DIY... Cables & Conectors

Question 2...          (Related  to Q1, so I'm not going to spin off another thread!)

For another Naim user (not on this forum and who uses a 3rd party CD player ), I intend to build a better cable than his existing piece of string.

Currently I propose using 2 x Furutech 216(G) RCA phono -> Mogami W3106 -> Prehkeytec 5 pin DIN to build this cable.

My question is...     Can anyone suggest better connectors than the Prehkeytec 5 pin DIN and  Furutech 216(G) phonos, without spending a small fortune on the phonos?
(His CD player and speakers don't justify paying for WBT Nextgens or Eichmanns).

Nope - nicely engineered as is. I'd just take the opportunity to remove the locking ring from the Din 4 and keep the fixing screw slack. 

PS - for Q2 even though you don't want to... Eichmann 

For signal IC's  I use Neutrik REAN NYS322 DIN 180’ 5-pin (silver plated pins)  I use these for signal only as they have no locking rings (a'la Lumina & HiLine).   They have a  chunky alloy body with simple easy to work solder & cable clamp  

For power carrying cables I use everyone's favourite,  the PREH (Locking Ring) DIN 240’ 5-pin & 4-pin

In my case I need 4 pin DINs (2 off, dual mono) but with the 272 they don't carry power - hence discussion is OK here.

I couldn't find any REAN 4 pin DINs.

For the RCA to DIN 5, I'll look into the REAN NY322, thanks.

Huge.

I’ve built quite a few cables with W2549 with very little success. (I bought 20 feet of the stuff).

The problem lies in the fact that my system is on the edge of being bass shy, with a slightly raised treble. There is no doubt that W2549 reduces the bass output and increases treble, in my system I end up with no bass and a lot of treble.

But the mids are open and detailed.

Of people who do like W2549, I know you use a sub and Tony uses speakers that certainly don’t look like they are lacking in the bass department. So you’ve probably not noticed the problem. (you don’t have a problem).

With regards to RCA plugs, I have a manticore turntable that was upgraded to their highest spec, by Manticore. The tonearm cable is D502 with Tiffany connectors; I doubt they’d have used duff connectors. Might be worth investigating, they’re now sold under the vampire brand, but Tiffany style connectors can be purchased at reasonable prices.

fatcat posted:

The problem lies in the fact that my system is on the edge of being bass shy, with a slightly raised treble. There is no doubt that W2549 reduces the bass output and increases treble, in my system I end up with no bass and a lot of treble.

Thats just the opposite to my experience with 2549.    My notes at the time:  Bass has more texture with a feeling of being more powerful .... treble has a lighter feel that makes the sound more atmospheric .... 

These are DIN-DIN CDX2 (at the time - now NDX)  plus NAT-05.  They are made to measure to the connect length to fit without excess.     

Huge posted:

I couldn't find any REAN 4 pin DINs.

Strange... but true... on the UK version of a 'well known auction site'.

However..... Deltron & PREH seem to be available in 4 pin...... 

Hi Fatcat,

Interesting conclusion about the bass, certainly not an effect of bass level (that's not actually possible unless the cable has very high resistance), but it can certainly still can be a matter of perceived bass emphasis (or lack thereof! ).  When I still had the ND5 XS / Nait XS system I set-up the sub with the help of REW and a calibrated mike while using the standard Lavender interconnect.  When I changed to the Mogami cable I rechecked the calibration and the result was identical - there's no difference in the actual level, however a change in the presentation can give a change in the perceived level.  In fact the enhanced mid-range may be responsible by drawing attention to this and away from the bass.

In my case now with the 272, it's a little more abstracted than that as the bass feed to my sub doesn't even touch the W2549 - the DSP for the sub is connected to the RCA outputs of the 272 (via Chord C-Lines); the Mogami cable connects the 272 to the 300DR and to the main speakers which are positioned in bass minima in my room.

Hi Mike,

Interesting conclusion about the bass, certainly not an effect of bass level (see above!).

I think this just shows how subjective we all are when listening to things!

In my case, I didn't really notice any change in the bass, and not much at HF; but I did notice a lot more detail, better differentiation of instrumental timbres and better readability of voices (these are mostly changes in the MF and lower HF audio bands).

Huge:  It was a while ago that I made the cables & I'm only quoting on the notes I made at the time.   But recalling & expanding on my notes;  bass level as such did not (it cannot) increase or decrease,  the improvement was in the better detail,  I assume the effect was because of less smearing (or similar)  that made detail (texture & timbre) carried in the bass appear to be "more powerful"    It was the same in treble,  the detail added a level of atmospheric ambiance.      Also worth noting I was comparing the Mogami with an AR Sounds 'Skylink'  on the CDX2 & FlashBackSales 'Premium' on the NAT-05.   

Hi Mike, exactly my same conclusion on HOW the perceived changes are made manifest.

Interesting the comparison to the AR Sounds 'Skylink' and FlashBackSales 'Premium'.

I think the comparison between W2549 and W2497 should be interesting - very different cable construction but similar materials.

It will be interesting,  but I can't use coax,  so I'm just an interested spectator 

Slightly off topic but to clarify ... is discussion of a custom I/C between NAC272 and NAP200 allowed, so long as the discussion makes clear the power connector from NAP200 isn't connected?

Hi Eloise,

Yes that's OK, because there's no power line in the cable as you say.

Eloise posted:

Slightly off topic but to clarify ... is discussion of a custom I/C between NAC272 and NAP200 allowed, so long as the discussion makes clear the power connector from NAP200 isn't connected?

Eloise, DIY discussion is not allowed under forum rules, however, in light of the spirit rather than the letter of the rule in question, I allow some limited DIY cable discussions at moderators discretion so long as it is only a signal cable and does not involve any cable that carries DC power (i.e. "SNAICs", Burndies etc..).

That's also why I started this in "The Padded Cell".

Richard Dane posted:

Eloise posted:

Slightly off topic but to clarify ... is discussion of a custom I/C between NAC272 and NAP200 allowed, so long as the discussion makes clear the power connector from NAP200 isn't connected?

Eloise, DIY discussion is not allowed under forum rules, however, in light of the spirit rather than the letter of the rule in question, I allow some limited DIY cable discussions at moderators discretion so long as it is only a signal cable and does not involve any cable that carries DC power (i.e. "SNAICs", Burndies etc..).

Thanks... will err on the side of caution and not ask...

"So long as it is only a signal cable and does not involve any cable that carries DC power (i.e. "SNAICs", Burndies etc..)"...   Go on...

Do it...   Ask away...

As you have a 272 and it's a custom I/C, it doesn't have to have the power connected, and this is the padded cell, so you'll be fine...
(And if you're not, Richard will just delete the parts of the question that aren't fine, he's very reasonable! - just remember no commercial links or for sale / free type offers.)

P.S. Gosh, that was an awful lot of ellipses!

Okay ... so currently I have an "unofficial" 2 RCA to DIN cable between the NAC272 and NAP200 (2 RCA at NAC end of course).  I know best option would be the original Naim SNAIC (is SNAIC right) but I bought the NAP200 second hand and it didn't have the SNAIC.

So being handy with a soldering iron, I was considering replacing the cable (iirc it was from Flashback) with a length of star quad wired so that one pair of cables was for left, one pair for right ... that should (to my mind) keep the Naim star earthing.  Nothing connected to the +24v pins.

Just need to buy a pair of DIN connectors; but anyone see anything wrong with wiring this way?

I did something very similar to connect a 272 to the power amp of a Nait XS 2.  It worked fine.

I currently use similar cables to connect to a NAP 300 (but they're separate L&R).

In the past I made a 5 pin DIN interconnect using Mogami W2534 (Star Quad) in a pseudo balanced configuration (four cores being Signal L, Return L, Signal R, Return R, with the screen connected at the source end only.  I compared this to Mogami W2549 (TwinAx) in the unbalanced configuration (two cores being Signal L, Signal R, with the screen carrying both return currents, i.e. connected at both ends).  The differences did favour the Star Quad, but the differences really were very small, and I don't think they justified the hassle of connecting the screen and two cores to one tiny little DIN connector pin at the source end.

What Star Quad mic cable were you thinking of using?
I believe Naim use Prehkeytec DINs for both Lavenders and SNAICs and they are reasonably easily available.

I'm sure a DIN 4 -> DIN 4 using any decent microphone cable will easily outperform your current RCA -> DIN 4 cable.  Incidentally as non-powered interconnects I think the Mogami neglex cables perform better than the Naim SNAICs when used this way.

Huge posted:

...................     I compared this to Mogami W2549 (TwinAx) in the unbalanced configuration (two cores being Signal L, Signal R, with the screen carrying both return currents, i.e. connected at both ends).  The differences did favour the Star Quad, but the differences really were very small, and I don't think they justified the hassle of connecting the screen and two cores to one tiny little DIN connector pin at the source end.

Agreed,  connecting 2549 in a DIN is way easier than 2534.   I choose 2549 just because of this.  But about a year ago a friend asked me to make him some 2534 - lots of grrr's - & I tested one (as you do) on my system & really could not hear anything different. 

One consideration I used in my decision to go with the 2549 is that all Naim circuits have a common ground (0ve) ,  not least seen in the single DIN pin-2 used as 0ve,  so no matter how many cores and/or screen is used for 0ve in the cable,  it all connects to one DIN pin at both cable ends & it all goes to a common ground in the Naim boxes,  0ve on the 2549 screen alone does that admirably.    

Oh yes, and it much reduces the risk of having to resolder a connector because a wire has drifted 1/2mm sideways and caused a short!   In fact to solder the 4 cores + shield to one DIN plug I actually went as far as constructing a soldering jig just to hold everything in place.

Like Mike, I've done both Star Quad and TwinAx, and I now stick to TwinAx (W2549 in the Mogami range) for stereo in a single cable.

Mike-B posted:

<snip>
But about a year ago a friend asked me to make him some 2534 - lots of grrr's -
<snip>

Is that the reason for the avatar?

(I know you've actually had that avatar for a lot longer than that, but I had to take the opportunity!)

Huge posted:

What Star Quad mic cable were you thinking of using?

I believe Naim use Prehkeytec DINs for both Lavenders and SNAICs and they are reasonably easily available.

Ive got a length of VanDamme starquad I might give it a go with... but not sure if it’s just better to also get some Mogami.  But as I’ve also got some twinax balanced, would you suggest that would be better than the starquad?

I take it that's VanDamme XKE.  I think the Mogami W2549 would be better, but that's mostly based on reputation.

What's the TwinAx?