Speaker Cable installed by Electrician

eddiem74

A couple of years back our living room was re-done, and I told the electrician I wanted our room wired for surround sound, although at the time I just knew I wanted that but had no experience in what I needed (not that I do now either).

Attached a 3 pics for your reference:
1) cover plate electrician provided to nicely conseal wiring
2) speaker cable and connector to cover plate for satellite speakers
3) comparison of my electrician installed speaker cable against QED X-Tube

The cable my electrician used has a white outer core, and inside then a blue, and brown inner cable. I am not sure of the quality or correctness of this cable, I assume he just used a standard basic speaker cable?

What I would like your thought's on are; is this cable okay to get me by, or way below par for my new Onkyo 605 Amp & KEF KHT 3005s speakers?

If I am in trouble with this, appreciate any advise on good speaker cable and where to source.

Thanks.

conax

this is dangerous ground here:D

the cable you have looks like .75 round mains flex, the connector a TS jack plug and socket to suit. what is going to be said after this is that you should rip it out and replace with dedicated 79 strand speaker cable the jack sockets either removed or replaced with binding plates. really it all depends on what level you want to demand from the system. from a pratical point of view if it was me and i couldnt replace the cables I would get rid of the jack sockets replace with binding posts and hook it up as it is after all its a surround sound system not a audiophile system. the front speakers should be placed middle hight either side of the TV and equal distance apart, the centre speaker under (or above) the screen so you can easilly replace these so your only stuck with the surround sound speaker cables.

McFearless

whats 79 strand cable?i would have just used 1.5 2core flex,but im an electrician so i dunno,is flex no good??

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

what is going to be said after this is that you should rip it out and replace with dedicated 79 strand speaker cable the jack sockets either removed or replaced with binding plates.

Yep, That's exactly what I'd be saying. It's obvious from the jack plug sockets (WTF?) that the sparks didn't really know what he was doing and just provided a system that would work but wouldn't be great. 79 strand cable is well short of audiophile levels but will do a decent cinema setup. You have good amp & speakers there..... anything less than 79 strand would degade it IMHO.

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

the front speakers should be placed middle hight either side of the TV and equal distance apart, the centre speaker under (or above) the screen .....

Fronts should ideally be placed so that the tweeters are level with your ears.

conax

Slaphead07 wrote:

Fronts should ideally be placed so that the tweeters are level with your ears.

why dont you take a look at the speakers he has...duh.

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

why dont you take a look at the speakers he has...duh.

Given that I can't take a look at the TV or where/how it's sited and I'm not entirely clear what "middle hight either side of the TV" really means I offered a simple maxim that covers the placement of all speakers.

eddiem74

79 strand cable is well short of audiophile levels but will do a decent cinema setup. You have good amp & speakers there..... anything less than 79 strand would degade it IMHO.

So if 79 strand is the minimum what else should I consider to improve quality further ? Also if I was going to get out the hammer and chistle and run new speaker cable, does it need to be of a particular type to be then plastered over?

Given that I can't take a look at the TV or where/how it's sited...

See attached 3 pics of my living room. As you can see one of my issues is TV location, and where all existing cabling has been routed back to.

Slaphead07

It looks like you'll have to put your fronts on stands (see your Argos catalogue!).

When you go past 79 strand you're into a whole world of cable characteristics which frankly you don't need the hassle of (bring on the experts with their multi-meters :rolleyes: ) but as 79 strand will be absolutely fine just stick with that.

Xennon

To the OP, What you have installed is fine. And if anyone here can explain to me factually why 0.75 2 core is not up to the task of supplying signal to a couple of hundred watt speakers I and the IEEE would be interested in hearing that.

Next someone will try to sell him/her directional cable :rolleyes:

eddiem74

Xennon,

Thanks for your inputs. I'm a complete novice moving into the world of separates, and am doing my best to get a fairly decent set-up. From browsing around the web today, I also found many articles which seemed to indicate thicker cabling was the way to go, there was even a comparison on one article to plumbing, i.e. thick n thin piping, and trying to force water through. Anyway, enough said there I think........:eek:

Slaphead07,

Where can I source 79 strand cable, Maplins or ? and what type should I be looking for ? Any recommendations ?

Slaphead07

eddiem74 wrote:

Slaphead07,

Where can I source 79 strand cable, Maplins or ? and what type should I be looking for ? Any recommendations ?

Maplins sell it by the reel. I'm told there's different gauges of 79 strand cable but worry about that when you get there (they probably only stock one type anyway!). The "pipe" metaphor for cables is a fairly good one... you'll get a signal through any wire... even basic bell-wire, but you won't get full bass, clear mid-range and clean treble.

conax

Xennon wrote:

To the OP, What you have installed is fine. And if anyone here can explain to me factually why 0.75 2 core is not up to the task of supplying signal to a couple of hundred watt speakers I and the IEEE would be interested in hearing that.

Next someone will try to sell him/her directional cable :rolleyes:

Yep I agree, but take a look a the genesis report on speaker cables, might help you see where they come from,somewhere in there I think they forget its a human ear that is listening to the audio. I have another one that totally dismisses the genesis report as well.
but I always like the Idea of speaker cable for speakers and mains wiring for mains.....sewage pipes for sewage, water pipes for water, Im a bit funny that way:)

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

.....I think they forget its a human ear that is listening to the audio.

That's the only measurement that counts and I know from long experience that cables do make a difference. Not necessarily more expensive ones, but certainly different materials produce a different sound.

conax

Slaphead07 wrote:

That's the only measurement that counts and I know from long experience that cables do make a difference. Not necessarily more expensive ones, but certainly different materials produce a different sound.

Cept did you see what they use to test in the report. and dont get me wrong up to a certain level I am all for speaker cable after that I have to revaluate with my calculator as the freq responce on the human ear does not go much above 20Khz and the time responses of some tests would require a hearing frequency well into the hundreds of MHz.

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

Cept did you see what they use to test in the report.

I didn't..... It's not the sort of stuff I'd normally read. I'll do a quick google and have a look. I heard interconnect cable last week that costs €13,000 a metre. I'll pause while you read that again. Thing is that there's already a few customers interested in it (here in Ireland) and it would be wrong to think that these people are stupid or don't know what they're doing. They're the "Odin" cables on the left of this page http://www.nordost.co.uk/ and before people start ranting Nordost are a very well respected cable company and not purveyors of snake oil.
Although it should be borne in mind that interconnects have a much greater bearing on sound than speaker cables and this thread began on speaker cables....


found it at http://www.qed.co.uk/downloads/qed/brochures/genreprt.pdf

McFearless

Slaphead07 wrote:

I I heard interconnect cable last week that costs €13,000 a metre.

that has to be bull!!,i refuse to believe that!!thats crazy,what the hell does it do!?

Slaphead07

McFearless wrote:

that has to be bull!!,i refuse to believe that!!thats crazy,what the hell does it do!?

It corrects grammar, adds capital letters and reduces the need the exclamation for marks. What do you think it does?

conax

Slaphead07 wrote:

It corrects grammar, adds capital letters and reduces the need the exclamation for marks.

WOW! and just 13g......me thinks Ill wait for the Lidl equivalent:)

Xennon

People....these are surround speakers the OP is connecting via this cable, if they were handling more than 500W RMS I would be advising him to change to perhaps a 1.5mm2 or more depending on what he was driving.

You guys are telling a lad who has the cable already run, to dig it all out to put in figure8 speaker cable. That cable exists because its cheaper than mains flex, i.e. it doesn't have a rated breakdown voltage.

A speaker is a hugely inefficient device as it is, changing the speaker cable is not going to make ANY acoustic difference in this case. If you wish to take it further I would say that the materials in the room would have more of an impact on the acoustics of the system.

To the OP, if you think the cable makes a difference, then by all means buy some figure8 spk cable and connect it to the speaker...then compare with the installed cable. After all, you are the one that will be listening.

I would however recommend that you power down the amp when plugging jack plugs in and out. Some jack socket can momentarily short when inserting and removing the plug. BTW Jack plugs have been used in the audio world for eons.

I'm still laughing at the pair of phono to phono cables I saw in a shop for over E60, ooh the power of marketing and mis-information.

Regarding the Genesis Report, is this it? http://www.qed.co.uk/downloads/qed/brochures/genreprt.pdf ;
This paper is not a research paper, it was produced by a company that sells these products. When I see a whitepaper published by the IEEE regarding this, I will be more than happy to quote it.

conax

Xennon wrote:

People....these are surround speakers the OP is connecting via this cable, if they were handling more than 500W RMS I would be advising him to change to perhaps a 1.5mm2 or more depending on what he was driving.

You guys are telling a lad who has the cable already run, to dig it all out to put in figure8 speaker cable. That cable exists because its cheaper than mains flex, i.e. it doesn't have a rated breakdown voltage.

A speaker is a hugely inefficient device as it is, changing the speaker cable is not going to make ANY acoustic difference in this case. If you wish to take it further I would say that the materials in the room would have more of an impact on the acoustics of the system.

To the OP, if you think the cable makes a difference, then by all means buy some figure8 spk cable and connect it to the speaker...then compare with the installed cable. After all, you are the one that will be listening.

I would however recommend that you power down the amp when plugging jack plugs in and out. Some jack socket can momentarily short when inserting and removing the plug. BTW Jack plugs have been used in the audio world for eons.

I'm still laughing at the pair of phono to phono cables I saw in a shop for over E60, ooh the power of marketing and mis-information.

Regarding the Genesis Report, is this it? http://www.qed.co.uk/downloads/qed/brochures/genreprt.pdf ;
This paper is not a research paper, it was produced by a company that sells these products. When I see a whitepaper published by the IEEE regarding this, I will be more than happy to quote it.

errr read the replies again, I said leave the cables there, the move to 79 strand has nothing to do with expensive cables, there is a formulae for working out the guage of the cable vs the impedence of the speaker, 79 strand covers the majority of systems it is always a safe bet. Even Slaphead didnt mention expensive cables. the genesis report was to show the levels manufactures go to, to express their facts on cables. However as QED are a custom install based company they know that many of the users are technically minded, so they have tried to steer away from the nonsense claimed by other manufactures. If you read it correctly they are trying to dismiss most of the so called "facts" not the other way around as you suggest.
However having said that there are total inaccuracies in their report as well, take the oxygen free copper for example! and how they word the difference not as marginal or almost non existent, but as slightly superior,its got nothing to do with the oxygen either way.

As for the Jacks...yep they are used for audio applications, high power event systems etc,but look speaker cable for speakers.

I am the last person to go for the expensive cables and interconnects, I believe in physics and up to a certain point physics and the transfer of audio applies to speaker cables. the important thing to know is where the physics end and the crap begins and to be honest that line was not even nearly crossed in any of the above postings.

eddiem74

Everyone, I am really appreciating the feedback and discussion, learning more everyday thanks to you all. Keep it coming !

Yesterday, I discussed everything with the wife and we even experimented moving the TV around the living room. The end result is now we are considering moving the TV and associated cabling to the backwall in the living room (see pic for refresher).

We are at least going to explore this, and see what is practical to do if anything. To be honest the TV location has never been the greatest, and not if you want a decent home set-up which we do. It's a good size room, and we are not taking advantage of it, so lets see what happens.

Reality is, if we do this, we will have to move cables anyway, so might kill two birds with one stone here. Will see what the plaster (wifes brother ) and "new" electrician say !

Cheers.

Slaphead07

Jack plugs are used for musical instruments but never Hifi... completely different delivery system.

And you're right to laugh at €60 interconnect cables... it costs >€130 to make decent ones.... good plugs alone are €12.50 each (cost price) so that's €50 straightaway. €60 cables will be crap alright.

padi89

Slaphead07 wrote:

And you're right to laugh at €60 interconnect cables... it costs >€130 to make decent ones.... good plugs alone are €12.50 each (cost price) so that's €50 straightaway. €60 cables will be crap alright.

Nonsense.Good cable as in what, build quality?Slaphead is entitled to his opinion but i STRONGLY suggest you A/B an averaged price IC against a more expensive one and see if you can tell the difference.
I have heard some very expensive cables through various sources A/B'ed with cheaper ICs and i could never tell the difference.I even blind tested with a mate and neither of us had a clue which was which.Of course the enthusiasts will tell you ,you have poor hearing.....weak system ...blah blah.Making claim on the net that you can tell a difference is pointless without proof,its something that has to be done in person.
No point in even discussing this its just

Slaphead07

padi89 wrote:

Nonsense.Good cable as in what, build quality?Slaphead is entitled to his opinion but i STRONGLY suggest you A/B an averaged price IC against a more expensive one and see if you can tell the difference.

I have done regularly over the years and in fact did so again just the other week (with a poster from here) and it just confirmed again my view that poor cables are a waste of money.

padi89 wrote:

I have heard some very expensive cables through various sources A/B'ed with cheaper ICs and i could never tell the difference.I even blind tested with a mate and neither of us had a clue which was which.

and therefore nobody else is entitled to? That's just absurd.... and unjustifiably arrogant.

padi89 wrote:

Of course the enthusiasts will tell you ,you have poor hearing.....weak system ...blah blah.Making claim on the net that you can tell a difference is pointless without proof,its something that has to be done in person.

I think you'll find we don't care if you believe or not.

I don't think these boards are the best place for a philosophical discussion about something you don't hear against something I do hear. I have no intention of letting some bloke off the internet decide what cables I should use no more than what car I can drive or what clothes I wear. Get over yourself.

padi89

Slaphead07 wrote:

I have done regularly over the years and in fact did so again just the other week (with a poster from here) and it just confirmed again my view that poor cables are a waste of money.



and therefore nobody else is entitled to? That's just absurd.... and unjustifiably arrogant.



I think you'll find we don't care if you believe or not.

I don't think these boards are the best place for a philosophical discussion about something you don't hear against something I do hear. I have no intention of letting some bloke off the internet decide what cables I should use no more than what car I can drive or what clothes I wear. Get over yourself.

Wooooooo there Slaphead don't get your knickers in a twist,as i said at the start YOU are entitled to your opinion.You rubbished people spending 60 on an IC and said it should be at least 130 so all i am doing is giving a different side.
If that is the minimum someone should be spending on a cable then Hi-Fi is strictly for people with plenty of spare cash.In all fairness if you said that to somebody starting out they'd run a mile,sounds like Russ Andrews talk to me.Someone could buy a nice little Amp 2nd hand for 130 euro.
If there is such a difference then why is there so much talk in various Hi-Fi forums regarding just using Van-Damme Blue or Cat5 speaker cable as opposed to expensive stuff?Or even DIY cables that are made just as well for a fraction
of the cost?If cables do really have that much impact then surely people should be pulling their Amps apart to replace binding posts and RCA inputs,wouldn't be much point plugging an expensive cable into an inferior device.
If you hear a difference fair enough,but as i said it is something that you can only do in person.

Slaphead07

Russ Andrews is a chancer is he?

padi89

Slaphead07 wrote:

Russ Andrews is a chancer is he?

YYuuuuuppppppppppppp

http://www.russandrews.com/lookup/1/region/UK/currency/GBP/customer_id/PAA2613098807110JSZCPKRDNWCUDLPZ/product-Pro-Earthing-kit-1821.htm
http://www.russandrews.com/lookup/1/region/UK/currency/GBP/customer_id/PAA2613098807110JSZCPKRDNWCUDLPZ/product-SuperCube-1830.htm

Man i forgot how bad that site was,christ, the claims that are made!!!!!!

Slaphead07

why don't you throw your eyes to heaven to make yourself sound even better informed. Russ Andrews is the benchmark for mains conditioning across many industries and not only at a consumer level. Of course he may shut up shop now that some internet weirdo has said "Man i forgot how bad that site was,christ, the claims that are made!!!!!!" and beaten him severely with exclamation marks.

padi89

Slaphead07 wrote:

why don't you throw your eyes to heaven to make yourself sound even better informed. Russ Andrews is the benchmark for mains conditioning across many industries and not only at a consumer level. Of course he may shut up shop now that some internet weirdo has said "Man i forgot how bad that site was,christ, the claims that are made!!!!!!" and beaten him severely with exclamation marks.

Internet Weirdo? :rolleyes: Im not the one getting all worked up here over some cables, Slaphead i can't be arsed you just cannot be civil.Always,everytime its the cable enthusiasts that get all wound up.............some things never change.
Well one things for sure Russ Andrews are consistant in their claims,all of their products will ''give wider soundstage,deeper bass''
http://www.russandrews.com/lookup/1/region/UK/currency/GBP/customer_id/PAA2613098807110JSZCPKRDNWCUDLPZ/product-Pro-ReleeS-5411.htm
A wipe??????.......errmmm OK.Goodnight

Red Alert

I'm going to debunk this cable thing: I worked in a shop that had three floors and a monster of a sound system. Four big crest VS650's directly drove 28 Rogers DB101's (which are HiFi rather than bog standard PA-grade speakers) with no 100V matching. Whole thing was wired with usual mains cable and sounded terrific - whether you were listening to a CD at a normal level when the place was empty or whether they had a DJ who rocked it out a bit.

I've pretty bog standard speaker cable at home connecting a Yamaha AX396 to Mission M33's.

Line level is a different story - I've decent shielded (thick) wires from my music server and multi CD to my amps at home because I have found they sound better.

The Ritz

Yet another fairly straightforward thread goes off-topic into "interconnect" land. We've been here before, time to chill out, please.

Mod-mode Ritz.

conax

I think it goes something like this, the guy with the 50e interconnect is happy, the guy with the 200e interconnect thinks the 20e interconnect is junk, the guy with the 1000e interconnect thinks the 200e interconnect is crap, the 5000e guy complains about the 1000e interconnect and so on. at the end of the day there is only one happy guy

Xennon

Jack plugs are used for musical instruments but never Hifi... completely different delivery system.

Because the movement of electrons is different for hi-fi systems?

And you're right to laugh at €60 interconnect cables... it costs >€130 to make decent ones.... good plugs alone are €12.50 each (cost price) so that's €50 straightaway. €60 cables will be crap alright.

Nice big window in that shop methinks, they sell directional speaker cable there aswell btw.

Conax, apologies I didn't mean to rant.

To the OP, the speaker cable you have is fine for the task at hand.

conax

Xennon wrote:

Because the movement of electrons is different for hi-fi systems?

Zennon I think we will have to get you a big spoon to stir that pot:)

Nice big window in that shop methinks, they sell directional speaker cable there aswell btw.

My favourite is the pre conditioning of speaker, mains and interconnects i.e running high current Mains through the power lead before using them, or the run in period for speaker cables (they sound better after x many hours)

Conax, apologies I didn't mean to rant.

No need to, we are all out to kill each other here me thinks

To the OP, the speaker cable you have is fine for the task at hand.

Almost forgot about the OP:)

Slaphead07

Red Alert wrote:

I'm going to debunk this cable thing: I worked in a shop that had three floors and a monster of a sound system. Four big crest VS650's directly drove 28 Rogers DB101's.

If you're going to "debunk" anything you'll have to compare like with like. Three floors and a "monster" sound system cannot be compared to a living room with a properly setup stereo.

conax

Red Alert wrote:

I'm going to debunk this cable thing: I worked in a shop that had three floors and a monster of a sound system. Four big crest VS650's directly drove 28 Rogers DB101's (which are HiFi rather than bog standard PA-grade speakers) with no 100V matching. Whole thing was wired with usual mains cable and sounded terrific - whether you were listening to a CD at a normal level when the place was empty or whether they had a DJ who rocked it out a bit.

well I dont know about the rest of ye but im sold on that....mains cable all the way from now on.

I've pretty bog standard speaker cable at home connecting a Yamaha AX396 to Mission M33's.

considering your above statement, I wonder is that almost an oxymoron.

Slaphead07

there's absolutely no doubt that mains cable will work although I've only ever seen the heavier stuff used (the Gray sleeved 2 ply + earth) . It can work very well but it's far from perfect and hardly a final solution in a good system. Bass tends to be a bit flabby and the trebles are a little rough, mid-range is muddy. The phrase "spoiling the ship for a h'pence worth of tar" applies to hifi separates..... if you've spent good money on speakers and amp don't start scrimping on flimsy cables - you'll always hear the weakest link in your system.

conax

Slaphead07 wrote:

there's absolutely no doubt that mains cable will work although I've only ever seen the heavier stuff used (the Gray sleeved 2 ply + earth) . It can work very well but it's far from perfect and hardly a final solution in a good system. Bass tends to be a bit flabby and the trebles are a little rough, mid-range is muddy. The phrase "spoiling the ship for a h'pence worth of tar" applies to hifi separates..... if you've spent good money on speakers and amp don't start scrimping on flimsy cables - you'll always hear the weakest link in your system.

I actually can't believe Im saying this, but I agree with slaphead there:)
mains cable will work, its electrical wiring and the signal is electrical but there are audible differences between mains cable and proper speaker cable, truth been told on an average system with short lengths I would be cautious to do a blind test, but on longer lengths no problem you would pick it out easy enough.

I also agree with spending money on the interconnects and speaker cable in keeping with the cost of the system, not that after a certain point the sound will be any better more to keep the cosmetics of the system in par, your not going to throw 79 strand speaker cable between an amp and speakers that cost 20g, but when people stat claiming that their 200e digital interconnect improves the "soundfield" and "tonal balance" of the system...well thats another matter.

ZENER

Xennon wrote:

To the OP, What you have installed is fine. And if anyone here can explain to me factually why 0.75 2 core is not up to the task of supplying signal to a couple of hundred watt speakers I and the IEEE would be interested in hearing that.

Next someone will try to sell him/her directional cable :rolleyes:

If you're familiar with IEEE regulations then you will be aware that a 1mm cable drops about 28mV per amp per meter. Assuming a 10m 2-core speaker cable of this diameter then the total length of the conductor is 20m (10 to and 10 from the speaker) then this equates to .56V per amp carried. An amplifier delivering - say - 50 Watts RMS to a speaker may in fact deliver transients of up up to 10 Amps to the speaker. This means a 1mm 2-core flex of 10 meters would drop .56 x 10 across the length of the conductor which is about 5.6 volts !! Considering the amplifier may have up to 35V at it's output terminal this accounts for almost 1/6 of the total voltage output from the amp being dropped across the resistance of the cable rather than where it should be - the speaker ! That's 16% of your power lost in the cable. For this reason I would use a 2.5mm cable minimum which will reduce this loss to about 8%. This has the effect of behaving like a compressor - the more current carried the higher the loss - the lower the available output power. My opinions on OFC cables are known here so I won't revisit that issue, so whether you like your copper asphyxiated or not 2.5 would be desirable over a 0.75 flex. 79 strands just means the cable is ultra flexible - if you like that fair enough ! Also remember we haven't even touched on the capacitance and inductance inherent in all cables which would have an audible effect on a cable.

As for 1/4" jack connectors - these were designed in the early days for telephone use in exchanges. Their use in speakers was primarily for ease of use when connecting/disconnecting. They do not provide a reliable resistance free connection adding further to the losses in the supply chain to the speaker.

Directional cables I have my doubts about in fairness - this is AC we're talking about after all which travels in both directions unless of course it's carried on a positive DC carrier, which it isn't in this case.

conax wrote:

why dont you take a look at the speakers he has...duh.

The satellite speakers deliver the mid and high frequencies therefore they would be considered a tweeter among other things so slapheads comment is correct in my opinion.

Slaphead07 wrote:

It corrects grammar, adds capital letters and reduces the need the exclamation for marks. What do you think it does?

Still trying to pick myself up off the ground after this one - brilliant !!

Xennon wrote:

People....these are surround speakers the OP is connecting via this cable, if they were handling more than 500W RMS I would be advising him to change to perhaps a 1.5mm2 or more depending on what he was driving.

If amplifiers delivered voltages that were a constant 230VAC then you'd be correct because the current would be under 6 amps and not too fussy about dropping a few volts. Amplifiers are transient devices delivering varying voltages in or out of phase with each other so a 500 W amplifier may deliver up to 30 or 40 amps to a speaker - so a 1.5mm cable ?? I think not.

Although electricians are taught all this as apprentices most forget it after a few months wiring houses. Before you attack me for that comment I am an electrician of 23 years, so don't.

edit: corrected my calculations
ZEN

conax

ZENER wrote:

The satellite speakers deliver the mid and high frequencies therefore they would be considered a tweeter among other things so slapheads comment is correct in my opinion.

except their not, they are full range, and this is a home theatre system, and the idea of the LCR is to tie in and draw attention to and with the imagery on the screen.

ZENER

conax wrote:

except their not, they are full range, and this is a home theatre system, and the idea of the LCR is to tie in and draw attention to and with the imagery on the screen.

Eh . . . what ?

Actually sorry I get what you're saying. If they are full range then why do they need an extra woofer for low frequencies then ?

ZEN

conax

ZENER wrote:

Eh . . . what ?

Actually sorry I get what you're saying. If they are full range then why do they need an extra woofer for low frequencies then ?

ZEN

yep brilliant answer:rolleyes:



50 watts 10meters of .75 copper cable into 8 ohms dBloss .87dB, 1mm .45dB, 2.5mm .07dB.

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

except their not, they are full range.

Are you telling us that the speakers pictured (not actual size) are full range speakers? I think not! They will handle the high frequencies and the upper mid range - any claim by KEF that they go lower should be mocked and their factory be daubed with rude and derogatory slogans.

Your assertion that the left centre and right are to draw attention on complement the actual image is only partially correct. As long as the left and right are equidistant from the screen then it's fine... my own L&R are about 4 feet either side of the screen. I think we're all agreed on where the centre would go.

ZENER

conax wrote:

yep brilliant answer:rolleyes:

I'm not quite sure what you mean there but this is the spec on the satellite speakers in that Kef package:

4 x Satellite speaker - 2-way - 100 Watt - 70 - 55000 Hz - 8 Ohm - Wired,
1 x Center channel speaker - 3-way - 100 Watt - 65 - 55000 Hz - 8 Ohm - Wired,
1 x Active subwoofer - 250 Watt - 30 - 250 Hz - Wired

The front and rears are 2 way which means they have a tweeter and their lowest frequency - usually quoted at 3db down is 70Hz - so not really full range. As with most of these system types the Sub Woofer takes up most of the slack handling frequencies below 250 Hz and providing focus for the system.

This is getting away from the topic of this thread though -

Is the .75mm cable the electrician installed good enough ? Not if you're serious about the sound quality.

Are the 1/4" 2 pole jack sockets adequate ? If you're prepared to go with 0.75mm cable then the inclusion of these won't really matter to you but beware what someone said earlier - some sockets are make before break so may momentarily short out the amplifier output.

50 watts 10meters of .75 copper cable into 8 ohms dBloss .87dB, 1mm .45dB, 2.5mm .07dB.

Sounds about right, the bigger the cable the lower the loss. Simple physics !

ZEN

conax

Slaphead07 wrote:

Are you telling us that the speakers pictured (not actual size) are full range speakers? I think not! They will handle the high frequencies and the upper mid range - any claim by KEF that they go lower should be mocked and their factory be daubed with rude and derogatory slogans.

Your assertion that the left centre and right are to draw attention on complement the actual image is only partially correct. As long as the left and right are equidistant from the screen then it's fine... my own L&R are about 4 feet either side of the screen. I think we're all agreed on where the centre would go.

Now slaphead there is no need to go picking holes, the Kef sub has a frequency range of 30Hz to 250Hz, now if as you suggest the satellites are upper mid range and up. As middle of the mid range is around 2.5kH we will say that upper mid range is what? 3kHz so there is a gap from 250Hz to 3k. where does all the sound go?:)
It was a wide statement as the satellite speakers are closer to full range than to any other range by a long shot.
Now as you also well know, there is no way of telling where people are going to situate their TV set, if the TV is over the fireplace and the viewer is sitting 6-10 feet back with the speaker cone at ear level and we will say 4 feet either side of the TV then it is my opinion that dialogue from the left or right of the screen will be pulled down from the image to the speakers as we are very good at direction finding dialogue that can be mildly annoying. the standard set out for surround sound (as it is mixed) has all speakers on the same axis, the idea of the speaker placement has everything to do with enhancing the film atmosphere and is tied directly to the viewing, yes equal distance from the screen is of upmost importance, but as I said at the top and earlier when the OP was putting the TV on the wall the speakers give the best image (with relation to the screen) place the speaker equal distance from the middle of the screen ( this is not to say its exact for everybody, but in the majority of cases it is correct) If the speakers are lower than the screen this is no great problem but the further apart (with reference to a higher screen) they are the more the sound image is drawn from the screen. It was a wide ranging statement nothing to get your knickers in a twist over.

conax

ZENER wrote:

Sounds about right, the bigger the cable the lower the loss. Simple physics !

ZEN

Glad you think so:)

Slaphead07

conax wrote:

It was a wide ranging statement nothing to get your knickers in a twist over.

My knickers remain untwisted.... stop obsessing over them.

ZENER

conax wrote:

NAs middle of the mid range is around 2.5kH we will say that upper mid range is what? 3kHz so there is a gap from 250Hz to 3k. where does all the sound go?:)

Midrange frequencies are generally accepted to be between 300 and 5000Hz. Speaker manufacturers are renowned for massaging response figures to suit their own requirements. An amplifiers frequency response is the range it is capable of reproducing from the lower range to the upper range where it's output does not drop below -3db. Audio amplifiers tend to have a flat response from about 30Hz to 18KHz tailing off at either end, but speakers do not so getting the figures to look good is a relatively simple exercise of picking a frequency curve and plotting the -3db points to suit. The size of the enclosures for those satellite speakers leads me to believe they would have a difficult job reproducing anything below 200 Hz hence the response and power of the sub woofer.

This thread has gone way off topic at this stage so I'm not going to post again for fear of a banning or reprisal from the mod who has already expressed concern over the direction this thread has gone to.

ZEN

conax

ZENER wrote:

Midrange frequencies are

This thread has gone way off topic at this stage so I'm not going to post again for fear of a banning or reprisal from the mod who has already expressed concern over the direction this thread has gone to.

ZEN

Ahhh come on ZEN, don't be like that:) audio is great its the only subject I know other than religion where if you know what buttons to push you get a great response, and along the way everybody learns something.

Now where were we.....ah thats right that is the mid range freq, and as posted 2.5 would be the middle of the mid range the upper would be around 3k (in response to Slapheads response) to the speaker capabilities I wanted to know where the audio from the crossover from the sub to the speakers went as he stated they were only upper midrange,furthermore............FFS your right ZEN way off....I duly give up:D

The Ritz

Zener,

This thread has gone way off topic at this stage so I'm not going to post again for fear of a banning or reprisal from the mod who has already expressed concern over the direction this thread has gone to.

The direction I was concerned about was the note of rancour which inevtiably ensues discussion of interconnects, be they cheap or expensive. I have apersonal preference for......... nope, not going there......

The lack of that rancour has made this into an interesting discussion - post away. I'm not one for banning unless in the face of extreme personal insults, and my life is already too complicated to have to plot reprisals !

I won't argue with your calculations about loss over cables or their electrical behaviour - I guess the more general issue about the effect on the overall "sound" is more one of subjectivity. I know that when I upgraded the speaker wire in my own system I noticed a difference - there's no point in me getting into "wine tasting" language about it, the sound was simply clearer to me. Mind you, the "temporary - for two years ! - speaker wire I had for my rears wasn't great so maybe it's no surprise.

The issue of satellite speakers is particulrly interesting - with the Kefs going down to 70hz, there's very little overlap if the sub is set to cut off at 80hz.

This means that setting up the speakers can be quite tricky to make sure that the sub and the sats are well integrated. Room response and sub placement are also influencing factors, but that really has to be sorted out by the person in their own environment. I'm using MS Genies and I still have some work to do - I'd like to try room equalisation, but am rebuilding my system bit by bit at the moment so it'll have to wait until I can pick up the requisite equipment secondhand.


Ritz.