Jump to content

A general power cable discussion


JSmith

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, WhakPak said:

 

Different twists and turns in the design, different shielding density, different molded barrels, different materials, ergonomics, and whatever else that might be proprietary to the manufacturer. None of which I cared much for the understanding of the wheres or hows. The choice was simple, I just buy their top-of-the-range cable, and if it can bend to fit, I keep it until they go one better. I have sold a lot of power cables over the years that became surplus during this evolution process.

 

You're a cable manufacturers dream customer.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, WhakPak said:

The choice

 

Thanks for sharing, but more interested here in reasons rather than personal choice or preference.

 

It would be interesting to know what that cable is doing (or not doing) that the others aren't (or are).

 

JSmith :ninja:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, JSmith said:

...It would be interesting to know what that cable is doing (or not doing) that the others aren't (or are).

 

 

There is an element of brand loyalty for my cable choices. I would never buy a power cable that used heat-shrink tube as a finish on the barrel, or that had a barrel assembled with screws, or that used screws to fix the conductors to the tangs. There are some very expensive power cables I wouldn't take a 2nd look at if they had any of these design elements. So if the cable choice options pass those tests, and they pass the bend radius test, and they make a form tight fit to the boxes they need to plug in to, these things are a good indicator to me. I don't reject power cables because they sound rubbish, as they don't generally sound rubbish. I probably wouldn't immediately notice if somebody had sneaked in and swapped out my power cable of choice with a stock power cable, but during the course of a listening session my senses would probably pick up that something wasn't quite the same as before, and would lead me to wonder why. Only then would I find that someone had played a sneaky trick on me.

Edited by WhakPak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rocky500 said:

This was an Interview with a cable maker.

Seems to shed some light on what may be happening?

https://www.gcaudio.com/tips-tricks/why-power-cables-make-a-difference/

 

Yes I've read that before and was almost going to post it here.

 

But with comments like this and the fact it's all drawn into a marketing blurb I felt it doesn't have much weight;

 

Our philosophy is to create a product that is a faithful musical component

 

Anything independent and possibly peer reviewed? The disparity between the Audioholics article and this... well they're miles apart. This disparity is what needs to be clarified.

 

JSmith :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites



7 hours ago, rocky500 said:

This was an Interview with a cable maker.

Seems to shed some light on what may be happening?

https://www.gcaudio.com/tips-tricks/why-power-cables-make-a-difference/

 

It is hardly surprising that a power cable manufacturer would ignore the most basic laws of physics, when attempting to justify the sale of his product. For years, tobacco manufacturers claimed that their products were completely safe. I know this may be a shocking revelation to you, but some people tell fibs to enrich themselves. If the designer of this product was REALLY honest, then he would produce independent, double blind tests to prove how good the product is. I see no evidence of such a test. I wonder why?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

 

It is hardly surprising that a power cable manufacturer would ignore the most basic laws of physics, when attempting to justify the sale of his product. 

 

What basic laws of physics is Caelin Gabriel ignoring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Martykt said:

 

What basic laws of physics is Caelin Gabriel ignoring?

 

This:

 

The power cord is not the last 6 feet, it is the first 6 feet from the perspective of the component. As stated in #1 the local current and electromagnetic effects directly affect the sonic performance of the component

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer
2 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

 

This:

 

The power cord is not the last 6 feet, it is the first 6 feet from the perspective of the component. As stated in #1 the local current and electromagnetic effects directly affect the sonic performance of the component

Can you elaborate?

im not sure how that breaks any laws 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

Can you elaborate?

im not sure how that breaks any laws 

 

The component is 'in the loop'. The power cable is not the first 2 Metres, nor the last. It is simply in the loop. AC power doesn't care about fancy cables, plugs and the like. Certainly, any poor connections and high resistance points or sections will affect the circuit, but that is it. The writer is using gobbledegook and pseudo-science to answer non-questions. All that is required is a properly conducted, independent, double blind test. That he avoids doing so, tells us all we need to know. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

The power cable is not the first 2 Metres, nor the last. It is simply in the loop.

I do not have a great deal of electrical knowledge but that makes things much clearer. 

Edited by EV Cali
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tesla13BMW said:

 

But energy can neither be created or destroyed.  So all the energy that flows in the active leg can't end up in the neutral leg as energy is used by the appliance?????

 

Yes, it can. Electrons are, if you like, 'carriers of energy'. A higher Voltage raises the energy level of the electrons, whilst more electrons increase the current. Make sense? 

 

15 hours ago, tesla13BMW said:

 

So how does power / energy flow down a cable, I thought it was a drift of energy in the electron cloud of atoms without the electrons actually doing any gross travel in the conductor?

 

Sort of. It's a bit like that office desk toy we've all seen:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_cradle

 

Stick an electron in one end of a wire and an electron pops out the other end. The actual electron 'drift velocity' may be in the order of a few Metres/second. The apparent velocity is still close to 'c' (the velocity of light). What happens is that when you stick an electron in one end of a wire, an electron is knocked out of orbit, which, in turn, knocks another one from it's orbit and so on. 

 

 

15 hours ago, tesla13BMW said:

 

@Zaphod Beeblebrox resistance of the cable and contact resistance inhibiting current flow are the only factors within physics that you consider play a role in the transmission of power down a mains cable supplying and appliance except for the small effect of interference with possible benefits to shielding?

 

Pretty much, yes. Related to the above, you can also have poor contacts, which may lead to arcing and thus interference. Which is partly why a captive lead is far superior to ALL plugs and sockets and particularly compared to the horrible and very nasty IEC connectors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

 

Yes, it can. Electrons are, if you like, 'carriers of energy'. A higher Voltage raises the energy level of the electrons, whilst more electrons increase the current. Make sense? 

 

 

Yes this does make sense, but, I don't see this being a case in an amplifier for example.  If the amplifier has done work and used energy that energy has come from the electrons delivered to it and therefore there are now electrons at a lower energy.

 

If energy is delivered in the phase and returned out the neutral would there not be less energy in the neutral line.

 

But I question whether energy is actually delivered in one line at all.  As it is AC current is flowing in both directions.  But is there a "general drift" of energy in only one direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tesla13BMW said:

 

Yes this does make sense, but, I don't see this being a case in an amplifier for example.  If the amplifier has done work and used energy that energy has come from the electrons delivered to it and therefore there are now electrons at a lower energy.

 

My explanation was highly simplistic, but yes, the electrons have done their work and are now at a lower energy level. 

 

Just now, tesla13BMW said:

 

If energy is delivered in the phase and returned out the neutral would there not be less energy in the neutral line.

 

No. Let's say that the power station is 1,000km away from the home. That means the electrons from the power station will be 'created' and returned in approximately 6 X 10^-6 seconds. 6 millionths of a second. By comparison the period of a 50Hz mains cycle is 20 X 10^-3 seconds, or 20 thousandths of a second. So, in one complete cycle of the mains, the electrons have made a round trip from the power station more than 3 thousand times! Remember, AC is constantly varying with a sine wave form. In one instant, the positive going part of the waveform is on the active, in the next, it is one the neutral. It just so happens that 'we' have elected to Earth one side of the generator. There is no reason why we have to do so. It is done for convenience and safety.

 

Just now, tesla13BMW said:

But I question whether energy is actually delivered in one line at all.  As it is AC current is flowing in both directions.  But is there a "general drift" of energy in only one direction?

 

No. See above. I hope it makes sense. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



49 minutes ago, Soundwise said:

Was surfing the net looking up Furutech FI-28 connectors and found this power cable review. I found the read interesting:

 

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/audioartcable/cable_5.html

 

 

In what way/s did you find the article interesting? 

 

I see no technical details, nor evidence of a carefully conducted test. 

 

[EDIT] I wish they would perform a spell check, before they publish. "Power chord" indeed. Yikes!

Edited by Zaphod Beeblebrox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

carefully conducted test.

 

Ok, so where should the testing start (no in relation to that review)?

 

I'm starting to think ABX is not the best approach, at least to start as their is a flaw to begin with being a human that can differ on perception and focus. In fact more than one person sitting in different places in an untreated room without system calibration creates an even worse situation.

 

Surely we should start with two identical systems running a clean and monitorable power supply with a switch box for the speaker cables. The first test here would be to use measuring equipment to see if the output of each system is the same sonically via the switchbox for each power cable to be used in the test.

 

If it is, move to the next step, if not investigate why they don't measure the same and rectify.

 

Next test then would be to methodically swap over cables one at a time measuring and recording each with a swap between systems.

 

Continue doing this until a measurable and repeatable difference is isolated.

 

Then to attempt to correlate those results to a real world situation, conduct a very strict ABX where participants have already been identified as having listening training, yet are not completely aware of the reason they are asked to give results or the preparation beforehand. Each person one at a time in the same spot with measurements taken from that same spot each time too.

 

If no audible difference can be isolated, go back and investigate other cables that may demonstrate a larger measurered difference and repeat.

 

If still no audible difference can be isolated, move to changing system components one at a time and repeating the process.

 

A strong correlation of data vs real world results is the only way surely attempt to quantify this in any meaningful way and then is only a strong correlation, not causation.

 

Thoughts?

 

JSmith :ninja:

Edited by JSmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, WhakPak said:

Comes as a surprise to me, unless that audible artifact is a rattling transformer. 

 

It can also (in the extreme) make the transformer appear undersized.

 

13 hours ago, Addicted to music said:

If you suspect one component is being effected by DC then the rest of the gear on the same mains line will guarantee to be effected.    If one component is humming and the rest isn't it sure isn't DC on the lines but gaurantee to be a fault within that component!  

 

I'm not necessarily sure this is the case.... if by affected, you mean audibly significant.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



24 minutes ago, JSmith said:

Surely we should start with two identical systems running a clean and monitorable power supply with a switch box for the speaker cables. The first test here would be to use measuring equipment to see if the output of each system is the same sonically via the switchbox for each power cable to be used in the test.

 

If it is, move to the next step

 

Yes - this is exactly what happens when people are designing power supplies and devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JSmith said:

Sure, but I don't think the best place to start is a potentially inaccurate ABX.

 

Yes, I agree.

 

The reason is that when you begin such a test, one of the requirements is that there is a known and quantifiable difference between A and B ......   otherwise, the question ....  can I determine whether X is A or B is non-nonsensical, as there is the possibility that A and B are the same.

 

Also, it dilutes the subsequent analysis ... ie. being able to state:  "This (defined) difference, was audible (define)"

 

I have participated in many such tests where A and B were the same (literally the same thing) .... and it very uncommon that I would pick this up  (I would always think they were different).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Addicted to music said:

 

How do you know there is DC on the mains?  

 

Did you see and prove it on a CRO?    

 

What did it do to the other equipment you have hanging of the the mains?  

 

These are the questions you have to ask yourself when you think there is DC on the mains.  

 

If you suspect one component is being effected by DC then the rest of the gear on the same mains line will guarantee to be effected.    If one component is humming and the rest isn't it sure isn't DC on the lines but gaurantee to be a fault within that component!  

 

DC on the mains as little as less than a volt DC can have some serious issues to all electrical equipment you have connected to the mains on the same phase.  Once present on the line it is hard to eliminate, the only way to do that is remove the source.   

 

In my entire career repairing electronic printers I've only encountered one point in my life where DC on the mains line presented a problem.   And that equipment where a Solid state relay leaked DC into the transformer it was driving.  This cause the transformer to overheat after a short period of operation.   Replacing that solid state relay, returned the transformer to normal operation.

 

Hi yes, after hearing problems in comparison to another stereo rig that is pure DC that has been in service for some years, such as rattling transformers and excessive heat in the power supplies (all 4.4Kw of toroids in my hand made power Amps) 

 

Investigation with a CRO and other instruments took place to find the audible/physical problems and rectify. Found was DC and hash taking the form of crest factor sine wave peak chopping with switch spiking. My remedy was to use another power supply that had "known characteristics at load"

 

In 32 years of building power supplies from the ground up, Power Engineering design, winding 90MVA Hydro Generators to fitting off a power point to building stereo equipment from a pile of bits, will only comment on actual experience with ears, calibrated certified instrumentation  and nothing else.

 

40 minutes ago, JSmith said:

 

Ok, so where should the testing start (no in relation to that review)?

 

I'm starting to think ABX is not the best approach, at least to start as their is a flaw to begin with being a human that can differ on perception and focus. In fact more than one person sitting in different places in an untreated room without system calibration creates an even worse situation.

 

Surely we should start with two identical systems running a clean and monitorable power supply with a switch box for the speaker cables. The first test here would be to use measuring equipment to see if the output of each system is the same sonically via the switchbox for each power cable to be used in the test.

 

If it is, move to the next step, if not investigate why they don't measure the same and rectify.

 

Next test then would be to methodically swap over cables one at a time measuring and recording each with a swap between systems.

 

Continue doing this until a measurable and repeatable difference is isolated.

 

Then to attempt to correlate those results to a real world situation, conduct a very strict ABX where participants have already been identified as having listening training, yet are not completely aware of the reason they are asked to give results or the preparation beforehand. Each person one at a time in the same spot with measurements taken from that same spot each time too.

 

If no audible difference can be isolated, go back and investigate other cables that may demonstrate a larger measurered difference and repeat.

 

If still no audible difference can be isolated, move to changing system components one at a time and repeating the process.

 

A strong correlation of data vs real world results is the only way surely attempt to quantify this in any meaningful way and then is only a strong correlation, not causation.

 

Thoughts?

 

JSmith :ninja:

 

Sounds very reasonable, the only point I'm trying to convey is that all other influences on the listening test to be addressed which in the real is not much fun, it's science, but in the end the results are more tenable and ratifiable.

 

Play on 

:D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top