 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
due to my wife complaining my system is "too detailed," I switched back to my old Sonoran Signature speaker cables, which is the original version with accordian-like jacket. As I understand it, it's a solid core copper design with some proprietary damping "gel" and Heavy shielding.Wow, I've been neglecting this cable due to a myriad of silver, ribbons, "newer" techniques, etc, etc. But it was like going back old-home meshed potatoes and meat loaf. There's just something out simple solid-core copper that brings out the "meat" and harmonics through the midrange correctly. Sure I've heard and made cables that has more apparent "speed" and extension, but the Sonorans sure sounds fulfilling and completely killed my upgraditis at the moment.
By the way, has anyone listened to newer Sonoran "Plateau" speakers and how they compare to the older design?
Follow Ups:
Tom Woodbury set up the Sonoran speaker wire about 10-12 years ago using 12-14 gauge ethernet and it is still more than competitve with contemporary wires......Sets an almost perfect stage......When I started playing with speaker wires I went with silver, but ended up with literally the same configuration after playing with it for about six months.....Tom was ahead of his time.....
and increase the surface area of the solid copper conductor for lower series resistance & increased power transfer, minimize skin effect via wide flat conductors, reduce inductance to a minimum while increasing bandwidth at the same time by stacking the conductors on top of each other with minimal spacing between them, lower the nominal impedance to that of what the amplifier / speaker wants to see, etc... and you'll end up with Goertz MI cables. Just remember to use Zobel networks with them, whether you think you need them or not. Sean
>PS... Stick with their original flat speaker cables, not their newer spiral wrapped round cables.
Trying to find the pricelist I thought I would be getting a visit from the Cable Cult Enforcers Committee anytime.Beautiful stuff though! Prices are steep and I see why.
I think foils are the way to go,but they are a pain to make and are quite sensitive. Will try to see what I can do with them in sometime.
NS
Goertz cables actually have technological reasons as to why they are designed / constructed the way that they are. As such, they are priced relatively reasonably. Where it gets pricey is when you start looking at their MI-3's and the silver versions. As such, the MI-2 Veracity ( NOT the round spiral wrapped Python's ) speaker cables are the best bang for the buck.If you use these cables with the appropriate Zobel's ( build your own, forget the factory supplied ones ) and you don't like what you hear, start looking at the other components in your system. You've finally heard what your system really sounds like without speaker cable distortions / colourations entering into the equation. Facts are facts. Having said that, that doesn't mean that one shouldn't go with their own personal preferences. That is, if they prefer distortions and colourations over accurate musicality. Then again, if you've got a mismatched system or under-designed components, they might need all the help ( coloured band-aids ) that they can get. Sean
>
Sean:
No doubt that the cable is a different approach and alot has gone into the design. For those looking for the final fix in order to alleviate cable colorations it is perhaps a great way to go.I decided to specialze in affordable cables which to me are close to SOTA to my ears,taste and have little synergy issues when being inserted in diffrent setups. Silver is a real challenge to get right because of the brightness colloration associted with it. If one can tame Silver to be as good with the best Copper designs which produce great signal integrety from the Bass up through the Midrange then allow for the best trait of Silver shine through without the Glare of brightness,but the Clear extension from 16-20Khz+ then that is a cable well worth pursueing. That is what I accomplished I believe.
SOTA includes having few synergy issues which means that any system you put the component in they shall perform relatively the same. That being said for cables that is allowing the signal to pass through with out coloring the playback or signal. That is what I think designers aim for and if they have done it then all the power to them and they have my respect.
Very interesting designs and I will keep what you have written I shall keep for reference for those wanting a better solution at a cost.
NS
www.NEARSOTA.com
While i admire your goals, you'll soon come to realize that there is only one way to remove colouration and system dependency and that is to cover ALL the bases equally at the same time. If you sacrifice performance in one area ( series resistance, nominal impedance, skin effect, time smear, limited bandwidth, dielectric absorption, etc..), that will always manifest itself one way or the other. On top of that, the cable will perform differently in each system due to the fact that not all amplifier designs respond the same to various impedances. The Goertz design takes all of that into account:Series resistance: Their smallest speaker cable is 13 gauge with others available at 10 and 7 gauge. If you read their website, Goertz offers suggestions as to how long of a run and how much power each cable is designed to operate with. Obviously, a longer run or a higher powered installation requires a heavier gauge in order to pass the current and / or minimize series resistance at full load.
Nominal impedance: All of their speaker cables offer a nominal impedance that is below 10 ohms, so it does not interfere / create impedance bumps between the amp and speaker. Minimizing cable induced reflections has multiple benefits. Due to minimized impedance mismatches you gain increased power transfer. Since the amp doesn't have to deal with as much reflected EMF and sees an easier load, it sounds less strained. Due to a more consistent impedance ( regardless of frequency ), this allows the amp to load up and control the load with the least amount of ringing, which removes further veiling from the sonics.
Skin effect: No skin effect here as the cable itself is ALL "skin" due to its' very wide, flat and thin construction. If you doubt that skin effect comes into play in the audio bandwidth, please study the research as performed by Jung and Marsh.
Time smear: By using one conductor, the signal path remains one length regardless of frequency. You don't run into "strand jumping" via stranded cable or dissimilar arrival times from various length paths as used in many multi-conductored Litz based designs. Any time that you have multiple signal paths available, you'll always have a small amount of time smear involved. After all, it is IMPOSSIBLE to make ALL the conductors exactly the same length.
Limited bandwidth: By reducing the inductance and increasing the capacitance, which results in a very low nominal impedance, we've also increased bandwidth. While this can be a problem for some amps due to maintaining such a low impedance at ultrasonic frequencies, use of high quality Zobel networks take care of that without interferring with in-band signals. As such, all of the music AND the harmonic structure is preserved from top to bottom. On top of that, the amp sees a more suitable and consistent nominal impedance regardless of frequency. As such, loading characteristics are improved across the bandwidth along with a measurable increase in transient capabilities. Faster rise times with reduced ringing increases detail without sounding "harsh".
Dielectric absorption: By using Teflon as an insulator and minimizing the quantity of insulator used, you've reduced DA to a minimum. At the same time, you've increased the safety and reliability factor of the cabling due to reducing the potential for shorting out or corroding as compared to air insulated cabling.
If you leave out any of these factors, the cable itself will introduce its' own electrical characteristics into the system. As such, varying electrical characteristics, especially those that vary with frequency, are what cause cables to have a sonic signature from system to system. Since each speaker has its' own electrical characteristics and each amp responds differently to those characteristics, wouldn't it be best to remove ALL the variables of speaker cable characteristics from that equation ( or at least minimize them ) ? If you don't, the speaker cable is no longer just a "transmission line" or "power funnel" from the amp to the speaker and back, it becomes a much more active part of how the system responds electrically and sounds.
As far as silver and copper go, most silver cables aren't "real" silver. Many use a base conductor of copper and then apply a silver plating on top of that. Depending on the base materials used ( quality of copper and silver ) and the depth of the silver plating applied, some of these cables can sound quite horrible. Part of this has to do with skin effect and whether the signal is riding on the silver plating up top, down in the copper below or "straddling" the area between both layers of metal. As such, if one wants to go the route of silver plated copper, you better make sure that the base metals are of very high quality AND the plating is plenty thick. Otherwise, the "nirvana" that you seek may turn into "limbo" and you won't know why.
The other alternative is to use REAL high purity silver. Goertz does just this with their AG series of speaker cables. These are NOT silver plated, but are REAL silver from tip to tip. Even with using a high grade base conductor though, some folks find these to be tipped up in sound i.e. lacking warmth. To get around this and to further minimize any one specific sonic trait of the cable, one can vary the characteristics of the conductors being used. By doing this, there is no one specific contributing factor to the sonics that one hears. For sake of reference, this has been done for years by some manufacturers and Jon Risch also uses this approach on his 89259 / 89248 interconnects.
To be specific, what i'm talking about here is to use one run of the Goertz AG silver for one polarity and a run of Goertz MI copper for the other polarity. This tends to balance out the warmth of the copper with the increased detail of the silver, resulting in a near perfect hybrid. There is no plating involved and all of the beneficial attributes of the Goertz "flat sandwiched conductor" design is maintained. While Goertz does not offer this as a production model, they will build ANYTHING that you want using production parts.
As a side note, Goertz does offer a production cable with both silver and copper conductors in it, but it is not of the flat variety and isn't geometrically correct for what we want to do in order to maintain a low nominal impedance or wide bandwidth. This cable is in their "round and twisted" series, which is not as good of a performer as their flat series. For one thing, the twisted series has FAR more dielectric involved and the dielectric used is of much lower quality. On a second note, the conductors are spiral wrapped / twisted, which can cause damage to the crystal structure of the wire. Part of the beauty of their flat series is that they require minimal break-in time, which has to do with a consistent, non-fractured crystal structure and reduced DA from minimizing the quantity of dielectric used. Sean
>PS... I have NO business affiliation with Goertz or any other cable or audio based manufacturer. I am involved in the RF industry where proper cable selection can make / break you. As such, i've applied my knowledge and experience to selecting the most correctly designed cables for each appropriate signal path. By applying science and using it in the proper manner, one can make sizable steps forward in their audio system. If the scientific steps applied to a system doesn't sound "most correct" compared to other approaches, either there are other flaws in the system that have been exposed or the scientific methods chosen were flawed / not applied properly. After all, manipulation of electrical signals to reproduce recorded musical signals is ALL "science". While some will consider circuit and system building to be an "art", that only comes into play when you don't understand or can't explain the "science" behind it.
Goertz cables are not the only ones that acheive all these goals, and until recently, they did not offer the teflon insulated ribbons, so they were not fully optimal in tat regard either.RE nominal impedance, this may help some, but classic theory does not tend to support the need for it with audio cables. It may have more to do with suppresion of RF, etc. than actually matching load impedances. Maintaining a low overall characteristic impedance would help minimize RF pickup, as well as minimize the strength of EMI pickup.
RE time smear, I personally think this is related more to the skin effect issue, although large stranded cables may incur a penalty due to the strand jumping, thinner stranded constructions will not have nearly as much strand jumping occuring because there is much less driving force involved and less strands to deal with, and all coaxial constructions (ala Wireworld type construction) may be more or less free from it.
Re the dielectric, two thin ribbons close to one another will maximize the dielectric involvement, the field strength is going to be quite high compared to geometries that spread the field out more. Thus, the stacked ribbon geometry requires a superior dielectric to begin with.
I believe that is the reason that I did not react as positively to the original Goertz cables, as they did not have the teflon.The capacitive loading of the Goertz geometry is fairly high, and while it may technically be an amp loading issue, the fact remains that there are quite a few amps that can not handle the load, even with Zobel networks. This is not trivial for those who either have their amps shut down, or experience amp damage due to the capacitive loading.
Finally, their use with mid-fi equipment that can handle the load still entails the fact that they may not synergize with the system, some folks would not enjoy the naked signal presented to the speakers very much, and need a less revealing cable. It is easy to say "upgrade your system or tweak it for better sound", but there are limits to what can be achieved with tweaking, and limits to one's budget.
Jon Risch
"Goertz cables are not the only ones that acheive all these goals, and until recently, they did not offer the teflon insulated ribbons, so they were not fully optimal in tat regard either."Other than the cables that are clones of Goertz ( Electrofluidics ), there are no other cables that achieve ALL of the design attributes that i highlighted here. EVERY other cable falls short in at least one specific area. As such, Goertz are the most advanced and balanced approach to speaker cabling at this point in time. Even the Electrofluidics clones fall short here as they are using a lower grade dielectric insulator.
"RE nominal impedance, this may help some, but classic theory does not tend to support the need for it with audio cables. It may have more to do with suppresion of RF, etc. than actually matching load impedances. Maintaining a low overall characteristic impedance would help minimize RF pickup, as well as minimize the strength of EMI pickup."
If you were to look at the differences amongst cabling using a current proble on a spectrum analyzer, you would see the differences that impedance matching makes, even at audio frequencies. I know that this is not a conventional approach, but then again, using non-conventional thinking is what gives us technological advancement. As you are well aware, just because current standards and belief don't agree with what i'm stating here doesn't make it so. We are still learning, just as we have been throughout all of time.
As one achieves a closer impedance match, ringing is reduced. With the reduction in ringing, power transfer becomes more linear and the amp is less strained. As such, sonics are improved in terms of less grain, increased liquidity and improved harmonic structure.
"RE time smear, I personally think this is related more to the skin effect issue, although large stranded cables may incur a penalty due to the strand jumping, thinner stranded constructions will not have nearly as much strand jumping occuring because there is much less driving force involved and less strands to deal with, and all coaxial constructions (ala Wireworld type construction) may be more or less free from it."
I agree that time smear has a LOT to do with skin effect and are directly linked together. This is why cables that use tons of stranding, even individually insulated solid conductored Litz based designs with small gauge conductors, suffer from tizzy treble. I've experienced this with everything from home-brew CAT 5 designs to high tech "computer aided design" products like Analysis Plus.
"Re the dielectric, two thin ribbons close to one another will maximize the dielectric involvement, the field strength is going to be quite high compared to geometries that spread the field out more. Thus, the stacked ribbon geometry requires a superior dielectric to begin with. I believe that is the reason that I did not react as positively to the original Goertz cables, as they did not have the teflon."
I have no idea as to why you might not have liked the earlier version of Goertz flat cables. Could have been a matter of personal preference, or as you mentioned in your post, a problem of revelatory nature in your componentry. I'm not throwing stones here, only passing on observations. As you know, some presentations that are actually more accurate seem "different" because we aren't used to hearing things that way in the confines of our audio system.
"The capacitive loading of the Goertz geometry is fairly high, and while it may technically be an amp loading issue, the fact remains that there are quite a few amps that can not handle the load, even with Zobel networks. This is not trivial for those who either have their amps shut down, or experience amp damage due to the capacitive loading."
If an amplifier is shutting down with this type of a load, application of a Zobel at the speaker terminals AND at the output of the amp will typically negate any problems. One may have to juggle the values used, but this is easily remedied if one is willing to experiment.
As a side note, i have ALWAYS stated that a Zobel should be considered mandatory ( NOT optional ) when using these cables. As was shown in a recent thread, some designs believed to be stable with this type of load actually weren't. Besides the improvement in sonics that were gained by installing a Zobel, the lifespan of the amp was no doubt extended. Taking chances by not using a Zobel is both foolish and cost prohibitive.
"Finally, their use with mid-fi equipment that can handle the load still entails the fact that they may not synergize with the system, some folks would not enjoy the naked signal presented to the speakers very much, and need a less revealing cable. It is easy to say "upgrade your system or tweak it for better sound", but there are limits to what can be achieved with tweaking, and limits to one's budget."
I agree with these statements wholeheartedly. Then again, i'm assuming that someone that frequents these forums has enough sense to avoid "junk" componentry. While we all have to start off somewhere, i would not consider investing $150 - $300 in speaker cables a wise move when using ANY type of receiver, etc... Systems should be built as systems taking all of the cost and operating parameters into consideration. As such, the approach of using "complimentary colourations" IS acceptable if working with a limited budget and / or gear that is not capable of being truly accurate. I have always stated that one should buy and use what works best within the confines of their system to their ears. My above comments were based on the premise that those visiting this forum were trying to achieve total system linearity and musicality or at least learn about such approaches. Those that are working their way up the ladder can apply "trickle-down technology" as they can afford to.
I'm glad that we basically agree on most points and can openly discuss those that we don't agree upon. This is how progress is made i.e. sharing of ideas and experiences. As i have stated to you both publicly and privately, i have a great amount of respect for you and the amount of effort that you've put into sharing and educating those willing to listen and learn. Keep up the good work. Sean
>
cd
That is really a great thesis and write-up! Hope you paste and copied most of it.I agree with the design goals and the implementation seem sound. The price point is beyond what others are willing to pay is the only point that I make.
When purchasing cabling for a complete HT system for a newbie or for a starter system the price is to much for certain people absorb. For those striving for perfection then it is the way to go. That is what I am looking at. It is the market I am looking at mostly in order for people to atleast get a taste of quality sound for bear minimum without having to spend more than $200 for total cabling.
An example is the following:
Looking at the kind of system one can build today for an affordable price.Panny XR-45 $300 J&R's
Ascend CBM-170 $328\Pr.
Pioneer 563A Universal DVDP $170
StereoVox Digital IC $80
Power Cord (Aftermarket) $60-100
NEAR OTA Hook-Up Cable $100 Front\RR\CC\IC
Add-Ons
Sub $200-500 New\Used
Phonostage Hagerman Coronet $50-$130Powercords to chose from:
Bob Crump DIY-CobraCables.com
Bolder-NITRO
Cardas C7
AQ-NRG
TG Audio Silver PC*Tweeks can be added to the Panasonic Unit.
That is a system I could easily live with ans I would recommend for people just starting out with a fixed income or for a cost effective sound system. The price would go down for either used buys or Discount hunting. It's around $1500 tops.
I would get the Goertz Cables at the drop of a hat given the reputation and design when looking for cables in that price range as I agree with the design Philos. and the quality. That I agree with you totally on. For a cost effective solution with no RFI situation to worry about I could happily live with my solution.
NS
no "cutting and pasting" involved. I did this to both clarify and explain why i have the beliefs and experiences that i do. Anyone can "talk shit" but knowing what one is talking about and having those concepts firmly grounded in verifiable facts can make a world of difference to the unbeliever. As such, when it comes to helping others better understand what they seek and why, i'm more than willing to try and help them out. That is, whether it is typing over the net or babbling in person : )I could add / remove some of the suggested products from your list, but that would be a personal matter and up to subjective interpretation. Having said that, Goertz speaker cables can typically be purchased with a slight discount from an authorized dealer OR found on the net used for a very reasonable price. To top it off, when you buy cables directly from Goertz, they allow a 30 day in-house trial period. This is what i would recommend and have found to work out best since you know exactly what you are paying for that way.
The reason that they show up used is for one of the above mentioned reasons i.e. people have poorly designed systems and these cables reveal the flaws, they don't use impedance matching network that really is mandatory and not optional as Goertz suggests or they have specific personal preferences that don't fall in line with "musical accuracy". The only other reason that i've found that people sell their Goertz speaker cables is to move further up the line ( MI-1's to MI-2's ), etc... If one were to buy the MI-2's to begin with, they would pretty much be covered for most installations right off the bat.
When you consider all of the above, cost is not really a factor here. When you take into consideration that most "audiophiles" will "upgrade" ( more like move sideways ) speaker cabling at least once or twice in their lives, adding up those expenditures will typically cover the cost of a suitable Goertz cable to begin with. If one takes this approach, they now know that they've got neutral speaker cables that are simply passing the signal fed into them. There is no need to upgrade or change cabling or further expenses in the future, so purchasing Goertz speaker cables right off the bat truly is a "sound investment" : ) Sean
>
Sean:
I just sold off a Passive Controller which was very revealing, so I see what you mean about people not likeing what they find using a wire or components that reveal the naked truth of ones equiptment. My speakers do that quite well.I'm downsizing now.
I will look at the prices again. You've been very informative,thanks!
Passive controllers bring another dimension of problems with them to the typical audio system. Unless the impedance of the potentiometer is buffered through passive circuitry, the source sees an ever changing load as one adjusts the volume setting. In such a case, using an interconnect that has a high series resistance ( like a Magnan Signature ) will provide the most stable and consistent load with improved sonics. Otherwise, the sonics produced will vary quite noticeably with various cabling and the associated impedances presented to the source components.There is another aspect to using a passive line section that many folks overlook and / or just don't know about. That is, the reactance levels / reflected EMF that the amplifier has to deal with from the speakers would be easier to pass back up the signal chain to the source without a buffer or active gain stage between them. This will cause an increase in distortion due to the varying conditions at the input of the amp and the reflected EMF modulating the output of the source. As such, using a passive line section should be confined to systems that make use of benign loudspeaker loads AND have amplifiers that are phenomenally well designed & built. One or the other ( built like a tank OR benign speaker loads ) is not enough. Otherwise, there are both sonic and electrical advantages to running buffered or active gain stages between the amp and the source. Sean
>PS... Like i said, audio is a science. Between science and a little common sense, you can go a long way on a little bit of dough : )
When or if asked what components would you settle on for either an affordable HT system or Audio system what would you consider.Before these Digital Amps came on the scene the only way to get a quality affordable HT\Stereo setup was to pay for one component that might cost $1500 to start with and I would probably have to get a component that is even higher priced because I mainly listen to Stereo.That component being the SS Processor\Preamp being most the expense of the system. Most all processors will interfer with the luxury of good Audio. I hated trying to mix and match for the 2 to mesh right. Mac's.Lexicon's,Rotel,Anthem all have costly units. Some alot more than others.
The Passive was used for testing mostly,but it certainly for the most part,got out of the way of the signal unlike most HT units.
So what do you suppose as a cost effective system including speakers?
Just wondering!
I can't / won't recommend components for specific reasons. To be quite honest, i'm not much of a believer in any current makes / models of audio gear and modify most everything i decide to keep. I agree that everything is built to a price point and there are plenty of corners cut in order to do this. Pre-Pro's are a perfect example as most all of them are FAR inferior to much lower costing preamps when it comes to absolute audio quality. Then again, that only means that there is more room for improvement in terms of parts swapping and modifications : ) Sean
>
You seem to have come to the same conclusion, in a way, as myself. That is to acquire components which can be modified to bring performance levels up instead of buying mega expensive components. Not that there is anything wrong with that,but from a Price to performance aspect seems to be wasteful.If I partied like the guy I saw last night on TV who spends $8K a night in NYC then I might just say throw a few of those Lamms in there while your at it.
JMO
I too am having fun with my bedroom system's simple solid core speaker wire. Home Depot sells Polypropylene insulated 18 gauge solid core copper wire that, when used as a tightly twisted pair, sounds rather nice, IMHO. The Coleman sprinkler cable I pulled it from is way inexpensive, as well. If I can come up with an easy DIY cable vibration dampening method I may be even more pleased. Perhaps two gentle spirals of 100% cotton twine around the twisted pair (once against the twist then again in the other direction), mummy wrapped with Teflon tape, then covered with 1/4" techflex to finish it off might do the trick. Any other ideas?
Simple designs seem to sound better to me in almost anything.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
