Who is using stock red/back speaker cables for their mid/high end MM speakers

[Philip]

Those with order.. pls check PM.

For those ordering 404 breakout cable & stereo miniplug interconnect, I will be using e Canare L-4E5C Star Quad Microphone cable instead of Belden 1800F. This is having e quadstar config for better performance.

Phil

 

[bencheongcm]

Philip check PM

thanks

 

[AZE]

Geez.. u sure like to bring up e tech specs measured in ideal condition like those anechoic chamber. This is e biggest mistake people made esp those who heard great demo expecting e setup 2 sound e same as e treated showroom. Then to be disappointed when they set it up at home.

Less smooth but by how much? Does it make sure a big diff? I believe it also depends on e freq & e SPL. At e same SPL it is know that e low & high end will attenuate much more than other frequency.

Until I can see some proof.. its hard for me to accept the efficiency theory.

Phil

The condition is not ideal but is modelled after real world conditions, digit-life said that themselves, not me.

Yes the attenuation is higher in high end and lower end, but it is in orders of < 1db in short runs.

And then, I must say again, there is no way the extension can improve unless the efficiency is improved. The reason why at the same input power level, the sound output is higher, is because more power is reaching the sats, and hence it proves the point that efficiency actually increased.

Then your "theory" of improving the extension by 5db.
+3db is caused by doubling of power, +6db is 4X power. Improvement of 5db is as good as feeding 4X power to the frequency it is improved on.

So your miracle cable actually has 400% efficiency increase!
Think again.

As I've said, there will be improvements, but it is never as great as you have advertised. And the improvements are mainly dues to better shielding, smoother flow of electrons through the wires to maintain the integrity of the in and out signals. The respose will be more linear and more responsive. The improvement is SPL, efficiency, depth, is not the greatest part.

 

[Philip]

The condition is not ideal but is modelled after real world conditions, digit-life said that themselves, not me.

Yes the attenuation is higher in high end and lower end, but it is in orders of < 1db in short runs.

And then, I must say again, there is no way the extension can improve unless the efficiency is improved. The reason why at the same input power level, the sound output is higher, is because more power is reaching the sats, and hence it proves the point that efficiency actually increased.

Then your "theory" of improving the extension by 5db.
+3db is caused by doubling of power, +6db is 4X power. Improvement of 5db is as good as feeding 4X power to the frequency it is improved on.

So your miracle cable actually has 400% efficiency increase!
Think again.

As I've said, there will be improvements, but it is never as great as you have advertised. And the improvements are mainly dues to better shielding, smoother flow of electrons through the wires to maintain the integrity of the in and out signals. The respose will be more linear and more responsive. The improvement is SPL, efficiency, depth, is not the greatest part.

What good speaker cable does is to improve both ends extension. In another word, instead of -15dB.. it could be -10dB & etc making it even more obvious to e ears.

Just a recap of what I said earlier.. See.. I said "Could be" mr.. I didn't said its definitely.

BTW, I ain't advertising my products as miracle cable either. I have been warning people I cannot guarantee any positive results if u read carefully. I make it a point to reiterate myself all e time.

Err?? < 1dB for both end? Hmmm.. don't understand this. If u look at e graph, its definitely more than 1 dB. In fact.. it can drop more than 50 to 60dB when it roll off but thats over a range of freq.

Its ok lar.. I can't agree completely with all your suggestion but lets just say that we might come from quite a different school of thoughts.

Just like how u refuse to believe that there will be more bass coming out from the satellite speakers even when those people who tried are hearing them.

As to who is right or wrong.. maybe some expert in acoustic can help to clarify.

Phil

 

[Philip]

Philip check PM

thanks

Replied.

Phil

 

[bencheongcm]

Replied.

Phil

Replied

 

[AZE]

Just a recap of what I said earlier.. See.. I said "Could be" mr.. I didn't said its definitely.

BTW, I ain't advertising my products as miracle cable either. I have been warning people I cannot guarantee any positive results if u read carefully. I make it a point to reiterate myself all e time.

Err?? < 1dB for both end? Hmmm.. don't understand this. If u look at e graph, its definitely more than 1 dB. In fact.. it can drop more than 50 to 60dB when it roll off but thats over a range of freq.

Its ok lar.. I can't agree completely with all your suggestion but lets just say that we might come from quite a different school of thoughts.

Just like how u refuse to believe that there will be more bass coming out from the satellite speakers even when those people who tried are hearing them.

As to who is right or wrong.. maybe some expert in acoustic can help to clarify.

Phil

Eh... If you are not sure of the improvements, then why bother putting up the figures? 5db is a real huge increment. If you say <=3db then it might sounds more convincing, although the figure is more to 1-2 db because MegaWorks sat are low power sats.

As for the graph,
no.1, the rolloff observed is dues to crossover attenuation. There is no way to change it without changing out the whole crossover unit. Changing wires won't help a bit. Even if a super conductor is used, the crossover characteristics cannot be altered without changing crossover design.

no.2 due to speaker mechanical and electrical rolloff, both of which are dependant on the design of the driver unit itself and the materials used. The Qts(total dampening value with regards to mechanical and electrical aspect of driver) and the cabinet design dictates the rolling off at the high and low end.
Once the mechanical limit is reached, it doesn't matter how much power is applied to it, or how good the cable is, the improvements in SPL/extension if any, is only to be accompanied by distortion because the driver unit is the limiting part.

Good wires will have lower overall impedance and allows more current to pass through. But as calculated from the sites I posted, the values of attenuation is not very large.


I never said I don't believe that the bass out put has increased, in fact I do, just not to the extend of your "could be" value.
And in fact time and again I've said that cable upgrade will helps, and I do encourage ppl to ditch the stock cables for decent(not too ex though) ones, although I cannot agree that bass extension is the main thing that is improved. The improvement over the full range of the sats is greater IMO with regards to distortion, control and reposiveness, signal integrity etc.

 

[ragnarok95]

ok we got 2 sound guru here......can you all use PM?

 

[bencheongcm]

ok we got 2 sound guru here......can you all use PM?

actyally they type it out... also got something to learn from mah

 

[ragnarok95]

Yap...then when they point u r wrong, u r right, then its not so beautiful anymore

 

[Philip]

Eh... If you are not sure of the improvements, then why bother putting up the figures? 5db is a real huge increment. If you say <=3db then it might sounds more convincing, although the figure is more to 1-2 db because MegaWorks sat are low power sats.

As for the graph,
no.1, the rolloff observed is dues to crossover attenuation. There is no way to change it without changing out the whole crossover unit. Changing wires won't help a bit. Even if a super conductor is used, the crossover characteristics cannot be altered without changing crossover design.

no.2 due to speaker mechanical and electrical rolloff, both of which are dependant on the design of the driver unit itself and the materials used. The Qts(total dampening value with regards to mechanical and electrical aspect of driver) and the cabinet design dictates the rolling off at the high and low end.
Once the mechanical limit is reached, it doesn't matter how much power is applied to it, or how good the cable is, the improvements in SPL/extension if any, is only to be accompanied by distortion because the driver unit is the limiting part.

Good wires will have lower overall impedance and allows more current to pass through. But as calculated from the sites I posted, the values of attenuation is not very large.


I never said I don't believe that the bass out put has increased, in fact I do, just not to the extend of your "could be" value.
And in fact time and again I've said that cable upgrade will helps, and I do encourage ppl to ditch the stock cables for decent(not too ex though) ones, although I cannot agree that bass extension is the main thing that is improved. The improvement over the full range of the sats is greater IMO with regards to distortion, control and reposiveness, signal integrity etc.

Figures are with reference to e graph I use for illustration. It is also the very fact that I got no measuring instrument that I use e term "could be". All meant for illustration purpose.

"The rolloff observed is dues to crossover attenuation" - Disagree.. there are many factor involved which determines e actual rolloff for e freq response. E driver & cabinent design as u correctly stated in point 2. The cables used, crossover setting & etc.

Wat you are saying in pt 2 is e overall performance is still dependent on e speaker capability which I agree. If e driver can't deliver low end extension.. it will be that case regardless of what cable we use. Like I said before.. if e speaker sucks.. its sucks no matter what.

Wires has other characteristic than impedence. There are other things like capacitance & inductance which varied with different material & geometry. So good cable does not only reduces impedence.

Dude.. the graph already show the satellite can hit 80/100hz & u still want to debate on this issue?

Probably the better bass is due to cleaner and tigher reponse with better signal, and also a relieve of stress from the amps and PSUs as the power drawn is used more efficiently. And thus cleaner and more reserves of power for the subwoofer.

As usual, I would say the improvements are mainly due to shielding and thus clean undistorted signal, high efficiency and thus less stressed amps and PSU, and hence give more reserves to the PSU and hence even the sub may benefit from it.

As you can see from your pass remarks, you have been suggesting the improvement in bass performance is a result of higher efficiency & thus better reserve power for e subwoofer to reproduce better bass. NOT because the satellite is reproducing more bass on its own.

Now that I read the posts over again.. let me clarify on the "lower extension" suggestion. I'm not trying to say a 80hz to 20khz driver can be enhance to deliver 60hz or 25khz performance just be changing cable. My point is those sucky stock cable is hindering the perofmance & might be creating higher attenuation at both extreme ends & that will reduce e actual response of the speaker. Thus by using proper cable, this limitation will be overcome & there will be a improvement in e freq extension..

Anyway guys.. don't worry we ain't flaming each other.. just a healthy debate. Everyone can learn a thing or 2 here..

Phil

 

[AZE]

Figures are with reference to e graph I use for illustration. It is also the very fact that I got no measuring instrument that I use e term "could be". All meant for illustration purpose.

"The rolloff observed is dues to crossover attenuation" - Disagree.. there are many factor involved which determines e actual rolloff for e freq response. E driver & cabinent design as u correctly stated in point 2. The cables used, crossover setting & etc.

Wat you are saying in pt 2 is e overall performance is still dependent on e speaker capability which I agree. If e driver can't deliver low end extension.. it will be that case regardless of what cable we use. Like I said before.. if e speaker sucks.. its sucks no matter what.

Wires has other characteristic than impedence. There are other things like capacitance & inductance which varied with different material & geometry. So good cable does not only reduces impedence.

Dude.. the graph already show the satellite can hit 80/100hz & u still want to debate on this issue?

As you can see from your pass remarks, you have been suggesting the improvement in bass performance is a result of higher efficiency & thus better reserve power for e subwoofer to reproduce better bass. NOT because the satellite is reproducing more bass on its own.

Now that I read the posts over again.. let me clarify on the "lower extension" suggestion. I'm not trying to say a 80hz to 20khz driver can be enhance to deliver 60hz or 25khz performance just be changing cable. My point is those sucky stock cable is hindering the perofmance & might be creating higher attenuation at both extreme ends & that will reduce e actual response of the speaker. Thus by using proper cable, this limitation will be overcome & there will be a improvement in e freq extension..

Anyway guys.. don't worry we ain't flaming each other.. just a healthy debate. Everyone can learn a thing or 2 here..

Phil

As I've said, crossover is always the integral part that determines the rolloff. You cannot playback a signal out of nothing then there is no signal at all. If the crossover is a 1st order one, it will always be a -6db/octave drop regardless of whatever super conductor cable used. The design is the limiting factor, not the cable when crossover is being observed. The only way to remove the limitation is to change the crossover, or remove it all together.

Oh yes, about capacitance. Thicker cables will give more capacitance too if the cable are of the same grade. The increase in design and material must offset the increase in capacitance due to thicker cables. And yes capacitance and inductance can cause phase shift and that is why inductors and capacitors are used in crossover network, to switch phase above certain frequency with the values of indutors and capacitors used.

I've never said that the sats cannot hit 80Hz/100Hz, just that it can never be flat to that point especially when the crossover is at 150Hz, nor is there a way to increase the response of that portion by the amount of your "could be" value. I've already mentioned the approximate rolloff value from calculations, which is not exact due to implementation and design and room effects.

What I've said is that the main improvements are not due to the improvements to the sats extension. As I've always said, the improvement in extension is there, but little at best due to crossover and driver natural rolloff.
But with the improvements in other spectrums throughout, can reduce the need of power to produce the same output, and hence less power is needed, and more reserves in the PSU for the sub.

The attenuation is as I've said, very low at best even at both ends. To overcome the limitation at both ends, a better cable is used as you have said. And in that sense, less attenuation at both ends ==> higher overall efficiency ==> proves my point that efficiency actually increased ==> less power needed to playback at same level ==> more reserves and cleaner output ==> better output throughout, even with the sub(much less though). But as always, the improvement is not great in that area and is not the main improvement in changing cables.

 

[TonyDelPiero]

I have been reading this thread very often.
I do agree with Philip.
I do hear bass coming from satellite speakers.
^_^

 

[AZE]

I have been reading this thread very often.
I do agree with Philip.
I do hear bass coming from satellite speakers.
^_^

Technically speaking, there are 10 octaves in the human audible range.

About 3.3 octaves, ~ 200-225Hz and below are regarded as bass.

Well most good satellite are more than enough to cover that range, in fact, good satellite should go all the way down to 100Hz, preferbly 80Hz as required by THX.

 

[Philip]

Hahhaha.... we are getting longer & longer.. hope the guys don't mind.

But don't u agree it a gentle rolloff which means there will still be signal being pass through the crossover to the satellite. Based on this very fact, is there still any basis of argument that the Satellite can still reproduce 80/100hz signal?

Bro.. confirm lar.. I won't be stupid enuff to post e graph if I claim a sat can reproduce 80/100hz flat lar.

More reserves in the PSU for the sub? You are still suggesting the bass improvement is from e sub when we got 3 person down here who told u we heard more bass coming out from the Satellite.

Now picture this. Say we are playing at e same vol level on e contol pod for both stock & e cables I made. The same amount of power is used to drive the satellite. But because of the better electrical characteristic of e cable.. we can hear better bass from the sat due to e lower attenuation of low freq signal. So is that a result of efficiency or a question of better extension? Or will u be telling me better efficency of e cable instead of e sub? hahaha

Well.. I invite u to drop by my place to test on my MW550. I got SPL meter plus test tone CD to perform tests to find out whether at e same volume. E belden/Canare are able to generate higher SPL at low frequency.

Phil

 

[ISS]

I have been reading this thread very often.
I do agree with Philip.
I do hear bass coming from satellite speakers.
^_^

Satellites do produce bass, its just that its not that audible. If you generate a frequency response graph, you will realise that the gain of satellites will drop pretty sharp below 200Hz. Thats where the sub will take over.

 

[TonyDelPiero]

Yeah,middle-end and high-end satellite speakers are capable of doing that.
but on spec in model product paper,it is better not see and rely it too much.
Like philip said,quite number of model products do not meet with its spec exactly due to our adequate measurement equipments.(what we may measure with such measuring equipments may not be in that professionally way)
The best thing is to listen the sound and see if you have soft spot for speakers that produce sounds beautifully in certain hz.
There are so many different school of thoughts among us.Let us enjoy learning each other's opinion even though there are some disagreement.
Stay healthy in such discussion.Cheers

 

[TonyDelPiero]

Satellites do produce bass, its just that its not that audible. If you generate a frequency response graph, you will realise that the gain of satellites will drop pretty sharp below 200Hz. Thats where the sub will take over.

Yes,satellite speakers are like that in that aspect like what you said,ISS
I believe that such certain room acoustics will boost it.By hook or crook.
It is better to leave subwoofers to do bass reproduction job without any doubt.

 

[AZE]

Hahhaha.... we are getting longer & longer.. hope the guys don't mind.

But don't u agree it a gentle rolloff which means there will still be signal being pass through the crossover to the satellite. Based on this very fact, is there still any basis of argument that the Satellite can still reproduce 80/100hz signal?

Bro.. confirm lar.. I won't be stupid enuff to post e graph if I claim a sat can reproduce 80/100hz flat lar.

More reserves in the PSU for the sub? You are still suggesting the bass improvement is from e sub when we got 3 person down here who told u we heard more bass coming out from the Satellite.

Now picture this. Say we are playing at e same vol level on e contol pod for both stock & e cables I made. The same amount of power is used to drive the satellite. But because of the better electrical characteristic of e cable.. we can hear better bass from the sat due to e lower attenuation of low freq signal. So is that a result of efficiency or a question of better extension?

Well.. I invite u to drop by my place to test on my MW550. I got SPL meter plus test tone CD to perform tests to find out whether at e same volume. E belden/Canare are able to generate higher SPL at low frequency.

Phil

I am going to say again, I never doubt that the sats can produce 80/100Hz, just that the values of improvement you gave don't sounds right. The graphs did show that the extension and no way you can increase the response by the value you have suggested.

I said that both the sats and sub can get improvement, but the improvement in extension of the sat is minimal, and so is the sub. The overall improvement will sound as though the overall bass is improved. The improvement with better cables will cause improvement to the whole spectrum and adds up to the expeience, tigher more controlled bass and less muddyness.
If you drive the sat with the same amount of power, the sat should should sound louder due to improved overall efficiency of better cable. So now turn it back down to original volume, and less power is being used.

As I've said, the SPL will increase but it is not much, nor is it the the main improvement of changing cables.

Hmm... how many $1,000 your meter cost, got aneochic chamber to test?

 

[AZE]

Satellites do produce bass, its just that its not that audible. If you generate a frequency response graph, you will realise that the gain of satellites will drop pretty sharp below 200Hz. Thats where the sub will take over.

Depends on design, some sats do go below 200Hz flat, and some reaches 150Hz(MegaWorks), 120Hz(PM Ultra) and some 100Hz(GigaWorks)