of good integrated amp/preamps out there now. There are pros and cons to doing this just like anything else. In the case of the CD player, the manufacturer generally uses an OK-to-poor DAC but, what if I want better? What if I don't like the way my Plinius integrated sounds and I want to try tubes? I can't bypass the pre-amp section's signal path... My point is that hifi geeks like to tweak, customize, etc. The more integrated, the less capabilities there are to play. So, limiting people to one set of components to avoid choosing a good IC isn't a solution to most people.

Also, would you have separate power supplies for everything or just one big one? This would also open the door to cheap electronics... for which there is already a huge market. (see Circuit City, Best Buy, Tweeter, etc.)

Bill Baker · « **Reply #2 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 02:22 pm »

Carlman is correct. This would put far too many limitations on chossing or "building" a system.
Even though nobody likes to admit it, we like to "fine tune" our systems with various interconnects just as we do with the different components we choose.
Good interconnects do not have to cost a lot of money and if possible, just make sure you use the shortest cable possible.
An integrated system? It would never take off as you would be putting your trust into the taste of the designer which would most likely not be the same as yours.
Variables are what makes this hobby what it is. Without variables, there would be no AudioCircle!! We don't want that.

tom1356 · « **Reply #3 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 05:02 pm »

Of course you can have the best of both worlds...just like no IC at all.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=215804

Bosh · « **Reply #4 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 05:47 pm »

At least the amp/pre interconnects are eliminated, and I have as much flexibility with source components as one does with seperates.

There are a few reasons why integrated units are so popular, it seems, everywhere but the USA. Far fewer "Texas Sized" rooms being one. And of course it's often a more cost effective solution. But the main reason I opted for an (ASL) integrated was the ability to shorten signal paths and simplify the spagehetti jungle (if only by one run!).

Even those who've gotten wealthy marketing cables will admit that the best wire is no wire. And for the forseeable future, about the only place one can "cut down" on the damn things, at least in the high(er) end, is the option of an integrated amp.

IMHOO, etc.

Bosh · « **Reply #5 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 05:49 pm »

Quote from: tom1356

Of course you can have the best of both worlds...just like no IC at all.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=215804

John B · « **Reply #6 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 07:00 pm »

I don't think you can get away from ICs. Even if everything was in one box (ie HT Receiver) you've still got interconnects, per say, in the form of internal wiring. Now that begs another question, why would my high end external interconnects make a difference when the internal wiring, probably not very high end, in my components is factored into the equation. Whatever benefits I'm getting, like cleaner signal path, interference shielding, would be lost once the signal hit the less than optimized internal wiring. Never the less, in my evaluation sessions, the high end ICs did make a noticeable improvement in the performance of my rig.

audioengr · « **Reply #7 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 09:03 pm »

No interconnect is preferable. I say this even though I sell IC's. If your components are well-designed, no IC should always perform better.

There is one exception. If you have a stock or a modded transport with slow SP/DIF signal edges (25 nsec is standard), the reflections on the digital cable can affect the edges if you use a cable shorter than 1.5m. These reflections will cause edge jitter which may be audible. As part of the mods I do, I speed-up the edges to 5-10 nsec, so that the reflections will occur well after each edge has transitioned, and the edges will not be affected. This allows the use of even 0.5m digital cables with no edge degradation.

audioengr · « **Reply #8 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 09:06 pm »

Quote

why would my high end external interconnects make a difference when the internal wiring, probably not very high end, in my components is factored into the equation.

The internal wiring does make a huge difference. Both the external and internal wiring makes a difference. This is why you should consider modding your components in addition to using high-performance external cables.

John B · « **Reply #9 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 10:09 pm »

Quote

The internal wiring does make a huge difference. Both the external and internal wiring makes a difference. This is why you should consider modding your components in addition to using high-performance external cables.

Problem with modding components is you void your warranty. Of course with mid-fi gear, it's not that big a risk, but at the price level of my separates it would be a proposition not to take too lightly. It would need to be a mod offered from an outfit like Modwright, whose reliability is well known, however they don't offer mods to the particular gear that I have.

eico1 · « **Reply #10 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 10:21 pm »

There is much less chance of internal wire making a difference since many times the runs are a less than a foot and usually unsheilded separate wires soldered directly without connectors. If you really fear the internal wire wll negate any upgraded interconnects or speaker cables, what about all that junk used in the recording process that will always be embedded in the recording?

steve

JLM · « **Reply #11 on:** 29 Aug 2003, 11:49 pm »

A couple of years back I was considering using active speakers with a tube CD player with variable outputs. That's the purest I could come up with.

I Think the question can be rephrased as:

Can I pick components that will have better synergy than what a trusted/respected equipment designer can bring to market?

A couple of thoughts are implied here:

1. Naturally I'd choose to purchase in any case from a company/designer I trust and respect.

2. Developing the ideal product and having it be marketable is two different things (for instance the ideal sounding product may not be practical or may be just too weird).

3. Having a marketable product and successfully marketing it is also two different things. Few great designers are also great at marketing or even running a business.

If the ideal product was marketable and if it became marketable, then I'd say that the trusted/respected designer could synergize better than I could at least 9 times out of 10.

jeff

tom1356 · « **Reply #12 on:** 30 Aug 2003, 01:52 am »

Quote from: Bosh

Quote from: tom1356
Of course you can have the best of both worlds...just like no IC at all.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=215804

The teflon one is a female panel mount RCA made with coiled 22 gauge .9999 silver wire which is also the hook up wire inside the component. So no solder on the connector end.
The birds eye maple one is a male RCA which uses the same .9999 silver wire inserted through the connector. No solder here either.
The wire in IC's is far less important than the connector itself.
I call them BTN's for better than nothing.

witchdoctor · « **Reply #13 on:** 30 Aug 2003, 02:37 pm »

If you think no interconnects sound great wait until you try no speaker cables. Active speakers have the amps built into them. It is customized for each driver by the speaker designer and uses an active crossover.
Did you ever wonder why professional studios use active speakers?
Because they are NOT as accurate or MORE accurate? DUHHH!!!
Why audiophiles are addicted to amps and speaker cables is beyond me.

tmd · « **Reply #14 on:** 30 Aug 2003, 07:25 pm »

While I wholeheartedly agree that most of us like to tinker around with different bits and pieces, there are some out there, perhaps budding audiophiles or a certain breed that doesn't tinker who might just like to buy one piece of electronics, two speakers and some cable as a single purchase.
As someone said above, a good designer can synergise better than us at least nine out of ten times. There are definite advantages to a system like this. There is also the single power plug/cable, space saving, single source to protect from vibration etc......
It might be a system that starts a guy out and when he gets curious about what more power will get him or how tube sounds versus SS, he can go out and spend lots of money on separates and cables.
There is no reason why an all in one unit couldn't have pre outs, separate direct inputs to the amp section and so on. In fact, there is no reason why a well designed unit couldn't have modules that are 'substituted' for others as necessary, either by the factory or by the user. All these would be designed to work together well.

tom1356 · « **Reply #15 on:** 30 Aug 2003, 11:37 pm »

Commercially available active speakers are a bad idea for the following reasons.
They severely limit your choices in both amps and speaker.
Their only perceived benefit is a short speaker cable which comes at the expense of a very sensitive and long source cable.
An amplifier needs to be protected from vibrations not inserted into a pseudo paint mixer.
If something goes wrong then both your amps and speakers are out of commission.
Very few designers can do a speaker well.
Very few designers can do an amp well.
I don't know any who can do both well.

If your goal is o.k. sound and a tidy area then they might fit the bill.

witchdoctor · « **Reply #16 on:** 31 Aug 2003, 05:03 am »

Tom congratulations you have managed to insult pretty much every audio
company in just one post. Are you insane? There are MANY great amplifier and speaker designers. Some even have rooms right here on Audiocircle. If you have been listening to Bose and Rat shack you should try checking out some new gear.
I agree that choices among active gear is more limited. That doesn't mean that these are bad choices. Pro studios all over the world seem to get by just fine with this limited selection. And you better hope it works or else every CD you have ever bought has been butchered due to inaccurate reproduction during mixing. Take 5 minutes and read some of the reviews on popular active speakers from Genelec and ATC. They are posted at ecoustics.com.
Your comment about the only perceived benefit is a shorter speaker cable is absurd. Do you know the difference between active and passive crossovers? Have you ever heard of bi and tri amping? Each driver has its own dedicated amp inside the active speaker custom matched to the driver. Why would you want something more expensive and less efficient? Can you imagine buying a separate mono block and speaker wire for each driver in each speaker?
I have three Paradigm Active 40's in front, that is a total of 9 drivers and 9 monoblocks. I have two active ADP surrounds (bi-poles) That is 8 drivers and 8 mono blocks. I have two Paradigm Active 20 side axis speakers. That's 4 drivers and 4 monopoles. Do you have any idea how much money I saved by not having to buy 21 monoblock amps and twenty one runs of speaker wire? Can you imagine having to pick the best amp for each woofer and each tweeter?
An amplifier needs to be protected from vibration, true. so you sit the speaker on your stands, cones, whatever. My front speakers sit on Mapleshade Bedrock speaker stands. They isolate both my speakers AND my amps at the same time = more money saved.

BTW if something goes wrong with your speaker in a traditional set up your amp will be useless until you get the speaker fixed anyway so that point makes no sense.
If your goal is to spend a lot of money and hope your amp and speakers match ,well by all means do it.
As for myself ,I'll just copy the studios that are producing the music I listen to and hope they know what they are doing.
BTW, there is a difference between pro and home active gear. Both Genelec and ATC make both.

witchdoctor · « **Reply #17 on:** 31 Aug 2003, 05:24 am »

Links to more info on active speakers:

ATC
http://www.positive-feedback.com/ambackissues/atc.htm
Genelec
http://www.audaud.com/audaud/NOV01/EQUIP/equip1NOV01.html
Paradigm
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/paradigm_active40.htm

JLM · « **Reply #18 on:** 31 Aug 2003, 12:44 pm »

The only downsides I see of active speakers are:

1. Longer IC's between preamp and power amps (versus longer speaker cables, the debate has gone on before, it's gotta be a trade off of some sort).

2. Speaker vibrations in the power amp (nearly every subwoofer should have this problem in spades, so I don't see this as being much of a concern). And BTW, how many SVS sub owners/reviewers have found a difference between their active versus passive subs?

3. Limited choices

Does Paradigm still offer active speakers?

jeff

JLM · « **Reply #19 on:** 31 Aug 2003, 12:59 pm »

BTW, the original active speaker are the single driver type of speakers that have no crossovers. You can pick the amp (use the manufacturer's recommendations if you want) and decide between longer IC's versus speaker cables.

A single driver has no phasing issues between drivers or via a crossover, total conherency, ideal point source for imaging, no issues matching different drivers (efficiency, dispersion angles, dome versus cone characteristics, etc.), and better overall speaker efficiency (without power losses via a crossover). Personally I prefer the single drivers without whizzer cones (a mechanical crossover of sorts).

Look at Omega Speakers and Solar HiFi here at audio circle. Add a powered sub if needed. It'd still be a fully active speaker system.

jeff