Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superoir SQ

[PeterSt]

Hey Joachim,

Sorry for my vague answers, but I didn't have much time. Or did not *want* to spend much time, because my listening time is precious and this is always in the evening couple of hours.

I have interpretation problems with "they are all over the place" , because it was your intention to uncoil the cable for a comparision.

All over in/through the room I meant. So "un-coiled".

You still have Mani's 10m cables. Do you have the possibility to test the "old Orelo MKII" loop. (DAC 33 Ohm RCA, your 75Ohm cable and the old RCA connection at your active speakers, with and without coiled cables)

Technically yes of course, but practically is something else. And it will be "guessing" again, which is precisely what we should NOT do;
All these things work (or work not) for technical reasons, and this one now works (and es expected, once I learned a few things - finally ).

So "NO COIL" is an advantage. Right?

Yes. But actually the other way around : No "coil" should ever be there in any electrical cable.

Or do you have another proposal for us "outsiders"

The only thing I should be able to do with usefulness is try whether all is quite OK as well with a not-adjused output impedance of the NOS1(a). If that is the case then you (and others) can replace the output terminals of the NOS1(a) an input terminals of the amp, which terminals we provide together with the cable.

Oh sh******************t ... I just thought of a way how the output impedance adjustment of the NOS1(a) can be avoided !!
Ha !
So *that* I will try out here.

Regards,
Peter

[PeterSt]

All right. Back to the listening to Mani's 10m40 ...

I dare say that this is the best one so far. But this is a bit dangerous because :

1. In normal fashion (meaning all straight on the floor and no coil forming) it exhibits the same as my 3m15 except for :
2. I could not detect any of that ringing.

Ad 2.
This is the dangerous part because it may have depended on what I played yesterday and I did not play all the same as I did before. However, once you know what to listen for I should have heard it, but I did not.

The cable for Mani was constructed just a little bit different for the crimping of the centre pin than mine, and Mani's technically is the better one.

Regarding this latter you may not believe it, but without the proper tools this can not be done in well fashion. So for fun : When we put networking cables together of this kind (which we did for many many kilometers in the past) then virtually we would use a hammer when needed, and when the data was OK it just was. Done. And it always was.
This is how audio is different because we can not technically see it is the very best. So for (digital of course) networking data there's a huge margin for where it will still operate (at 100%) while varying this margin for audio will make a difference, because all does (the digital data sure WILL look different at varying this margin, while of course we audio addicts know that everything which looks different also sounds different)
And oh, those tools take you down for 310 euros - crazy - and they ONLY apply to this cable and connector.

Anyway, now with this 10 meters (spec is something like 130 meters at 3GB IIRC) I could not hear any downsides compared to my 3m15 and thus actually the other way around. And a new one for me : I played a couple of tracks from Blade Runner (Vangelis) and there are very pure and very loud bells in there, at on estimate 10KHz. With very loud I mean that again it looks like being able to fry a tweeter, and this while none of this was ever heard previously by me (but I never played this with any of the BNC cables). Here you can feel that something is going on which previously just was not possible for whatever (filtering) reason.

What I did to observe the ringing explicitly, was playing that Isaac Hayes again (OK, few minutes only). Now it suddenly is totally clear that there's a brush-like device with - I'd say" small balls at the end of it. Not sure whether this formally exists, but I sure have one in the kitchen drawer for stirring. So envision that at first (my cable) I had to go to the speaker with a "what's up ?" while now this was not necessary and you can hear it from a mile distance. So that improvement - again.

For Mani : If you can supersede this with any interlink of any $ then let me know because I tend to bet a "sure not".
But do not "coil it up" because that for 100% sure makes a difference and I don't think it is for the better. It can be applied as a tweak though (one winding, two windings, etc.).

Lastly, and then I should be finished with this, it is clear to me that the lower end - or "slam" end is all what this is about were it for balance. I think the sub-low frequencies improve from it too, but most of it happens somewhat more upwards. So when the most slam or firm bass happens, this is not happening in the woofers here. As usual difficult to explain, but it's a fullness that could be explained by the same "means" how something gets so crystal clear for the higher (real mid) frequencies. Something like "way less distorted" (or undistorted) what makes a wave more firm/steady. So with the sub low frequencies we can test this easily by means of feeling the woofer and how for example Windows 8 does a way better job on this than Windows 7 (in Windows 8 you feel what you hear) and it is my estimate that the same can go on for any frequency, that now making the ONE frequency intended way louder (the fed energy is not spread to other (thus false) frequencies).

May it tell something, in all this time I never ever felt the slightest urge to adjust the F-M curve settings of the speaker. Before I sure did, depending on what played, and this *today* is an indication that things were not right to begin with and you will not be able to find the 100% best anyway. An optimum yes, but the 100% no. This follows from (my) logic.
And FYI : There is no single way that any DSP changed setting will be able to "create" what such a cable does because it is about different "properties". So you can add bass but you can't prevent the spread to other frequencies because for the DSP this is just "music data" and it doesn't know about it. Btw, we don't either and any THD (or FFT) analyser won't be able to tell reliably also. This is because all is about the impedance relation from front to end, and the analyser itself is different than our amps and things will behave differently because of that.
And again FYI : A proper impedance analyser costs $$$$$ but a test fixation for e.g. 75 Ohm costs 4000 already (and then I would still doubt the results for real merit).

I'd like to call the improvement "infinite" but don't ask me whether a 20K interlink would do the same. So please remember, this is the first time I went into cables so I don't have the real experience.
But also to remember : I am not able to differentiate with the real instruments any more and I don't need my own drumming recording for it - suddenly. I think I know how that now can be, but this post is long enough already.

Summarized, *I* now feel confident that this can work for everyone, because I think I proved that the length is unrelated (reflections are properly damped anyway). But let's wait until Mani has a judgement. He will have all on Tuesday, but it will last until next weekend before he is there to apply the "amp" adjustments.

The Topic can be closed now.
Peter

[manisandher]

Hey Peter, thanks for this (your last post especially). I can't wait to compare my current H+S 50 Ohm BNC cable with yours. I'm actually very happy with my current cable, so it should be interesting. As you mentioned, I won't be around when my (second) NOS1a with BNC connectors and the cables arrive, so I won't be able to try things until next weekend. But I'll report my findings here as soon as I possibly can.

Mani.

[CoenP]

In the mood for tweaking?

Get those cables off the floor. All cables. There's charge and vibrations there. Empty toilet closet rolls will do. Anyone's got those so there's no excuse!

Regards, Coen

[juanpmar]

I read in some place here that the adapters won´t be a good idea with the BNC cable. As there are probably some people that don´t want or can´t change the XLR inputs in the amps and the outputs in the dac I wonder if these impedance transformers would be of some help.

http://www.neutrik.com/en/accessories/aes-ebu-impedance-transformers/

Regards,
Juan

[AlainGr]

Hi Juan,

Quite interesting The fact that all is "locked" on each side would make the connection more robust than a BNC to RCA adapter...

Regards,

Alain

[toddn]

Hi Juan,

I've used Adaptors like these for digital connection from a source to a D/A converter, but I would be extremely hesitant to use any kind of coupling transformer on the pristine analog outputs of the NOS1. I was using an electronic crossover with very high grade Jensen transformers on the inputs and it definitely took the life out of the sound of the NOS1.
BTW, I am currently running standard BNC to XLR with the 50 ohm cables on my low frequency amps and like what I'm hearing.
I have modified the inputs on my midrange/tweeter amps with 50ohm BNC inputs but still connecting my 50ohm BNC cable using 50ohm BNC to RCA Adaptors on the NOS1a outputs and it has been truly transformative to the sound quality compared to the balanced cabling I was using.

Todd

[PeterSt]

Todd and all,

I was using an electronic crossover with very high grade Jensen transformers on the inputs and it definitely took the life out of the sound of the NOS1.

A few years ago (during the development of the first NOS1) I tried to use those too for galvanic isolation (still have them in the drawer here - costed 130 euros pp IIRC). You already don't want to see the measurement results with them in. Really.
I don't know about the Neutriks, but I sure have been looking at them for you. But if the principle is the same (literally transfomer based) then almost sure it's a No.

Regards,
Peter

[AlainGr]

Todd and all,

I was using an electronic crossover with very high grade Jensen transformers on the inputs and it definitely took the life out of the sound of the NOS1.

A few years ago (during the development of the first NOS1) I tried to use those too for galvanic isolation (still have them in the drawer here - costed 130 euros pp IIRC). You already don't want to see the measurement results with them in. Really.
I don't know about the Neutriks, but I sure have been looking at them for you. But if the principle is the same (literally transfomer based) then almost sure it's a No.

Regards,
Peter

These Neutriks are said to be "passive"... Does it change anything (or not) ?

Alain

[PeterSt]

Hi Alain,

No, doesn't change a thing. But it (also) depends on how it works and I - without really knowing all about it - wouldn't trust "impedance conversion" as such anyway. I have been looking into that earlier, and although stuff exists at the mere chip level (OpAmps), I saw nothing that got me excited. I gave up on it (sometimes I need to do other things as well) with those Neutriks also in mind. And about that one more thing :

As you can see in the "specs" of them, it is easily told that it can convert to 110 Ohm impedance of XLR.
Eh, what ?
I think it is good to know that, like with RCA, there is nothing in "XLR" that makes it 110 Ohm. That is, if I am correct on this, but others may know better.
But if I am correct on this, it also means that such a Neutrik is just an adapter but probably an expensive one (I did not look). Also, for the XLR guys, this won't be making a balanced signal of it. Or ...

Now I suddenly recall what I obtained my Jensen's for - it was exactly for that, but the other way around of what we want. So these turn a Singled Ended (RCA) signal into balanced, route the balanced signal to the other end and there you can make it SE again with such a same transformer. And this did not work out (way poor measurement figures). I also recall that I dug them up last week to see whether they could be used (for you) to what we want : have the SE coax as the transport means of the signal, and turn that into balanced at the (amp's) end of it. But the connections are not suitable for this because "the other way around".

I really wish I could measre this by means as needed, because this guessing leads to nowhere. And if someone finally has a good reference (could be me at this moment) then what ? keep on trying other solutions until one seems to work out the same BUT easily applicable to everybody ? Quite undoable (time, $$).

Peter

[AlainGr]

Peter,

I understand what you mean. My concern is that while I use a preamp, it would mean that I need 2 pairs of cables and I really am not sure I want to go through the process of having my components fit with BNC connections... Not that I don't understand the benefits, but... And I am not sure why...

Alain

[PeterSt]

Hey Alain,

With the notice that you should be sleeping at this time and that the danger exists you will never get some sleep any more for this night :

I thought you dared to get rid of the pre-amp long ago my now ?
Apparently not.

Using the preamp does not make sense in this realm (of the BNC cable) although it should be able to improve just the same. But why go through the effort if you can do half of it anyway, the other half being destructive behind your back ? Thus :

a. Using the preamp is for the worse (and if too much digital attenuation is needed get another power amp );
b. Output impedance of the preamp will be 600 Ohm or so, and thus this (75 Ohm) does not apply there;
c. Meanwhile nothing really matches between preamp and poweramp, but this is another (new) story (but read : what prevents the reflections in that connection ?).

I tend to say : Do it all (meaning ditch the preamp to begin with) or do nothing. But this is not really different from me "forbidding" to use a preamp. Between quotes of course, but you know ...

Sweet dreams ! (ahum)
Peter

[Matt]

Peter,

do you use Neutrik BNCs with your Van Damme cable?

KR

Matt

[CoenP]

Irrc the AUDIO spec for XLR is 2x600 ohms, but this is not related to HF reflections, but to standardizing the interface while supporting long length of cable while minimizing capacitive loss of the audio signal. I would guess that no other spec than geometry and durability will be relevant for this application. Otoh all connectors will off course exhibit an impedance yet not by design (with audio in mind).

Like Ethernet, USB also has a balanced signal (stated as 90 ohms impedance) so I guess a 110 ohm balanced standard will be feasible too with different geometry and dielectric, at least for the cable. Give the lousy connectors of the aforementioned two I guess it is not considered very relevant for proper termination. Ok, the 40/100 Gig ETN connector is looking sturdy though.

regards, Coen

[PeterSt]

do you use Neutrik BNCs with your Van Damme cable?

Hey Matt,

Am I using a Van Damme cable ?

Peter