How essential is shielding?

it's a wonderful day...have three fingers of good liquor and listen to your favorite album.

One would need 2 identical cables, the only difference being shielded vs non, in order to make a reasonable comparison.

Hi Tholt - This is a good point, and I agree that comparing two cables that differed only in the presence/absence of shielding would be an informative test. But I don't know that it's the only possible source of information about the typical characteristics of unshielded designs.

It seems to me that, for any category of component, whether it be cables, amps, speakers, or whatever, there are at least some generalizations to be made about the typical characteristics of a particular design approach. Hence the countless generalizations that are routinely made about SET amps, electrostatic speakers, passive preamps, or whatever. Many of those generalizations are the subject of some controversy, and nearly all of them have various exceptions, but that does not diminish the value of those generalizations as heuristics for sharing and developing communal knowledge. What I'm trying to say is that I believe that useful generalizations can often be made about the typical characteristics of a particular design approach, even in the absence of carefully controlled experiments.

Of course, I could be wrong about "openness" being a typical characteristic of unshielded cables. It would be interesting to hear from other folks who use them, to see if they have noticed something similar.

Bryon

I tend to think of "openness" as correlating with upper treble extension. For a line level interface, what would maximize upper treble extension (or at least minimize any degradation of it) would be low cable capacitance (meaning low capacitance per unit length and/or minimal length), and also low output impedance of the component that drives the cable.

Just a thought to keep in mind.

Best regards,
-- Al

What I'm trying to say is that I believe that useful generalizations can often be made about the typical characteristics of a particular design approach, even in the absence of carefully controlled experiments.

True, but how would you isolate the general characteristics directly due to shielding, or lack thereof? Cable type, gauge, single/stranded, connectors, solder etc. all are part of the sound of a cable. I assume (could be wrong) that shielding wouldn't be as influential to the sound as some of the aforementioned components.

I once used 47 Lab Stratos cable: 26 gauge single copper wire in plastic tubing, about as naked and unshielded as it gets. I liked it. Thinking back, I suppose it had a certain open quality to it. The 47 Lab motto of "only the simplest can accommodate the most complex" is epitomized with the Stratos cable (certainly sans shielding). But I can't help but think that the cable itself had more to do with the overall sound than it's (lack of) wrapper. Would it sound significantly more 'muffled' if it were shielded? Maybe. Actually, It would be a great cable to experiment with, going back to my first paragraph. One tiny copper wire: to shield or not to shield.

A heretical idea - how much of the "openness" of unshielded cables could be mimicked using tone controls/EQ? An identical cable, but with shielding and a high frequency shelf boost of .5dB from around 9kHz and up. I don't know the answer and I'm just wondering.