What am I looking at here? Is this for real?!
$100,000.USD power cable haha. Looks like they injected plaster into a furutech end.
Sadly, I think it is.
Too many “clichés” in the same page. Can’t be real.
Similar to this item, currently in sale:
Okay, that one is real. I am most definitely certain that they would have sold that headphone and the wall that it was on for $110,000.
I know I would have.
It’s a shame, but they don’t have anything for a plain old Feldspar guy like me.
That is a very funny website, VL.
Not perhaps quite as funny as the Acme Klein Bottle website.
https://www.kleinbottle.com
I need to get a sent of Tantalus coffee mugs.
Haha! That’s ridiculous.
@Torq can I ask you something else? What about that cryo treatment of some cables? Is it esoteric, too or does it have any purpose? Is there an audible (or measurable) difference when cryo treated? As always: thanks
I was sure that there was a discussion of this before; I know it’s been touched on. I looked here…
and I looked here…
And HERE…
Found this @Torq quote
These cables still feature:
- Proprietary dual-interleaved, quad-helix, geometry.
- Ultra-low resistance** and capacitance.
- High purity, oxygen-free, pure-copper wiring.
- High-density, plated copper-matrix shielding.
- Electron-beam irradiation (EBI) - for improved flexibility and reduced microphonics.
- Cryogenic treatment - because … “Why not?”
- Reflective and Glow-in-the-Dark cable sheathing.
And, of course, they’re reassuringly expensive .
But no direct answer.
Let’s see what everyone thinks. Here’s a MULTIPLE RESPONSE Poll.
- Cable temperature makes no difference at any time, unless it is so hot it melts.
- Cold treatment may make a difference, but only while the cable is cold - until we get room temperature superconductors
- Of course cryogenic treatment can make a difference - I just don’t know if I can hear it
- Treatment with cold is something materials science people have done for years. Look at Damascus steel, or quenching any steel.
- Cold treatment makes a difference - to the manufacturer’s bottom line.
- "What you talkin’ bout, Willis?
And I should note that I’ve heard responsible materials scientists say that there is no directionality in piece of wire. But I don’t think I’ve heard a clear discussion of cryogenic treatment. Anyone who can reply with serious pointers please do. I’m personally of the I’ll believe it if it’s superconductive school.
There are visible changes before/after cryogenically treating some materials when viewing the grain/boundary structures under an electron microscope. Proper cryogenic processing can, as with annealing processes, “relax” the structure and reduce the number/size of such boundaries (see prior discussion about these as related to OFC/OCC conductors), resulting in improved thermal and electrical conductivity and reducing internal reflection.
And certainly there are reasons for annealing or cryo-treating materials in engineering … usually to do with improved strength/resilience/consistency in extreme applications.
In terms of measurable electrical changes? Not really at audio frequencies, lengths and applications.
Audible changes? I would say not.
Most people cannot reliably hear distortion in musical material even as high as -60 dB. That’s about 0.1% distortion (and I’ve seen supposedly “trained” listeners blow that same test at -33 dB, which is 2.2% distortion).
Put that in perspective, the changes resulting in cryo-treating are going to be down around the same levels as Johnson noise, which for a human voice centered frequency, in a typical room temperature commercial conductor, is somewhere around -140 dB (or 0.00001% distortion …). When we care about such things, we actually OPERATE the conductor in cryogenic state rather than just treat it and then use it at room temperature.
And ALL of that assumes proper cryogenic processing … not the quick, relatively high-temperature, processes that bulk-processing of non-critical materials often entails.
As to why I did it on my own cables … it’s relatively inexpensive (smaller commercial processors charge by size/weight), people ask for it and it doesn’t do any harm. But then I also didn’t sell such cables with any claims of audible benefits.
With most materials, resistance goes up with temperature.
For copper, the temperature coefficent looks like this (nano Ohm per meter):
Note This is in Kelvin, room temperature is at 290 to 300 K
What makes a difference to resistance of metals is if it is in a hardened state or in an annealed state. The later not only makes it less brittle, but allowes better currentt flow (in the order of nano Ohms per meter, in case of copper).
TL;DR Unless you submerge your cables in liquid nitrogen (gets you down to 120-ish Kelvin), anything cryo related does not matter.
For more info on cryogenic treatments:
@Torq I have got one more newbie question, I am SORRY
What braid (let’s say for an 8 braid cable) is the “best”? square, round, flat, etc.? What braid do you make? Are the differences just cosmetic nature and I choose this or that because of the looks?
Not @Torq but here is a post of his where he discusses his cable builds…
There’s no simple answer, as what geometry is best depends on what electrical properties/effects you’re specifically trying to achieve.
Most of the 4/8 flat/round/square braids I see don’t use the necessary spacers and binders to fully maintain their geometry as the cable bends to offer any significant EM/RF rejection, for example.
In general, it’s very hard to beat the rejection of a simple star-quad configuration for each driver (that’s four wires per side, in a very specific winding, and using specific legs of each side as pairs for the + and - signals). Many of the fancy, exotic-wire, 8-way braids you see don’t even approach the consistency or rejection of something as simple as one run of $0.50/foot Canare L-4E6S per channel.
So, for the most part, unless the characteristics of the “braid” are actually published (both electrical and physical … twist ratio, how spacing is maintained, and so on) I would personally regard it as a primarily cosmetic concern.
Does anyone know: Is a 16 braid cable (if possible to solder onto the needed plug and financially within reach and when portability is not needed) always better then an 8 braid cable?
Or in other words: What is to be expected when going from a 4-braid cable, to an 8-braid and 16-braid?
You can read this post, which addresses the same issues (just in the context of 4 to 8, rather than 8 to 16, conductors).
But in short:
No.
The number of “braids” isn’t really the issue, unless the conductor properties and count is invariant per braided element. But assuming they are … each doubling would halve the resistance of the cable and double the capacitance.
EM/RF rejection may get worse or better, depending on how the braid consistency is, how spacing and twist changes with cable flexure, and on what respective braiding patterns are used for each configuration. And, of course, there may be no meaningful rejection at all.
Thanks @Torq, and halving the resistance and doubling the capacitance is a good thing I guess?
It depends on the application and components, as well as the actual values involved.
Ideally BOTH values want to be as low as possible.
At a practical level, the capacitance of a cable (from the conductor/geometry) for a conventional dynamic or planar headphone is largely immaterial. For but an electrostatic headphone it is a critical factor and cables are often linear/ribbon style (rather than braided), non-litz, in order to keep the capacitance absolutely as low as possible.
And for normal headphones, outside doing something ridiculous, the cable impedance is going to be tiny anyway, though it can become a factor when dealing with very low impedance, high-sensitivity IEMs.
Ah, I see. So if I‘d need a short cable for my Stellia, it won’t matter if I have a 4 or 8 braid?
Nope, since the braiding is either only interesting cosmetically, or if done suitable would add EM/RF rejection characteristics that don’t really matter unless you’re using a long cable in an interference prone environment.