CABLE CONSTRUCTION

When it comes to cable constructions, everything makes a difference. Most (but not all) of these differences are measurable. What is at issue is whether these differences are audible ... or not, when tested properly using a blind A- test. !ighted tests are at best unreliable, and at worst cause people to believe things that are simply untrue. "he vast ma#ority of all cable claims have no basis in reality, and rely on the placebo effect.

Introduction "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing." The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, ou!las Ada"s

The above could just as easily be re-phrased - for example ... "I refuse to prove that my cables will make your system sound better", says the snake oil vendor, "for proof denies faith, and without faith, you will hear nothing." The tenets of faith are an absolute requirement for many of the claims that are made for many (probably most) of the "esoteric" hi-fi additions that you will find everywhere on the web. There is no real information, technical, scientific or otherwise, and the only terms you will hear will be of a subjective nature - for example "solid, spar lin!, sweet, musical" will be contrasted with "muffled, veiled, !rainy, harsh" - the very selection of the words is desi!ned to sway you to their position, preferably subconsciously. The mar etin! is often very subtle, extremely persuasive, and there is no confusin! techno-tal in there to confuse the non technical reader. "hile it may seem li e #irvana, the claims are nearly all completely false. $aith (in the reli!ious sense) is based on the premise that faith is %od&s proof that %od&s existence is truth and does not rely on facts. 'ndeed, if facts were available, then faith is not required - so in a sense, faith can be seen to be based on an absence of evidence - a fiction. (elievers may also qualify faith as either representin! truth or they will represent it as bein! above and beyond our understandin!. Truth becomes a consequence of

faith which is the believer&s reco!nition of the absence of evidence. Truth is therefore defined accordin! to a circular perception. ' am not about to dispute the reli!ious beliefs of anyone - these are sacrosanct, and belon! to the individual alone. "hen the same ar!uments are used for audio, this is a different matter. *udio (unli e reli!ious beliefs) is based on science. "ithout the efforts of scientific wor and studies over many years by a !reat many people, we would not have audio as we now it. #ow, we have charlatans and thieves claimin! that science is ruinin! audio, and that we have to !et bac to the basics to enable real enjoyment. +ou need, nay! must have$ the latest shiny roc on top of your ,- player, lest the sound be harsh, !rainy, and lac in! bass authority, and without the latest cables at only ./0122 per foot, you are missin! out on half of the music. (ut ... you must believe, for the ma!ic will surely be dissipated instantly should you attempt even the most rudimentary scientific test, or even request any technical information. #ow, consider the situation with watches. 3as any ultra-hi!h-priced watchma er ever claimed that the "quality" of the time told by their watch is superior to that from "ordinary" watches, or that the "sense" of the time has !reater depth and more "chi"4 5aybe they just haven&t thou!ht of that an!le yet, but ' expect that this is unli ely. The simple fact is that these pieces of jewellery are finely crafted and superbly executed time eepers, but are usually no better or worse that "lesser" brands that do exactly the same job. The situation with cables is no different - you may choose to pay outlandish prices to !et somethin! that loo s ama6in!, and demonstrates to everyone how much money you have, but it will not ma e a ma!ical difference to the sound, there will be few (if any) real differences in the electrical characteristics, and it will sound much the same as "lesser" cables, sellin! at perhaps )22th of the price. 'f ima!e is important to you, and you can afford it, then that is your choice - just don&t expect that it will ma e your system better, and don&t try to convince others that without "it", they are missin! half their music or their sounds are bein! man!ulated in some mysterious way that can only be "fixed" by spendin! vastly more than they may be able to afford.

Note: It "ust #e co$sidered that there are so"e %eo%le &hose heari$! acuity is 'ar !reater tha$ the a(era!e, a$d they "ay &ell hear thi$!s that &e )"ere "ortals) ca$$ot* +or such i$di(iduals, a %articular ca#le "i!ht i$deed sho& a$ i"%ro(e"e$t ,or at least a di''ere$ce-, #ut this does $ot "ea$ that the sa"e i"%ro(e"e$t.di''ere$ce &ill #e audi#le to a$yo$e else* The "a/ority o' this series o' articles is directed at the "a/ority o' liste$ers 0 $o sur%rise there* 1ust #ecause so"e rare %erso$ &ith heari$! that is &ell a#o(e a(era!e ca$ hear a di''ere$ce does not "ea$ that e(eryo$e &ill do so, althou!h it is u$likely that a$yo$e &ill ad"it to #ei$! u$a#le to disti$!uish o$e 'ro" a$other* No0o$e &a$ts to #e classi'ied as #ei$! )ti$0 eared), a$d es%ecially so i' they ha(e s%e$t a lot o' ti"e a$d "o$ey o$ their syste"* 2es, there are a ,(ery- 'e& %eo%le &ho ca$ !e$ui$ely #e co$sidered to ha(e )!olde$ ears), /ust as there are a 'e& "usicia$s &ho ha(e %er'ect %itch, a$d (arious other i$di(iduals &ith a %articular skill i$ so"e area that "ost o' us lack* 1ust as $o0o$e &ill $or"ally re/ect the %hoto!ra%hs take$ 'ro" a ca"era ,'or exa"%le- that o$e %erso$ ca$ see are e(er so sli!htly 'la&ed ,#ut look 'i$e to us-, the$ $or should &e re/ect a ca#le that sou$ds /ust 'i$e* I$deed, the (ariatio$s i$ di''ere$t recordi$!s ,e(e$ o' the sa"e "aterial 0 a$d es%ecially so &ith (i$yl3- &ill #e 'ar !reater tha$ the (ariatio$s o' a$y ca#le &ith reaso$a#le co$structio$ a$d se$si#le desi!$* -espite what you may read in various forum pa!es, this entire series of articles is not intended as a "beat up the subjectivists" tale, but rather a discourse based on research that ', and a !reat many others before me, have done. The idea is not to ruin anyone&s enjoyment of audio, but to ma e sure that the facts are available, without the hype and (/ so commonly associated with hi!h fidelity.

The major (and well respected) audio companies did not develop their equipment usin! only their ears as a !uide. "ithout exception, all the bi! (and very expensive in many cases) brands have been measured, probed, simulated, then measured some more - before anyone actually !ets to hear one. 3ow much of this pure research has !one into most of the overpriced cables and "accessories" currently available4 ' don&t thin ' need to answer that, as we all have a pretty !ood idea. /o much has been said about cables over the past few years that there couldn&t possibly be any more to discuss. #ice theory, but the wheel has turned a full circle, and there are now people claimin! that there is no difference at all between any spea er cable or interconnect. 'n exactly the same way as the claims that there were "hu!e differences" were mainly false, so too are claims that there are none. There is no "blac and white" in this topic, but a !reat many shades of !rey, and the latest update to this article attempts to clarify the position. /pea er cables in particular are still a major topic of conversation on many forum sites, and remain one of the more contentious issues. * quic summary of the topics to follow (in the cable discussion, at least) would be ...

4o&er leads &ill rarely ,i' e(er- ha(e a$y e''ect o$ the sou$d, %ro(ided they are o' reaso$a#le co$structio$ a$d are $ot i$duci$! $oise i$to ,u$shielded- i$terco$$ects* The o$ly exce%tio$s are those that use 'ilters o' so"e sort, &hich &ill reduce the $oise 'loor i$ areas &here i$ter'ere$ce is a %ro#le"* So"e leads are o' 'li"sy co$structio$, a$d "ay reduce the a(aila#le %o&er 'or sustai$ed loud %assa!es, ho&e(er, the di''ere$ce &ill rarely exceed 5dB i$ "ost cases* S%eaker ca#les can ,a$d so"eti"es do- sou$d di''ere$t &ith a !i(e$ a"%li'ier a$d louds%eaker co"#i$atio$, e(e$ &here they are &ell desi!$ed a$d o' reaso$a#le !au!e* Excluded are (ery thi$ or extre"ely silly co"#i$atio$s 0 these &ill al&ays do so"ethi$! to the sou$d, rarely !ood* I$terco$$ects might sou$d di''ere$t, #ut o$ly i' they use odd co$structio$ tech$i6ues* Ge$erally s%eaki$!, all %ro%erly ,se$si#lydesi!$ed a$d &ell "ade i$terco$$ects &ill sou$d the sa"e 0 excludi$! $oise %icku% &hich is co""o$ &ith u$shielded desi!$s*

This is $ot to say that so"e %eo%le &ill $ot deri(e !reat e$/oy"e$t 'ro" the 'act that they ha(e s%e$t as "uch o$ their ca#les as "ere "ortals ca$ a''ord 'or their &hole syste", #ut this is 7e$/oy"e$t7, a$d has $othi$! to do &ith sou$d 6uality* This is a#out %resti!e a$d status, $either o' &hich a''ect the sou$d* Try This Next Time Someone Tries to Sell You Something ... Than s to a reader for the su!!estion, this is a wonderful way to prove somethin! to yourself. #ext time a salesperson tries to flo! you the latest and !reatest (and of course most expensive) cable they have on offer, just use this technique ... /u!!est that you would li e to hear the cable in action before committin! yourself. *s you wal to the demo room with the salesperson, come up with &spontaneous& bri!ht idea - su!!est that you swap the cables, and if the salesperson can correctly identify the &super cable& that s9he so desperately wants you to purchase, then you will do so. #aturally, you will want to ma e the swap several times, and the salesperson will have to !et it ri!ht at least :;< of the time. There is every chance that the pac et will never be opened, the comparison never done, and you will save a bunch of money. There is nothin! dishonest about what you are doin! - you simply want (and are entitled to) verification that the cable will ma e a difference, and if the salesperson is unwillin! to participate in the test, s9he nows somethin! that s9he hasn&t told you= Beware! 'f there is any su!!estion that the cable needs to be &bro en in& before you hear the difference, the salesperson is lyin!= *t this point, you should immediately let them now that you now that they are lyin!, and leave the shop. ,able &brea -in& is a myth, and is perpetuated by those with somethin! to hide - noone has ever been able to show that there is any scientific justification to the claim, nor shown that the performance has chan!ed in any way whatsoever. ,able brea in is real, and occurs between the ears of the listener - nowhere else (most certainly not in the cable).

Preamble

The last lin entry for the *(> 3ome ?a!e has been included so you can have a loo at some actual *(> double blind tests that have been carried out. The listin! at the *(> site is not extensive, but is excellent reference material. +ou will find some of the results surprisin!, and when viewed and interpreted sensibly, they tend to support the comments ' have made in this article. 'n some cases, the results surprised me, in that ' was expectin! the listener panel to declare various items as different, and they instead thou!ht they were the same (which is to say that the two items under test could not be identified with certainty, so any choice was pure !uesswor ). 'n this article, ' shall attempt to explain some of the misconceptions and untruths that are rife in the audio industry. This article is bound to offend some, but the information is based on fact, scientific data and the results of my own (and others&) testin!, plus the help ' have received from readers, who have provided more information on a number of topics. 'n contrast, much of the disinformation comes from the rantin!s of 3i-$i reviewers, most of whom now so little about electronics that it is shameful (and fraudulent) for them to be in a position to tell the unsuspectin! public what to buy, based on entirely subjective criteria. 'n almost all other areas of human interest, objective measurements are paramount. * domestic vacuum cleaner&s performance is based on how much dirt it collects from the carpet - any philosophical discussion about the type of motor used, or it&s rotational direction havin! a subtle effect on how clean the carpet feels is at best a pointless and tiresome exercise, and (' hope) has never been entered into. -iscussion - indeed, heated debate - on parameters not dissimilar to those above are commonplace in the hi!h end audio industry, and have been ra!in! since the late )@:2&s. The majority of people who listen to music !enerally listen to a few systems at a non-specialist retail outlet, and buy a combination that sounds !ood (to them), has the features they want, and fits their bud!et. They are no more interested in the !reat audio debate than they would be in the philosophy of the rotatin! mechanical components of their vacuum cleaner.

'n his article "/cience and /ubjectivism in *udio", -ou!las /elf A)B wrote

A short de'i$itio$ o' the Su#/ecti(ist %ositio$ o$ %o&er a"%li'iers "i!ht read as 'ollo&s8 o O#/ecti(e "easure"e$ts o' a$ a"%li'ier)s %er'or"a$ce are u$i"%orta$t co"%ared &ith the su#/ecti(e i"%ressio$s recei(ed i$ i$'or"al liste$i$! tests* Should the t&o co$tradict the o#/ecti(e results "ay #e dis"issed out o' ha$d* o e!radatio$ e''ects exist i$ a"%li'iers that are u$k$o&$ to e$!i$eeri$! scie$ce, a$d are $ot re(ealed #y the usual "easure"e$ts* o Co$sidera#le latitude "ay #e used i$ su!!esti$! hy%othetical "echa$is"s o' audio i"%air"e$t, such as "ysterious ca%acitor shortco"i$!s a$d su#tle ca#le de'ects, &ithout re'ere$ce to the %lausi#ility o' the co$ce%t, or !atheri$! a$y e(ide$ce to su%%ort it* I #elie(e this is a reaso$a#le state"e$t o' the situatio$* 9ea$&hile the o(er&hel"i$! "a/ority o' the %u#lic #uy co$(e$tio$al hi0'i syste"s, i!$ori$! the ex%e$si(e a$d esoteric hi!h0e$d sector &here the de#ate is 'iercest* I$ the 'ollo&i$! articles I shall dissect so"e o' the clai"s "ade o$ "a$y o' the co"%o$e$ts i$ the audio chai$, a$d sho& &hy they are "isleadi$!, 'alse, a$d i$ "a$y cases do&$ri!ht disho$est* See +urther Readi$! 'or *** &ell, 'urther readi$!* Preamble Part 2 * fairly well nown person (rampant on certain forum pa!es) has claimed that ' consider all conductors and insulators to be "perfect", and that "all en!ineers who desi!n in the real world now this is not the case". Dh really= ... and where exactly did ' say that all conductors and insulators are "perfect"4 "here did ' imply that they are perfect4 These questions remain unanswered (of course) because ' have never claimed, assumed or implied that they are perfect. %o insulator or conductor is perfect - in fact, no "anythin!" is perfect. The simple fact of the matter is that these imperfections are not si!nificant at audio frequencies, except perhaps in "unusual" cable constructions (of the type often su!!ested by the lunatic frin!e). This is one of the typical "red herrin!s" that ravin! psychotics will brin! up time and time a!ain, to bolster their unsubstantiated and flawed "reasonin!". ,laims li e that are typical of delusional thin in!, and the delusional only have to claim that ' (or someone else) said that "all conductors and
:

insulators are perfect" (for example), and it somehow ma es it "true" that these words were in fact used. "ell, ' have some news that may come as a shoc - anyone can say anythin! they li e, but the sayin! does not ma e it so= ' have never claimed that all conductors or insulators are perfect, but ' have challen!ed anyone who claims that the imperfections are audible to please do so. /o far, there has not been one shred of evidence that indicates that TeflonT5 (wonderful stuff that may well be) is audibly superior to ?E, in a properly controlled double-blind (or *(>) test. -ifferences are measurable (with the ri!ht equipment) but are not relevant to the audio ran!e unless the "facts" or cable topolo!y are manipulated to influence the test. ' have as ed every person and9or company named in the 5ad *s 3ell articles for any information they have that substantiates their outra!eous claims, and not one, not a sin!le one, has supplied anythin! more than some useless promotional material or "satisfied customer" e-mails. "hy is "satisfied customer" in quotes4 3ow do ', or anyone else, now that they are !enuine4 $or all we now, they are fabricated (i.e. lies), without an iota of truth in any of them. Dh, but ' am so negative= Df course ' am, these people are liars, charlatans and thieves, either by accident (they may actually think they are realistic because of mental illness Asuch as delusion or psychosisB or some other miti!atin! circumstance) or by desi!n - they simply have one !oal ... to separate people from their money. The actual "mechanism" is unimportant - the fact that they are wron! does not enter into their equation of life, so whether their claims are due to mental illness or !reed ma es no difference to the consumer, who is bein! ripped off and lied to either way. ' recently had an e-mail exchan!e on the topic of interconnects, and the "conversation" started out innocently enou!h. ' was advised that by usin! the tape loop on a preamp, ' could listen to the effects of different interconnect cables, simply by switchin! to9from tape monitor. ' firstly su!!ested the test methodolo!y su!!ested was flawed, since any additional circuitry used to ma e up the tape loop circuit would have some influence. 'n addition, the feedbac to the brain ( nowin! which switch settin! was which) means that a !enuinely objective (double blind) test was impossible. The test method does not even qualify as sin!le blind - it is an open test, and the

experimenter expectancy effect will confer non-existent attributes to the material bein! tested, based on preconceived ideas and expectations. The e-mails went bac and forth for a while, and eventually ' was findin! that it too up too much of my time, and the topic is not all that interestin! anyway - after all, how excited can one !et over ordinary si!nal leads. This is doubly true when the other party invents reasons that *(> tests are "invalid" for audio - somethin! about the si!nal complexity, and the psycholo!ical effects of the music was mentioned. This is exactly why we must use *(> or similar double blind tests - anythin! else will fail to properly eliminate feedbac cues, and these will be used (albeit subconsciously) to determine whether the "standard" or "test" item is currently in circuit. *ny test where there is any possibility of identifyin! the components under test is completely invalid. 't is interestin! that in a relatively non-demandin! application such as an interconnect, a material such as aluminium would li ely be sneered at by any audiophile, yet this very same material is used re!ularly in loudspea er voice coils. ' am reasonably sure that sonic performance of an aluminium interconnect would be deemed to fall way short of excellence, yet ' hear (or read) no hi!hly critical comments about usin! it in a voice coil. This is an extremely demandin! role, and the performance of aluminium is (or can be) audibly and measurably worse than copper. G 5y (almost) final e-mail pointed out that no metallic conductor introduces distortion. #ow, ' must admit that ' did not qualify this, but when ' spea of distortion ' refer almost invariably to non-linear distortion (i.e. the type introduced by all active components, that !enerates harmonics and intermodulation products not present in the ori!inal si!nal). * simple question would have cleared this up, but ... The response ' received astonished me - suddenly, my statement that "no metallic conductor introduces distortion" was utterly misconstrued, and became "all metals are perfect conductors"= 't was inferred (of course) that this was the reason that my tests and experiences are simply invalid, while those of my correspondent were reasoned and obvious. This is absolutely the sort of thin in! that !ot everyone to this impasse in the first place. ' never su!!ested that all metals are perfect conductors - ' said that they don&t !enerate (non-linear) distortion. (y means of misinterpretation, the subjectivist camp will now thin it has another "weapon" a!ainst the enemy - the
@

fact that it is the result of a !ross man!lin! of the ori!inal statement is of no consequence ... "#ever let the facts !et in the way of a !ood story". The fact of the matter is that no metallic conductor causes (non-linear) distortion. There are various resistances dependin! on the metal, but it&s basic conductivity is completely linear. ,hec thin!s li e thermal coefficient of resistance for any metal - it is linear. There are no curves or "fud!e factors" to be ta en into account. "hile it may be possible to ma e an alloy that exhibits some de!ree of nonlinearity, this would not be used as an electrical conductor, and would certainly not be su!!ested as an alternative to copper. Hven then, within the very limited ran!e of acceptable temperatures in the listenin! room, such non-linearities could easily be less than that of air - the medium that carries the sound from the spea ers to our ears.. #one of this has anythin! to do with s in effect, velocity factor or any of the other seemin!ly stran!e behaviours of all conductors at hi!h frequencies (none of which are non-linear distortions), we are interested in the simple ability to conduct current from point * to point ( without any form of rectification or other non-linear effect. *ll metallic conductors in common use will do this perfectly well, and will not add harmonics or chan!e the waveshape in any non-linear way. 3armonics can of course be removed - this is a filter effect (a completely passive linear function), and is caused by capacitance and inductance. *ll cables have these parameters as a fact of life - a silver wire and an aluminium wire of the same len!th and diameter have different resistance, but inductance and capacitance are the same. The de!ree of hostility ' experienced towards *(> testin! was equally pu66lin!. ' don&t now of any desi!ner who will claim that listenin! tests are invalid - only that they may not reveal the entire truth of the matter, and that additional "technical" evaluations may be needed to find out why the listenin! tests did (or did not) correlate with the measurements. Dn the other hand, many subjectivists claim that anythin! other than a listenin! test is invalid, and commonly and even vi!orously eschew *(> testin! - possibly because they now in their hearts that they will be unable to find any difference. This is very confrontin!, and to have one&s beliefs shattered is not a pleasant experience. "hat is the most interestin! to me is the "head in the sand" behaviour. ' was automatically wron! in my thin in!, and ' suspect that anythin! that ' said would
)2

have been twisted around to ma e sure that ' stayed wron!. ' could (of course) have simply a!reed with the subjectivist&s position, however to have done so would have been a lie on my part. The issues at sta e here are the crux of the on-!oin! debate between the two "camps". "hile ' will admit that not all desi!ners will ta e any subjective opinion seriously, ' do now from my own testin! and from a hu!e amount of reader feedbac that some of my desi!ns sound better with different transistors or power supply confi!urations (for example). 5ost of these differences can be quantified, althou!h some are elusive, and that is somethin! that ' live with, nowin! that many of the further "twea s" are assessed by purely subjective methods. There is every chance that *(> testin! would reveal no audible difference. * More on Aluminium (Aluminum) ' mentioned above that aluminium interconnects would !enerate scorn and derision from the audiophiles. "ell, it seems that for some, even usin! it for shieldin! is bad ... 7U$used RCA i$%uts o$ the #ack o' :a"%li'iers; are %ro$e to %icku% stray R+ I$ter'ere$ce a$d E9I* This ca$ cause a hi!her le(el o' #ack!rou$d $oise, ha<e a$d !rai$* +or years audio%hiles ha(e used shorti$! %lu!s or ,!a!3- alu"i$u" 'oil, to re"edy the situatio$* U$'ortu$ately, "a$y %rea"%s do $ot like to ha(e their i$%uts shorted* =hat to do>7 =o$der &hat 7!a!37 i"%lies 0 I thi$k I ca$ !uess* Needless to say, the a$s&er &as i$ the %roduct li$e 'or the site i$ 6uestio$ 0 I shudder to thi$k ho& "uch their little RCA 7hats7 cost* ' saw remar ably few references to aluminium even bein! used (let alone soundin! "bad") in interconnects, and no adverse comments at all about it&s use as a voice coil windin! wire. ' must confess that ' did not spend a vast amount of time on this, partly because as ' said early in this section - cables are just not very interestin! I-) 3ow does this thin in! occur4 *n excellent article on the human belief system is The (elief Hn!ine, which is to be found at httpI99www.csicop.or!9si9@;2;9belief.html. The article describes the mechanisms we use to !enerate beliefs, and the ways that these beliefs are reinforced as we !o alon!. Dne tiny quote from the article ... Our #rai$s a$d $er(ous syste"s co$stitute a #elie'0!e$erati$! "achi$e, a syste" that e(ol(ed to assure $ot truth, lo!ic, a$d reaso$, #ut sur(i(al*
))

=hat does sur(i(al ha(e to do &ith i$terco$$ects 0 $othi$! at all, o' course* But this does $ot cha$!e the &ay &e thi$k, a$d es%ecially does $ot cha$!e the &ay &e thi$k &e thi$k* Belie's are extre"ely %o&er'ul, a$d ca$ #e al"ost i"%ossi#ly di''icult to shed o$ce they ha(e #eco"e e$tre$ched *** I ha(e $o ex%ectatio$s at all that this article &ill cha$!e that o$e little #it, #ut i' it hel%s others ,$ot yet co$ta"i$ated- to stay &ell clear o' %seudo scie$ce, the$ I ha(e do$e &hat I could* Speaker Leads /pea er leads have been discussed extensively in my article on impedance, but ' shall repeat some of this here for the sa e of completeness. $or the full text, see 'mpedance A1B and *mp /ound, an article discussin! the influences that affect the sound of amplifiers. This was pointed out to me by a reader, and was ori!inally published in the #ew +or Times (on-line edition) a while a!o ... htt%8..&&&*$yti"es*co".li#rary.tech.??.5@.circuits.articles.@Ado&$*ht"l Co%yri!ht 5??? The Ne& 2ork Ti"es Co"%a$y

)1