 
|
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 |
68.222.64.24
In Reply to: Would 89259 all by itself sound appreciably different than 1506A? posted by Square Peg on November 29, 2006 at 11:33:34:
Actually, they have changed their recipe, the standard coax they used to use is 1505F, which is not a teflon insulated cable, but rather, a polyethylene insulated cable. It has a double braided shield, with tinned copper, and a compacted center wire (this is stranded wire that has ben 'smashed' togehter, so that the space between the conductors has been minimized, it does not sound as good as regular stranded, or a single small solid wire).As I talk about in my DIY interconnect note, foamed teflon sounds superior overall compared to foamed PE, bare copper sounds beter than tinned copper, and a single shield (preferably bare copper) sounds better than combo shields of copper braid and foil, OR double copper braid shields.
They curently use a proprietary/custom coax called LC-1, which has bare copper double-braid, and a smaller solid bare copper center wire, and uses foamed PE for the insulation. It appears to be a bit of an improvement over the 15056F, but it is still not at the same performance level as 89259.
As for 1506A, it has a combo shield consisting of braided tinned copper with a Duofoil TM layer (aluminum foil, then mylar tape with aluminum foil again). While these types of combo shields work great for digital, they do not sound quite as clean for analog audio use, just as the double shield approach of the 1505F or the LC-1 is not as clean as a single bare copper braided shield.
So yes, Belden 89259 will sound slightly different than 1506A, in that it will sound a bit cleaner, with less grainyness and less stridency. Note that these are VERY subtle things, and not noticed in a quick casual listen, or when using lo-fi equipment.
Jon Risch
Follow Ups:
long sub ICs (as I knew it has foamed teflon dielectric and thought it was fairly low capacitance).As you say 1506a is "does not sound quite as clean for analog audio use" ... and has some grainyness and stridency. Would this comment not apply for LF-only use (say 300Hz and lower)?
Regards,
Andy
Yes, I have recommended 1506A for subwoofer use, as it failings are primarily in the midrange and treble, the bass is still nice and tight, with little overhang or boom, and excellent pitch definition.It is also well shielded, and does not pick up much noise for a long sub run.
Jon Risch
.
Not that it means much, but my findings agree with everything Jon shared above.With that in mind, my opinion is that Jon's twisted pair IC design using the solid conductor as the hot is a noticeable step up from the 89259 by itself. In raw form and to my ears, 89259 sounds somewhat lean, bright and smeared up top. If one is happy with the 89259, you'll really be overjoyed with some of Jon's twisted pair designs : )
Using the center core of 89248 as the "hot" and the center core of 89259 as the ground* tends to soften the top end a bit and adds some bottem end weight. Most of this is probably due to the heavier gauge solid core of the 89248 center conductor, but i also think getting rid of the stranded braid on the 89259 helps clean things up too. In this configuration, the cable is very smooth and seductive sounding. To my ears though, there is a very slight trunctuation of the top end compared to the best cabling that i've used.
The use of 1506A opens things up just a bit on top, making this an even better cable with slightly better overall transparency. Some may prefer the 89248 / 89259 in their system, some may prefer the 1506A / 89259. Either way, i would HIGHLY recommend either of these designs over the use of 89259 in coaxial form or with two 89259 cores arranged as a twisted pair.
While Jon recommends heavy twisting of the conductors, i'm of the opinion that this methodology has more potential drawbacks than benefits when building an interconnect. Reducing the twists per foot of an interconnect not only lowers capacitance, but it also causes less metal fatigue in the conductors and reduces the potential for microphony i.e. fewer twists makes the cable less rigid. This also requires less burn-in time, which is moot point if you have a Mobie or something similar. As far as "burn in time", 30 days on a Mobie ( or equivalent ) can make most any cable better. The benefits are easily audible in my experience and well worth the wait. There really is NO comparison between burned in cables vs unburned cables in my opinion. Just bare in mind that not all "cable burners" work the same way / offer the same benefits.
As such, I would suggest using a moderate amount of twisting and avoiding the shielding unless absolutely necessary. Shielding can work well if properly implimented, but it is hard to achieve optimal results in a DIY design without a LOT of care. Moderate twisting of conductors can work wonders in terms of increased rejection to RFI & EMI and if you pay attention to cable routing, shielding becomes less critical. If you live in a HEAVILY populated area in close quarters, shielding may be necessary though.
Use the best RCA / XLR connectors that you can afford and good solder i.e. Wonder Solder, Cardas, WBT, etc... Kester can also work well, but it is very "smokey" and can leave a lot of flux residue behind. This is due to using a higher ratio of rosin, which works well with less than clean mating surfaces. In my opinion, it is better to start with clean contact areas than to try and rely on the use of rosin to make a good connection.
Obviously, these are just my opinions and i hope that Jon doesn't mind my intrusion into this thread and the sharing my opinions. I'm a great fan of Jon's work and we are lucky to have folks like him on this forum. Many of his posts opened my eyes to variances in cable design and material usage, paving the way for my own education on the subject. Sean
>* I prefer to use the solid conductors for hot and stranded for ground. Some may prefer the opposite arrangement i.e. solid for ground and stranded for hot.
Sean, could you give your opinion on Belden 89207 compared to the ones you mentioned, if you have tried it.
I just built a 5m pair to use between my pre and monos. I only have about 60 hours on them, I find them very detailed, holographic,extended top to bottom, but just not as smooth as I would like.
I am hoping that more burn in will help.
I am tempted to try the straight 89259, but I hate to be stuck with so much cable if its not any better.BTW, whats a Mobie?
Thanks for your input.
Allan
While the use of effective cable burning methods will end up smoothing things out a bit, i personally would not use cabling of this type for full bandwidth audio reproduction. It might work okay for something along the lines of an interconnect for subwoofer use, but it is less than optimally designed for wide bandwidth high fidelity use. Obviously, this is strictly my opinion based on my past experiences with cables of this nature. What someone else likes and hears with this cable may be completely different.As a side note, if you want to see what this cable sounds like after burning, pull it out of your system and send it to me. I'll burn them in and ship them back to you. For best results, cables need to be burned for at least 30 days continuous using the methods that i prefer and packaged in a box large enough to avoid sharp bends. All i ask is that you include the cost of return shipping & insurance. I don't mind helping fellow enthusiasts out, but i can't afford to go out of pocket doing so. Contact me directly for details if you are interested.
A "Mobie" is a cable burn-in device that was manufactured by G&D several years ago. Like other G&D products i.e. their Reference One and Ulitmate One Transports, they are no longer available but do show up rarely on the used market. In most cases, the only time that people sell them is when they've found something superior which is typically a whole heckuva lot more money. Sean
>
nt.
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 © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
