[Niteshade]

I've been thinking about this for a while and it seems to me that the best approach to making audio cables is to use RF coax! Let's face it- something like RG-8M doesn't noticably attenuate a signal running through it for at least 50 feet at frequencies as high as 200Mhz. At audio frequencies the loss has to be near zero for maybe 100ft or more. Most cables are 3ft to 8ft long. There can't be any losses or signal modifications while using high grade coax for such short runs when the upper frequency is only around 20Khz, well below what the coax's frequency rating is. Scope probes use even smaller coax and modern scopes can reach well above 100Mhz. Just some food for thought. One more thing: Coax is dirt cheap. There are shielding options as well- 80% on up normally and even double shielding.

[JoshK]

I am very sympathetic to this view.  Mic cable is the other choice.  It has really low LCR since the level is so low in MICs and the cords are often long. 

I say exploit the economies of scale where they can deliver a superior product at a very reasonable price.

[DaveC113]

I only use shielded cable for s/pdif.... the shielding seems to do more harm than good with ICs and speaker cables most of the time, IMO.

edit: don't want to sound like they're a bad idea, I think the price/performance ratio is quite good.

[geezer]

I'm with you. I'm currently having part of my house wired for sound, and I'm using coax for all signals. In future, if the need arises, I will be ready to send digital signals, including TV, through the system.

[Folsom]

I think Mic cables work pretty darn good for the price, and I mean like the cheap Dayton stuff sounds pretty damn nice, even nicer than most RG59/6 and other things in that realm. The cheaper stuff might even be nicer in sound, more capacitance (I think) so it will not be so flat.

I guess having the crisscross pattern in a cable is good, lots of cancelation from outside noise... you do not get this with coax. You can get it with Mic cable if you do not use the shield for the negative. However using the shield for the negative works pretty good too, and offers some small protection to the signal, but ultimately has no real cancelating properties so if it is running near much of anything that is a big noise inducer you are in trouble.

Using RG and criss crossing is a BAD idea. It will do things you never thought you would hear.


Perhaps one day I will play with something new.... Those two I feel I explored a lot.

[Daryl]

The problem with interconnects is that high frequency output impedance is pretty high with some componets.

This high output impedance causes the capacitance of interconnects to load down the source componet and rolloff high frequencies.

Capacitance is your biggest enemy along with ground loops/noise.

RF coax is excellent however It's capacitance could be lower if there wasn't the need to have a 50 or 75 ohm characteristic impedance.

In audio the higher the characteristic impedance of the interconnect cable the better so there is opportunity for improvement.

Blue Jeans cable has their own interconnect cable (LC-1) which uses a smaller center conductor and as large an outside dimension as they could fit into their connectors resulting in a capacitance of 12pf/ft.

The LC-1 has double braided shields giving excellent noise rejection as well as ground loop rejection.

[Niteshade]

12pf/ft is really good. RG-8M is around 26pf/foot.

[art]

There are shielding options as well- 80% on up normally and even double shielding.

Depending on what you are trying to shield, there are different techniques.

Pat

[art]

RF coax is excellent however It's capacitance could be lower if there wasn't the need to have a 50 or 75 ohm characteristic impedance.

In audio the higher the characteristic impedance of the interconnect cable the better so there is opportunity for improvement.

Really? Where do you come up with this stuff. Gee, and how big would it have to be if it wasn't 75 ohms? Or such a small centre conductor? Would that be practical? And what difference would it actually make?

None of this will predict how it will sound.

It guys like you that makes people like me (from industry) want to avoid this place like the plague.

Congrats, dude........this is the second thread today that you have run me out of.

Over and out.

Pat

[mfsoa]

Blue Jeans cable has their own interconnect cable (LC-1) which uses a smaller center conductor and as large an outside dimension as they could fit into their connectors resulting in a capacitance of 12pf/ft.

The LC-1 has double braided shields giving excellent noise rejection as well as ground loop rejection.

It's cheap, too. Too bad it doesn't sound very good.

[opaqueice]

It's cheap, too. Too bad it doesn't sound very good.

Cheap is relative term.  $.77/6 ft - that's cheap!

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10218&cs_id=1021803&p_id=659&seq=1&format=2

And by the way, I have a pair of the bluejeans inerconnects.  They sound very good to me. 

[JoshK]

RF coax is excellent however It's capacitance could be lower if there wasn't the need to have a 50 or 75 ohm characteristic impedance.

In audio the higher the characteristic impedance of the interconnect cable the better so there is opportunity for improvement.

Really? Where do you come up with this stuff. Gee, and how big would it have to be if it wasn't 75 ohms? Or such a small centre conductor? Would that be practical? And what difference would it actually make?

None of this will predict how it will sound.

It guys like you that makes people like me (from industry) want to avoid this place like the plague.

Congrats, dude........this is the second thread today that you have run me out of.

Over and out.

Pat

Rather than being combatitive, why don't you explain what you think does matter.  That way something constructive can come of it.

[DaveC113]

I actually agree with Daryl that lowering capacitance makes for better sounding ICs. I've had the best luck with configurations like the VH Audio Chela cable (but using fewer conductors) or the Anti-Cable IC design. I have not measured the capacitance of these designs, but I'd guess the capacitance would be lower than a twisted pair or coax design because the wires are kept farther apart, and they cross at almost right angles instead of running parallel. I have a couple of coax based ICs from Zu and Vampire, they are ok, but not as good as the DIY ICs I've made with the aforementioned geometries. With speaker cable, lowering inductance seems to be key, so a configuration like the star quad or twisted pair works well for me. My current favorite speaker cable is a star quad using 18 gage mil spec silver plated copper wire with teflon insulation. It costs $.18/ft x 80 ft = $14.40 to make a 9 ft pair of speaker wire. (It shrinks a bit when twisted).

Dave

[Niteshade]

My solution: Coax is inexpensive! Get some, put decent ends on it and try it out. It's a great rainy day project. I have used it before with great results. My runs generally don't go over 6ft, so there won't be anything worth mentioning to modify the signal passing through it. It really should work well for long runs too. Don't buy some garbage coax- make sure it has a copper outer braid. Either a braided or solid core is fine. Belden and Carol Cable make decent coax. Again, make sure the conductors are copper. Some of the cheap stuff uses aluminum shielding braid. Aluminum is fine for a foil shield, but not for the braid.

When I make amplifiers or preamps, they are made to work with less than ideal external components because I don't have any idea what people will connect to it. I don't go below THX rated speaker cable or interconnects and do not go above it either. Who would purchase something from my company if I said, "BEST used with ______" that's $100.00 per foot. I never said your experience wouldn't improve with stuff like that- but I _have_ to make sure it works perfectly with garden variety wire.

Please share your experiences with different cables.