Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

YOU missed the point completely ! (long)

Hi.

First off, what I did was an attempt of some qualitative analysis which may lead to why we hear the difference in cables due to their
construction.

I did already state clearly we don't even know what to measure let alone the effective instrumentation available to make such measurement valid to what we hear. Yet you still reiterate the forever tune of the naysayers: "YOU do not have the ability to measure it". So do YOU have the ability to measure it then????
Give me a break, please. I'm sick & tired to read this sterile commente all the time.

Surely the signal propagation velocity is based on the ideal situation of vacuum or "free space", which would never happen in the realworld, regardless whatever construction of the transmission line, namely coaxial cable. So, your statement is WRONG.

For any straight ROUND copper conductors, the v.c. factor is the reciprocal of the square root of the effective dielectric constant (e) of the conductor insulation. Wherever there is insulation dielctric, there is a delay. This is nature. So how come your statement: "the ONLY transmission line which has the ability to transfer a siganl at the FREE SPACE velocity of the dielectric is a coaxial line"? You assume a coaxial cable is a bare wire w/o insulation?

The velocity of a wave in a coaxial cable can be expressed as a percentage of the velocity of light. For a coaxial cable using solid PE, it v.c. is 0.659, & e=2.26

However, using foam PE where air is trapped inside the foamed dielectric, say RG-62 coaxial, the effective e is much less & v.c. is higher due to the air trapped inside, i.e. v.c.=0.80 & e=1.55.

I used v.c. & e to explain the delay of signal transmission which will surely give some perspectives easier for our readers to understand.

Now you bring in something else: "magnetic field" & "E field".
YOU are now complicating the issue which I tried to explain in simple language.

So what "magnetic field" & "E field" are to do with what we hear? Please explain it in simple language so that our readers can understand.

The bunch of forumulae won't help anyway. You put them there to scare
off people?

So let me go back to H & E field you bring forth which you failed to explain why you mentioned them relative to cable sonics.

The relative amplitudes of electric field (E) & mangetic field (H)
due to a signal passing through a transmission line, say, a coaxial cable is determined by the capacitance & inductance per unit length of the cable (assuming NO, repeat no reflections from the load).

The characteristic impedance (Z) = E/H = square root of L/C.

Another simple equation for Z is Z= 101,600/capacitance x v.e. of the insulation dielectric.

From the 2nd formula, we can see the faster is the v.e of the insulation dieelctric, lower the the impedance.

You could be a great scholar, but you got make our readers understand what you want to tell.

c-J

PS: the info. given my my posts are referenced from:
Radio Engineers Handbook, Pulse, Digital, & Switching Waveforms,
& Reference Data for Radio Engineers.



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Signature Sound   [ Signature Sound Lounge ]

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]