Jump to content

Ugly

DIY Speaker cable using RG/213

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said:

As you say, that will also be fairly inaccurate, due to the problem of being able to supply an accurate low current source, and have a multimeter with high enough resolution and accuracy, for the average sparky, which was what my comment was directed at.

Multimeters that electrician's have would be more than accurate enough, most digital types would be (cannot think electricians would use anything else these days), they may not normally carry the two required (again I doubt they would carry less than two) or possibly not know of this method of low resistance measurement?

I would hope that most electricians would be able to do this measurement.

The results would I think be accurate enough for speaker cables not for instrumentation situations.

I will setup some resistance measurement tests on cabling just to see what results I can get with some common cables.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, soundbyte said:

Multimeters that electrician's have would be more than accurate enough, most digital types would be (cannot think electricians would use anything else these days), they may not normally carry the two required (again I doubt they would carry less than two) or possibly not know of this method of low resistance measurement?

I would hope that most electricians would be able to do this measurement.

The results would I think be accurate enough for speaker cables not for instrumentation situations.

I will setup some resistance measurement tests on cabling just to see what results I can get with some common cables.

 

Bugger, for some reason I lost my reply, so I'll start again.

 

Actually if he used a higher current supply he would have a more accurate reading due to the higher voltage drop on the wire. This would lessen effects of lead length, contact resistance etc.

So using a 1A supply, and 10M of 16AWG copper at typically 13.7ohm/Km would be 0.137ohms (too small to accurately measure even on a Fluke 87V) he should get 137mV dropped across the cable. So it is possible for your average sparky to accomplish. He just needs to work out how to supply a constant 1A current through the cable. I'm guessing that's where he'll have problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bob_m_54 said:

Bugger, for some reason I lost my reply, so I'll start again.

 

Actually if he used a higher current supply he would have a more accurate reading due to the higher voltage drop on the wire. This would lessen effects of lead length, contact resistance etc.

So using a 1A supply, and 10M of 16AWG copper at typically 13.7ohm/Km would be 0.137ohms (too small to accurately measure even on a Fluke 87V) he should get 137mV dropped across the cable. So it is possible for your average sparky to accomplish. He just needs to work out how to supply a constant 1A current through the cable. I'm guessing that's where he'll have problems.

As far as the current it really does not need to be constant but repeatable, I am used a wire wound 47ohm (nominal) resistor in series with a 14.4 V (nominal) regulated supply.

This measures 47.1713 ohms using the measurement technique.

With 47 ohms in series with a ~ 2.4 metre 4 pair Cat 6 UTP Network cable using four wires in parallel in one cable (half the wire available) and it measures 249.7 mA and 46.3mV which is 0.1854 ohms.

Second check is with (27ohms nominal in series) through the same cable measures .49A and 90.0 mV which gives .1835 ohms.

Two lengths in parallel measure with the same 27 ohms 179.8mV at .49A gives .3669 ohms which means one length measures .1835 ohms.

A difference of .0001 ohms between the two current values, not too shabby.

It can be done with low currents but it would be best with higher currents up near .5A or more.

 

More investigations later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/08/2015 at 11:16 AM, Ugly said:

Hi All,

 

Based on various discussions around SNA, I decided to have a go at some speaker cables using RG/213.  

 

@Ugly Nice work!

 

You have encouraged me to have a go at making some of these. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 21/08/2015 at 11:34 PM, Thebaconson said:

if it was treated as say just the cable at 100pf and an 8ohm speaker, @1m that would be an RC filter with around 200hz (bass has more presence you said?) RC filter at 200hz could do that.

but then if you used an approximate valve for your amp of say 47kohm your cut off would be somewhere in the 0.03hz range.

 

On 22/08/2015 at 6:18 PM, Thebaconson said:

 

F=(1/2PiRC)

 

 

I think you left some zeros out of your equation.  It's only pico Farads we're dealing with here.

R = 8 Ohms.   C = 0.0000000001 Farads (i.e. 100pF)

By my calculations, the HF rolloff frequency for these RC values is approx. 198.9 MegaHertz.  i.e. everything below that frequency is unaffected.

Even 10 metres @ 120pF per metre would still have a turnover around 16.5 MHz.

***

Sorry, just saw this was already sorted in previous posts.

Edited by surprisetech
extra info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a couple of pairs I made recently, inspired by Trevor's enthusiasm for this cable. I have to say I immediately perceived an improvement to my ears, subsequently born out by repeated comparisons with the Audioquest Rockerfeller which they subsequently replaced as a permanent attachment to my Kingsound ESLs. They were also tried on my dynamic speakers with no noticeable improvement worth persevering with. I was also tempted to try a pair in cross linked configuration which has had acclaim in some forums. Unless your'e a professional python wrestler I wouldn't recommend this. I couldn't say this arrangement offered any real improvement, and the twisted behemoths became problematic trying to get decent bend radii into the rear of components.

Blk&Yel 01.jpg

Blk&Yel 02.jpg

Blk&Yel 05.jpg

Blk&Yel 06.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


On 29/04/2018 at 9:58 PM, PicoWattson said:

Here's a couple of pairs I made recently, inspired by Trevor's enthusiasm for this cable.

They look great.

 

On 29/04/2018 at 9:58 PM, PicoWattson said:

I was also tempted to try a pair in cross linked configuration which has had acclaim in some forums.

Could you explain this? I am not sure what "cross linked configuration" means.

 

Thanks Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, DarkNark said:

Could you explain this? I am not sure what "cross linked configuration" means.

 

Thanks Dave

 

Normally, when you use a coax cable, you would make the speaker cable so that the centre core carried the signal (so going to the red binding post), with the shield going to the black binding post.

 

A "cross-linked config" is when you use 2 lengths of cable for each speaker and, at each end, you connect the centre core of one length to the shield of the other.  As you end up with 2 centre+shield wires at each end ... you need to be careful to maintain correct polarity when you connect them up.

 

Andy

 

Edited by andyr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I finally got around to trying to make some. It proved to be more difficult than I expected, probably because of my choice of amplifier. My Emotiva XPA-1's have the binding posts about 10" apart. So when I tried to unpick the braid far enough as per @Ugly first post, I just ended up with a tangled mess. I had a couple of goes at it and in the end I just soldered some tails on. Worked out in the end.

 

 

 

 

IMG_7277.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought some RG213 from Jaycar  at $4.50 a metre and made 2x 3 metre runs  for the tweeters, Now i'm not sure if it's because i've added more cables but the top end sounds better than just using jumpers between the bi wire posts.

 

tweeters: RG 213

bass/mid: 12x strands of 18ga mil spec teflon silver plated copper (6 pos / 6 neg)

 

running them pair wire but I will heat shrink the ends and add spades& banana plugs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/05/2018 at 1:11 PM, DarkNark said:

Well I finally got around to trying to make some. It proved to be more difficult than I expected, probably because of my choice of amplifier. My Emotiva XPA-1's have the binding posts about 10" apart. So when I tried to unpick the braid far enough as per @Ugly first post, I just ended up with a tangled mess. I had a couple of goes at it and in the end I just soldered some tails on. Worked out in the end.

 

IMG_7277.JPG

 

I see you are using the best banana plugs, Darknark.  👍

 

Andy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Thanks Andy.

 

Yes I decided to try them because they seemed to come recommended on the forum. They are actually significantly better than the other type I was using.   

 

Thanks people of stereo net, i have learnt a lot 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assume this cable would be a good choice for internal speaker connections? Has anyone tried it? I.e between the drivers and the binding posts (via crossover if passive)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty difficult stuff to work with in short lengths, but if you have some distance between the X-over location and the rear of the drivers it could be worth a try. Let us know how you get on.

 

Edited by PicoWattson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For shorter lengths you can strip off the outer pvc sheath and recover with a more flexible soft braid to make the bend radius a little more compliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×