|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2125 Registered: Oct-07 | I'm curious as to why audio of all sorts is said to get 'better' with break in. If it's just a matter of what I think of as breaking in, shouldn't some stuff get worse as it wears in? Is their something else going on here? I heard it best with my panels...which did have some problems for maybe the first 15 or 20 hours of play, as the caps formed (all I can think of) but after that, have remained remarkable stable. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15922 Registered: May-04 | . Whether a component or speaker benefits from the first few initial hours of operation depends largely on the component and the acuity of the listener's skills. For any electronic circuit the caps, internal cabling or circuit board traces will break in by doing their dielectric aborption thing and taking a "set" that then remains as their constant signature. Other than the small capacitive values found in a resitor or inductor I think you would be hard pressed to find even the most ardent believer, using any real world informational basis, telling you a coil has much in the way of break in time. There the constant heating and cooling which come with every use tend to produce their own variables with each use. I've had people tell me their tubes "break in" and sound better after so many hours though I've never heard any such thing after the tubes have warmed up completely (about twenty to thirty minutes time) and the transformers have been heated through to their core - which, with the 60 lb. Mac tube amps and their heavily potted tranformers, can seem to occur over two or more days time. Mechanical devices such as speaker cones or diaphragms tend to loosen their suspension a bit in the first few hours and will change the overall character of the speaker's voicing over that time. Certain opinion states that break in time is in many cases just the time spent by the listener adjusting their expectations to the realities of any change made. . |
|
Gold Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 1250 Registered: Jul-07 | I've noticed it to varying degrees on different components. The two smallest pieces I have (my DAC and phono amp) took the longest oddly. Maddeningly long actually. I just went through it again with my RWA amp after it was worked on, but it seemed to settle in after only 30-50 hours. It's cookin' now. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2129 Registered: Oct-07 | quote:: Certain opinion states that break in time is in many cases just the time spent by the listener adjusting their expectations to the realities of any change made. That, and the real changes which occur accounts for a 'broken in' piece being better without fail. My 'd' outfit seems to take about 20 minutes to settle in after a cold startup. Panels are the example I like. Those caps? The stiff, new Mylar? But nothing like 100s of hours. Does anyone have an example of something which got worse as it aged....but was still functioning properly and within 'spec'? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15923 Registered: May-04 | . Uhhh, ... any NAD product. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2131 Registered: Oct-07 | Not a fan, eh? My Rotel amp with my panels never sounded good at higher levels. I gave it 6 months played daily. Didn't help. No factory 4 ohm rating, either. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 4663 Registered: Feb-07 | FWIW, I've found break-in most relevant with speakers and CD players. And of course tubes. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittStamford, Connecticut USA Post Number: 4355 Registered: May-05 | I believe in speaker break in and cartridge break in, as they vibrate to produce/reproduce the sound. I've heard electronics get a bit better with some age, but I honestly think it was more warm-up than break in. My Theta DAC was about a dozen years old when I bought it. Never turned off until the previous owner sold it to my dealer. It sounded distorted in the highs and loose in the bass for about two days. After that, it sounded the same. Whenever I turned it off more than a day or two, the same thing all over again. I mention that because I'm getting a similar thing with the rest of my gear. My Rega DAC doesn't sound much different than now than it did after 2-3 days of contant power to it. I turned it off for a day last week, and the same thing as day 1 or so. My B60 sounds thin and dull for about 30 minutes or so from a cold start. After that, it opens up and sounds 99% as good as it does after a day or two. Everyone hears what they hear, and I won't discredit what they're hearing. I'm just reporting what I hear/have heard with new gear. It's never sounded radically different after 2-3 days of use than it did after 100's of hours. Jan - NAD products function properly and perform within spec after they've aged? You may need to look at the question again Just having fun here. I had no major issues with NAD when I owned their stuff. Good for the money. |
|
Gold Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 1251 Registered: Jul-07 | Fostex drivers are renowned for their long break-in periods.....several hundred hours.....and many claim they continue to improve for years. Some manufacturers (Zu Audio) now offer break-in services for their speakers prior to shipping, presumably to avoid the headache for their Customers. Not everyone can leave 90+ db music blarring 24/7. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15924 Registered: May-04 | . "Jan - NAD products function properly and perform within spec after they've aged? You may need to look at the question again" You mean to tell me "broken" and "dead" are not within NAD's specs? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16003 Registered: Jan-08 | Leo The heat degrades the componants like transistors, resistors and transfomers, for the Caps, the dimension and voltage margin make that a cap will last longer than a other. A amplifier with a bigger heat sink to cool down will last longer, the power up to reach the run spec will be also shorter with less error when cold. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2134 Registered: Oct-07 | Plym, I'm asking about say.....the 1st 100 or so hours of a new pieces 'lifetime'. Stuff used properly will last a long time, with the possible exception of caps. I just wonder why, people perceive the sound of something to get better for a time when first being run. It's called 'break in' and is invariable perceived to improve. IF the sound does indeed change for some physical reason, why does it NEVER get worse as it runs in? The one exception I can think of are Capacitors. They may take several cycles to 'form' and indeed change during that time. But nothing like 300 hours worth. My panels, when new, changed for about the first 25 or so hours, and have been stable since. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16015 Registered: Jan-08 | Leo Before each serious listening I unhook and re-hook all cables to remove the oxidazing of the connectors and I can tell you that I see a good difference in the depth of sound, the Instruments and the vocal becomes spaced out and clearer. How time we take to become accustomed to the new sound, I remember that every time I had a new component in my system, I was more susceptible to look for the defect in the sound than to listen the music. Now for the the speakers, I agree with you that they need a breaking-in period, for the amplifier, the quality and the voltage gaps of the caps and resistor(over-heated) and the cooling of the transistor are all some factors for the reliability, to avoid all pluggable componants like chips or fuses which oxidize and alter the sound. Last year I repaired an old organ for a friend, it was a simple broked wire which was the problem, this organ had over 100 pluggable chips on the main board then after a good clean up and de-oxidizing, the sound become so different and listenable that my friend re-admitted this organ like the first of his own three. With the time, the oxidazing on the cable end under the sheath can created a semiconducting which alter the sound, the adding of grease or silicone limit it. There are many factor which affect the sound that the not informed person will think to buy a new composant instead of repairing the source of the problem. Good for the industry but not for our budget! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15926 Registered: May-04 | . "IF the sound does indeed change for some physical reason, why does it NEVER get worse as it runs in?" I'm not sure that assumption is factual. First, to reach the subjective conclusion you describe, you must first relaize you're dealing with human perception which is very fragile and extremely susceptible to suggestion. We hear what we wish to hear in many cases. Inserting a new component, cable or footer, etc. can intially result in a perception of improved musical quality which only over the next few days or weeks shows itself to be less convincing overall. Often this is simply a matter of either buyer's remorse or the extremely fickle nature of too many buyers. Either way the end result comes back to establishing priorities and understanding how to apply them to an audition process. Possibly the listener is hearing an increase in, say, detail with the new component in line. If increased detail retrieval was the intent when the item was purchased, the buyer has succeeded. Since detail was on the buyer's mind when making the decision to try this component, it naturally follows that detail is exactly what they are most attentive to during the audition (assuming they've had an aidition) and when first listening to the change in their system. However, if over the next few days of listening it becomes apparent the new component has decreased other values or introduced new problems, then ultimately the buyer and the component have failed. IMO mixing a "bright" component with a "warm" speaker is very likely to have such results as neither component's personality is in line with the other's and the final result, despite possible good first impressions, will be a failure as the listener goes deeper into the music to find satisfaction. In the end, it's always a good idea to go backward in your system and re-insert the old product or remove the new (whichever suits the situation) to make sure what you've accomplished what is truly a step forward and not just a step sideways - or worse. Otherwise, if the buyer has done due dilligence and has convinced themself they have made a correct decision, then why shouldn't the product only get better? No decent high end designer would release a product that hasn't been thoroughly tested in numerous ways including allowing for "break in". High end designers have a pretty good working knowledge of how their equipment will be used and what the results will be after the component has gone through any issues of establishing its final sound. It's not as if the design for a new VTL amplifier, for example, is formed solely on paper and put together without ever hearing a final product. The list of "audiophile approved" components is fairly well established when it comes to caps, resistors, connectors, etc. all the way down to the perceived differences between things such as Teflon vs PVC dielectric or soldered vs unsoldered lead outs on a cap. How those components perform after the intial break in period is well known and not something that should come as a surprise to any competent designer. If a particular cap or resistor actually did perform in some way "worse" than before break in, I can't envision any good designer selecting that cap or resistor for use. Considering any component has a certain variance allowed for in its production spec, the "breaking in" of new parts wouldn't seem to be capable of altering the component's final values in sufficient degree to actually throw the entire component in the "this is trash" column. There have been reports of manufacturer's whose products have a noticeable variance in sound quality from one individual piece to the next. This would apear to be less of an issue today then in years past and probably has more to do with less stringent quality control performed by the manufacturer. This was a fairly common problem in the early days of third world assembly of products but has mostly been dealt with by stricter control by the manufacturer whose name will appear on the final product. B&W occupied quite a bit of column inch space when they decided to establish their Chinese factory under direct B&W control. Numerous other companies have followed their lead and now have much tighter control over how their products are assembled and tested before being released to the public. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15927 Registered: May-04 | . "Before each serious listening I unhook and re-hook all cables to remove the oxidazing of the connectors ... " I can't say I think this is a good idea. Any plated material should resist oxidation for quite some time, gold having been selected for its long term resistance to oxidation. Constantly removing and re-inserting your ic's risks loosening the spring action of the plug's "leaves" which will only result in decreased music reproduction qualities - not better. Any changes you are hearing are more likely due to bias expectations than to actual performance improvements. More importantly, if this technique were applied to all equipment, you might actually risk doing damage to your components as many cables have RCA's designed to fit so tightly to the jack that they can oftentimes pull an improperly mounted jack (which can be found on a wide variety of consumer products) out of the component. For this very reason many cable and receiver/cassette/CD/DVD player manufacturers issue warnings about removing cables. That's not to say good system housekeeping is not important but only to suggest it should be done on a reasoned schedule and with due caution to the potential damage which might occur through overly zealous abuse of the equipment. "With the time, the oxidazing on the cable end under the sheath can created a semiconducting which alter the sound, the adding of grease or silicone limit it." You'd do better treating a decent audio component with something like this; http://caig.com/ or this; http://www.musicdirect.com/product/74454 rather than slathering silicone or grease on a contact. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16017 Registered: Jan-08 | Hi Jan That make a difference! Even if the connectors are Gold plate! What can I say to convince you! There is none of plugged chips in my system, I was talking for some other product. ,the plug are also the worst thing for the sound, a good soldered link is much better, manufacturer use it to save on the cost of the manufacturing. If a damage is made, I will repair it myself! For the CD/DVD etc., its more to prevent the potential static! I listed the grease because it's better than nothing, i assume that we can use a much better product. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15929 Registered: May-04 | . "What can I say to convince you!" You don't have to convice me of anything, P. But, as I said, you are probably convincing yourself of something that doesn't really exist. Bias expectations are quite deceptive and easily mistaken for actual perceptions when they are not much more than what the listener wants to hear. If you are actually experiencing such a dramatic improvement in music quality just by pulling and reinserting your gold plated connectors on a constant schedule, then I would have to assume you already have problems with connectivity which have developed from your habit. If you want a more long lasting and repeatable listening experience when it comes to your connection quality, the Kontak would be a very good choice. Apply it quite sparingly during a yearly housekeeping and even with pure copper connectors the chances of decreased connectivity due to oxidation will be minimal. This is the stuff the US miltary sends into outer space and beneath the oceans so there's little chance it's going to loose its value over a few months time in an earthbound audio system. Otherwise, as I also said, you risk damaging the connectors over time by frequently connecting and disconnecting them. That, as you said, is good for the industry but not for your budget. While you may be able to perform your own repairs, most people would rather not get their hands into their equipment. " There is none of plugged chips in my system ... " Let's hear it for vintage equipment designed before chips were invented. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16018 Registered: Jan-08 | Always happy to discuss with you! You can think what you want, it does not change my point of view! I was talking about a chip plugged in a socket! LOL! None chips in digital tuner and CD player? If it does not come from you , it's not good! Right? Have a good day! |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2137 Registered: Oct-07 | Plym, to be honest with 'ya, I'm way leery of removing and replacing socketed chips. One bent pin can ruin your whole day. Not many audio guys are comfortable with doing this, either. NOT to mention potential static issues and blown gates. Jans comments about equipment break in make sense. Still curious why a Cable would seem to always sound better after run in? Some report they don't like soldered connections, but not frequently enough to make any conclusions. More dielectric saturation stuff? |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16019 Registered: Jan-08 | Leo I understand that most poeple will not modified or repair their equipment but what I'm saying is how the electronic must be to perform at the top, this was discussed many times in the past year by all the pros with the same conclusion, nothing new with that, why a integrated amp sound better than a preamp/amp with the same componants for both? The shortest road is always better for the sound! The only thing which is better today is the comprehension of parasite and the faster speed of driver/power as well that most of the semi-condutors, the caps are to tight regarding the size and voltage. For sure if you pay the price, anything is impossible! |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2140 Registered: Oct-07 | Plym, May I quote your last line from the post above? Sounds a little like something BushII would say. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 4664 Registered: Feb-07 | That almost sounds like it was run through google translate, or a classified ad from Nigeria. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15930 Registered: May-04 | . "Still curious why a Cable would seem to always sound better after run in? Some report they don't like soldered connections, but not frequently enough to make any conclusions. More dielectric saturation stuff?" Mostly, yes. If you've read the classic Marsh/Jung articles on capacitors (first published in the February and March 1980 issues of Audio magazine), you would probably come away with the concept of a cable being not too dissimilar to a cap. Those articles were published just at the time passive components were being looked at with new eyes for the role they might play in the sonic behavior of a piece of audio gear or in the context of an entire system's performance. They established much of the groundwork for a rethinking which eventually resulted in a massive sea change in the design of high end electronics. http://waltjung.org/PDFs/Picking_Capacitors_1.pdf http://waltjung.org/PDFs/Picking_Capacitors_2.pdf "Some report they don't like soldered connections, but not frequently enough to make any conclusions." There are too many theories of operation for cables and connectors to settle on any one as being conclusive of anything. But, IMO, putting a glob of tin and lead on the end of expensive six-9's OFC conductors and gold plated RCA's doesn't strike me as the smartest thing you can do. My diy cables use a screw terminal and I would say that is a significant contributor to their performance. Of course, I made them, so I'm bound to like them, right? The issue of solder or no solder hasn't struck home with most audiophiles yet. There aren't many RCA's which do not require solder and the manufacturers probably prefer solder for reliability reasons. Like anything else in audio, if the audiophiles ever actually pay attention to how lousy the connectors are on their $2k cables, things will change. Until then, not much is going to move in a direction away from owning mostly audio jewelry rather than decent performing products. I doubt most audiophiles even know what the terminating impedance of a RCA plug should be or the negative effects of poorly/improperly terminated connectors. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15931 Registered: May-04 | . "You can think what you want, it does not change my point of view!" I didn't think it would. But I thought it was important for everyone else reading this to see some facts about your procedure. "I was talking about a chip plugged in a socket!" That's odd, you had been talking about yanking on your connectors. Let's look ... yep! that's what you had been talkin' about. "That make a difference! Even if the connectors are Gold plate!" And that's what I responded to. Whatever, P! Right? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16020 Registered: Jan-08 | Sorry Leo "For sure if you pay the price, anything is impossible!" "For sure if you pay the price, everything is possible" My error! In French we use both! |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2143 Registered: Oct-07 | In defense of solder: It should stick (wet) both surfaces to be 'mated'. Some metals don't stick to solder and should not be so treated. Proper solder connections are void free and thoroughly liquid before removal of the iron. Minimal amounts of solder should be used. 'The bigger the blob, the better the job', is simply wrong. I'm not up on different solders, Kester having always worked well for me. Some specialty solders like various silver solders have a following. Generally, you don't need huge, hi powered guns unless you are doing radiators or whatever. Electronics? small is good. I have an ancient Unger Imperial iron of maybe 30 watts with the smallest tip I could find. I can't find elements or tips, so one day I'll have to upgrade to a full-on real heat controlled station. That being said, for commerial, pre terminated cables, here would be my first choice....used by BlueJeans Cable. http://www.sonobondultrasonic.com/ This technology can apparently 'fuse' cable to connector using sound. I don't know, but I'd 'flood' the connection area with inert gas like argon during the fusion process to keep from making oxidized, hi resistance connections. All my DIY cable are setscrew connections. None are soldered, not even 'tinned'. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2144 Registered: Oct-07 | I'm sorry to pick on you Plym, but this, to me is a priceless opportunity and I've never had any impulse control. But, the fact that in French 'possible' and 'impossible' are somehow confused may be part of the problem! Overall, though, you do better in English than I would in French, so who am I to talk? C'est la vie, no? |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16021 Registered: Jan-08 | No problem Leo! The purpose of the welding is to eleminate the oxygen which oxidizes the metal which produce the bad conduction of the metal. Interesting the link you posted above because they use the argon to weld, the argon is a neutral gaz to replaced the air for a cleaner welding, I use this gaz with my Tig welder to weld stainless and aluminium. Like Jan said the reliabilty is better with solder, which I approve. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2146 Registered: Oct-07 | The 'I' in TIG is 'inert'....usually argon, but depending on metal can be any inert gas....Helium, for example. Xenon gas could be used but there are some Chlorine compounds possible.....Xenon Tetrachloride, for example. TIG welding is how you weld Titanium which turns to X*&^^^ when severely oxidized. The ultrasonic method creates heat using sound. Real loud and at a high frequency. In liquid ultrasonic tanks, I've seen 40khz used. Do NOT put your hand in one. You'll damage your hand/cartlidge. These tanks get hot, too. I think the ultrasonic bonding may satisfy Jan's urge for No Solder, while providing a sealed joint with no oxygen. The joining should last a long time. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15933 Registered: May-04 | . The idea of solder represents only the first layer in the many discontinuities found in even the most expensive cables. The problems are commonly found in interconnects where the high grade copper conductors are attached in some manner to an RCA plug. The RCA plug was originally created out of scrap metal to save money and single ended connections are typically not the best sounding. Speaking striuctly of the materials used to build a RCA the plug we use today will probably begin with a brass base which forms the bulk of the plug's shape. To the brass base some other alloys (phosphor bronze, some Beryllium and probably some tin to make things flow - all of which have low conductivity and make for poor face to face neighbors when you're trying to conduct extremely low level information) are commonly bonded to the material to facilitate the nickle/gold or silver top plating that the consumer sees as a "gold plug". The numerous discontinuities in materials and their attendant resistance to signal flow make for a real mess when the effort is claimed to be the extraction of the maximum amount of signal. XLR's aren't much better in terms of construction of the actual parts which make up a plug or jack. It's just that a XLR is a far better connector overall than a RCA and that balanced circuitry has an inherent -6dB advantage in noise and hum over a single ended circuit using even the very best RCA connectors. No matter how you make the connection between plug and conductor, the discontinuities in materials (six-9's copper to a brass shell and forward) will always represent a sticking point in the extraction of the finest detail, truest timbre and quickest pacing. At least a soldered RCA is a gas tight connection - thereby eliminating oxidation at the connection itself - which cannot be said for any of the current crop of screw type connectors I've seen on the market. It's always struck me as completely incongruous that audiophiles spend thousands of dollars trying to lower the noise floor of their equipment to facilitate the retrieval of low level information but still muck it up large by using a lousy connector whose intention is to be cheaply made. They then runn the signal through cables and circuits with higher noise levels. It seems particularly illogical to do so when the swap to a $5 connector would probably make more sense and result in a more significant improvement than will lavishing hundreds if not thousands of dollars on circuits which are destined to be inferior. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15935 Registered: May-04 | . Here you go, P; "Hard metals like rhodium really are only advantageous in connectors that require extreme resistance to abrasion from extensive repeated rubbing which is not typically associated with AV connections." You keep pulling on those cables and you keep abrading them and weakening them each time you pull and push. http://www.av-outlet.com/en-us/dept_149.html The idea is to make a better connection, not a lower quality one. . |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2149 Registered: Oct-07 | At least the ultrasonic doesn't add an additional metals. I would be real careful, by your reasoning, about phono circuits. These are the lowest level stuff most audiophiles routinely deal with and the most subject to the effects you note. To that I would add various bi-metalic effects where (any)2 dissimilar metals will have a characteristic voltage associated with the junction of them. The voltage is related to temperature. http://www.omega.com/temperature/z/pdf/z016.pdf Commonly used thermocouple alloys. NOTE: frequent use of Rhodium. Somewhere buried on the Omega site is a chart of MV vs Temp. Some alloys will produce a large enough voltage at low enough temps to interfere with very low level signals. The take-away? Everything matters, even those wretched 'invisible' connectors everyone takes for granted. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15936 Registered: May-04 | . Correct, leo, when gold plated connectors first appeared on high end cables and equipment there was a bit of a fuss made regarding the likelyhood of two dissimilar metals - commonly nickle and gold plating - producing a lower quality signal rather than a higher quality signal transfer. The counter intuitive logic claimed this to not be of any importance given the multiple layers of dissimilar materials found in the typical connector. Sort of an argument saying, "If you think that's bad, wait till I tell you about ... " My recollection of the argument involved the possible diode effects of the two metals reacting across the very small gaps found between the two pieces of the connection. Under magnification, the surface of a RCA plug/jack appear to be more similar to the surface of the moon than to the local skating rink. This could give rise to RFI pickup (a crystal radio tuned to one station, no?) and to additional noise generated by the connector itself. As oxidation occurred on the surface of the nickle plated component at a rate faster than it would show on the gold plated side, the problems became more likely to occur and to become increasingly noticeable. A similar case has been made for silver to gold plated connectors though silver oxide is considered a benign component having no audible effect on signal transfer. . |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2150 Registered: Oct-07 | I've seen PLENTY of SEM pics of 'smooth' stuff and it ALL looks like its been meteor bombarded. Even surfaces which have been polished with say......1 micron cerium oxide......under enough magnification look awful. Some semiconductor surfaces, however ARE very smooth as a result of processing. Epitaxial wafers ARE very smooth as issued and any defects are expressed and easily seen under a microscope. 'Stacking Faults' and 'Slip' are the 2 issues. Conventional polish / casting should be awful. All this stuff of greater and lesser effect is part of the 'haze' of hi-fi. All the internal connections in a piece of equipment with all the possible bimetal connections and temp gradients. NOBODY has any real idea other than theory and what they hear. Measure? Yet another can-o-worms. Wanna make a perfect connector? Shoot me some ideas and maybe a concept for a design. I'll work on it and make a drawing in Sketch Up. Process for manufacture will be difficult, but in limited runs who cares about cost? Must be an integrated solution with cable and all insulation included. The wide / narrow spaces used on thermocouple connections would be both polar and difficult (impossible?) to plug in incorrectly. These plugs are available in dozens of different alloys and the wire matches. Now there would be a place to conceptually begin. Pick a low resistance alloy, I had a filling once on which I could get KFI. That goofball Bill Handle would wake me out of a sound sleep at 0500 every morning. Moving to San Diego, 80 miles further south, helped. Silver oxide? We used to make our own silver on silicon reference standards. They were stable for a LONG time and I never saw a deterioration or change in reflectance...and believe me, I could tell if it was even 1% different. Aluminum, on the other hand, is awful stuff and the addition of any oxygen renders it an opaque mess. Even the Chrome standard was very stable, and Cro2 was a tape coating for a long time. I suppose diode effects are possible. I'd be worried about a connector at the hot end....say a tube amp...and the other side a nice, cool running SS preamp generating a minute DC current. And like I said, the guy with the MC cart would be most vulnerable. I just had an idea which I won't write here........Mind if i PM you? I won't do so without permish. Part of the idea includes micro-finishing to micron standards. All plating, if that's what it takes is done in a vacuum NOT as electroplating in a bath. let's make some money. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 16028 Registered: Jan-08 | metals p(n Ohms m) aluminum 26.5 brass 64 chromium 126 copper 17.1 gold 22.1 iron 96.1 lead 208 lithium 92.8 mercury 941 manganese 1440 nichrome 1500 nickel 69.3 palladium 105.4 platinum 105 plutonium 1414 silver 15.9 solder 150 steel, plain 180 steel, stainless 720 tantalum 131 tin 115 titanium 390 tungsten 52.8 uranium 280 zinc 59 Copper still the best conductor! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15939 Registered: May-04 | . I don't accept PM's through the forum for what should be obvious reasons, leo. I'll send you an email and we'll start from there. IMO the best connection would be hardwired from point to point. That's somewhat impractical for most systems but the idea of quick connect/disconnect would seem to be the beginning point for why audio connectors mostly suck when it comes to fidelity to the source. Eliminate solder and minimize material (doing away with the conventional dielectrics) are my personal ideals. When we were playing around with the diy's at Mike Wodek's house, we had what we both thought were some nice sounding, very dirt cheap ic's that are suitable for line level use (though lousy for phono as the ic's are completely unshielded). We were using the body of a Radio Shack screw type RCA; \link}http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2062472,http://www.r adioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2062472} without any solder connections. They're very flimsy but that was the idea, get away from the heavy tetosterone-juiced RCA's found on most audiophile approved cables. All comparisons held up well until MW found a good price on some Eichmann bullets; http://www.twochannelaudio.com/eichmann.html These were the first RCA's to actually show an improvement over the RS cheapos. At times you tend to conclude cheap is good because they aren't going to spend the money to muck things up. Which is another "suck it and see what comes out" philosophy - most current RS stuff remains crap and shouldn't be allowed in the same zip code with a decent audio system. For better or worse, RS has decided the audio hobbyist is no longer in their demographics and they are catering to the diy'ers less and less with each new catalog. But, they will give you easy (and expensive) credit and you can overpay numerous times for a mobile phone or a computer at RS. Whatever! The idea of a minimalist RCA has also been explored by Mapleshade; http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/Cables/departments/58/ though they aren't willing to sell the RCA's individually - which makes me sort of wonder if the not at all average RCA's are a large portion of what Mapleshade is (not) hearing from their cables. Like Mapleshade, my diy's are minimalist in their dielectric materials. My diy's are fragile and therefore out the mainstream - certainly for anyone wishing to disconnect/connect their cables on a constant schedule - and very anti-audiophile trendy. They're too easily duplicated at little cost and build time for the average listener to actually suggest anyone buy the cables. They are also limited in how far they can run since there is no shielding on the ic, after about two meters (max)they are probably starting to be too long for most installs. Otherwise, they seem to perform well and, when you dispense with the RCA altogether through some creative thinking and maybe some hands in the gear time, they are IMO (and MW's) tough to beat for sound but they become even more out of the mainstream. As I see it, one of the major impediments to good sound quality is making a gas tight connection with ic's. Using the current approach - which puts more favor on quick, easy to make/break connections than on ultimate sound quality - means this is an impossibility. Therefore, any connection you make will only be as good as the materials allow (which is rather pathetic for the most part in that the best conductors are also the softest, most easy to deform and damage materials and also the most expensive in their purest state) and that, in all likelyhood, the connection will have begun to deteriorate from the moment the connectors leave the manufacturing process and begin to oxidize. So, that leaves us with this scenario; you make a not so great connection when you first plug the pieces together and they get progressively worse from that moment forward. And they scoff at tubes! . |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 2154 Registered: Oct-07 | Agreed. RCA must go, and that is the direction I'm thinking. BJC is also on the right track |