Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superoir SQ

[PeterSt]

Right. It took me 11 hours in a row (nah, with some sleep in between) to form the best cable possible. All the elements should be here somewhere next week (this will be a DIY) and then we'll see.

For fun we can compare a couple of propertes with the Aircell 5 cable, which also looks very good to me. First mentioned number is from the Aircell 5, second number is from my Blaxius cable (hey, I gave it a name already ) :

Capacitance : 82pF/m - 52 pF/m.
Attenuation at 5 MHz : 2.07dB - 0.52dB.
Attenuation at 1.5GHz : 38.63dB - 18.1dB.
Propagation speed (% of light speed) : 82 - 85.
Impedance : 50 Ohm - 75 Ohm.
Physical properties : Known - Secret for now.

It was my goal to create a "true" impedance connection with a cable still "doable" and which with some DIY can connect up all the way to D/A converter and amplifier (just replace the output/input terminals). No adapters.
Also I wanted to be there myself in creating them, so nothing will be left to "wrong production" unless I mess up myself of course. So let's say that won't happen.

All together I just spent 175 euros for a set with all what's needed and which of course is outside the work to create them in well fashion. I think we can provide them for 225 - 250 euros at the desired length up to 4 meters = ~ 12ft (so 8 meters  = ~24ft in total). Longer is no problem - just somewhat more expensive.

Of course this makes no sense yet, and I am way premature. But it is nothing much very different from designing a D/A converter which also should work and be the best as long as you sort out all what's related and make the best of each of the elements so they match well.
But of course, if they sound poor after all, it's a no-go. And more of course, no way I am going to lie about it.

Something else : I also found true 75 Ohm BNC to RCA adapters (with say guarantee). I did not order those yet because they have to come from the US somewhere plus it won't be the best because of the extra two connections. Still I actually need to try those before I re-organize my outputs and inputs or otherwise I need to go back to the original situation in order to try the difference with the adapters. I say this (or want this) because it may not be for everybody to change the terminals in DAC and Amp and if it is not really necessary anyway ...
So that's an option too, but I need to try it.

Last thing : If this is not working out then I regard it a roller coaster and all what remains is "just try" cables like we did so far. So this is my sort of ultimate attempt.

Regards,
Peter

[vrao]

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/digital-audio/index.htm

 

[PeterSt]

VJ - I know that site. But what to do with it / what are you referring to ?

Thanks,
Peter

[vrao]

Well …. if you know the site, you know the cable as well. (I thought it has similar properties to the Blaxius ?!!
 

[PeterSt]

Haha, not that I can see anywhere.

[PeterSt]

Of course I can't hold back ...

Seems daft, but at reading through all these coax data I also ran into a description of how to assemble the connectors I use for the RG62 cable (93 Ohm). Then I saw I hadn't been doing it completely right (this is all how the impedance is maintained throughout the end (tip) of the connector).
And so I re-applied them in the now best way I could do it.

Well, my "Baddius" cable changed all over. Really so !
But side note : I also removed the cover of my NOS1a because I anticipated "euphonic" sound coming from it. And since this *is* a bit the character of the cable, I thought it could be for the better to counteract that somewhat. So I did this at the same time as I changed te cables, thus don't ask me which caused what for improvement.

At this moment I can't imagine that any "Blaxius" cable (see post from yesterday) is going to improve over the Bad-ass cable (which I now name Baddius) ...

Suddenly there is no single spur of highs being too rough. Totally the contrary. It is so soft and sound and nice and with a detail - unbelievable. All the necessary weight it still there but the whole character of the lot together changed. And merely : there's something going on now which was unexpected to begin with, but quite logical once you've heard it;

First off, it has become almost impossible to listen off-axis (not in the sweetspot I man). This time not because the best picture is received in the middle, but because outside of the middle I perceive phase problems;
What I get from this, is that all is now so super pinpointed and sharp boundaried, that no thing is going to work when not in that middle where all "phase" should be coherent. Mind you, FWIW because I have to make up something for this "fact".

There's now so crazy much highs that it starts to be dangerous. And I am not exaggerating. All remains without distortion and for all you hear you think "yeah, but how is it possible that we (I) perceive this as "in balance" while previously it did not disturb without all these highs.
What's also odd (to me) is that - if you hear this - you'd expect a too high dynamical sound, while totally the opposite is in order. This is not quite clear to me, but it could be a mind thing (brain processing).

It is also the very first time that I started to discover anomalies with my very self. Hard to explain, especially because I am new to this *and* it could be a whole new thing to begin with, but I can feel that I am limiting the bandwidth myself now. Some sort of inconcistency;
Last time I checked (ehm quite some years ago) all stopped for me above 12KHz. But say it is still that. What I "hear" now is some "cut off" somewhere, but this time not done by the system. It is me now. So, is the SPL of the highs is now so profound that I am the limiter myself ?
Do notice that I already talked about the system being the mere reference to the live drum kit we have here. So, system sounds better than the drum kit itself. Same thing perhaps ??

Then, what's all over noticable is the complete separation of everything. Of course, we already said earlier that all plays in its own space, but it's just more of that now. And, I guess we can not tell in advance when the limit of that is reached because we never know what the recording room mushed with that.

Violins sound better than ever before. But this is a bit dangerous because I still hear some euphonics and now I am not sure whether a violin just sounds like that, or that I must deal with some vibrations somewhere. And no, my NOS1a is not floating on water (any more). But I am tempted ...

With the notice that I seem to have reached a stage where ALL matters, no matter how minor :
I can 100% predict what is not going to play well because of a ready "too sharp" sound. And then I mean really.
Of course I had to run into a first one, but from there I can predict it and all I tried turned out to be 100% so. To you I can't give many examples because of you won't know it anyway, but one of them is Sgt Pepper. But, how to predict it ? well, because it is all which played abnormally in the highs previously (for its age I mean). And didn't I mention Sgt Pepper a 100 times before as an album which can go all directions. So don't ask me what they did to it, but the 10 or so more I could think of yesterday - all exactly the same. And mind you, this is not a matter of "oh, not the very best" but merely an "ouch, shut off !!".

Hey, try Led Zeppelin's Black Dog (no Remaster sh*t); This is full of "long cymbal" stuff. However, in the midst of the heavy guitar rock noises and further drumming. You know what ? I count a sheer 5 seconds of cymbal in the midst of all that noise. Try it and see what you get.

Then, when a vast change happened in my system, there's always A whole lotta Love (Led Zeppelin) on my list. And *this* brought me the biggest excitement;
I have talked many more times about this and how to get rid of that super heavy distortion on the big "slams" of whatever it is (this distortion never seemed intenional to me as long as I own the album, which is 40 years), and always an ever I try it to see whether I can finally hear what instrument is hit there. And yesterday I finally got rid of that distortion. Or almost perhaps, because it is still not clear what's been played there, but it now looks like to be a normal bass guitar. So mind you, this always came across as heavy oversteered recording sh*t, but today ? hey, today I can say the same but now from our analogue interlink ?
Yes, that is what I say. And once you heard how this now sounds you are "able" to hear throughout how this Led Zeppelin doesn't contain much of distortion overall and throughout. I also say this because once I had all so-called "much better" and reported that Led Zeppelin's recordings clearly showed analogue distortion. Man, what all can go wrong in our systems !

If I had to pin-point what really has been improved by a mile then I'd say the mid. This is all about the "so clear !" which was my very first notice with this 93 Ohm cable. This possibly also explains how stuff like Sgt Pepper hurts, because there's really not enough low frequency output to support that increased mid. And highs. Or something like that ...

Peter

[boleary]

Very weird. Peter, how you describe the "Baddius" is pretty much identical to how I perceive the L-Com RG 142's. As stated in my previous posts, it's  the clarity of the upper mid range, particularly male vocals, that has been so awesome here. Crazy since the 142's only lasted a minute in your system....

Okay, what ohm male bnc connector are you using for your 93 ohm cable? I've looked that cable up and found it from Pasternack with a 50 ohm connector. Just wondering. Here's a link:

http://www.pasternack.com/bnc-male-bnc-male-rg62au-cable-assembly-pe3081lf-p.aspx

[PeterSt]

Brian, that's the "danger" in my 93 Ohm setup ... I can't tell. All I can do is proceed with the old stuff and standards, which back at the time was 93 Ohm for network communications, for which I also obtained the connectors (this is over 20 years ago). I can't find 93 Ohm's today on the Net nor is there anything written on them. And they look (the dielectricum) the same as 50 Ohm, but since I never saw a picture of a 93 Ohm ...
And 75 Ohm sure is/looks different (those are under way to here).

As stated in my previous posts, it's  the clarity of the upper mid range, particularly male vocals, that has been so awesome here. Crazy since the 142's only lasted a minute in your system....

Yes it is crazy, and it really made me scratch my head (because I 100% trust you so it *is* weird). The only real difference I can think of is the low end of the speaker which in my case goes a tad further. So maybe depending on how that is "tuned" in general (by the cable) - here it is totally lacking or something. It is just all wrong (here !).

Regards,
Peter


PS: Just thinking : I should also have brand new "93 Ohm" connectors somewhere and I recall they came in plastic bags. Maybe there's something written on those bags.

[boleary]

Experienced a very nice bump in SQ with using silver plated conductor on BNC/RCA adapters made by RF Industries. Without any loss in dynamics, the bit of glare/harshness that was present has vanished. Here's their specs:

http://rfsearch.rfindustries.com/drawings/RFB-1140.pdf

 You can find them for around $2.50 a piece with a minimum order of 10 at most sites. Cheapest I found if you just want to order 4 was here:

http://www.protelecomsupply.com/rf-industries-rca-m-bnc-f-adapter

[manisandher]

I think this was mentioned earlier, but Brian, are you sure these adapters are 50 Ohms? I can't see this stated anywhere in the specs.

I'm almost tempted to buy some 75 Ohm BNC/RCA adapters just to hear how an impedance mismatch actually sounds, well-below RF. Are the 50 Ohm and 75 Ohm BNC dimensions identical, does anyone know?

Mani.

[boleary]

Hey Mani, they are listed on the RF Industries "50 ohm adapter" page here:http://www.rfcoaxconnectors.com/product-categories-adapters-BNC50.html

At least for RF an impedance mismatch is a bad thing. I read recently that an impedance mismatch between adapter and cable causes reflections inside the cable resulting in RF distortion. Can't find that article right now.

[PeterSt]

Hey,

My take :
If it's not specified it most probably will be 50 Ohm, *if* well manufacturerd at all. 75 Ohm is very very rare, or at least very had to prove it is that. I mean, many can be bought, but I don't believe a sh*t of it. So far I have found two, one of them being Van den Hul and I only "trust" that one because I can see them around the corner here if I want. But actually I don't believe that either (why ? because they too don't produce these themselves). So you need to dive into datasheets after first finding the manufacturer who 9 out of 10 times don't provide a datasheet for such "stupid" thingies. And why is that ? because no BCN-RCA connection is going to be good anyway.
Again, my take.

But no worries;
I went quiet, but this is because I am still waiting for my parts to arrive. And ... just found in my email that the parts ordered will be "late". So WTF and isn't it always the same (when I feel this can happen anyway).

So more later and going very strong (I think) ...
Peter

[PeterSt]

Finally ...

Now listen.

[christoffe]

Finally ...

Now listen.

Great!!!!
**This is a 75 Ohm connection. Do you have details about the future cable, 93 Ohms? The SQ is?**

I saw this coming and now? 

..... it's time for an external PSU, and then the NOS1a goes back to the Netherland for the next revision "B"!?!

Joachim

[PeterSt]

This is an "all the way" 75 Ohm connection but with the normal input impedance at the amplifier's side (like 100K).

The amp's side should not be changed either because of then required very large valued capacitors, which is no good for audio anyway. On the other hand this is not even required because the reflections are (if all is right) 100% damped on the output side. Of course this is theory only because I lack the equipment to measure it, but the theory should be correct. So reflections do occur at the amp's side, back to the input, but there it doesn't reflect back again towards the output and no mixing of original signal and reflections of it occur.