Has anyone used this speaker wire from Monoprice?
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 35 Registered: Oct-05 | 12AWG Enhanced Loud Oxygen-Free Copper Speaker Cable How was your sound with this cable? I have a Mirage Omni system. Thanks. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2203 Registered: May-05 | "Enhanced Loud" The company that makes Enzyte isn't branching out into speaker wire, are they? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11605 Registered: May-04 | . You don't need 12 A.W.G. speaker cables. http://www.sixmoons.com/audioreviews/whitelightning/moonshine.html |
|
Silver Member Username: Rysa3Houston, Texas Post Number: 234 Registered: Nov-06 | Glad to hear about the oxygen free status of those cables. hehe. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 36 Registered: Oct-05 | "You don't need 12 A.W.G. speaker cables." I could have used 16 or 14 gauge, but the price was right for the 12 gauge so I went with that. That won't be a problem, will it? |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1092 Registered: Apr-06 | 12AWG wiring is ugly and not especially easy to work with. However, it should do the job. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 37 Registered: Oct-05 | Thanks Stephen. You can see that I am new to this. After reading several articles about speaker cable, I was under the impression that 12 gauge wire was better than the standard 16 gauge. I have not yet received this wire from Monoprice, so it is easy enough to return. Would you please recommend another good wire - brand, gauge, etc.? I bought from Monoprice after reading favorable remarks here and on other forums and I did not want to spend alot of money on Monster cable unnecessarily. Thanks. |
|
Silver Member Username: StryvnPost Number: 534 Registered: Dec-06 | Don...follow the link that Jan has posted above. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1095 Registered: Apr-06 | I guess the first questions that would pop into my mind are what specific speakers are you using, and how long a run of wire will there be between the receiver and speakers? What kind of receiver/amplifier would also be useful information. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 38 Registered: Oct-05 | "I guess the first questions that would pop into my mind are what specific speakers are you using, and how long a run of wire will there be between the receiver and speakers? What kind of receiver/amplifier would also be useful information." I am using a Yamaha RX-V657 receiver. My speakers are: Mirage Omni 60 (Bookshelf) x2; Mirage Omni 260 Floor standing x2; Mirage Omnisat Satellites x2 and a Hsu Research subwoofer. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1097 Registered: Apr-06 | And distances? |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 39 Registered: Oct-05 | I forgot to tell you that I will be using the 260's as front mains so they will need only 6' wires and the 60's for surrounds - about 12' long each. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1098 Registered: Apr-06 | In that case, I sincerely doubt you'd notice a significant difference in sound between 16AWG speaker wiring and 12AWG wiring. As far as brand goes, I'm not going to get involved in a wire debate. However, suffice it to say, some people are happy with extension cord and others wouldn't settle for anything less than top of the line Audioquest Everest or something like that. In either case, you will want something that is durable, flexible, and either attractive or unobtrusive. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2136 Registered: Feb-04 | The lower the gauge, the thicker the wire. The thicker the wire, the less electrical resistance it has and will be a lesser percentage of the wire/speaker combination. See the table at: http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm You don't need 12 AWG, but it won't hurt! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11606 Registered: May-04 | . "You don't need 12 AWG, but it won't hurt!" That is nothing more than BS in this case. Some of us don't care for the sound of thick cables and "sound" is what you're buying in a cable if the runs are appropriately chosen. For that matter, a stiffer 12 A.W.G. might literally hurt some small satellites if it pulls them off balance. With the typical output impedance of a direct coupled amplifier and 6' of cable, there are no advantages to the slightly lower DC resistance 12 of A.W.G. cable over 16 A.W.G. cable and the higher inductance of the heavier cable might even become a detriment. To say otherwise is merely argument for the sake of argument from someone who prefers to tear apart anything I place in print. You do not require 12 A.W.G. cables for your present system. From the site PG linked to; "For example: you can use#18 wire for a 25 foot run to a nominal 8 ohm speaker ... " If Russell is held as an authority to quote, and he feels 18 A.W.G. is OK for up to 25' of cable length, then 16 A.W.g. should be fine and dandy for 6' runs. Russell also recommends against spending more than necessary just to impress someone. You have the 12 A.W.G. cables ordered so compare them to the cables listed in my first post. The cables I linked to are simple to "build" with or without bannana connectors and are available in any area where there is a WalMart. If you prefer the 12 A.W.G. cables, keep them and use the others to string Xmas lights. This pablum about 12 A.W.G. couldn't hurt is meant as a distraction. Make up your own mind. No one can safely tell you what sound you will hear when you use a particular cable within the context of your specific system. Listen and decide for yourself. . |
|
Silver Member Username: WattsssupBarrie, ON Canada Post Number: 115 Registered: Aug-06 | Cool link Peter. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2137 Registered: Feb-04 | Thanks Marc. That is nothing more than BS in this case. Huh? Saying that using the 12 AWG he just ordered won't hurt is BS? That's hysterical. Why are you trying to scare him about uisng it? This pablum about 12 A.W.G. couldn't hurt is meant as a distraction. One can only wonder what sort of distraction Mr. Vigne thinks I was trying to do, or why I was doing it. He doesn't say. Maybe he's paranoid that I'm trying to contradict something he hasn't said. Don't worry about it Don. Unless you feel that you might have overspent, you are not going to do any harm using 12 AWG. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 40 Registered: Oct-05 | "Don't worry about it Don. Unless you feel that you might have overspent, you are not going to do any harm using 12 AWG." Thanks Peter. I did not overspend. These cables only cost me $27.55 + shipping. I'll try the 12 AWG and see how it works. I am confused about the use of banana connectors with speaker cable. I am not using them right now to connect my CC and Omni 60's. The wires are just twisted around the proper points on the back of the receiver and they work fine. What advantage do banana connectors offer? |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2204 Registered: May-05 | Theoretically they decrease the chances of the ends of the bare wire oxidizing. They look prettier. They make connecting and disconnecting easier. On some gear, they make life easier if the speaker posts are too close to each other, like on surround receivers that have 12 binding posts cranned into a corner on the back. And they cost money, which increases sales. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11609 Registered: May-04 | . The idea that thicker cables will never hurt the sound is, IMO, as much an audio myth as the idea that all amplifiers that measure the same will sound the same, all cables will sound the same and bits is bits. Heavier gauge cables can hurt the sound and I would advocate for buying cables appropriate to the system requirements. Buying a 175/35 R22 tire for your '85 Civic just to get more rubber and lower rolling resistance isn't going to help the car and can't, on its face, be considered a wise choice. Neither is sticking a 10-12 A.W.G. cable on the end of a system going to help or, at least certainly "not hurt", the sound. I can't think of anything in consumer audio that doesn't have advantages and disadvantages. If I give you one thing with this product, I'll likely take away two other things with the same product. Thick cable being one of those trade offs. There are good and bad points to its use and times to use it and times to not use it. Just because you can doesn't make it correct. 1) In this (and most) consumer application(s), the receiver/amplifier has a sufficiently low output impedance that will make any reduction in cable "resistance" merely academic. 2) The Mirage speakers in this system are a rather benign load that require no broad current swings from the amplifier. Heavy gauge is only required for high current applications. With no high current requirement, there is no need for heavy gauge cables. That's what I originally stated, you don't need a 12 A.W.G. cable for this system. Buy the right tires and the correct cables and things will work better. 3) Lowering the DC resistance of the cable between an already low output impedance and a nominally high load impedance will not alter the damping factor of the system by any appreciable amount. The amplifier is limited (in this case) to a "no higher than" damping factor and moving from a factor of 40:1 to a factor of 41:1 isn't going to change the system sound. 4) Any actual reduction in cable resistance is miniscule at the lengths required for most consumer audio applications and all but meaningless in applications where output impedance remains low and load impedance remains relatively high. 5) Cable "resistance" is academic and should be placed in the larger, more important consideration of circuit "impedance", the circuit being the amplifier/cable/speaker system/cable/amplifier's negative feedback circuit. 6) If you're going to take something away from Russell's site, I would suggest you consider his argument to be nothing more than thicker cables are unnecessary unless the situation demands more copper. 7) If you are going to choose a less than 25 foot run of cable solely for a reduction in resistance, you've missed the boat on cables. 8) While DC resistance might drop when moving from a 16 to a 12 A.W.G. cable, capacitance and inductance will rise and the inductance might harm the sound of the system in some cases. (We don't even know the type of construction on Don's proposed new cables, which will affect the cable's in-circuit impedance, and lowering the overall capacitance and inductance of the cable will be more important than lowering the DC resistance.) 9) The available current output of this receiver/speaker combination will not tax an 18 A.W.G. cable and probably not even a 24 gauge cable. 10) Buy cables that are appropriate to the system requirements rather than making an assumption based on incomplete information and erroneous asssumptions. 11) If you believe your thick cables sound "better" just because they are thick, you are guilty of buying into just as much psuedo-scientific BS as if you bought into the most exotic claims for performance any cable manufacturer can put in an ad copy. At less than $30, the difference in price for Don is minimal and I would encourage him to listen. Listening is the test here. However, I will restate my original post to Don; "You don't need 12 A.W.G. speaker cables." And, I would still suggest Don compare the two cables before deciding which "sounds" best. Remove all preconceived ideas about gauge and simply listen to the music. I would also suggest anyone running thick cables on a receiver or low current amplifier/benign speaker load try the WM cables or a well constructed thinner gauge cable. There is more going on in a cable than merely gauge. I encourage anyone interested to spend a few dollars on a 16 A.W.G. cable and give it a listen. If you don't care for the sound of this cable, use it to hang Xmas lights. But do not let numbers on paper influence any decision you do not understand. Not to down play Mr. Russell's contribution but here's an article with a bit more information on the subject. However, it does not read as easily as Russell's. http://www.planetanalog.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201802376 . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11610 Registered: May-04 | . Don - If you try the WM cables, I would suggest you make bare wire connections rather than buying banana plugs. Be careful when inserting the bare wire into any connector, it only takes a single strand of copper to cause a short circuit. Make the connections in good light, with the amplifier powered down and double check all connections before you play any music. A good bare wire connection will certainly sound better than any banana plug I've come across. Banana plugs are meant for convenience and have become yet another piece of audio jewelery. Some cable manufacturers go to great lengths to choose the best sounding banana plug they can afford while others just stick what looks good on the ends and hope that sells their cable. Try the bare wire done correctly with all strands of the conductor inserted into the connector and worry about banana plugs later. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 41 Registered: Oct-05 | Thanks Jan for your very thoughtful and helpful posts. Well, since I have the 12 gauge wire coming, I'll see how it sounds. I can always use it to hang Christmas lights if I don't like the sound and pick up a 16 gauge cable instead. I purchased them from Monoprice.com because of the positive comments I read about Monoprice here and on other similar forums. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TobiasPost Number: 42 Registered: Oct-05 | After reading the "white lightening moonshine" article, I am wondering if I can just use the Woods Yard Master Patio Cord the writer recommends (that can be purchased from Walmart) without also using all the other connectors he added to it. Has anyone tried that? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11611 Registered: May-04 | . You can use the cable for your speaker connections without banana plugs. Just use the bare wire. You will have a difficult time making it work as an interconnect without some type of termination plug. If you're not good at soldering, I would stick with the WM cable as speaker cable. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: 007bPost Number: 41 Registered: Oct-07 | Nothing wrong with your choice Don. It's a little overkill for short lenghts though. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11612 Registered: May-04 | . If someone is enthralled by heavy gauge cables, remember you can always do double or even triple runs of 16 gauge to effectively lower the gauge of the cable run. This sort of 12 gauge cable, if twisted properly, will likely have fewer problems than a single 12 A.W.G. cable on its own. With 12 A.W.G. cable as your starting point, you cannot easily reduce the gauge to 16 A.W.G. without compromising the performance of the cable. I would still suggest using cables that are appropriate for your system. Assuming you could make the connections; does anyone believe 12 gauge speaker cables will help the sound of the typical HTIB? Why wouldn't it help if lower resistance is all there is to consider? And, therefore, ... . |
|
Bronze Member Username: 007bPost Number: 43 Registered: Oct-07 | "does anyone believe 12 gauge speaker cables will help the sound of the typical HTIB?" Jan Vigne If they do, they have problems far more serious than can be adequately addressd in this forum. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2138 Registered: Feb-04 | After Mr. Vigne posted You don't need 12 A.W.G. speaker cables, I simply added that it wouldn't hurt either. I guess this was interpreted as a personal attack on Mr. Vigne since he replied that was BS on my part. I thought that was hysterical, so Mr. Vigne answered with an 11-point reply. The reader will note that #1 isn't relevant, #2 through #7 don't explain why using heavier gauge would hurt, #8 mentions capacitance and inductance but fails to mention typical values which are bound to be irrelevant using 6-foot lengths, #9 and #10 also fail to say why using a thicker gauge would hurt. In conclusion Don, don't worry about it. Mr Vigne is likely the only person known to audio to worry about the inductance and capacitance at audio frequencies of a 6-foot long piece of 12 AWG wire and he has offered no other reason why it would hurt. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11613 Registered: May-04 | . All the while PG worried about the DC resistance of a six foot piece of wire. Read the aricle this time, PG. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11614 Registered: May-04 | . All the while PG worried about the DC resistance of a six foot piece of wire. Read the article this time, PG. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11615 Registered: May-04 | . And read what I am saying not what you wish it to be. I'll repeat it one more time for those who haven't been paying attention. There is no need for 12 A.W.G. cable in this system. I told Don to compare the two cables by listening to music. That's all. I don't believe there's much to make of the former statement and even the most thick cable minded amongst us could hardly argue with the latter. There's nothing to argue here, PG. If there were, I'm sure you'd be doing it. As is, your "not relevant" and so on - phhht! PG, do you seriously disagree that Don should compare the two cables by listening? If he finds one superior to the other, then he's done what is required to pick any component. . . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11617 Registered: May-04 | . PG - I'm certainly not interested in another 300 post thread with you but I would be interested in how you have come to the conclusion the output impedance of the amplifier "is not relevant". I don't believe I've ever heard anyone with any idea what's going on here suggest the output impedance an amplifier is not relevant to system sound. Please, explain how you believe this to be true. . |
|
Silver Member Username: James_the_godDoncaster, South Yorkshire England Post Number: 620 Registered: Jan-05 | Listen to cables. I have about 6 different cables lieing around which I have tried and now with my new speakers Ive done the same to find that these speakers aren't so choosy on what cable is used. As for cable awg I couldnt really give a damn how thick it as as long as the sound is good to me. Its the same principle with buying speakers-you listen/home demo first which is what I did. I have found that copper offers more bass in general but more neutral. Silver can give a clearer, brighter or more detailed sound. I'd concentrate more on what the cables made of and its design. I can reccommend Chord Carnival Classic and Silver Plus cable and Supra Rondo cable. |
|
Silver Member Username: James_the_godDoncaster, South Yorkshire England Post Number: 621 Registered: Jan-05 | A bit of advice. Different speakers respond differently to different cable, and against what you may expect as I've found. Don't forget this, it's important to always try yourself! |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2139 Registered: Feb-04 | All the while PG worried about the DC resistance of a six foot piece of wire. Read the aricle this time, PG. Please point to where I said anything of the sort. I'll repeat it one more time for those who haven't been paying attention. There is no need for 12 A.W.G. cable in this system. And I never disagreed with that. I said You don't need 12 AWG, but it won't hurt! because he had already ordered it. You then got all upset and claimed that it could hurt with all sorts of irrelevant points. And read what I am saying not what you wish it to be Right back at you, since you have a huge tendency to put words in my mouth. I never worried about the DC resistance from 6-foot of 12-AWG wire. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11626 Registered: May-04 | . "'All the while PG worried about the DC resistance of a six foot piece of wire.' Please point to where I said anything of the sort." OK. Posted on Monday, October 22, 2007 - 07:43 pm: "The lower the gauge, the thicker the wire. The thicker the wire, the less electrical resistance it has and will be a lesser percentage of the wire/speaker combination." Then just what is the "electrical" resistance you mention in that post? And why is the output impedance of the amplifier not relevant? If less "electrical" resistance in the cable is relevant in the overall "wire/speaker combination", why is the amplifier's contribution to this circuit not important? Are we back to speakers that don't require amplifiers to operate? Do you really believe the amplifier's output impedance is not relevant? Do you feel resistance is all that's important in this combination? "I guess this was interpreted as a personal attack on Mr. Vigne .... " "You then got all upset and claimed that it could hurt with all sorts of irrelevant points." When did you take up reading the thoughts of others, PG? I'm hardly upset but surely confused by your posts. My arguments are hardly irrelevant just because you don't care for them. IMO they are all relevant to choosing a speaker cable or else I wouldn't have listed them. In Don's case, the R,L,C effects of the cable will be minimized at 6' in length, but you began the issue with "The thicker the wire, the less electrical resistance it has and will be a lesser percentage of the wire/speaker combination." Either you were speaking of generic choices in cables, as I was, or you were speaking of these specific 6' cables which I would assume you were since Don mentioned the length he would be using in a post just previous to yours. Were you not paying attention? You really don't feel inductance is at least a somewhat important consideration in speaker cables? Or capacitance? Capacitance can send an amplifier into oscillation if the wrong cable/amp combination is used. I fail to see how you could so easily dismiss these qualities when choosing or recommending a speaker cable. Does cable construction; twisted pairs, coaxial, parallel legs, also mean nothing to you? . |
|
Silver Member Username: SerniterPiscataway, New Jersey USA Post Number: 170 Registered: Mar-06 | "Capacitance can send an amplifier into oscillation if the wrong cable/amp combination is used." Sounds interesting. Is there a study that describes this? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11631 Registered: May-04 | . A "study"? I don't know about any studies but there is information available on the internet. Do some research into cables and you'll likely come across the information. Since the circuit of amplifier/cable/speaker is always different in each system and the source is dynamic, I doubt anyone can give you specifics regarding when your amplifier might be in danger. If your amplifier is unstable, then you need to pay attention to cables with this problem in mind. However, if your amplifier is unstable, you have bigger fish to fry than just cables. For the most part, this problem has disappeared from the consumer audio market as most amplifiers have become much more stable than in years past. Unless you are using very exotic cables with a less than stellar amplifier (which then the question is; why?), there's probably no issue to concern yourself with. In fact many of today's amplifiers might actually prefer a bit of capacitance on the outputs to squelch RFI pickup in noisy locations or to smooth the solid state edge from a receiver. Read the article I linked to. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: SerniterPiscataway, New Jersey USA Post Number: 171 Registered: Mar-06 | Thank you. I'll spend some time on that article. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2140 Registered: Feb-04 | Then just what is the "electrical" resistance you mention in that post? Saying that the resistance decreases with thicker wire is stating the most basic and useful characteristic about speaker wire, and was stated to explain his impression that thicker wire was better. It doesn't mean that I was worried about the resistance of his wire, or that he could even tell the difference between 12 AWG or 16 AWG in a 6-foot length. Since he had bought the wire already, there was no need to worry him about the insignificant inductance and capacitance values of typical (normally-built) speaker wire. It has no effect on properly designed modern equipment (The infamous Naim gear was badly designed in that respect). Implying otherwise is FUD. Don, have you received the wire yet? Does it work well? Or did it send your modern receiver crashing into oscillation as forewarned by Mr. Vigne? Did you lose sleep wondering if you would return it in case it damaged your equipment? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11637 Registered: May-04 | . Talk about irrelevant answers! Resistance is the least variable characteristic of "speaker wire". Since you've twice ignored my question regarding amplifier output impedance, I can only assume you believe it along with cable construction should be considered "irrelevant". I suppose that's what comes from using K'horns and a HT receiver. I would suggest anyone not employing the same components to be a bit more careful in their decisions. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2214 Registered: May-05 | Just because speaker wire can cause an amp to oscillate doen't make it a bad amp by definition. Up until recently, Naim amps had problems with most speaker wire. Naim made their own wire and the warantee was void if different wire was used. Actually, I think it still is void to this day. Naim's top of the line amp is reported to still have problems with other wire, but the rest of them deal with most types. I don't think anyone would consider Naim amps poorly designed or bad amps. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 9043 Registered: Dec-04 | A guy at the store traded in a Rotel RMB985 amp cause it shut down with his streo. Worked fine at the shop. Did this twice. It always worked fine for me with rip cord or any other stuff. His twisted pair Kimber gave the amp fits. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11641 Registered: May-04 | . I do think calling Naim amplifiers "badly designed" is not only poorly worded English but less than wise and possibly approaching jingoism. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 9049 Registered: Dec-04 | Despite the cabling issues for Naim's better products, I cannot think of another readily available product range that encompasses the entire 'amp guys talk to speaker guys' premise to such a successful extent. And does so at a reasonable price/performance ratio. The Naim engineers have fully embraced the entire circuit, from output to end and back, ensuring exactly the sound that they want. About a million others want the same thing. Naim has it right. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2216 Registered: May-05 | I missed Peter's post regarding Naim amps. Along the lines of what Nuck is saying, Naim designs complete systems as a complete circuit. Everything is made to work perfectly in unison, right down to the speaker wire. Some may think of Naim's design philosophy as arrogence. They don't care what anyone else is doing, they do what they want. There's little to no consideration for using anything other than Naim stuff. They simply design a complete system from the plug that goes into the wall to the sound that comes out of the speakers. They state that using other companies' products anywhere in the chain will give less than favorable results. What's so wrong with designing a complete system that has been carefully thought out from the very begining to the very end? They even make their own equipment racks. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 61 Registered: Jul-07 | I don't think poorly designed is the right phraseology, although the word "limiting" comes to mind. I've never appreciated being painted into a corner, and if I knew buying one piece of gear meant I was getting locked into the whole "suite", then I'd be inclined to look elsewhere. Also, there are very few companies that can truly bring excellence to all components in the chain. They typically have a strength area, whether that's amplification, source components, speakers, etc. Not that they can't do them well, just not so well there aren't better options....unless of course you've designed other options out of the mix....which I think is limiting and, well, wrong. JMO. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1108 Registered: Apr-06 | Naim designs complete systems. There is nothing *wrong* with that at all. In fact, it is very very right in a number of respects from a design standpoint. The benefits of having every component designed to work together are huge. And from a consumer standpoint, I hardly see how your complaint is relevant. If you like the sound of the system, buy it. If not, move on. In either case, it is the performance of the *system* that matters, not the performance of the speaker wire, the pre-amp, the amp, etc. And if you're the type that builds your system piecemeal, you still have to take into account that the speaker you pick, with its individual electrical characteristics, will indeed limit the amplifiers that you should pick out for optimal performance. That circuit in turn along with other factors will determine what kind of wiring you should obtain. Etc. |
|
Bronze Member Username: 007bPost Number: 47 Registered: Oct-07 | "His twisted pair Kimber gave the amp fits." Never known Kimber to cause this. If the amp is that sensitive, I'd get rid of it. I've found Kimber (speaker and interconnects) to work exceptionally well with various loads. A previous poster who some of you guys lambasted pointed out that incorrect paring could cause amp/receiver problems. Wish you'd make up your minds. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11645 Registered: May-04 | . I assume you mean wiley and his clipping remark. Clipping is not the same as oscillation. I've never known of a speaker cable that would cause an amplifier to clip. Clipping is a problem caused at the front of the receiver/amplifier, not at the speaker connections. I've made up my mind on that one. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2220 Registered: May-05 | "Also, there are very few companies that can truly bring excellence to all components in the chain." Naim Linn Rega Krell - I don't think they make their own cables/interconnects. For the rcord, I'm not a big fan. McIntosh - I don't think they make their own cables/interconnects either. For the record, I'm a huge fan. And the last to semi-join that group - Bryston. For those who don't know, they make their own CD players, cables, connectors, interconnects, and active crossovers. They don't make their own speakers, but they work very closely with PMC in voicing. They also work very closely with Torus who makes power conditioners. They all bring excellence to every part of the chain. Preferences are subjective though. I'm sure there's more companies. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 62 Registered: Jul-07 | Naim designs complete systems. There is nothing *wrong* with that at all. Like I said, JMO. If it floats your boat (and I know Naim has a lot of fans) then knock yourself out (not literally, unless you're into that sort of thing). For me, I never understood the all or nothing approach. I like choice. Even if I like the sound of a complete Naim system, I'd eventually want to upgrade, and I wouldn't want my options to be Naim, Naim, or Naim. And in reality, I'm sure people are mixing Naim gear in quite successfully, with a little care. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 63 Registered: Jul-07 | Stu, like I said there are a few among the 100's of audio companies out there. And my concern is with the all-or-nothing implication, not that they are into a broad spectrum of components. Just a preference on my part I guess, and as you say, preferences are subjective. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1109 Registered: Apr-06 | " For me, I never understood the all or nothing approach." Because in the end, you the customer are building a *complete* system. Shouldn't it make some sense that someone puts out a *complete* system? Couple things to think about... Which is more likely to work well together: two components designed to work together, or two that are randomly thrown together? Which is more likely to give the sound that the designer of Company A intended: a system completely designed by Company A, or a system with components from Company A, B, and C? "Even if I like the sound of a complete Naim system, I'd eventually want to upgrade" Why? |
|
Bronze Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 64 Registered: Jul-07 | "Even if I like the sound of a complete Naim system, I'd eventually want to upgrade" Why?" Dude, if noone ever upgraded we wouldn't need this here forum. And again, it's not that two like components would work well together....that's all dandy. As long as their design doesn't limit them to ONLY playing well together. I guess I'm not communicating well today. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1110 Registered: Apr-06 | "Dude, if noone ever upgraded we wouldn't need this here forum. " Not relevant. All you simply seem to be implying is that you're a tweak who has a need to "upgrade" his system at a certain preset intervals. If that describes you, then a Naim system probably isn't for you. OTOH, if you're in the market for a new *system*, and you're capable of owning gear without needing to upgrade it, Naim is definitely worth looking into. The simple reality is, designing a complete system from the ground up gives them an advantage that makes them very competitive in their price class. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 2221 Registered: May-05 | Naim has plenty of upgrades within itself. Power supplies, cables, active crossovers... the list goes on and on. Considering the a top of the line in every way Naim system will run well over $100K and possibly into the $200K range, I'm pretty sure there's room to upgrade within a complete Naim system. Also, Naim gear works quite well with other gear. It just doesn't have that synergy that a complete Naim system has. But those weren't really my main points. My main point was that Naim has tought just about everything out. The interconnects are a specific length because that's the optimum distance between components. They strongly suggest keeping the speaker wire at a certain length, because they've found that works out best. There's a reason why they designed the Fraim (component stand) component heights and materials the way they did. Everything has a very specific reason for its design, including why a lot of speaker wire did/will cause the amps to oscillate. Personally, I'd rather know uo front what will work out best, and how much it'll run. I also like to know what upgrades are true upgrades, and which ones are a waste of time. If something doesn't work for your specific application, they have a good and knowledgable suggestion of which way to go. Hence why they suggest Chord wiring as an alternative. Naim's warantee is only good if you use Naim or Chord wiring. Anything else 'constitutes abuse.' |
|
Bronze Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 65 Registered: Jul-07 | Stephen M, not sure why you're intent on reading WAY more into my remarks than I've typed. I won't try to clarify my comments again, as it seems rather pointless. If in your opinion upgrading is only done by "tweaks", then you have a lot of work ahead making similar comments on nearly every thread in this forum. Better get busy. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1112 Registered: Apr-06 | Not exactly Chris. You stated that if you owned a Naim system and you liked it, you would still upgrade it. You didn't state *why* you would upgrade it when you were specifically asked, just that you would. Sounds like a tweak to me, but I suppose that is just my opinion. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2142 Registered: Feb-04 | I suppose that's what comes from using K'horns and a HT receiver. Such a child. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11653 Registered: May-04 | . ? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11656 Registered: May-04 | . How you'd put it, PG? "I guess this was interpreted as a personal attack .... " "You then got all upset." What a child!!! . |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2143 Registered: Feb-04 | It needs explaining? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem Can't argue with the idea, so attack the person (or his gear). |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11657 Registered: May-04 | . So, you think I was attacking your gear? Lord! You'll know when I'm attacking your gear and that wasn't it. Haven't we been through this all before? I say the word Klispch in any context and you take offense. PG, it's not my fault your speakers have the reputation they have or that you bought the equipment you own, so give me a break here. If you see any mention of the brand of speakers you own or the words "HT receiver" as an attack, you might want to consider getting rid of your system or, unlikely as it seems, growing up. I do have to agree I cannot attack your "idea". It's impossible to attack something that doesn't exist. The question put to you was whether you thought amplifier output impedance mattered. I asked several times and you never answered the question. There are names for that too, but I don't care to go there. Let it rest, PG. This thread is not about you no matter how much you want to make it so. Just let it go and move on. Continuing this harrassment is only going to make you look worse than you already do. Goodbye, PG. . |
|
Silver Member Username: EramseySouth carolina United States Post Number: 567 Registered: Feb-05 | For Christsake how about this: The output impedence of a ss amplifier should be typically less than 1 Ohm, the output impedence of a tube amp is usually around a few Ohms or more period!THAT IS ALL THAT MATTERS!!! This is my point. Whether you use 32AWG ribbon cable at 6" lengths or car battery,about 0AWG at 50' lengths (we are getting into circular mills here) the speaker wire is 2% of the equation and the idea of an amplifier that is designed to only work with a couple of choices of speaker wire or interconnect cables (oh! my first thought is how is this possible except if the wire has fixed connectors?!!!!) behooves me,and I'm reasonably confident would have many an audio design engineer scoffing, since in this day and age you can experiment with cable and wire and have a plethora of satisfying results in a broad range of pricing. Speaker wire of any guage even that unsuitable for home audio,less than 16AWG except for very short lengths less than 3' will not cause an audio amplifier to oscillate, as long as R,L, and C parameters are kept reasonable,which is done by being conservative with length maximums of various gauges. This is pure crockery as amplifier oscillation is a more prevalent factor at frequencies much higher than the audio bandwith. ON THIS DAY: Pray to your God. Keep your promises. Do not speak evil of anyone. Comfort a child or the weak or sick. Be considerate of others. Do what you can when you can. Take arms against malice. Don't revel in the misfortune of others. Denounce biggitory. Be safe and friendly and bless you in this world! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11658 Registered: May-04 | . "This is pure crockery as amplifier oscillation is a more prevalent factor at frequencies much higher than the audio bandwith." ER, I wish that were as true as you make it out. As I stated in my reply last Friday, oscillation is not a very real problem in most contemporary amplifiers. Designers of both amplification and cables have, for the most part, learned their lessons. There was, however, a very steep learning curve not that long ago in audio history that saw more than a few amplifiers go down in flames, if not literally then figuratively but with the same end result. And mainstream manufacturers almost always played it safe in this regard. I never knew a Yamaha amplifier that would oscillate due to the cable load. Therefore, the equipment most forum members choose is not a probable hazard. Stray from the mainstream just a bit, however, to a small start up manufacturer with no major publication reviews and internet only sales and the landscape can still rapidly change. I remember the days when amplifiers were pushing the envelope to get that last bit of good sound and even better reviews; and cable manufacturers were selling cables with bizarre construction techniques. Combine one of these unstable amplifiers (Jadis) with a high capacitance speaker cable (Cardas) and it could spell disaster. Hundreds of customer complaints and products that earned a reputation for not delivering on their promise, not to mention small companies that cannot survive dozens of returned products, have changed the overall landscape of amplifier/cable matching. I never intended anyone should be afraid their receiver was going to burst into flames because of a $20 cable. My comments are taken from personal experience with some very unhappy clients of some rather expensive and exotic gear that was never replaced. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11659 Registered: May-04 | . I would also disagree with your assessment of tube amplifiers in the modern age. There are still poorly manufactured tube amps with high output impedance specs. SET's will almost always be over one Ohm at 1kHz and therefore require output impedance be taken into consideration. But most of today's well built push-pull tube amps measure under one Ohm output impedance @1kHz and seldom rise above 1.5 Ohms at any frequency. It was not the measurement I was after, however, but the result of high (and low) output impedance combined with a dynamic load which might fluctuate wildly - as too many contemporary speakers seem to do. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11661 Registered: May-04 | . Here are the questions I posed to PG; 1) " ... I would be interested in how you have come to the conclusion the output impedance of the amplifier "is not relevant". I don't believe I've ever heard anyone with any idea what's going on here suggest the output impedance of an amplifier is not relevant to system sound. Please, explain how you believe this to be true." 2) "And why is the output impedance of the amplifier not relevant? If less "electrical" resistance in the cable is relevant in the overall "wire/speaker combination", why is the amplifier's contribution to this circuit not important? Are we back to speakers that don't require amplifiers to operate? Do you really believe the amplifier's output impedance is not relevant? Do you feel resistance is all that's important in this combination?" . |
|
Silver Member Username: EramseySouth carolina United States Post Number: 568 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks for the clarification Mr. Vigne. I was under the impression that a tube amp had a significantly higher output impedence than a ss amplifier. Once again your considerable amount of experience has revealed something I did not know. Still though, on the surface a little less than 1 Ohm to 1.5OHM(worst case) output Z of a tube amp is I'm afraid still significantly higher than the scathingly low output z of a ss amp which is in the 10's to single digit milliOhm range. The addition of output transformer likely accounts for this,and as I definately know and I'm sure you know as well L increases as freq. increases. Yes thank goodness audio designers have learned from their mistakes- for the most part. But to purposely design an amp to be used in conjunction with speaker wiring that has excessively high C or L seems very inane in this age where so many good choices are available and a such a wide range in pricing. Again, I am not an audio design engineer,a mere electrician, but I am hard pressed to think how excessive C or L would benefit an amp under any circumstance. To design an amp or any subsystem therof with this in mind would be reverse engineering and not in good "think outside the box" way. I have found in my limited experience with speakers(mainstream) that most are fairly benign loads even for capable reciever based systems. You don't really get into complex impedence curves and phase angles until you get into more esoteric audiophile oriented brands. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 9068 Registered: Dec-04 | ER, what do you consider a complex impedence curve? Or large phase angle deviation? A 'capable' receiver might be defined as one which can overcome these type of loads, I suppose, making it a kind of self-eating watermelon. Dozens of widely available speakers present loads that will expose a receiver at best, trigger protection circuits at near worst. I own 2 sets of these. I think the advertised 4 ohm impedence of a speaker is just a warning that you had better have a stout power supply to operate them properly, just as a receiver is/is not rated at 4 ohm capable, indicating that you should look for more benign loads to use it. The heavier facts of speaker wire characteristics come into play beyond receivers, as stated, I beleive. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11669 Registered: May-04 | . "Again, I am not an audio design engineer,a mere electrician, but I am hard pressed to think how excessive C or L would benefit an amp under any circumstance. To design an amp or any subsystem therof with this in mind would be reverse engineering and not in good 'think outside the box' way." Try thinking of the amplifier/cable/speaker/cable/amplifier circuit in terms of a few things. Back EMF, Zobel networks and negative feedback. Does that change how you see the whole circuit? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11672 Registered: May-04 | . Maybe it will help if I mention the amplifiers/cables most prone to self destructive oscillation back in the day were typically driving loads that were not kind to most amplifiers. Make the amplifier a bit unstable into a real world reactive load and you spell disaster. All too common were Apogees and Infinity's with highly demanding loads which seemed to be designed with no reference to what the amplifier's needs would be. In other words, highly reactive loads. How do you tame a highly reactive load? Capacitive? Inductive? Why would this possibly be advantageous to a typical HT receiver or budget solid state amplifier? And, as has been mentioned, Naim is in the business, presently at least, of designing entire systems from source to speaker. While it is not impossible to use a Naim amplifier with other than Naim speakers or Naim cables, you should be aware of the design requirements Naim considers important before you drift from those basic system needs. http://www.edn.com/archives/1995/122195/26di3.htm http://www.trueaudio.com/st_zobel.htm Then consider how this might affect NFB circuits. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11673 Registered: May-04 | . "Still though, on the surface a little less than 1 Ohm to 1.5OHM(worst case) output Z of a tube amp is I'm afraid still significantly higher than the scathingly low output z of a ss amp which is in the 10's to single digit milliOhm range. The addition of output transformer likely accounts for this,and as I definately know and I'm sure you know as well L increases as freq. increases." Tubes are high impedance output devices to begin with. The basic function of the output transformer on a tube amplifier is to serve as an impedance matching device between the high output impedance of the power tubes (probably around 100 Ohms for a typical push-pull pentode) and the characteristically low load impedance of the speaker. Thus you find the inclusion of the various taps on a tube amplifier's output transformers in order to better facilitate this impedance matching. But transformers do have their own characteristics as you mention. I have to admit it it beyond my skills to say just why an output transformer can step the impedance down to 1 Ohm but not the typically low impedance of a direct coupled amplifier (0.01-0.1 Ohms) other than manufacturing and shipping cost and relative size are relevant factors in the decisions made. Look at the measurements of a budget oriented Chinese tube amplifier (or an old Dynaco ST70 for that matter) vs. the more cost no object designs from Mcintosh or Audio Rresearch. The more budget influences the design, the higher the output impedance will be and the smaller the transformers will be. And triodes have higher inherent output impedance than pentodes. Therefore the higher nominal output impedance of a SET vs. a push-pull pentode based amplifier. Or, the more uncommon OTL tube based amplifier where output tubes are paralleled in large multiples to achieve a "reasonably" low output impedance without the intervention of an output transformer. All this does, however, get to my question of why output impedance of the amplifier could be considered irrelevant. Particularly if lowering the resistance of the speaker cable is considered to "not hurt". "You don't really get into complex impedence curves and phase angles until you get into more esoteric audiophile oriented brands." As Nuck has suggested, this isn't entirely true. Look at the measurements of most of the B&W line of speakers. While not common in eCoustics systems, any Thiel speaker will present a rather difficult to drive load even though they wouldn't normally be considered "esoteric". But first order crossovers bring their own problems and striving for maximally flat frequency response has its needs. Once again, designers have generally learned their lessons but some speaker designers still behave as if their designs did not require an amplifier in order to make sound. They view problems as if they only exist on paper and cannot make the leap to the real world or assume the buyer will compensate with higher budgets. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11674 Registered: May-04 | . So, at the end of all this, let's not forget the initial question. Why would amplifier output impedance matter? |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 2144 Registered: Feb-04 | Let it rest, PG. This thread is not about you no matter how much you want to make it so. Just let it go and move on. Continuing this harrassment is only going to make you look worse than you already do. Goodbye, PG. You really are a piece of work. Sure, pretend you took the high road and I'm harassing you. Meanwhile, I'll remind readers what you posted: I suppose that's what comes from using K'horns and a HT receiver. I would suggest anyone not employing the same components to be a bit more careful in their decisions. I'll bet that I'm not the only one who reads that as condescending. Of course JV sticks to the FUD; he said it once so has to back it up at all costs. I was thinking earlier today that the only way to back his claim is to pick the most fragile amplifier in combination with a weirdly-built cable; what do I read posted to the thread? Exactly that! A word of warning from Mr Vigne, don't use heavy wire because you might blow up your receiver! If Russell is held as an authority to quote, and he feels 18 A.W.G. is OK for up to 25' of cable length, then 16 A.W.g. should be fine and dandy for 6' runs. Russell also recommends against spending more than necessary just to impress someone. Careful about holding Mr. Russell as an authority. He's one of those fancy engineers, likely has funny letters after his name and likely no sales experience; what would he know? Mr. Russell says this about using thicker wire than needed: What if you use wire heavier than the minimum size recommended in the table? There is no audible improvement but there can be a considerable increase in cost. Doesn't mention it might hurt. Strange indeed! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11679 Registered: May-04 | .  right off the damn chair!!! Grow up, PG. This thread is not about you and it's not about your dislike for me. One more time; just let it go and move on. Continuing this harrassment is only going to make you look worse than you already do. And right now, you're looking pretty foolish. Everyone else here has moved on to relevant topics. I suggest you do the same. Goodbye, PG. . |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithCanada Post Number: 2149 Registered: Feb-04 | Overuse of smilies. Kinda like using big fonts. Keep on spreading the FUD Mr. Vigne! Gotta keep the troops in-line! Remember folks, your amplifier might blow up! |
|
Silver Member Username: EramseySouth carolina United States Post Number: 569 Registered: Feb-05 | Great info Jan I've learned a few things more. I have heard the the Thiels, in the early 90's powered by a Carver amp which seemed very capable with them but they are a tricky speaker indeed. Try thinking of the amplifier/cable/speaker/cable/amplifier circuit in terms of a few things. Back EMF, Zobel networks and negative feedback. Does that change how you see the whole circuit? Yes but the speaker wiring is still an extremely marginal consideration in the total circuit or at least it should be. ER, what do you consider a complex impedence curve? Or large phase angle deviation? Ans. Generally a speaker that has a phase shift of greater than about 70 deg total,the point at which a speaker becomes"tricky", in either direction +,- of a complete cycle(waveform from 0to 360 electrical deg. which is 0V back to zero. As we all know well by now a speakers Z is freq. dependent, given that certainty an easy speaker may dip to 4 ohms and stay there for some of the freq and rise to upwards of 10 Ohms or so as long as this change is relatively smooth and not the etremity of the Apogees,which had to be designed with little consideration of the amplifiers contribution indeed, the speaker should be a fairly easy load. This brings me to my next point. As Jan mentions other factors must be considered NF,Back EMF,etc. True all of these are considerations but they are mostly issues of the amplifier part of the equation. It is virtually impossible to design a ss amp that operates even at class A for the first few W of it's powerband without the use of NF. It is my understanding that some low wattage SET amps that only have a maximum power output of about 10W that run totally class A have been built that use no NF but this is hardly practical for 98% of amplifiers out there. I think R of a speaker wire as long as lengths are kept in check is mostly inconsequential. What is more of a consideration is L and C which you absolutely do not want to add in the speaker/amp interface since this is added already with the speakers crossover network. Of course there are always a few exceptions but for the most part "mainsteam speakers" i.e Polk, Infinity, Athena, Aperion audio etc are pretty easy loads even for a non heavy duty built receiver. An exception are Polk Lsi's which at 4 Ohms and a paltry 86 dB sensitivity are a difficult power hungry load for even a robust receiver and should be driven with a seperate amplifier. Just because a speaker is rated a 4Ohms doesn't mean that you should automatically dive for cover if you have a receiver. I hardly consider an amps output z to be irrelvalent as it IS factored in in the amp/wire/speaker interface but given the very low,exceptionally low output Z with ss it does seem rather miniscule. |
|
Gold Member Username: StefanomVienna, VA United States Post Number: 1122 Registered: Apr-06 | "What if you use wire heavier than the minimum size recommended in the table? There is no audible improvement but there can be a considerable increase in cost. Doesn't mention it might hurt. Strange indeed!" As I've stated before in this thread... Cost: Won't hurt particularly badly, but waste is waste. If you don't need the 10-15 bucks today, invest it in your 401k and watch it grow. Of course, I'm 26 and I hope to retire in 30 years, so for me 10-15 bucks today means $175-$260 in 30 years. Geez, if I do that enough times, I'll be rich! Ugly: Not everyone likes wiring as thick as a garden hose running through their house.If you have a spouse that is not thrilled with the prospect of 12AWG wire, you better believe it can hurt. Inflexible/Difficult to work with: Simply put, 16 gauge wiring is easier to deal with and much more flexible than 12 gauge wire. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11683 Registered: May-04 | . "Try thinking of the amplifier/cable/speaker/cable/amplifier circuit in terms of a few things. Back EMF, Zobel networks and negative feedback. Does that change how you see the whole circuit?" "Yes but the speaker wiring is still an extremely marginal consideration in the total circuit or at least it should be." Well, yes and no. Let's take a company such as Naim as an example. And keep in mind I am not a Naim expert. I have never sold the gear and it doesn't have much representation here in Dallas so I never had to deal with mating Naim to anything I was selling. But keep in mind that Naim tries to sell entire systems. Always have pretty much. And Naim marches to their own drummer. In fact they are big on getting you to march to the drummer (PRaT) they just don't care where the drummer sits on stage (flat Earthers). Think of the references to a Zoble network. If you're trying to maintain a resistive load into your amplifier, a Zobel is ideal and the circuit of choice.) If you haven't read the links to the Zobel, you should take the time.) Resistive loads are good for amplifiers while reactive loads are bad. That's generally agreed upon. Too many modern speakers are highly reactive loads. If you take for granted any amplifier is a modulated power supply (which it is), a resistive load is what you want that power supply to see on the end of its outputs. No multi-way speaker I can think of has a flat impedance or stable electrical phase angle if there is a crossover involved or if you dare to play music through the speaker. Also, the only reasonably high inductive load I can think of at present would be the magnetic planars from a company such as Magnepan. Most other speakers have an electrical phase angle that is predominantly capacitive in the low to mid frequencies rising to a more inductive load due to the {typically) uncompensated nature of the high frequency voice coil(s). (Electrostatics are the exception to this rule.) Not only can we measure the amount of reactance in the speaker system on a static basis; but the voice coils of the drivers are inductive loads in their own right. And, as has been pointed out, inductors change their characteristics as frequency rises and temperatures increase. All of which makes for a more reactive load into the amplifier but also changes the basic operational characteristics of the speaker system as it plays. It's unlikely you are going to have sufficient resistance ®, capacitance (C) or inductance (L) in a speaker cable to make the entire Zobel network out of just wire, but this is where Naim begins to tend to the preculiarities of their amplifiers and speakers. Naim amplifiers are generally unstable into a capacitive load. (There I go, eh, PG? Talking about fragile, unstable amplifiers. How unfair of me!) Connect a fairly high capacitance speaker cable such as Kimber (There I go again! What can I be thinking?!) and the amplifier will begin to oscillate. Eventually it will destroy itself. Connect a load other than a Naim speaker and once again you flirt with disaster. Most modern loudspeakers are somewhat - to - highly capacitive in their phase angle. Here I would consider "high" to be anything above 40° though obviously the amount of phase angle has to coincide with an atypical impedance before the amplifier can get into major trouble. So "low impedance" and "high phase angle" (capacitive or inductive reactance) are relative terms that rely on each other to make life simple or difficult for an amplifier. What Naim is attempting, from my understanding of their technology, is to load the amp down with a fairly high resistive and inductive cable which will begin to form a Zobel network on the outputs of the amplifier and compensate for any capacitance in the load. This makes their amps a bit more capable of driving speakers other than Naim or a few select products from companies that manufacture sensible speakers. It also makes their speakers appear more as a purely resistive load when paired with their amplifiers and cables. It also keeps the actual compensation network in the Naim speakers at a minimum so as not to slug the amplifier with a large inductor in line with the amplifier's outputs. To make this work properly, Naim speaker cables must be a minimum length and are directional. And the directional part, to my understanding is meant to ease the burden on the NFB circuit of the amplifier which deals with the back EMF signals from the speakers and will react differently to increased phase shifts due to high capacitance or inductance. So, one leg of the speaker cable is constructed differently than the other. At least, that's my understanding of what Naim is attempting with their system designs. I could be wrong, I've never seen this spelled out by Naim, and would appreciate any information to the contrary from Naim owners or admirers. So, ER, while this method of design might not be familiar to you or sound like a "proper" method of thinking outside the box, this is, in fact, quite a bit of conjerring beyond the traditional parallelogram and makes the Naim amplifiers operate just a bit more like the ideal on paper gain stage. In essence, it makes the speaker load appear more like any other low level circuit in the Naim equipment where output impedance and load impedance are almost always known specifications. "As Jan mentions other factors must be considered NF,Back EMF,etc. True all of these are considerations but they are mostly issues of the amplifier part of the equation." Yes, true. But we cannot divorce the amplifier from the speaker or the cables unless we only wish to view speakers as on paper entities. That is how some people prefer to think of speakers and it does make life simpler when trying to understand how systems operate. I think we make a large mistake when we attempt to think of the three components as anything other than the parts of a circuit. A circuit which NFB makes more complex. "It is virtually impossible to design a ss amp that operates even at class A for the first few W of it's powerband without the use of NF." Not necessarily. But what NFB does on the positive side of the equation is make the amplifier more stable into real world loads. In those rather weird amplifier/cable/speaker days of the 1980's, the idea of applying any NFB was considered to be a horrible breach of "straight wire with gain" ideology. This attitude was largely due to the abuse of NFB by designers trying to constantly lower the T.H.D. specs of their ss amplifiers while raising power specs and adding features. There were quite a few designs which totally dispensed with N.F.B. in those days trying to aim for buzzwords and these were amplifiers that were less than stable into a real world load. "It is my understanding that some low wattage SET amps that only have a maximum power output of about 10W that run totally class A have been built that use no NF but this is hardly practical for 98% of amplifiers out there." A single ended amplifier, by its very nature of having no paired output device, must run in class A operation. And, triodes, by their nature, have predominantly second order distortion with little to no other distortion product. Applying negative feedback to a triode actually makes the distortion worse by bringing in a fourth order component. Since there is no common ss equivalent to a triode tube, the use and abuse of NFB has become common place in transistor amplifiers. That was what the 1980's designers were rebelling against. They usually went about it in the wrong way and the results were less than wonderful. This was especially true when speakers and cables were not considered in the load shown to the amplifier but were largely purchased as separate items based on their reviews and not their performance within a system. " I think R of a speaker wire as long as lengths are kept in check is mostly inconsequential." So do I and that is why I advocate for the thinnest gauge of speaker cables possible for the application. To my ears, and this only applies to what I hear, lower gauge (thicker) cables tend to sound muddy when a thinner gauge cable would suffice. If you are using a solid state, direct coupled amplifier with a reasonably low output impedance (a typical HT receiver), into a speaker load that is not highly reactive (a Klipschorn), then lowering the R of the cable is serving no purpose other than making you feel good about your nice thick speaker cables. They cannot improve the sound if all the other factors are correct. IMO, they can hurt the sound by adding the typically higher capacitance of a lower gauge cable. And while capacitance can be argued as only affecting the load outside audio frequencies, there are more than a few people who don't consider that real world thinking based on what they hear. Whether you agree or not is not what I am arguing. This is my opinion and it is based on my experience and preferences. "What is more of a consideration is L and C which you absolutely do not want to add in the speaker/amp interface since this is added already with the speakers crossover network." Normally, I would agree. But there are exceptions to this which are reflected in Naim's design goals. "An exception are Polk Lsi's which at 4 Ohms and a paltry 86 dB sensitivity are a difficult power hungry load for even a robust receiver ... " Do not confuse electrical sensitivity with difficult to drive loads. The LS3/5a is spec'd at 82dB and is about as low in sensitivity as you'll find in consumer speakers. It is however, a relatively benign electrical load in terms of reactance. It represents an almost purely resistive load and, therefore, is a very amplifier friendly speaker on those terms. It does take higher than average voltage drive, however, to play loud but asks for little in the way of current. "I hardly consider an amps output z to be irrelvalent as it IS factored in in the amp/wire/speaker interface but given the very low,exceptionally low output Z with ss it does seem rather miniscule." Once again, I agree. As I stated a while back in this thread, the reduction of R in a thicker cable can be considered "irrelevant" when the output impedance of the amplifier is low and the load of the speakers is benign. Therefore, you cannot consider the output impedance (Z) of the amplifier to be irrelevant in and of itself. Now, the next question is, when would the amplifier's output impedance be relevant? And what would the result be on system sound? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 11694 Registered: May-04 | . Here's when it would be important and here's what would happen to system sound. https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/400463.html |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics