Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superoir SQ

[PeterSt]

Joachim,

It took me 3 seconds to know that you were right in every aspect.

Then I thought to bring some news :

This cable/connector combination produces a right/left separation as heard in the beginning with W8 and the optimal listening position is the sweet spot (edit: as always) now. Prior to the installation of that cable it was possible to listen with a satisfying result in "off axis" positions.

But because of my more or less challening post you now were ahead of me.
So the emphasis is the most (strange) occurring aspect actually. After two minutes I asked Ciska "what's the change ?". -> Hmm ... more fresh ?
I said "no, come here in the middle and listen".

There's a stereo effect I am not aware of that it can happen.
In addition, and this was the very first I noticed, the "Windows 8 plane" of where the sound springs from has vanished. It's just everwhere.
And indeed, I really don't need to listen to the seagulls to know the now "super effect".

All the time of the past 3 hours or so I was thinking "can I survice until 6:01am ?". But I will save it for the next couple of days. Completely amazing.

Joachim, apologies that I did not respond right away (while you addressed me). But is was all so logical to me that I *had* to try it first, actually knowing what the result would be;
This is about (eliminating) reflections and that only; like Paul said (and the German text btw). It is too stupid not to think of it myself.

So, the very first time I got excited about cables. Still 1$ btw.
And there will be more of this, I'm sure; Just spent 16 hours of "research" on it. But part 2 is a bit more difficult.
And part 1b.

Of course your hint already existed, Joachim. But I think this is from eras (or contexts) from more ancient history where things were different from how they are today.
Today it is just the best what could happen in 2014.
Or ?

Super thanks.
And a promise - no, guarantee : this will lead to so much more ...

Best regards and the 2014 prize for you, Joachim,
Peter

[christoffe]

Hi Peter,

ok, my wife heard the improvement of the SQ after her return from London immediately.

Joachim

[CoenP]

R u guys kidding us?

Correct me if I'm wrong but 2 adapaters, 50 ohms each that's a load of 25 ohms for the NOS1(a), output and terminating impedance not taken into consideration. You are just listening to the extra distortion of the output stage. I have speakers here with a higher impedance.

You must have had a loss of gain.

It could work but what impedance was the NOS designed for? Irrc most audio cables and RCAs are about 75 ohm, terminate both sides with that and you will eliminate reflections as well.

Please don't think I am sceptic about the idea, it was on my todo list as well but the output stage needs to be designed for it.

regards, Coen

[christoffe]

R u guys kidding us?

Hi Coen,

I'm not an electrician and - yes, we are I'm kidding, because I'm now on "cloud 9" with an amazing SQ!!!

For the test with the adapter I took a spare BNC cable, which was designed for a 50Ohm connection between the Dartzeel pre- and poweramp. This cable is double shielded and had a positive audible impact compared to the RCA connection between those two amps.

The NOS1 output impedance is acc. to the datasheet 33Ohm. Edit: The volume setting of XXH is the same as with the former RCA cable for my prefered SPL. Setting is/was -33 to - 31,5.

My advice is, buy this double shielded BNC cable  + adapter (cost appr. €300,00) install it and listen. You will not believe it, what you hear.

I daresay, if you want to improve the SQ with the same beneficial effect to your present audio chain, you have to invest in one of your components additional > € 5000,00 on top, at least!!!

kind reagrds

Joachim

[toddn]

So what about those of us who are fully balanced? Are there any lessons here that can be applied to XLR?

[christoffe]

So what about those of us who are fully balanced? Are there any lessons here that can be applied to XLR?

Hi,

it seems that the double shielded cable (note from Paul + Peter) has the major impact (influence) to the SQ.
I found a sample picture (see the lower one) how to assemble such a XLR connection with that cable. Please get in touch with an expert and ........ .

http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/connection/xlr-rca-1.html

You are the first guy to test such a cable with the XLR connector.

kind regards

Joachim

[PeterSt]

So what about those of us who are fully balanced? Are there any lessons here that can be applied to XLR?

I have been thinking about this Todd, but no real other solution than what Joachim's connection scheme shows. However, not like that, but with using 50 Ohm "terminators" again (the adaptors). It will be up to you whether you net gain on it. I'd say yes, but which also depends on the length of the interlink.
Regarding length, the 75 Ohm solution would be better, but this is all to try out because 75 Ohm can't be as optimal as 50 Ohm (for exactness of the match with cable and connector).

As we will see, this is only the beginning ...

[nik.d]

Hi Joachim, Peter

toddn has FULLY balanced system, meaning his amplifier input is balanced one, not single end (RCA). Why would he go BAL / UNBAL route ?

George

[Mamba315]

I also use amps with balanced inputs.  Exciting to see where this will go...

[PeterSt]

George,

Try to change attitude. Not that you behave so badly (haha) but try to put to your mind that nothing is absolute.

Especially in electrical design a 100 decisions can be taken to go from A to B. The decision for A determines most of the path to go to B. Or the other way around, the decision to WANT B determines what A can be. You think the latter which takes out all the options.

Say that in two very same situations you can choose for XLR or RCA. XLR will be the better one. Right ? Well, even that is not necesserily true because if the situations are really the same, XLR will have 6dB more output. For example with your NOS1 this is the case (so, the 6dB more *input* to the amp determines the more output). This means that the digital attenuation has to be set differently (assuming no preamp of course) and *that* already influences SQ.
We can neglect such a phenomenon, but all matters. So it is just an example at micro level, while at the more impacting level the examples also exist.

What we have at hand here is such a more impacting example. Why ? because 50 Ohm etc. termination for XLR does not exist. Not that we wouldn't be able to make it ...
So think "no connectors" and all options are open.

Example in the same realm is the two extra connectors we need for this at this moment; there's no single brain cell in me that thought about that being detrimental. Oh, it will be undoubtedly, but the advantage of the elimination of the reflections outweights it inifitely.

Thus, change attitude.
Peter

[PeterSt]

R u guys kidding us?

Maybe ...

It could work but what impedance was the NOS designed for?

Funny, but you could say "nothing" because all will work with 33 Ohm output impedance. This is exactly why ...

Correct me if I'm wrong but 2 adapaters, 50 ohms each that's a load of 25 ohms for the NOS1(a), output and terminating impedance not taken into consideration.

... I never thought about THAT. Instead I've been keen only to get this to work as soon as possible.

You are just listening to the extra distortion of the output stage. I have speakers here with a higher impedance.

You must have had a loss of gain.

A double no-way. Coincidentally (or not, because Joachim anncounced such a thing) I payed attention to that, but no. And, I couldn't imagine that either, because it doesn't work like that. For that matter (indeed) my old 75 Ohm setup would have attenuated more. But this was "open ended". So, with the setup as of now this is "terminated" and things could be different.

And because there is no way that I am listening to distortion now suddenly, it will be my nice task to find out why this works so much for the better. I really must dive into it, but a first idea I have is that there now will be a 50 Ohm - 100K relation between the *end* of the interlink and the amplifier. Don't ask me what that does for net effect at this moment. Similarly the 33 Ohm - 50 Ohm relation close to the DAC will do something but what is to find out.
I'd have to look a long way back, but IIRC there's 80mA of current output.

When the above is combined with a cable with no loss now, possibly this can explain why it only works for the better.
To keep in mind (but correct me when I'm wrong), when reflections are (fully !) eliminated this is not only about distortions not happening (new signal gets mixed with old signal -> a few ns propagation time through the cable back and forth), but such "mix" of signal also attenuates (cancel out). And creates standing waves. All in the cable I mean.
A bit more on this in a next post.

Peter

[PeterSt]

About what I perceive from it at the more "measurement" level ...

So, always my standing waves subject. You know, my means to "measure" whether things are right or wrong. Notice that this is largely about buzzing sounds for certain frequencies.
Of course I always talked (implied) acoustical standing waves, but you must realize that once we can make the buzzing less by means of a better source, it can't be about acoustical standing waves. OK ?
So it is *always* about electrical (electronic) implications.

As a sort of conincidence, or luck for our current subject, I am listening to my latest "Want some Bass" DSP settings for the Orelo MKII speaker;
It will be obvious that any "more bass" will also be more critical for the standing waves phenomenon. Do notice though that in my case this is not about "how more lower the frequency the more standing waves will occur" and that this is merely about buzzing as such, where buzzing can be at 100Hz or 150Hz or 350Hz etc. etc. So, 40Hz does never buzz as such (it's too slow). A fly buzzes.

With the current DSP setting, this buzzing is not always immediately apparent when you are in the listening room; you need to go outside of the listening room for that. And, what I always say : if outside you perceive a live band playing, all is fine. And how (when) does that happen ? when the frequencies remain even - in balance.

With my latest "Want some Bass" speaker setting, this was not 100%. I could notice it in the room here and there, but it did not disturb me. The more bass just made me happy enough to leave it be, although each time I hear something buzz I know it is not right.
But now go to the toilet.

So a few doors further and it makes me want to take some analyser with me in there because it is there (or then) where you can exactly hear all the jumping out frequencies and actually continuously. Say something like 12dB more loud than what the normal balance would imply. Thus really so much that an analyser would easily show it, and right away you would know what to attenuate. But I am not into room correction and all what I really get from it is that something is wrong in the base. Still it only happens with my more emphasized bass settings. So easy to think it is me with wrong settings or a speaker which can't cope with them. Still strange because I see no relation with the frequencies I hear jump out.

Logical, when they spring from the source.
Source this time = interlink.
So easy : standing waves in the interlink (and don't you think this can not happen !).

Of course easy to say afterwards, after noticing that with this cable I could stay in the toilet forever without being annoyed by anything. It's only that I didn't bring my beer, so ...

Btw, bass is only way more than before. And oh, this is such a situation that everything is way more (recognize ?). Also totally easy to feel on ... ?
the woofers of course. Much much more control as it feels (more stiff/firm movements).

Peter

[Mamba315]

Of course easy to say afterwards, after noticing that with this cable I could stay in the toilet forever without being annoyed by anything. It's only that I didn't bring my beer, so ...

Hahaha, this got me going.

Does all this mean that standing waves could be inside speaker cabling too?

[PeterSt]

Yes. Or at least I far away already throught about tackling that too - somehow. But next thing I thought of : I have no speaker cables. Yes, the internal wiring; too short to be bothered about.

Peter

[CoenP]

And because there is no way that I am listening to distortion now suddenly, it will be my nice task to find out why this works so much for the better. I really must dive into it, but a first idea I have is that there now will be a 50 Ohm - 100K relation between the *end* of the interlink and the amplifier. Don't ask me what that does for net effect at this moment. Similarly the 33 Ohm - 50 Ohm relation close to the DAC will do something but what is to find out.
I'd have to look a long way back, but IIRC there's 80mA of current output.

two adapters: terminated at both ends with 50 ohms. That's a properly terminated transmission line. Mind you that the imperfect 75ohm RCAs are still in service (!).

Here's one for you: what about the shift from a capacitive to a resistive load for the NOS's output?

With a terminating load of 100kOhms and a cable capacitance of 60pF the cable capacitance starts to dominate from 1/(2*pi*R*C) = 26,5 KHz. No doubt this will do something for the phase of the signal. Now with a 50 ohm resistance this will be 2000 times higher (MHz), with 25 ohms 4000 times.....

regards, Coen