Good, Neutral, Reasonably Priced Cables?

Rooze: To make things easier on you, here's a link to a thread where i made my most recent mention of Magnan interconnects. It can be found in a thread entitled IC Advice Needed.

Psychic: Send him on over, along with all of the other manufacturers that want to join in. Since they didn't want to try and refute the facts over at AA when i first detailed all of this, they can come for a "swim" now. The water feels fine and there's actually some technical specifications provided by a third party that we can use for reference material. We can see just how much snake oil / misinformation one can fit into a thread and at the same time, see who can lie through their teeth without smiling or giving themselves away. Somehow, i get the feeling that there are VERY few cable manufacturers that would be afraid to enter even the shallow end of this "pool". If they do, they better bring their "inflatable water wings" like young ones use before they really swim. You might also want to let them know that this "pool" has sharks in it : ) Sean
>

PS... How does one deal with the oxidation of a conductor when using a natural "non-sealed" type of dielectric? After all, oxygen is allowed to flow through a cloth fiber, which in turn oxidizes the conductor. Oxidation causes corrosion and pitting of the surface, resulting in increased skin effect, impedance bumps, irregular signal paths and higher resistance. Since this will take place over the entire length of the conductor due to a lack of dielectric protection, you've now got an entire length of potential signal variations.

The way to get around this is to use both the highest grade of dielectric that acts as a protective barrier AND the least amount of it. Yes, there may be a minute amount of signal degradation that takes place due to miniscule amounts of DA ( Dielectric Absorption ), but at least you've got a consistent conductor that is good for long term use that doesn't require constant maintenance due to corrosion.

For sake of comparison to other designs, the Goertz flat conductors have a very fine layer of dielectric plated directly onto the conductor and then another very thin film-like jacket over that to hold the two conductors together. The latest versions make use of Teflon, which is a material that has the lowest DA of any material known to man. Audioholics tested the older version, so the results may be even better with the current Goertz speaker cables due to the use of higher grade dielectric materials.

Sean, et al, thanks for the great info. (Sean, are you sure you only spend 15 minutes a day on Audiogon?)

Earlier, I made a comment that:
"MANY cables may sound neutral in one system but not another; ALL cables will influence their systems to some degree; SOME cables may sound neutral in most systems."

Does this make sense? It appears that the Goertz hits the last point pretty solidly.

By the way, to the earlier question about pc's affects on components with good power supplies -- I've tried three different pc's on my Sierra Olympias with no discernable affect on the sound. Even though the tranformer is torroidal, the power supply is absolutely massive (4+kva) and further bolstered by large caps at each output device. It may not be as elegant as what Sean describes, but it seems pretty pc neutral.

Sean, Robert is ahead in this game and can scientifically explain everything he does (goes beyoncé what is being discussed here, but I'm not at liberty to discuss). His cotton insulated ribbon speaker cables are outstanding. Lak brought a set of MSE one time he came over.

I'll probably get boo'ed off of here, from all the "Monster Haters" but, one of the best cheaper cables i have heard, it the Monster Interlink Reference 2. I bought a one meter pair for $79, msrp is $99, it is a very nice sounding cable, pretty neutral from what i can tell. I have heard other people rave about this cable also, sharing most of my same sentiments.

Ok, I'll take the bait at the risk of getting schooled again as to one reason why most Mfg'rs don't engage in a thread like this...the debates gets old and usually all's most folks want to do is prove they're right. Though some folks enjoy the pedestal of "god on a stick" that's not a position I desire to set myself up as so...

I'll preface this post with a couple of things. First, I have no intention of debating with anyone what we do, why we do what we do and/or the legitimacy of it all. Our clients can speak to some of that if they wish to. I'll only say this: our customer satisfaction (no return policy exercised) has been 96.8% of our total sales. We're shamelessly proud of that.

What findings and techniques I'm willing to share here are informational and that's it. If you find value in it, good for you. If not that's okay and further, it won't surprise me if Sean or someone else wants to do an apparent credible job of discrediting what we do here. That will be a shame.

I take a degree of pride in who I am and how that contributes to my and other enthusiast's enjoyment of reproduced music. I'm a musician and music lover first. Then I'm an artisan and thirdly an engineer with enough experience to be so but no formal education. With current culture and, what I think is contrary to our current value system, I consider the above an asset to what Ridge Street does and has to offer. As a musician, it's a passionate hobby. As an occupation, what started out as a passionate hobby of about twenty years has turned into Ridge Street Audio Designs going on ten years.

I suppose the main thing I think is worth addressing here is that science and engineering certainly have their value in audio but it is in no wise the be all/end all that too many folks in any field (but I think especially audio and, dare I say, wire!) laud it to be...even in 21st century! I think this lauding keeps people stuck. I've not shared this before but one of my approaches to "un-stucking" enthusiasts is I don't talk about everything we do with our cabling. If I did it would be a stumbling block for some people...especially for those who like numbers, graphs, measurements, white papers, facts, facts and more facts etc. to give the only credibility as to how something in audio might sound. Like I'm sure at least some of us, I've discovered too that some things that have been defined as hugely important aren't and some things that are said not to matter are hugely important. If I were strictly an engineer or scientist and didn't venture outside that frame or strictly relied upon that frame, I doubt my conclusions would be the same. Anyway...all this.

For those of us that will look, entertain and find some relevance to what's outside the "nine dots"...

Capacitance, inductance and/or resistance values in and of themselves mean little in any given cable. Characteristic impedance is very important to optimize in a given cable application. As Sean has said, with speaker cables it's difficult but easier to optimize for. Contrary to what has been said, there are ways around it for I/Cs but admittedly there are trade-offs. Fortunately, when other things are accounted for, those trade-offs are mostly inconsequential with today's better electronics. How the characteristic impedance actually performs is of the most importance and, to my knowledge, is a parameter no one else is considering and/or talking about.

Whether your fancy is Copper, Silver, Gold, Platinum or Polyflatulent, purity is important. The quality factor of a conductor or "Q" as I've termed it for us is more important and is distinct from a conductor's purity. A high purity/low Q conductor will not sound as good as a lower purity/high Q conductor. The later is also a more expensive material. A higher purity/higher Q conductor is best...da! and is a more expensive material...da da! As for silver which is what we use, regardless of what rep someone has or how distinguished they are in the market place, there is no 6n or 7n actual silver purity. Am I popular yet! LOL!

Surface area distribution is more important than conductor gauge.

Organic insulators are best. As is of prime importance to Van den Hul for example, sealing a cable so that it's protected from the elements is very important. The down side of this type of insulator is it's more difficult to protect it from the outside envirnoment but a cable can be protected if the proper care and technique is applied and it can be done in such a manner that it doesn't degrade sonic performance. Marketing ploy: Our cables float in water. So far, that marketing approach has not worked for us...LOL!

Construction technique is as important and should work hand-in-hand with a cable's topology. They should not be mutually exclusive of each other. One with out the other makes for an inferior cable.

Cable burn-in is a good thing to do. Cable break-in is different, is system dependant and, in our view, is more important but should not take the place of burn-in.

So, again all this. I hope there's some value in this for some of you. I suppose some of this may be sort of vague but I have found the details behind this stuff to be important. For those who might question some of this, good for you. If you're inclined to bash the hell out of some of this I think a better suggestion is to go on your own mission, discover what you discover and develop your own business out of that. That would be good and I'm betting we could inspire and learn a bit from each other.

Finally, I love this and it's served as a montra for me since I saw this on Simon York's site some time ago. I trust you'll enjoy it too…

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."

George Bernard Shaw