Any pointers how I can improve my system?

joerand posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

have found racking very device dependent.

I've found TTs most sensitive to different racking arrangements. As far as the black boxes go, I suppose I've always assumed that once established, quality racking will carry through upgrades. Now giving this a second thought, it seems relevant that higher level gear demands better racking. I'm positing about accepted racks like Fraim, Quadraspire, and Isoblue (which I use). Not that there aren't quality alternatives. Point being that once you do your due diligence on racking and hear a definitive difference in SQ, you have a benchmark to use confidently as you upgrade.

Begs the question; when does the rack become a limiting factor? A whole other can of worms.

I think it may also depend on the brand, some like Naim seemingly taking racking almost as an required complement to internal suspension (though I have always struggled to understand why that can’t be built into the casing, enabling more flexible placement in the home), while some other equipment is very much less dependant, maybe virtually immune to racking.

Turntables of course self-evidently have always been sensitive to what they sit on, though again some more than others.  TTs can also be affected by room placement - and presumably that also applies to other gear very sensitive to the racking.

Richard Dane posted:

Babek posted:

Thanks CHRISSU. I will ask about the Naim's Plugs. I HOPE i will find out my newly purchased (see above) plugs are better.

 

 

Use the Naim SA8 speaker connectors at the amp end - they are the perfect match for the sockets.  Anything else  - especially if it's "gold plated", should definitely be avoided here, as invariably it sounds worse...

Thanks for your point Richard.

Regarding connectors and speaker wires, I don't know too much. However, I rather stick to as much science as I can muster.

Gold is a noble metal, and in the noble metal class is one of the least reactive. Also its a very good conductor. One step below copper.

So if we were to consider two qualities we might need for good connectors and conductors, they might be inertness and conductivity.

Silver and copper are better conductors than gold, however they are more reactive. Hence all things being equal (quality etc) we are better off having copper or silver as none-exposed conductors and gold as exposed conductors. Hence the reason why we see products in the market as they are. Also, due to the skin effect, more surface area is considered best, hence lower AWG. These are the points I can relate to, they are basic science outside the audiophile world.

Unless someone can convince me using simple science, as above, why one product is better than another, I would have nothing but their word to go by. No disrespect, and to some that maybe good enough, but I just have a problem with that.

Could you elaborate why Naim connectors are better and why gold connectors are not a good idea? Thanks in advance.

Emre posted:

SOtM power supply if you don’t own it already...

i am very curious about 200ultra vs a naim streamer performance

Thanks Emre, a great point.

I did think about that, and in the process of getting it. Considering either the SBooster or the SOtM's own linear power supply, the latter being more expensive. Any experience on either?

Thanks

Innocent Bystander posted:

Marten do a subwoofer called Form, which I understand is designed to complement their range including the Dukes. Unless your room is very small that may round off your system.

Alternatively (or as well) the DAC may benefit from improvement, whether the NDAC, Chord Hugo (or Qutest), or for a real ‘wow’ factor, Dave. Or a streamer like one of the soon-to-be-released Naim ones (ND5XS2, NDX2 or ND555)

Thanks for the comment.

Babek, I can chip in.. because so called ‘gold plated’ connectors are in fact gold alloy plated connectors, with very little gold and made of varying metals including nickel, zinc, copper, palladium etc and these are not necessarily ideal as sonically transparent connectors, albeit being an alloy can be made to be hard wearing. Obviously pure gold is totally unsuitable as a connector metal as it is far too soft. The primary use of gold plating in connectors is not primarily for conductive qualities, but for corrosion resistance qualities. 

Finally skin effect is frequency dependent and comes into play at RF. At audio frequencies I suspect the skin effect is extremely minimal if evident at all.

Daniel H. posted:

A Naim powerline on your amp can help. Possibly powerlines on all your Naim boxes also. I also believe great gains can be made by power distribution. I use an Audioquest Niagara 1000 power bar. It is an improvement on the already very good Cablepro power bar I was using. I use a Shunyata power cord from the Niagara 1000 to the wall. 

Thanks Daniel

I have changed all my power lines with 12 AWG shielded cables, using US type plugs into a US power-bar and a 13amp fuse (long story - the power amp however I have connected directly to a dedicated socket through a UK plug). And yes I did the polarity correctly for US plugs and C15 sockets. I have read that using power-supply "cleaning" hardware might cause more issues than solve, and the arguments did sound like good science to me at the time. So I have stayed away from that.

The Audioquest Niagara 1000 looks great though and I know they cost a pretty penny.

Robiwan posted:

speaker set up/roomacoustics most important!

Hi Robiwan and Thanks, you are very right. I have done the best I can, its a small living-room not tiny though. My system does sound really good, I didn't mention that before. However, I want to improve it. Its an itch, as most of you gents are more than familiar with I am sure.

joerand posted:

Echoing Robiwan and IB,

Room treatment, and I'd add racking, should both be considered equally important to any component in a system's performance. 

 Babek; what's your rack and have you attempted any room treatment?

Thanks Joerand. On that front (speaker placement), I have done what I can.  

I had a carpenter build a veneered small wooden compartment/rack dedicated for Hifi (open back and deep, with different exit points for different types of wire, which is now full.

Babek posted:

Richard Dane posted:

Babek posted:

Thanks CHRISSU. I will ask about the Naim's Plugs. I HOPE i will find out my newly purchased (see above) plugs are better.

 

 

Use the Naim SA8 speaker connectors at the amp end - they are the perfect match for the sockets.  Anything else  - especially if it's "gold plated", should definitely be avoided here, as invariably it sounds worse...

Thanks for your point Richard.

Regarding connectors and speaker wires, I don't know too much. However, I rather stick to as much science as I can muster.

Gold is a noble metal, and in the noble metal class is one of the least reactive. Also its a very good conductor. One step below copper.

So if we were to consider two qualities we might need for good connectors and conductors, they might be inertness and conductivity.

Silver and copper are better conductors than gold, however they are more reactive. Hence all things being equal (quality etc) we are better off having copper or silver as none-exposed conductors and gold as exposed conductors. Hence the reason why we see products in the market as they are. Also, due to the skin effect, more surface area is considered best, hence lower AWG. These are the points I can relate to, they are basic science outside the audiophile world.

Unless someone can convince me using simple science, as above, why one product is better than another, I would have nothing but their word to go by. No disrespect, and to some that maybe good enough, but I just have a problem with that.

Could you elaborate why Naim connectors are better and why gold connectors are not a good idea? Thanks in advance.

It is best to avoid dissimilar metals in exposed contact, as that can lead to galvanic corrosion under humid conditions. For this reason, if your speakers have silver or silver plated contacts, as I think they may have, that would be best for the speaker plugs, especially if they are in a humid environment (that, of course , is provided that the cable wire if not silver or silver plated is suitably soldered to the plug to not allow galvanic corrosion there!). But silver contacts are likely to need periodic cleaning (pulling out and replugging a few times every few months may suffice).

I personally like gold to gold connections, for their immunity oxidation or reaction with airborne pollutants, the resistance a thin layer of plating imposes being negligible, possibly less than that of degraded contacts of other metals, and unchanging.

Babek posted:

Richard Dane posted:

Babek posted:

Thanks CHRISSU. I will ask about the Naim's Plugs. I HOPE i will find out my newly purchased (see above) plugs are better.

 

 

Use the Naim SA8 speaker connectors at the amp end - they are the perfect match for the sockets.  Anything else  - especially if it's "gold plated", should definitely be avoided here, as invariably it sounds worse...

Thanks for your point Richard.

Regarding connectors and speaker wires, I don't know too much. However, I rather stick to as much science as I can muster.

Gold is a noble metal, and in the noble metal class is one of the least reactive. Also its a very good conductor. One step below copper.

So if we were to consider two qualities we might need for good connectors and conductors, they might be inertness and conductivity.

Silver and copper are better conductors than gold, however they are more reactive. Hence all things being equal (quality etc) we are better off having copper or silver as none-exposed conductors and gold as exposed conductors. Hence the reason why we see products in the market as they are. Also, due to the skin effect, more surface area is considered best, hence lower AWG. These are the points I can relate to, they are basic science outside the audiophile world.

Unless someone can convince me using simple science, as above, why one product is better than another, I would have nothing but their word to go by. No disrespect, and to some that maybe good enough, but I just have a problem with that.

Could you elaborate why Naim connectors are better and why gold connectors are not a good idea? Thanks in advance.

Very simple; the physical design and the metal in the plug and in the socket are perfectly matched - this is the most important thing.  The plug also allows for a really good solder joint to be made and the housing means that no undue  or uneven stresses are placed on the pins when in the socket.  The sum total is that you get best performance with the Naim SA8 plug when used with Naim sockets. But don't just take my word for it - try for yourself.  Some years back at the factory I  listened to some highly rated plugs on similar lengths of NACA5 (all consistently well soldered) and the SA8s were preferred each time, and not just by me, it was unanimous.  The best bit - they come free with the Naim amp, so be wise and use them.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Babek, I can chip in.. because so called ‘gold plated’ connectors are in fact gold alloy plated connectors, with very little gold and made of varying metals including nickel, zinc, copper, palladium etc and these are not necessarily ideal as sonically transparent connectors, albeit being an alloy can be made to be hard wearing. Obviously pure gold is totally unsuitable as a connector metal as it is far too soft. The primary use of gold plating in connectors is not primarily for conductive qualities, but for corrosion resistance qualities. 

Finally skin effect is frequency dependent and comes into play at RF. At audio frequencies I suspect the skin effect is extremely minimal if evident at all.

Thanks for your comments.

Yes of course they won't use pure gold, but plenty of metals with very good conductivity, like the ones you mentioned will be used. One hopes a  good quality plug/connector manufacturer considers these things, as its well-known science and it won't cost them vs what they are charging.

Don't you think that skin effect as well as all others come into some play when one is looking at an a.c. signal at all god forsaken frequencies and at all voltages ranging from 30-40volts to 1/1,000,000 of a volt? It reminds me of that movie "Shooter" taking a shot at 1mile away, factoring the Coriolis effect caused by the rotational motion of Earth

btw the skin effect is there at all frequencies, for copper at 20kHz its less than 10th of what it is at 50Hz. I mean the skin gets thiner at 20kHz

Sorry, but i am being told one type of product is not up to standard. But what is the Naim plugs made from? Any ideas why they are better?

hungryhalibut posted:

Setting aside the SOtM, of which I know nothing, what you want is a napsc and Hicap DR for your 202. 

I am looking to buy the Hicap DR (used one) as you suggested. Thx

Do make sure to get the napsc as well. 

Babek posted:

Robiwan posted:

speaker set up/roomacoustics most important!

Hi Robiwan and Thanks, you are very right. I have done the best I can, its a small living-room not tiny though. My system does sound really good, I didn't mention that before. However, I want to improve it. Its an itch, as most of you gents are more than familiar with I am sure.

hi, what are you missing now regarding soundquality? 

Hmm, I am of the clear inderstanding that ‘skin effect’ reduces with frequency, i.e. it is less at 50Hz than 20KHz.

A calculation based on defining skin effect depth as being the depth at which corrent density drops to 37% of that at the surface*, gives a ‘skin depth’ for copper of 0.46mm at 20KHz and 9 mm at 50Hz. I do not know the veracity of that calculation, but have no reason to think it is not - assuming it is correct, skin effect would only start to be mildly significant at these frequencies with solid core conductors: at 20 kHz the skin depth only becomes less than the conductor radius in copper wires of more than 0.92mm diameter (0.66mm²), and in stranded cables the skin effect is so small as to be likely to be of no relevance whatsoever at audio frequencies. At 50Hz the skin depth of 9mm is clearly irrelevant in any practical cable.

 Much on Wikipedia on the subject.

*Equation:: δ = 1000. √ ( ρ / (π.fo.μr.μo) ) where

δ = skin depth mm

ρ = resistivity Ωm (copper = 1.678 x 10^-8)

fo = signal frequency Hz

μr = relative permeability (approx 1)

μo = permeability of free space (=4π x 10^-7)

(reposted due to an error)

Babek posted:

 

btw the skin effect is there at all frequencies, for copper at 20kHz its less than 10th of what it is at 50Hz. I mean the skin gets thiner at 20kHz

The skin effect is on all ac signals as you say

but skin depth approximates to SQRT((2*conductor resistivity)/(2*Pi*f*conductor-permeability*relative-freespace-permeability))

Where f is the frequency of the flowing current.

so copper having a much lower permeability than say iron with very high permeability has a greater skin depth and therefore has less ac resistance than iron. The skin depth of copper is such that allows audio frequencies to pass with very little ac resistance in small conductors as the current density difference between the edge and centre will be minimal at audio frequencies... but sure in the limit there will be frequency related losses, but an iron wire for example would be terribleat  audio frequencies  as there will be a significant change in current density, as it’s skin depth at 60 Hz is apparently only about 220 u metres ... where as with copper it’s about 8.3 mm

 it I do think however over all skin effect attenuation with copper at audio frequencies will be minimal.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Babek posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Finally skin effect is frequency dependent and comes into play at RF. At audio frequencies I suspect the skin effect is extremely minimal if evident at all.

 

Don't you think that skin effect as well as all others come into some play when one is looking at an a.c. signal at all god forsaken frequencies and at all voltages ranging from 30-40volts to 1/1,000,000 of a volt? It reminds me of that movie "Shooter" taking a shot at 1mile away, factoring the Coriolis effect caused by the rotational motion of Earth

 btw the skin effect is there at all frequencies, for copper at 20kHz its less than 10th of what it is at 50Hz. I mean the skin gets thiner at 20kHz 

Hmm, I am of the clear inderstanding that  ‘skin effect’ reduces with frequency, i.e. it is less at 50Hz than 20KHz.  

A calculation based on defining skin effect depth as being the depth at which corrent density drops to 37% of that at the surface*, gives a ‘skin depth’ for copper of 0.46mm at 20KHz and 0.92mm at 50Hz. I do not know the veracity of that calculation, but have no reason to  think it is not - assuming it is correct, skin effect would only start to be mildly significant at these frequencies with solid core conductors: at 20 kHz the skin depth only becomes less than the conductor radius in copper wires of more than 0.92mm diameter (0.66mm²), and in stranded cables the skin effect is so small as to be likely to be of no relevance whatsoever at audio frequencies.

 

 

*https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/tools/skin-depth-calculator/

*Equation::  δ = 1000. √ ( ρ / (π.fo.μr.μo) )  where

δ = skin depth mm

ρ = resistivity Ωm (copper = 1.678 x 10^-8)

fo = signal frequency Hz

μr = relative permeability (approx 1)

μo = permeability of free space (=4π x 10^-7)

Thanks for all of that and thanks for taking the time to pursue the chat. Much appreciated.

I think we are essentially saying the same things as far as I can understand. However, where I see the skin depth at 50Hz vs 20kHz is a lot  different than your numbers. At 50Hz should be around 8mm and at 20kHz is 0.6mm. So one can see the massive gradient.

It seems electricity "flows" quite the opposite to how fluids flows. In pipes a fluid is almost stationary at the boundaries with maximum flow in the middle. 

There is another even more pertinent point that is worth noting.

As you have pointed out skin depth is defined as the depth where current density drops below 37%. However when we are talking about precision instruments worth 10's thousands sensitive to 1/1,000,000 of voltage, 37% is quite inadequate/insensitive measure, if you see what I mean. Horses for courses. '1/e' which is the 37% btw is a parameter prob not as suitable to audio as it is to energy/electrical transportations.

Cheers

Robiwan posted:

Babek posted:

Robiwan posted:

speaker set up/roomacoustics most important!

Hi Robiwan and Thanks, you are very right. I have done the best I can, its a small living-room not tiny though. My system does sound really good, I didn't mention that before. However, I want to improve it. Its an itch, as most of you gents are more than familiar with I am sure.

hi, what are you missing now regarding soundquality? 

More clarity, more depth?

I know little about what is out there in terms of equipment, the only reason I have Naim is by coincidence. Back in the 90's I just happened to have gone to Grahams (hifi shop in London) and they recommended a setup with a Naim integrated amp (still have). So learning how to get the most is important, and that is the great value of using forums like this for me.

The only

Babek posted:

I think we are essentially saying the same things as far as I can understand. However, where I see the skin depth at 50Hz vs 20kHz is a lot  different than your numbers. At 50Hz should be around 8mm and at 20kHz is 0.6mm. So one can see the massive gradient.

It seems electricity "flows" quite the opposite to how fluids flows. In pipes a fluid is almost stationary at the boundaries with maximum flow in the middle. 

There is another even more pertinent point that is worth noting.

As you have pointed out skin depth is defined as the depth where current density drops below 37%. However when we are talking about precision instruments worth 10's thousands sensitive to 1/1,000,000 of voltage, 37% is quite inadequate/insensitive measure, if you see what I mean. Horses for courses. '1/e' which is the 37% btw is a parameter prob not as suitable to audio as it is to energy/electrical transportations.

Cheers

Yes I spotted my calculation error at 50Hz shortly before you posted this, and reposted with some amendments.

But I disagree with you re significance at audio frequencies - 37% less current density at 0.46mm depth is very much less reduction in the individual conductor strands of multiple strand cables, which might be  be not much more than perhaps 0.1 or 0.15mm radius in speaker cables, or quite a bit less in interconnects. As I suggested, it is only likely to start to exhibit some effect -and that very small - at the highest frequencies in solid core cables of significant gauge - of course, I can’t say nobody would hear a difference, though it would be hard to know if any difference was due to skin effect in such cables, or othr electrical characteristics. 

Innocent Bystander posted:

Babek posted:

I think we are essentially saying the same things as far as I can understand. However, where I see the skin depth at 50Hz vs 20kHz is a lot  different than your numbers. At 50Hz should be around 8mm and at 20kHz is 0.6mm. So one can see the massive gradient.

It seems electricity "flows" quite the opposite to how fluids flows. In pipes a fluid is almost stationary at the boundaries with maximum flow in the middle. 

There is another even more pertinent point that is worth noting.

As you have pointed out skin depth is defined as the depth where current density drops below 37%. However when we are talking about precision instruments worth 10's thousands sensitive to 1/1,000,000 of voltage, 37% is quite inadequate/insensitive measure, if you see what I mean. Horses for courses. '1/e' which is the 37% btw is a parameter prob not as suitable to audio as it is to energy/electrical transportations.

Cheers

Yes I spotted my calculation error at 50Hz shortly before you posted this, and reposted with some amendments.

But I disagree with you re significance at audio frequencies - 37% less current density at 0.46mm depth is very much less reduction in the individual conductor strands of multiple strand cables, which might be  be not much more than perhaps 0.1 or 0.15mm radius in speaker cables, or quite a bit less in interconnects. As I suggested, it is only likely to start to exhibit some effect -and that very small - at the highest frequencies in solid core cables of significant gauge - of course, I can’t say nobody would hear a difference, though it would be hard to know if any difference was due to skin effect in such cables, or othr electrical characteristics. 

Thanks for your input. Again, much appreciated.

Babek posted:

As you have pointed out skin depth is defined as the depth where current density drops below 37%. However when we are talking about precision instruments worth 10's thousands sensitive to 1/1,000,000 of voltage, 37% is quite inadequate/insensitive measure, if you see what I mean. Horses for courses. '1/e' which is the 37% btw is a parameter prob not as suitable to audio as it is to energy/electrical transportations.

But it looks like you referring to this as a problem... it’s just a description of what constitutes part of the reactance of a piece of wire, ie basic electronics... in other words as the skin effect depth increases, the inductive reactance decreases.. and explains why in part certain conductors/interconnects  can act as tone controls .. and indeed with speaker cable this reactive element is taken into the design of the amp without output Zobel filters such as the higher end Naim amps... and the speaker cable effectively becomes part of the amp and specific lengths of specific cable is given as being optimal for a balanced sound.

i guess the term Skin Effect is misleading, as effectively one is simply referring to crossectional reactance of a conductor.. where the reactance is at a minimum at the edge of a conductor... or any dielectric... our good old soil has skin effects too....