Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superoir SQ

[boleary]

Does it matter if the adapter is rated at 50 or 75 ohms? Joachim, in his reply #2, said he used 50 ohm adapters, so I ordered 50 ohm too. Looking at Nik.d's list above I couldn't tell if they were 50 or 75 ohm.

http://www.l-com.com/coaxial-coaxial-adapter-bnc-female-50-ohm-rca-male

[vrao]

George, thanks for the list.
As mani mentioned the Ohelbach looks very interesting, but there is no mention about the impedance?

[nik.d]

@vrao
Yes, that's very confusing for say very well respected cable factory. Their PDF is, say, ridiculous.
For Mouser, Digikey & Pacific Cable ones I'v checked by filtering (50 Ohm) Pacific Cable has same connector with *-75*
added at end of product name. Did not post direct link to mfr site 'cause my browser is blocking Java App for this product.
Riddle still remains on 'boutique' and most expensive one. BNC connectors of 75 Ohm impedance are larger in diameter
and that's the only difference between them, AFAIK.
 

[christoffe]

so I ordered 50 ohm

perfect!

Joachim

[PeterSt]

All,

Last Saturday, my 5th day of listening through the BNC interlinks, I started to be sure I could hear a flavor in the highs. Maybe it has been there from day 1, but let's say that I heard a few things for the better anyway and I didn't want to hear flavors.

But yesterday things changed;

Listening through this cable 6 days ago started out with the more emphasized bass (see Want some Bass topic. It brought a better balance in everything although I would say that generally it could be too heavy to my taste. So as promised in there (link) yesterday I reverted to the normal neutral speaker settings, just to see how the BNC cable would behave from there.

First notice, if I observed well, was the still more bass. Actually a bit strange, because it was difficult to notice less bass. Well, it was less, but the "too heavy" remained.
Since I was doing this to bring back more dynamics - because the more bass tends to mask the higher frequencies which makes everything more "slow", I played another of these MC Hammer albums (I mentioned MC Hammer earlier in this topic) to see whether that one now was too dynamical. Actually I chose MC Hammer again because I expected it to be OK because the bass seemed still OK. Well, that worked !
Hmm ...

At 3 quarters of it, I started to observe Madonna / Michael Jackson synthesized (grey) drums as something like "he too" but with the notice I most probably did not play that album ever in digital. All sounds super much better than 10 years ago, so that's why the "he too".
So I switched over to one of my mere test albums to see how that would behave. Actually for the bass only.

After 15 minutes I shut down the whole system because I was totally fed up with it. Ouch ouch ouch.

Coen, might we have bet over a nice bottle of whiskey, pick your brand ...

All right (not), I now know where such an interconnection gets its "virtues" from. And actually it is very interesting;
Assuming that everyebody perceives the Silverstone USB3 interface the same way ... this cable is that times 3 or so.
But let's first go back to how the cable started "working" :

So, the more bass (see link I gave) is really that. The whole picture changes, and you don't hear me say it is wrong to begin with. However, what surely happens is that the highs are masked and without all starting to be dull right away, it *is* true that all gets slower of it. So the snap of a snare drum turns into a "less snare" simply because of the higher frequencies are overwhelmed by the "tom" part of the snare drum (the cabinet of it). This is not per se wrong, but it *is* more slow, and for comparing with reality you could be disturbed by it. Also, the lower frequency instruments with snap, will become more low frequency because of it. And strangely enough a kick drum is an example of that. Things get "heavy" ...

If you listen to this for a couple of days - which was 3 days in my case - all sorts of revelation happen when you are able to add some special kind of highs. Like a Silverstone card in 3 fold.
All opens up and while the more square fragile frequencies where mushed out by the lower ones, things really start to happen when you make those fragile frequencies ... more square. But by what means ? Silverstone card means. And what was that ? "creating" holes in the "smoothnes".

What is the Silverstone card actually doing ? Making a cymbal "vibrate" better into a cymbal. Can't be put to words, but you'll know it (if you have one, especially with normal NOS1 (not NOS1a)).
So holes = on/off = square. Very nice for localisation and also very nice for separation and imaging. And depth. And more.

Because this is Joachim's subject (topic), I'll make another side step;
It hasn't been emphasized too much, but somewhere in between the lines in some post from some topic in this forum (pfff) I told that my Seagull did not work so well any more. And what was going on there ? I "turned down" the squariness. By what means was that ? Oh, NOS1a and in combination with the new Custom Filter means of XXHighEnd.
Did I care ? maybe some times. But there's more ease in the sound and in the end you could hear that this was about "distortion" as such. Difficult to explain it through distortion, but if something is too square (for our system to cope with) then the result is distortion.

Joachim, you said it : The Seagull flies as never before.
Yes, maybe. I tried it too a few days ago, but I already couldn't concentrate on the (perceived) music in there because the fragility of the sounds had vanished. I now refer (thus already a few days back) to the often same flavor. Actually hard to recognize the whole track because of that (recognition points had vanished).

And so I yesterday set the speaker to the "lean" setting (the original measured setting) and put on one of my well known "test" albums;

With now all my attention to "could it be the cable" I right away noticed that I couldn't see the size of the cymbals. This is how the triple Silverstone effect jumped to me; Too much of it, and with its impact on especially cymbals, now all cymbals were influenced into sort of too small ones.
No, no way this could be right; actually I heard "hash" but with a lower frequency we normally dedicate "hash" to. A very profound on/off sound.

I couldn't say at all the sound was too lean, but I now noticed as well that the bass was not what it can be. Also hard to explain, but where an electric bass nicely showed its frequency, the acoustic bass was coloured. Too much of it ? possibly.
But I couldn't observe the basses for too long because the highs started to hurt. Really hurt. I said to myself "this is dirty". Not grey - the opposite I'd say, but the too much on/off of it made it dirty. And thus painful as well.

Of course my big mistake has been that I tried the BNC cable in an already tweaked setting to begin with (the more emphasized bass). This is how the cable looked to be doing good. So on top of the overwhelming bass it was able to just pop up a sufficient amount of squariness to net make the imaging even better. All went better because of it.
Except for the flavor ...
(and flavors KILL me !)

So without the "bass tweaking" it is totally rubbish. And I wished I had tried the cable in the normal setting to begin with.

Please notice, up to disclaimer (and also pay attention) :
*Because* this is listening to tweaked sound to begin with (more bass), it WILL be so that my observation is subjective now. In other words, things are not right to begin with, and THUS we can't relate to mere reality and we start to pick the best virtues out of what we hear and tend to neglect the anomalies. It's what we want. Still, it is not said that *with* the more emphasized bass the net result can not be better with the BNC cable. It's a weak balance. So in this case (or my case) it is about me just not being able to listen to flavors since I got used to tune for neutrality. And, I already know that not so many people even want that or know what it is. To summarize this :
I don't like the cable because it implies a flavor BUT in the already flavored setting to begin with (emphasized bass). And please remember, with the normal speaker settings I have no complaints apart from a handful of albums not playing (too dynamical or too lean if you want). This too is "me" and possibly I am quite alone. So my bass is neutral, is OK, does not lack a thing to me (and of which by now it could be clear that I am alone on that one already) and if THEN (in that setting) such a cable is mounted, well, then the cable s*cks all over.
Of course it is my opinion that it s*cks anyway, because it is my opinion that it should be used in a neutral setting to begin with. But if I am alone in
a. my bass is neutral so all is right;
b. put in that cable shows 100% clear how bad it does,
then who am I as this loner to decide for you that the cable can't work in your preferred bass-heavy (my opinion) setting.

But tonigt I will be back to the normal cablle - that's for sure.

Also watch out for my next disclaimer :
It is not said (or 100% sure to me) that it is the cable which "creates" the distortion. I mean, it can also be that it passes on better what the source is really telling. If that would be the real truth, then too bad and nothing much to do about that at this moment. Yes, maybe apply a nice heavily ringing filter. But I am not going to do that anyway ...

Peter

[Scroobius]

Peter - Aren't your "normal" interconnects coaxial cable? I thought they were when I came over. If they are coax what impedance are they? in other words what is the comparison between.

Cheers

Paul

[PeterSt]

Paul,

I'd say "nothing" because not terminated (properly). But the cable itself, 75 Ohm.

Regards,
Peter

[christoffe]

b. put in that cable shows 100% clear how bad it does,
then who am I as this loner to decide for you that the cable can't work in your preferred bass-heavy (my opinion) setting.

Hi Peter,

fair writing.

We audiophiles are listening with different cables, and the BNC cable with the adapters are in a reasonable price league, and we are not bankrupt after a “failed” test perception.

As I wrote a couple of times, “bass freaks” are bass freaks and their audio system is tuned for it!
I did never hear such basses (as heard in Peters superb listening room) in live concerts.

Opposed to Peter, I believe in cables or in other words, I do hear differences between some cables. For a longer time I heard music with the Nordost Valhalla and changed in 2009 to the Swedish Entreq (Challenger) cables. There was a small difference between these two cables, and it was to distinguish on a very high level.

I never heard such a drastic difference in cables as between the RCA and BNC cables as now.
The bass in my system is now more realistic, nearer to the sound of live concerts. At deep frequencies the driver of the active subwoofer is now under full control, no undefined notes anymore.

On my system (see settings in profils) is less bass with the BNC’s than with the RCA’s. That is opposite to Peters findings with the Orelos MKII.

This BNC cables are producing less noise than the RCA’s.

The clicks of the cymbals on the Sakura, Sakura track on Stanley Clarkes CD “Jazz In The Garden” (http://www.amazon.com/Jazz-Garden-Stanley-Clarke/dp/B001VFM0QU/ref=sr_1_8?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1410775739&sr=1-8&keywords=stanley+clarke ) a better to hear/follow than ever.

For tests I’m more listening to live concert CDs, such as “Tenderness” from Al Jarreau (I saw him in a Frankfurt concert) ( http://www.amazon.com/Tenderness-Al-Jarreau/dp/B0016OAUAY/ref=sr_1_10?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1410776113&sr=1-10&keywords=al+jarreau ) and what is coming from the speakers is very realistic., also the “Return to Forever” live CD’s.

Eberhard Weber is playing a wonderful bass on the CD “Endless Days” and the SQ is great on my system. http://www.amazon.com/Endless-Days-Eberhard-Weber/dp/B00005BG87/ref=sr_1_9?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1410779098&sr=1-9&keywords=eberhard+weber

Every cable is a compromise in our systems, one person emphasises the highs, the other the mids and the next one the bass ……….. .

The BNC cable is for my system the best compromise and I can’t go back to a RCA cable.

So, happy testing for the forum members.

On our adjacent “toilet” , eh, library with the computer table the SQ is great.

Joachim

P.S.
Peter, I have problems with the interpretation of the following definitions:
-   so holes = on/off = square; squariness
-   grey
-   flavor

EDIT I:

-Quote-
Also watch out for my next disclaimer :
It is not said (or 100% sure to me) that it is the cable which "creates" the distortion. I mean, it can also be that it passes on better what the source is really telling. If that would be the real truth, then too bad and nothing much to do about that at this moment. Yes, maybe apply a nice heavily ringing filter. But I am not going to do that anyway ...
-Unquote-

My assumption is, due to the construction of the double shielded cable there is less noise and < HF immissions, and what we hear is nearer to the reality.

[PeterSt]

Peter, I have problems with the interpretation of the following definitions:
-   so holes = on/off = square; squariness

High frequency on/off sound. So the sound goes on and off in a high frequency, that in itself implying squares as such. And that creates the :

-   grey

So say that a 12KHz intended tone is going on/off for 50% of it's "duty cycle" then the result is 6Khz but not a sine (plus very high frequency harmonics beyond the audio band).

-   flavor

Not neutral. All "cymbals" sound similar.

-Quote-
Also watch out for my next disclaimer :
It is not said (or 100% sure to me) that it is the cable which "creates" the distortion. I mean, it can also be that it passes on better what the source is really telling. If that would be the real truth, then too bad and nothing much to do about that at this moment. Yes, maybe apply a nice heavily ringing filter. But I am not going to do that anyway ...
-Unquote-

My assumption is, due to the construction of the double shielded cable there is less noise and < HF immissions, and what we hear is nearer to the reality.

It is okay if you think that, but anticipate that you fool yourself. For example, it is true that the "ticks" etc. on cymbals are better audible, but it is not right that no "developing" sound of the cymbal is there. This is how all the ticks an random cymbals start to sound the same.
You are even allowed to judge all as "better resolution" and from there more sharply boundaried, but you never win any game (from me) when that again all sounds similar while it is clear that nothing should sound similar.

Also, no double triple etc. cable is going to help a thing here, because I am using that for ages already (and for that reason btw).

and what we hear is nearer to the reality.

This is the danger-part;
I tend to agree with this with the BCN cable in. But nobody ever is going to convince me that *thus* not-neutrality will be our share.  But hey, I punched the subject enough I think, and everybody (now fed with some mere negatives) can decide for his own. So please do, and don't stop reporting !!

Thank you Joachim,
Peter

[vrao]

Oh My.....
Last night I did my research on another cable with
50Gz bandwidth.
I guess it's irrelevant now.

 

[PeterSt]

It is not said (or 100% sure to me) that it is the cable which "creates" the distortion. I mean, it can also be that it passes on better what the source is really telling.

With this in mind ...

I thought, what the h*ck, let's try to measure differences in THD between the cable I always use and the BNC cable.
Well, I never got 'round to that ...

I saw a pile of noise (like 200uV-p while it should be 25uV-p). What ?
Yep.
Hmm ...
That noise appeared not to be there from the measurement PC - only the audio PC. I didn't understand and even removing the USB cable did not matter (with the measurement PC it did).
One hour further :

Two weeks ago I moved the measurement PC (= "server" as well) down to the basement and with that all the power arrangements changed. That server PC (connected through isolated LAN/Ethernet with the audio PC) went into a separate earth ring. Before this change it always has been in the same earth ring as the audio PC.
But what can now be the difference ?

I honestly don't know.
Always and always the audio PC had to be in the same ring as the audio equipment itself BUT connected to mains earth (and the equipment not). Today ? well, I moved the audio PC into the earthless outlet (same as the audio gear) and ... gone was the noise (notice that this whatever noise itself is  inaudible anyway).

One more thing (but actually for a different topic) :
When the NOS1a is connected to the server PC (in mains earth and another earth ring), the black wire in the NOS1a has to be CONNECTED or otherwise I would see the same noise. However, that PC does not contain any isolated Silverstone card. For the audio PC this did not matter (as how it was prior to this change - and noise remains as high and looked completely the same). Now, with the NOS1 connected to the audio PC (with isolated Silverstone) as of the change I applied, the wire has to be LOOSE, or otherwise the noise is slightly worse (but I can't incur for any high levels any more anyway now).

How the power meter (to the audio PC) can show 4 Watts of usage more in this situation ? Of course I can't tell. But it should be related to current now flowing over hot + neutral while previously part of it went over earh as well (and the meter not taking that into account I'd say).

D*mn difficult stuff AGAIN.

Same album as the one because of which I shut off everything yesterday is playing for 22 minutes now. Maybe it is because of this typing that I still survive it.

???

Peter

PS: Can't listen much more today because I need to go out shortly.

[PeterSt]

Oh My.....
Last night I did my research on another cable with
50Gz bandwidth.
I guess it's irrelevant now.

 

Or not.

Or indeed.

So I see you guys looking for the highest bandwidth, but all you can imply with that is amplifiers not coping. Or speakers.
So think about this ...

Peter

[manisandher]

Well, I'm with Joachim on this one.

I first tried the BNC cable (a single 5m run with BNC-RCA adapters at both ends) in my office system - NOS1 (not 'a') connected directly to Stax headphones. There was simply no question that this was the most transparent of the cables I had to hand, including some pretty expensive stuff. I listened for hours to this setup and had virtually no complaints. My wife also agreed. Incredible detail, but totally smooth. The most tuneful bass I had heard through these headphones. My Stax are >10 years old and were the cheapest of the range back then. I love their tone, but have always thought the LF is a bit full and slow. But not with the BNC cable - the bottom end really tightened up.

I then tried two 5m runs in series to create a 10m run. There was virtually no change in the sound - maybe a tad brighter, but really nothing noticeable.

Having assured myself that these cables were 'the real deal', I routed a pair of 10m runs under my floorboards from the NOS1a in my basement to the Orelo speakers in my main room. The sound was transformed (for the absolute better).

I hear no 'flavour' whatsoever. Even on the same album, differences between the recording/mixing/mastering of different tracks are clearly audible.

How can my experience be so different from Peter's? I dunno... Maybe his BNC-RCA adapters are not truly 50 Ohms, and mine are???

In any event, my BNC cables are here to stay until I can be convinced that they're adding a flavour to the sound. At the moment, I don't hear them 'adding any flavour', but rather hear them 'taking away a mask'.

Mani.

[PeterSt]

Maybe it is because of this typing that I still survive it.

I rephrased that a couple of times, but I think it still showed the opposite of what I meant to say (I just put it wrongly). During that typing I thought "okay, it won't be so that this doesn't disturb now because I'm typing and not really paying attention to the music ?!".

At this moment I am fairly sure that my noise problem played a large role in this all. So I say/quote it again :

It is not said (or 100% sure to me) that it is the cable which "creates" the distortion. I mean, it can also be that it passes on better what the source is really telling.

... and if the source contains noise ...

I was able to play a couple of albums yesterday after all and what I could tell from it is that the highs seem to be way more extended (+ refined !) than before. Mind you, this is with the (my) standard DSP setting hence the perceived "lean" setting. Well, nothing lean in there anyway and I really don't see how anyone would want more / more powerfull bass.

So, continuing with this cable ...

Peter

[arvind]

Hi Guys,

Seems to be a very interesting discovery (if I may call it). Certainly worth attempting as the cost is very minimal. However for guys (like me) who are still using a pre amp,  should we go a step further & attempt to change the interconnect between the pre amp & amp too?

Best regards,

Arvind