OK, some cables seem to enhance bass response and I hope you get some suggestions on that, but such a cable is not neutral. For my 2 cents, if you want more bass, look into spending on component upgrades and perhaps power cords--and check your speaker positioning. IMHO cables don't work as tone enhancers.
33 responses Add your response
What do you not like about what you hear now? It would help to know more about your system.
Once you get down around 80Hz and below, you can run romex and it won't matter. Cables that do present a bigger bass sound often do so at the expense of another range of frequencies. Or, much like ported speakers, they are made to store and release energy into a range. It is not rocket science and no mysterious thing. Cables are a system that are modeled with inductance, capacitance, and resistance. Why do you think some cables sound slow and some fast, some bloated and some not?
Yes they do. Kimber Hero is also clean, tight, and full sounding. Overall pretty fast, neutral, articulate, and easy to live with while improving on bass signal transfer.
how do they do that?[/quote]
I suspect it has to do with getting all frequencies to arrive at the same time. If a bass tone's fundamental and all its overtones arrive at the same time, the bass will sound subjectively stronger. A cable that is very fast with mids and highs but less so with bass will sound bass-weak by comparison. This is the criticism often leveled at the very fast cables such as Nordost--the air, transparency and inner detail are breathtaking but bass sounds a little thin.
By contrast, the cables with the networks--MIT and Transparent--which are designed to keep timings of all frequencies aligned, are known for full, extended bass.
I theorize that Kimber Hero manages to do a similar thing with its multiple gauges and windings. I also hear this from my Zu cables. Zu was co-founded by a Kimber guy, and Zu makes extensive use of multiple gauges, alloys, and geometry to (I suppose) maintain tonal balance and timing coherency.
06-05-11: HifihvnIf you don't know the difference between electricity and electronics, you have no business hanging out on this forum to make know-it-all, smart ass comments.
You're confusing the difference between electric current and electronic signal. They are two different things with different rules and characteristics. When we talk about "speed" in signal cables we're referring to signal rise time, which has little to do with the conducting speed of electricity and is entirely dependent on the bandwidth of the conductor. Electrical devices started with the light bulb and proceeded from there; they are concerned with conduction of current. Electronics began with tubes and deal with manipulating voltage fluctuations to create signals to mimic soundwaves or to convey other intricate patterns.
This difference has only been around since the 1920s. Try to keep up.
If you don't know the difference between electricity and electronics, you have no business hanging out on this forum to make know-it-all, smart ass comments.I may not be an EE, or the most up to date on some stuff, but before you try talking about how wires and cable work, you need to know what a watt is, from about 200 years ago.
You keep pushing that Onkyo amp as an amp that produces 350 watts. NOT POSSIBLE. Learn how to read basic specs, before you start getting nasty. You ran off a great member who won't post anymore, because of your being rude to him. He was right at the time also. Get educated. Grow up. Link for your 350 watt amp post that puts out under 55 watts per channel.[http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1170999828&openusid&zzJohnnyb53&4&5#Johnnyb53]
This post is so preposterous it bears some correction. To say I "keep pushing that Onkyo amp" is a bit of a stretch since his link refers to a 3-year-old thread. The amp in question is the Onkyo A-9555 hybrid switching integrated amplifier, rated at around 85 wpc into 8 ohms. Double that output into 4 ohms and sum the output of both channels to come up with Hifihvn's 350 watts. The Onkyo factory specs are here, but even more revealing is Stereophile's test results, which say in part:
Defining clipping as 1% THD, the A-9555 comfortably exceeded its rated power, clipping at 110Wpc into 8 ohms (20.4dBW), 175Wpc into 4 ohms (19.4dBW), and, with one channel driven rather than two, 245W into 2 ohms (17.9dBW)....So, not only is that output *possible*, it's confirmed by independent testing.
Why Hifihvn thinks the A-9555 can barely make 55 watts, I can only guess that he's confusing the A-9555 with the much smaller A-5VL with built-in DAC. The A-5VL hadn't even been released when I posted about the A-9555 in Sept. 2008 and it's not like the model numbers would be easily confused.
The A-9555 isn't the ultimate integrated amp, but at a street price under $500 it's a great value.
It puts out a solid 100 wpc into 8 ohms and 175 into 4 ohms, both channels driven. It's able to deliver a lot of current when called for, and the amp sounds bigger than its power rating would suggest.
The amp in question is the Onkyo A-9555 hybrid switching integrated amplifier, rated at around 85 wpc into 8 ohms. Double that output into 4 ohms and sum the output of both channels to come up with Hifihvn's
Johnnyb53, you try to make an impression that you have a high level of knowledge like an Electrical Engineer. Anyone with some basic electronics education would know that you can't get something for nothing. This would be like a "Perpetual Motion Machine". The amp would save the worlds energy problems, if it worked like you must think it does. In the audio world, a stereo amp should be rated with both channels driven at the *same* time. This is why the IHF worked with the government years back, to get rid of phony "peak power" ratings. But no, these companies found loop holes in the law, and use them. The real companies use the true ratings, especially the high end American companies. This Onkyo consumes 110 watts max. That includes all loss do to thermal, and other issues in the design. *If* it ran at 100% percent efficiency (doesn't work that way) , that would give 55 watts RMS per channel. That 175 watt per channel quote, is from *your* figures, in *your* prior statement, not mine. If you want to be an Electrical Engineer, see if you could go to a University, and become one. You will have to do a lot of learning, and just can't throw some figures around there. That sure will not happen. Try to be more informed, and accurate. Link for your statement first, and link for Onkyo that has
specs that show it only consumes 110 watts.[http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?aamps&1170999828&openusid&zzJohnnyb53&4&5][http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=A-9555&class=Amplifier&p=s]
If a 3rd party test (Stereophile) measures 175 wpc into 4 ohms, I would believe those results before drawing some sweeping conclusion based on the manufacturer's spec sheet, which may even be a misprint.
Your assertion about power consumption vs. power output motivated me to search out the specs on some new ultra-light class D bass guitar amplifiers. Gallien-Krueger, a specialist in this area, has an amp that makes 200w into 4 ohms and draws 240 watts max. They have another amp that makes 500w into 4 ohms and consumes 580 watts at full power. So class D switching amps (which the Onkyo is) are very efficient. Since the Onkyo specs DO NOT specify 110 watts as the MAX draw, I can only conclude that it either means typical or average consumption or it is erroneous. I sure wouldn't base the capabilities of the amp on one unqualified mfr's spec, especially when a 3rd party (Stereophile) independently verified that the Onkyo produced 110 wpc (both channels driven) into 8 ohms and 175 wpc (again, both channels driven) into 4 ohms.
I have one last question, however. What does any of this have to do with finding interconnects with good bass response?
Sure, a lot of equipment could put out more that it's designed for, but this is short term only. Audiophiles want their amps to give the real power(true watts RMS), both channels driven,20 to 20,000 hz, on a continuous basis. Now that these companies have found ways to use figures such as at 1khz, or whatever else they can to give you a phony rating. Here is an Onkyo receiver that can make one think it will give 135 watts a channel. But the test results show it is far from it. And they only tested it at 1khz, not at 20 to 20,000 hz. Sure an easy test, but failed. Links for this Onkyo.[http://www.us.onkyo.com/model.cfm?m=TX-NR1008&class=Receiver&p=f][http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/content/onkyo-tx-nr1008-av-receiver]
In reference to your second question, one would assume you know the basics, before getting into high tech talk.
READ THE STEREOPHILE REPORT! They tested it according to FTC requirements--one hour 1/3-power burn-in, testing from 20-20KHz continuous power output both channels driven. It measured 110 wpc into 8 ohms and 175 wpc into 4 ohms. What part of that don't you understand? Who cares what the Onkyo specs say when a 3rd party put it on the test bench and tested strictly according to the FTC rules?
In reference to my second question, it's not an issue of "tech talk," it's basic forum courtesy to stick to the OP's subject and not hijack his thread about interconnects by bringing in a 3-year-old post about an amplifier.
Defining clipping as 1% THD, the A-9555 comfortably exceeded its rated power, clipping at 110Wpc into 8 ohms (20.4dBW), 175Wpc into 4 ohms (19.4dBW), and, with one channel driven rather than two, 245W into 2 ohms (17.9dBW) (footnote 1). There is a peculiar rise in the A-9555's THD+N percentage when the output reaches a few watts;
I can read. They pre-conditioned it at one third its rated power. Its rated power is at 1khz, not 20-20,000 hz hz. I only read that they tested it at the way they rated it, for
1 khz. Onkyo themselves say 85 watts at 1khz. Major difference. Don't understand? Apparently not. That's the problem. FWIW, that *at 1 khz* is one of the loopholes. Who listens to 1 khz only? And clipping? You I guess. Onkyo 1khz specs. LOL.
One of the best interconnects I have found for deep, tight, controlled bass is XLO signature. Back in the day they were highly rated by Stereophile and TAS, Then it was the "Signature 1.1" The current version is 3.1. They are unshielded, but most of the time that is not an issue. The Kimber Hero is also good for bass, but not in the same league as the XLO, but it depends on what you want to spend.
Here is an audiogon thread on the 1.1
here is a review of the newer version