[benedium]

wwenze wrote:

Is the difference between cables more than differences between the same cable tested multiple times?

Oooh is that same as a control sample in experiments?

[lxXXxl]

wwenze wrote:

Is the difference between cables more than differences between the same cable tested multiple times?

Noted. I try that in future rounds.

[alamakazim]

Repeatability i emphasize

if u can plot a graph exactly the same 10 out of 10... then u are good to go...

else you can forget about your experiment

[Clearnfc]

alamakazim wrote:

Repeatability i emphasize

if u can plot a graph exactly the same 10 out of 10... then u are good to go...

else you can forget about your experiment

Even if you can repeat the test, there is still one hurdle you cannot overcome. What contributes as audible difference and whats "better" ?? Eg, SNR 95 and 100. Difference is 5. Can see on graph, but does it result in any audible difference?? This one is subjective.

If you take a 10 pple sample in a blind test, 2 thinks 95 one is better, 3 thinks 100 one is better. 5 think no difference. Because of human perception of whats is better, its extremely difficult to have a conclusion.

Its also not limited to sound. Even same song sung by different singers.... how do you measure objectively which singer sings it best? Its impossible.

[lxXXxl]

alamakazim wrote:

Repeatability i emphasize

if u can plot a graph exactly the same 10 out of 10... then u are good to go...

else you can forget about your experiment

Don't quite understand what you mean.
Are you referring to wwenze's comments to test the same cable more than once? And that the measurements should be repeated multiple times to ensure the results are consistent?

[wwenze]

Because FR measurements are never 100% accurate

Take the below for example. I measured 3 without changing anything, then stood up from my chair, hid below the table, measured 3, and then went back onto the chair, and took 1 measurement. Note the differences within each group and between each group. This is close mic with a cardioid microphone, too, yet look at the effect of where I sit.

Above was with sine sweep. If you use pink noise, you would also notice the first measurement is always very off, and then it slowly averages to what it should be. However no two measurements will be the same.

[hmsweethm]

wwenze wrote:

Because FR measurements are never 100% accurate

Take the below for example. I measured 3 without changing anything, then stood up from my chair, hid below the table, measured 3, and then went back onto the chair, and took 1 measurement. Note the differences within each group and between each group. This is close mic with a cardioid microphone, too, yet look at the effect of where I sit.

Above was with sine sweep. If you use pink noise, you would also notice the first measurement is always very off, and then it slowly averages to what it should be. However no two measurements will be the same.

So Sine wave is better than pink noise?
I think these tests must be done in a controlled environment aka no aircon, no fan etc.
The tester probably cannot be in the room.
I think probably it’s really difficult to carry out these tests and thus cable companies never really perform the tests to verify their claims as it could backfire on them when a customer or some audio expert perform the test and contradicts theirs.

[hmsweethm]

At Sim Lim ogling at the test equipment.
Always familiar with continuity measurement which is resistance. Ohms.
Then saw a insulation resistance, which is a measure of how well the insulation can prevent current from escaping.
So a random thought. If the copper conductor is good but the insulation is poor, current will escape.
Wonder if those audiophiles who test cable continuity got test insulation resistance.

[Clearnfc]

hmsweethm wrote:

At Sim Lim ogling at the test equipment.
Always familiar with continuity measurement which is resistance. Ohms.
Then saw a insulation resistance, which is a measure of how well the insulation can prevent current from escaping.
So a random thought. If the copper conductor is good but the insulation is poor, current will escape.
Wonder if those audiophiles who test cable continuity got test insulation resistance.

For this one, I feel its quite minor. This is because the voltage used by our speakers isn't high enough to overcome the resistance from the insulation. The cables are mostly using insulation like PVC, teflon etc... All have good insulation properties.

IMHO, the bigger issue will be the insulation acting as dielectric which results in increase capacitance.

Another thing appears to be insulation reacting with the copper. I read that the chlorine from the insulation may react with the copper cause a change in the inductance. Its minor though.

[lxXXxl]

hmsweethm wrote:

So Sine wave is better than pink noise?
I think these tests must be done in a controlled environment aka no aircon, no fan etc.
The tester probably cannot be in the room.
I think probably it’s really difficult to carry out these tests and thus cable companies never really perform the tests to verify their claims as it could backfire on them when a customer or some audio expert perform the test and contradicts theirs.

I would say controlled but realistic environment. It's like testing car tires under lab conditions vs real world road conditions. Both are valuable data.

And of course cable companies don't want to do those tests, makes the selling so much harder for what. They're targeting people who have money and either don't know any better, don't care, and/or whom believe their ears can capture small audio differences better than microphones anyway

[Clearnfc]

This message is hidden because lxXXxl is on your ignore list.

[lxXXxl]

Comparing US$8 - $50 XLR cables with measurements.

Note how the guy has to amplify the signal by almost 50db to see any actual effects from external EMI, but pretty cool to see and hear the interference.

Go to 10:40 mark to see the conclusions. But to summarize, no tonal / frequency response differences between the 4 cables at all. Price difference is purely for build quality, shielding, branding and warranty.

So unless you like to anyhow rub your cables against EMI sources like power bricks very often, the cheapest XLR cables (out of these 4) are perfectly fine. And the exact same findings can be applied to speaker cables too.

Then just for fun, compare the above with this.
He only starts talking about cables from 02:30. A manufacturer who definitely have the ability and equipment to show measurements, and yet the best he can manage (to answer the question) are his descriptions of 'everyone who came into room heard 'striking' differences...', 'system not revealing enough...', etc
Oh yah, and he's 'best friends' with the cable manufacturer, so....

[mypillowtalks]

hmsweethm wrote:

At Sim Lim ogling at the test equipment.
Always familiar with continuity measurement which is resistance. Ohms.
Then saw a insulation resistance, which is a measure of how well the insulation can prevent current from escaping.
So a random thought. If the copper conductor is good but the insulation is poor, current will escape.
Wonder if those audiophiles who test cable continuity got test insulation resistance.

I use insulation resistance tester in my work for electrical installations. Two cables close to each other is like 2 plates of a capacitor.

Current may "flow" thru the phase conductor and the other cable. Like you mentioned, if good insulation, less current can flow, thus the insulation resistance reading is higher.

For us is to look at the reading and ensure that we dont connect a shorted outgoing cable to the circuit breaker and turn it on on a short circuit.

But i did not try it on audio cables before. There is an option to select how many volts you want to send thru.

Sent from Your Favourite Non-Biting Talking Pillow using GAGT