The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Digital Interconnect Review


  • To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: Digital Interconnect Review
  • From: "Timothy Morris" <timothy.morris@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:57:03 +0100
  • Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
  • Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
  • Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Doxey [mailto:ukha@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 04 August 2001 09:35
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxxSubject: RE: [ukha_d] Digital Interconnect Review

Thanks Alan.
 
Youve confirmed what I have always said. 
 
Being open minded I'm almost starting to feel a little foolish. I'm going to repeat the exercise again with some even more upmarket cables to see whether I really could hear a difference or wheter I just wanted to hear one ;-) 
 
For Analogue Audio, good screening is a must and low capacitance if you dont want to loose the higher frequencies. Or you can convert to a balanced signal and send it for long distances over two bits of wet string.....well not quite but any old twisted pair comms cable, even telephone cable. When we ran Coastal Radio at the local college there was a run of 100m of normal telephone cable from the studio to the refectory for an amp that we placed in there.  
 
Don't forget skin effect too - which is why teflon seems to be used almost universally now except in the cheapest of cables. 
 
Even BiWiring is of limited but noticeable benefit. You are effectively just putting a much thicker cable to feed the speaker but as long as they are still being fed from the same amp you can still get cross modulation from heavy bass transients that will cause audible effects on the higher frequencies. 
 
You can but - and this information comes from an amplifier designer, and there are always tradeoffs to be had - there is a benefit to using one well designed amp per channel - and you then avoid stereo cross talk. Of course the best way is to use four mono amps ;-)
 
When I get time I will send Tim a set of KAT5 modules to try on his Plasma screen. I would be interested to find out what he thinks of the quality. Mark Harrison was suitable impressed with the Audio performance and I know what others think of the video performance. I would also be interested to find out how much Tims Component Video lead set cost. Probably more than my TV !!!
 
£200 retail, but I managed to get 50 quid off. I did look at cheaper cables but with them there always seemed to be (small) losses in resolution. Interestingly the Panasonic Plasma suffered from an Svideo timing error, which I've been working with Panasonic UK to fix using the service menu. We finally got there on Wednesday, and what a difference! There are now only subtle differences between Component and Svideo. I'm using Supra Svideo cables - can't remember how much I paid for them, but they look expensive and have got meaty plugs on the end, so they probably are :-)
 
Tim.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor


____________________________________
Automated Home UK
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
____________________________________

Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.