Thoughts on Magnetically-Shielded Cables?


Is shielding RCA cables with earth magnets a viable approach to shield the cables from RFI.  I've searched far and wide on the web and can find no research info on this except one manufacturer.  Does anyone have any familiarity with this?  Below is a partial excerpt of the cable description from a reviewer.

'The manufacturer describes construction as incorporating a natural capacitive rejection of radio frequency interference by their construction alone, separates the conductors using a thin layer of Teflon (PTFE) between the send and the return conductors, as well as a large air gap dielectric, and protects this configuration by surrounding it with magnets. These magnets are specially ordered and are magnetically supersaturated in a multiple pole magnetization pattern, so their magnetic strength is evenly distributed across the surface. The cable tested here goes for quality materials ,combines 24k gold, 99.999% pure silver, and oxygen-free copper in a special formulation.'
paulg24
Smoke and mirrors demo at Axpona.
Steep price/tweak ratio.
Post removed 
Try it and see. Just try not to get caught up in the stories about why. Because I can tell you, with more examples than you would even believe, how many times the really good stories turned out to be completely wrong.

By stories I mean pretty much everything from RFI to PTFE to five nine’s pure silver. Five nine’s pure BS, is what it is. Stories. How’s it sound? Try it and see.
That is a load of trash for sure.
Ferrite clamps are not magnetic.
Dumb comment.
Yeah, try it with MC’s money.
Any possible improvement was not noticeable at a noisy show.
Clamps are for noise control, not cable enhancement. They actually degrade IC SQ.

https://www.russandrews.com/us/rf-clamp-pack-of-2-small/
Put them on light cords in listening room for lower measured noise.

The only thing any magnetism or ferrite effect will do to a audio cable is blunt transients and smear the residual/shifted transients in time.

which will sometimes make the transients seem louder or as increased detail, due to being out of position. As in, being a form of additive and/or subtractive information. Some scenarios might have the signal as sounding dull. This is the most common outcome. Depends on the ferrite coating, if it has any.

Next point, is that with the transients being out of place, in time, they obscure real transient decay and obscure other micro detail. Multiple whammy for the wrong reasons in the wrong directions.

ferrite makes for some good application with good reasoning in some industrial, measurement, and test rigs for measurement purposes, etc... but makes no sense at all in audio.

The electrical and electronic logic of ferrite bead or ferrite material within the context of application to signal cables.... does not transfer to audio signal handling.

the part of the signal they damage is the entire spot, 100% of it, where our ears ’hear’ or ’do work’ with the audio signal. The human hear hears only the positive leading edge or side of the transient, it’s level, and it’s level with respect to others of the same nature, and the time between them.

Which constitutes about 10% of the sinewave analysis ---at the most. The ear is frighteningly efficient and well built.

Again, engineering logic as it stands has to be modified so it can be relevant for audio measurement and design.

People should try and understand that we use conductive materials to translate or transfer or move electrical signals, but that does not mean that wire is the perfect material for electrical signal transfer and movement. No, not at all. It is merely the consensus. it is the common method.

It is by no means or nature the perfect medium. It is simply the mot common one we can work with that we stumbled upon in the early days of working with ’electricity’.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Eg, this little thing called convention, were we agree to do things a certain way. In the same way the speed of light is a convention. In reality the speed of light has never really been measured and no known method to do so, exists to this date of December 2020. Seriously. It’s written right into Einstein’s 1905 paper and has remained that way since then. No attempt tried since - has ever fixed this problem.

Eg, that people scream that the speed of light is a fact. No, it isn’t. Empirical or not, it still sits there ---completely unproven.

It’s Godel’s incompleteness problem coming to bear upon a point in this ’reality’ which encompasses it’s fundamentals... and therefore cannot be solved from inside the frameworks. Maybe quantum spooky action at a distance will provide a reference point that is outside the frameworks.

But only a negative result or observed differential could truly affirm, as a neutral result proves nothing... as the answer would be a now show. the only way that  a quantum test would be helpful is if one can conclusively prove their quantum scenario is real and has similar or exactly the same response characteristics as the experiment the Newtonian world would show. What you really want is the ability to introduce and remove a differential that makes a change, with reliability.

Otherwise we’ll remain lost in a inexplicable unresolvable universe re light speed..