Ralf Kleemann wrote on Thu, 17 August 2006 10:32 |
Hi Dan, My apologies if my number examples were potentially supporting false assumptions. I just measured the resistance of the Vovox cable and one of my older XLR cables with the same length. They both have 0.8 Ohm resistance. I have no intention to promote the manufacturer or any of their claims. That's why I sent the cable back in the first place... AND for putting a directionality flag on them!!
Best regards, Ralf
|
I was not saying that you are the source of the claims. There are many sources and they "get propagated" by people that believe the stories, especially when such stories are being pounded over and over.
That arrow directionality marking is a great example for how some real big audio wire companies are responsible for massive public deception. That crock caught on big times, to the point that "other cable companies" felt "a marketing need" to do the same.
It is possible that some cables with arrows are OK, and that the arrows were put after the fact, for "marketing competitive reasons". Personally, I would not bother with any cables with arrows. If they promote that crock, what else are they ready to do?
As a rule, cables for audio and digital audio, are for signals under 25MHz (analog, AES, SPDIF...). In cases where we do not use hundreds of feet length (say for 25MHz and under at 50 feet or less) cables are a lot more about the physical construction, dimensions, mechanical properties, insulation material (dielectric constant). The conductor material is not where the differences are. You want copper, and you will most likely get copper, which by itself is rather "passive material". All the claims about "conditioning" those materials, "giving them directionality", better conductivity and so on is crock.
The data regarding conductivity of various materials, how conductivity changes with temperature, the dielectric constants of the insulation (effecting cable capacitance and impedance) are all well known for many years and can be found in engineering reference tables and literature. The calculations for impedance, time delay, attenuation due to high current and attenuation due to high frequency for various structures (coax, twisted pair, printed circuit trace over ground plane and so on, is all well studied and known for nearly 50 year. The methods and even some specialized gear to check transmission properties are well established.
The "problem" for some specialized cable makers (or sellers) is that a mass produced cable can be sold for reasonably low cost. So they must find a way to "offer more" in order to charge more. So they come up with "buzz words", and put a lot into the "look" of the cable, making it very "fancy".
I have no problem with "fancy", as long as it is understood that one is paying for "fancy". The problem begins when they start floating "stories". And they are very experienced at spreading baloney.
I am NOT suggesting that making cables is an easy thing to do. The "machinery" used to take row materials and make them into cables is seriously "heavy duty" and impressive. Production tolerances are important, especially when you go to very high frequencies.
Regards
Dan Lavry
http://www.lavryengineering.com