Hifi buffs...

[schmunk]

This is usually for shielding purposes to reduce distortion.

I like this quote from the Chord Cables website, which sums up this concept neatly:

"Most cables are directional, they sound better when connected in one direction than the other. As yet, we have found no way to establish the direction by measurement. During development of an interconnect or speaker cable, we establish direction through blind listening tests carried out by ourselves, retailers and hi-fi manufacturers. The results are remarkably consistent. "

I think we can all draw our own conclusions from this statement...

[Taz]

schmunk: here's a better explanation of a high-end speaker cable (the Clarity 7) that's directional:

http://www.empiricalaudio.com/frclarity7.html

"Each cable includes an Anti-ResonanceTM termination.
This makes the cable directional"

"This construction creates a very high-bandwidth cable, actually capable
of Radio Frequency (RF) power transmission. High-bandwidth is necessary
because this shifts the natural cable resonances and roll-off to very
high-frequencies, allowing the Anti-ResonanceTM Terminations to be
effective. The Anti-Resonance Termination eliminates cable electrical
resonances without impacting the audio bandwidth. The frequency and
phase response of the cable remains ruler-flat in the audio band, while
eliminating resonances. As a result, the Clarity7 is very high-loss at RF
frequencies and extremely low-loss at audio frequencies. Read more about
resonance on the FAQ page. The field-cancelling geometry also eliminates
the need for shielding which has the negative effect of increasing
capacitance."

It's effectively a bandpass filter that is connected to the source end of the cable. It stops unwanted signals (eg. RF) from travelling to the amp. If it's a longish length then the unwanted signals will distort the sound. Of course, you may or may not be able to hear that distortion anyway. There's probably an element of snake oil about it, I have to agree, but not totally.

[unrealrocks]

So if they are directional do they tell you if you should hook them up using traditional current theory or the way the electrons ACTUALLY flow?

[Butuz]

Cor how many times have we done this

At the end of the day - who cares what other people spend.

I mean - come on look at everyone on here. Some people spend £500 on a gfx card just to get another 376 3DMark2006's. Some people spend £500 upgrading from a 3.4 to a 3.8ghz CPU just so they can nock an extra 2% of their distributed computing times. I hardly think any of you hardware geeks are in a position to make fun of us that just wish to make our CD's / Vinyl sound as good as possible.

Butuz

[schmunk]

It's effectively a bandpass filter that is connected to the source end of the cable. It stops unwanted signals (eg. RF) from travelling to the amp. If it's a longish length then the unwanted signals will distort the sound. Of course, you may or may not be able to hear that distortion anyway. There's probably an element of snake oil about it, I have to agree, but not totally.

But surely you want your filter at the speaker end of the cable, to ensure the unwanted signals don't affect the signal entering the speakers...?

[5lab]

schmunk - no because by that time the unwanted signals might (somehow) have already affected the signal going down the cable..

speakers just dont play stuff that's out of range..

[schmunk]

Then surely a ghetto blaster (to remove the source-speaker cable run), stood on spikes on top of a stand full of lead shot, with wooden knobs and a gold plated power cable which is raised off the ground by little pylons, is the ultimate music player..!

[kalniel]

Actually you have to rub your cables in one direction with a sivet cat to obtain optimal directionality

The statement about RF power transmission worries me - seeing as any unshielded cable transmits power through RF, are they saying their cables are less well shielded than they should be?

[5lab]

Then surely a ghetto blaster (to remove the source-speaker cable run), stood on spikes on top of a stand full of lead shot, with wooden knobs and a gold plated power cable which is raised off the ground by little pylons, is the ultimate music player..!

nagh, the electronics within the blaster would interfere with the speakers.. need a distance away to prevent it

also, stereo imagry would be non-existant.

[schmunk]

also, stereo imagry would be non-existant.

You need to touch your nose to the tape deck...

[Taz]

You need to touch your nose to the tape deck...

And cup your ears!

[Jonny M]

Surely the best way to avoid interference is just to run balanced throughout the system?

[Clunk]

Surely the best way to avoid interference is just to run balanced throughout the system?

and not naked through the fields.

[Bourne]

I'm sorry - this is a sort of rant. It annoys me seeing people going out and spending STUPID money on cables...especially when they're DIGITAL! WTF! Even speaker cables which are decent are going to make such a small difference it's untrue. Then it's "omfg can you hear the difference..it sounds so much better" - no dude it sounds better because you are conning yourself into believing that £100 cable is worth it. Then it's..."make sure those speakers are positioned correctly...get a ruler out and get someone in to check the acoustics of the room" - whilst I agree positioning can be important...I find it hard to believe that decent kit could sound any better by positioning it mm perfect, get them a decent way apart and facing the same way = win. Then there's the AV type..."I've just spent £90 on a HDMI cable" - you do know a £5 would do exactly the same job - "Oh no the difference in PQ is stunning...so much clearer".


It seriously gets me. It gets to the point where differences in hardware just cannot be heard by the human ear...and the changes become so tiny, but still you get people screaming from the roof tops about how their krell amp can do XR$DX or it sounds "richer" or "fuller" I mean come on...they've invented their own language for christ's sake!

I say:

No more than £500 on an amp
No more than £10 on cables
No more than £300 on a CD player

Anyway...I'm probably totally wrong, but still

I take it from your rant that you are partially deaf....... because on that budget you might as well be.

[Robert]

Dude every post you've made tonight is ****, seriously.

I'm talking from a common sense stand point. Unless you are retarded of course.

Go on go and spend £1000000000000 on a digital/whatever cable, then let's see whos the idiot!

[Bourne]

Dude every post you've made tonight is ****, seriously.

Wow never had a stalker....



read some of your posts too fella...... looks like your used to talking S. H I T E.