• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Bob`s pimp it yourself mains cable

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/mains/filters2.html

explains various uses.

if you remove RFI from a mains lead intended for digital and a wide bandwidth linear psu then I think its a good move.

still looking for that info regarding the ferrite rejecting unwanted energy from the amplifier and sending it back into the amp.

and this link they have a similar debate regarding the use of ferrites. they say yes for mains cables.

www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/ferrite-beads-on-hifi-cables

I will dig up the exact details but im getting tired its late here :)
 
the various shield types and application of one or two ferrites at what point also has effect.

floating shields.
semi floating shields.
fully grounded shileds.

all have more and less ideal application scenarios

often with the wrong shielding implementation the noise will find its way back into the power or (signal in digital cable context)

the main point is filtering RFI and improving the working environment of analogue signals.

also with a view to giving digital equipment less high frequency noise to contend with.

any circuit will operate at its best with clean ripple free power.

I have a filter on my 12v ATX feed to the CPU. less noise and cleaner power gets the audio processed with greater signal to noise ratio.

in domestic application the tolerance for S/N ratio is around 60db attenuation.

in medical and military application these techniques have to hit a 90db S/N ratio

so by exploring and following through the more demanding specifications my precious audio signal should be delivered with less corruptive noise in the signal range.
 
The ferrites will not "restrict" the PSU and can help with reducing EMI. But a good PSU will already have plenty of filtering built in.

It's also OK to use ferrites on the speaker cables. They will not have any impact on the frequency response since they stop common mode noise, not the differential mode signal. (If they stopped differential mode signals, HDMI cables with ferrites would not work!) You can also use coax cable as shielded speaker cable. Use the core for signal and shield for ground on a single ended amplifier or two coax lines with the cores for each signal and ground the shields to the amplifier casing.

Similarly, ferrites can be used on low level signal cables, either analog or digital, single ended or differential. (You can also put some on a fiber cable if you like, but it would have zero effect...)
 
data in block transfer mode is a digital pulse above or below the base line. digital converted to a waveform suddenly becomes a time critical issue with the need for clean power to reduce rounding the square waveform.
and the clock pulse to generate the timing becomes more critical.
and on another aspect you can buy shielded sata cables.
less error correction means metter timing and less cpu cycles used on putting it right.
theres vast reasons and theory to all of the subjects we have touched on.

refer to DNM cables. unshielded to a large degree and he gives reason from research for this.
if you get a ferrite within a few inches of dnm speaker cable you can hear the signal has changed on the offending channel.

they also use casework free from metallics after the study of eddy currents.

so I find whats best for analogue and digital very opposing techniques.

I would never go near a speaker or analogue signal cable with shielding or ferrites.
but do all I can to create a faraday cage approach to digital casework and signals.

ferrites on hdmi and usb are of a specific range that does not effect the signal range.
and in there better application the outer sleeve is isolated from the signal and power cores to avoid effecting the signal frequency.
 
Last edited:
All the SATA cables I have come across are shielded.
The "rounding off" of the square waveforms is determined by bandwidth of the channel. As long as the receiver can correctly decode the data (possibly with the help of compensation), all is well.
 
sup.jpg
example of this digital interconnect.
the supressors are of a value designed not to effect the signal.
the teflon silver coated braid acts as the antenna and collects the energy that would otherwise enter the signal and power cores.

its a fully shielded faraday in effect.
the data is preserved from external RFI and the shield avoids the ferrites from effecting the signal and is of a specific value to avoid harm incase the unwanted effect enters the signal cores.
 
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/jitter1_e.html

this explains the issue with timing and waveform at the stage the signal is reconstructed to analogue.

edit: high end dacs wont even work with cheap cables. there too tight a tolerance.
I have a 10meter optical cable that works fine. try a cheap 1 meter and the dac spits out intermittent corrupt signals until it declares it an error and stops processing.

decent audio components have tight operational tolerance so these effects beneficial or not can be heard.

in a senario where the square wave is on an analogue carrier signal any spikes or ripple will offset the surmised data and move the intended values to reconstruct the sound wave.

theres no information in a digital recording regarding the clock rate it was captured at or on the consistency of its timing. so the dac responsible for reconstructing the given information relies on it being theoretically perfect.
probably not the case out of all but the finest recording studios

edit: the only computer capable of true real time generation of an analogue signal is the high end apple mac.
a PC with no budget concious approach would need some reconstruction of the OS and to employ GPU cards capable of tesla calculations.
the whole PC audio is still in its infancy. an I7 with full instruction set has the advantage of simultaneous memory addressing. so large banks of ram with small overall capacity in memory terms is the most cost effective step forward in the current technological state.

I have an aerospace company currently mulling over designing a emi cage for a usb audio card. in theory it will give the card optimal environmental conditions to operate in. the company that makes the card are keen to have a sample sent to them for approval yet they state from there knowledge base the card in question has all it needs to perform. yet there still open to the better understood knowledge base of the aerospace company.

much like the PC no one person can understand every subject that arises. people within specific fields contribute to a whole. so we experiment in an effort to push results forward.

we can debate for another 50 pages with our combined limited knowledge base but I doubt it will lead to nothing more than an agreement to difffer.
thats why theres companies throughout with different design philosophies.

if we provide links to the information we have taken on board then we can reach our own conclusions.

I take on board what you pose because I want to understand more :)
 
Last edited:
I did spot an 11min video with oscilloscopes regarding the effects of ferrites. :D

thats as much number as your getting out of me a 1:12 in the morning edog :D lol

I will ask various companies nicely to show there workings.
and try to get the toys for hard data.

cant you just accept I have really big ears and I can tell today's mods have benefited. lol

and it sounds loud in dynamic terms but the neighbour hasn't come round to ask me to turn it down because of his baby he referred to as "it" lol

two scientific results at my disposal :rofl:
 
edit: high end dacs wont even work with cheap cables. there too tight a tolerance.
I have a 10meter optical cable that works fine. try a cheap 1 meter and the dac spits out intermittent corrupt signals until it declares it an error and stops processing.
When I was a contractor at a networking company, they mostly used "cheap" fiber cables from Monoprice. They work flawlessly despite the link running at 10Gbps and above. The only fiber cables that gave problems were the ones that got broken from bending too much. Most likely that's what happened to your cheap cable. The part that carries the signal is a very thin strand of glass, thinner than a hair. The cheap cables skimp on the protective wrapping around it and are easier to break.
 
No.. sounds like a bunch of not needed mods from the discussion.

Well IBM knew the correct way to internal cable when they started to develop computers and decided to use twisted pair wiring because it was cheaper to implement.

And nope to the broken optical cable... Go look into how they work. It would have been the reflections and timing that caused the sync to loose its lock.

Its similar with digital coax. Supposedly the signal can bounce back and forth shadowing the desired signal. Thats why a aes/ebu connection is preferred as it sends an opposite value through the other signal core. That enables the processing to varify.

In vague terms... Just woke up.

Well edog if its a bunch of not needed mods then I will leave it here.
And in future just not post on anything but help regarding hardware and software.

I foreclose :thup:
 
Bobby, Here is the thing. You are talking only in subjective terms. So some people may not be able to hear the difference if they have cheap speakers/cans. NiHaoMike, who is also quite sharp when it comes to things like this, is contending otherwise as well.

All I am asking for is some actual proof of what you are saying is needed. Or a better reason than, I think it needs it.

I, nor anyone else has any problems with you posting help like this, but, it should come with something more concrete behind it, especially when people question the way it works. Support your assertions is all one is asking for, otherwise, who really knows if it is true. There is misinformation, intentional or not, all over the internet. ;)
 
fair pointers Edog. I dont mean to be a funny swine. Im under stress and just been to get my "anti kill pills" stepped up. lol

I have my power of attorney in Bulgaria telling me my tennants have done a runner. (though I already found them :D )

and I need to pick up a tracking bug to place on someones vehicle because the police will pay but cant legally deploy the tracker.

my friends and colleagues life and children are in danger so this just made me spit the dummy being a Z list issue.

welcome to my world :)

I understand your issue and will in my own time provide more thought out information and show my workings.

respect OCF people... :salute:

Peace out :thup:
 
And nope to the broken optical cable... Go look into how they work. It would have been the reflections and timing that caused the sync to loose its lock.

Its similar with digital coax. Supposedly the signal can bounce back and forth shadowing the desired signal. Thats why a aes/ebu connection is preferred as it sends an opposite value through the other signal core. That enables the processing to varify.
That makes no sense when "cheap" fiber is regularly used in 10Gbps applications while 8 channels of uncompressed full HD audio is about 36.9Mbps. The timing requirements would have to be very strict indeed to work at 10Gbps.

What could happen is the cheap fiber being excessively lossy or the ends have poor tolerances that cause poor alignment.

The issue with coax is an impedance mismatch problem. The signal will not "bounce off the end" if properly terminated. (And that's an issue regardless of the quality of the cable, except for scope probe cable that's designed to suppress reflections.) Differential signaling makes no difference in that it will also reflect if not properly terminated.
 
post no32 nihaomike.

I said I foreclose.

so you win your right about everything... now **** off from my back!
 
Back