- Posted by JBen (A) on September 23, 2010 at 23:36:20
In Reply to: RE: Free wire size calculator for your audio system posted by johnvb on September 22, 2010 at 17:24:54
I've been a convert to Magwire since D encouraged me to try it a couple of years ago. One run in my place reaches 10ft, which in reality is two runs (I bi-amp my MMGs). The other side is shorter. Despite the wonderful sound, this forced me to deal with the imbalance. Thin wire IS more resistive.
Still, no matter what I brought in, branded or not branded cable, the Magwire beat it at most everything. Then, last year a friend tried the Magwire with his B&W 802D. We were not thrilled. So, he asked me, and I helped in testing more brands. Mixed reactions, never mind the price! Eventually, we built three cat5 versions...neither of us liked it in any special way. In fact, though "anemic" by his standards, he correctly pointed out that the Magwire still beat all of these at the very top end.
That's when I thought that I would ignore common wisdom even further. I came up with the "MultiMags". No rocket science here. Simply add more of them Magwires and ignore the perils of undue inductance and capacitance. The current "best" version is called Multimag842T and it adds up to about 12 guage.
The number stands for 8 runs of 22ga, 4 runs of 26ga plus 2 runs of 30ga, all from the Radio Shack packs. These are wrapped in one spiraling overlapping layer of Teflon tape; that's the "T". It is a little hard to make plus it is boring work!. That's because of a key step: The bundle MUST NOT twist much ...NO braiding.
Keeping the wires straight means that one has to wrap the Teflon tape by hand to minimize twists. Arms do get a good workout and hand dexterity (holding the spool around the bundle) zooms up after a couple of hours.
The MM842T retains the best of single wire, or 010 (one 26ga)- very clean highs. MM842T beats 010 plus MM020T, MM442T, MM221T and MM202T in imaging and dynamics. There was a MultiMag10-84 but I had not thought of the Teflon tape yet and used Tyvek tape. It was not that good. I really don't know which spoiled the party -- too much cabling or the Tyvek tape.
During the Razoring tweak tests weeks ago, MultiMag842T cable came through like a champ. However, the one salient surprise came after the first wave of tests. I have been re-testing past tweaks and various pieces of equipment with the now Full-Razored/StickBraced MMGs.
The original Denon AVR-2106 receiver that I used until 2 years ago (never before a good imager), likes these cables so much that it images almost as well as any of the better stuff I have tired. I had a borrowed set of AudioQuest CV-4 and tried them. The 2106 did not like them that much. For that matter, the MultiMag842T bested everything with any combination I tried. At a cost of $30-$60 of spools plus several hours of boring work, one does get a very decent set of cables.
Anyway, after hearing my set of MultiMag842T with his B&W speakers, my friend wanted to make his own set but never had the time. So, I am making the set for him now. His runs are longer than mine (one side is 15ft long)...did I say this was boring? We will be testing it his weekend.
BTW, he returned the AQ CV-4 and other esoteric cable stuff. While I finsh his new cables, he is running electric 12Ga solid copper wire from Home Depot...not too refined but punchy as hell!
Follow Ups:
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - johnvb 04:51:41 09/24/10
(6)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by JBen on September 23, 2010 at 23:36:20
"MultiMag842T cable"...is that like patent pending?...jk:^). Sounds like quite the recipe, someday I will try it.
I haven't done any of the braided recipes for teflon cat 5, using it straight out of the box is just a simple and quick way to have 15-gauge wire with 24 gauge twisted strands, easy to try the bundles twisted together or "shotgunned" seperated. I do have some rolls of 16-24 gauge mag wire to try out later, after the mods and room treatments are done.
Now that I have my power amp in between the speakers, my cable runs are < 4' long, which should help also.
I have used magnet wire in the past, the only negative is removing the varnish can be a pita. The best way I found so far is to just burn it off with a blob of solder, but that only works with the small gauge stuff. If one had a nice solder pot, that would work better. Plus I was always worried about the cat tripping over the thin wire (had it on elevators).
I know when I was running single driver speakers with a 3 watt tube amp, single 24 gauge runs of cat 5 (which is the de facto recommendation of that crowd), or magnet wire did make a BIG difference in smoothing out the fostex drivers.
Edits: 09/24/10 09/24/10
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 13:28:02 09/24/10
(1)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by johnvb on September 24, 2010 at 04:51:41
I keep finding that straight, unbraided solid wire(s) do(es) better. The best Cat5 we made was also that way. Not as good as Magwire but clearly better than Monster XP-something.
One of the Cat5 recipies we tried braided several (whole) Cat5 wires. It was the worst sounding cable ever. It ate up the top end to such an extent that it seemed as if an equalizer had notched off frequencies above 10khz.
The other repeatable thing here is that, IMAGING, is better sustained by thicker cabling. However, thicker cable is not easily made into great top-end producers. That seems to be the point at which bundling thin multi solid-cores (keeping their indivudual insulation) does much better. Again, with no braiding.
I suspect that the type of insulation on Magwire is somehow helping. This was surprising to me: I can't measure inductance but measured capacitance on MM842T is nil compared to other cables tried here (except the other MultiMags, the 26ga and the 12ga solid copper electric wire).
Edits: 09/24/10
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 05:39:58 09/25/10
(0)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by JBen on September 24, 2010 at 13:28:02
J,
The other repeatable thing here is that, IMAGING, is better sustained by thicker cabling. However, thicker cable is not easily made into great top-end producers. That seems to be the point at which bundling thin multi solid-cores (keeping their indivudual insulation) does much better. Again, with no braiding.
I am not sure that this is an accurate conclusion. Sure I bet you heard it this way. But I think it has more to do with vibrations than being thicker. Said another way, if you use the thin wire AND treat for vibration, the imaging is great, but it can suffer if you dont treat for it. The multirun thicker cable you made is naturally better at handling vibrations because of its mass construction and teflon....
Think about that conclusion in light of one strand of magwire vs that monster cable you mention. Which one has better imaging???
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 05:39:58 09/25/10
(0)
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 08:07:29 09/24/10
(3)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by johnvb on September 24, 2010 at 04:51:41
Hey Johnvb,
That is a good point about the insulation. IMHO a solder pot is a must, though I have made complete sets with sandpaper. No way I would make some magwire cables without the solder pot after having used one.
Here is a cat proof magwire speaker cable:
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
- That looks very nice. - johnvb 08:53:45 09/24/10
(2)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by Dawnrazor on September 24, 2010 at 08:07:29
One of these days I'll score one of those pots, but they are kind of pricey.
Maybe diy one?
- RE: That looks very nice. - Dawnrazor 11:37:06 09/24/10
(1)
- In Reply to: RE: That looks very nice. posted by johnvb on September 24, 2010 at 08:53:45
J,
Here is a link for an inexpensive one that should do the trick for magwire.
There is a more expensive one that is 400w too, both fairly affordable.
Anyone know what makes one of these usable for lead free solder?? Does on need a certain wattage??
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
- That's reasonable...nt - johnvb 11:49:18 09/24/10
(0)
- In Reply to: RE: That looks very nice. posted by Dawnrazor on September 24, 2010 at 11:37:06
.
- That's reasonable...nt - johnvb 11:49:18 09/24/10
(0)
- RE: That looks very nice. - Dawnrazor 11:37:06 09/24/10
(1)
- That looks very nice. - johnvb 08:53:45 09/24/10
(2)
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 13:28:02 09/24/10
(1)
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 00:15:35 09/24/10
(3)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by JBen on September 23, 2010 at 23:36:20
Hey Jben,
I've been a convert to Magwire since D encouraged me to try it a couple of years ago. One run in my place reaches 10ft, which in reality is two runs (I bi-amp my MMGs). The other side is shorter. Despite the wonderful sound, this forced me to deal with the imbalance. Thin wire IS more resistive.
Why was there and imbalance??
Also, when you had less strands, did you have them wrapped in teflon? Say 2 strands??
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 10:42:42 09/24/10
(2)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by Dawnrazor on September 24, 2010 at 00:15:35
Hi D,
I never finished the Teflon tape on the twin or single 26ga runs. Time constraints and loss of patience in those days.
Imbalance #1:
Short run to one speaker vs the other. I was able to reduce this to just under .5 db. by using two 26ga runs
Imbalance #2:
In bi-amping, I find that the Magwire (1 or 2 strand) is picky about mixing with other wires. If I wanted more punch in the lower panels, I would use other thicker cables for these (but keep the tweeters with 26ga only). I was never totally happy doing this. There were both objective and subjective observations to this effect. Net result; I returned to "all panels at thin Magwire" when the music mix did not call for extreme dynamics to be enjoyable. Remebember how I kept breaking them? That was the switching.
One of the things that the MultiMags did (when using the same type of bundle for the high and low panels) is bring a more cohesive presentation.
It all became clearer during the Razoring tweak tests with the P-Frames (and now Stick Braces). The Razoring tweaks do a great job of holding detail and texture in the mids. It made clear that even mixing the old plain 26ga for the tweeter with MultiMag842T for the lows was not the best. Luckily, MM842T for both panels does the job. It does not take away from what 26ga alone did for the tweeter before.
I may have not mentioned this: when the A21 was here for the Razoring Tweaks, I ran it with various cable sets. When I heard it with MM842T I was blown away by the sound in all respects.
Monstrous solidity of the 3D landscape was one of them.
Then, at one point, I bi-amped with the A21 doing just the tweeters and staying at volumes that kept it within class A. Oh boy!
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 06:03:03 09/25/10
(1)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by JBen on September 24, 2010 at 10:42:42
Hey J,
Imbalance #1:
Short run to one speaker vs the other. I was able to reduce this to just under .5 db. by using two 26ga runs
YIKES. Are you saying that your speaker cables were different lengths??? If so, you should know better than that! Anyhow did you see the new cplay version?? It has a balance control. Bet you saw that. If I get it, it allows for adjusting ONLY one channel, which would help you a bit I think. How long are those runs anyhow.
Imbalance #2:
In bi-amping, I find that the Magwire (1 or 2 strand) is picky about mixing with other wires. If I wanted more punch in the lower panels, I would use other thicker cables for these (but keep the tweeters with 26ga only). I was never totally happy doing this. There were both objective and subjective observations to this effect. Net result; I returned to "all panels at thin Magwire" when the music mix did not call for extreme dynamics to be enjoyable. Remebember how I kept breaking them? That was the switching.
I agree with this as a general rule...when biamping it is crucial to have the same amp (or amp family) and same wire for all drivers. Though I suppose one could mix things if you get the crossover settings right. It is just easier to get things dialed in when things are symmetric.
That dynamics issue though I think has more to do with vibration and movement than gauge. Maybe that needs some explanation. Allen Wright who got me into the thin stuff with his cookbook, talks about bass and thin wire (in this example, it is about ICs, but there are others where he talks about speaker cables):
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=cables&n=143092&highlight=thin+Allen+Wright&r=
One of the things that the MultiMags did (when using the same type of bundle for the high and low panels) is bring a more cohesive presentation.
It bet it did.
No one here remembers the bending of our minds
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 00:01:39 09/26/10
(0)
- In Reply to: RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! posted by Dawnrazor on September 25, 2010 at 06:03:03
Well, before I clear up a thing or two on these, today (Saturday) we tested the new set of MultiMags842T that were made for my friend's B&W 802Ds.
The first time he had heard my own set of the MM842T, it being shorter than what he needs, the 802Ds had to be moved to less favorable positions. Still, he was impressed. The new cable set now allows the speakers to stay were they belong.
I thought he had already returned the pricey AudioQuest I mentioned earlier. As it turned out, a neighbor decided to buy them from him. So we borrowed them back for a comparo during today's test.
The AQ CV4 set sounds good, really good all around. Yet, the MultiMags matched it blow by blow for the most, and it did 2 things clearly better. First, imaging with the MM842T is better, as in more palpable and defined. Second, the top end is clearer, more extended and sweeter. We were glued to our seats at times, not wanting to switch cables again for comparison. I felt elated that so many hours of work were not wasted.
The AQ did seem more forgiving of upper midrange brashness, or perhaps it was less capable of delivering it as it really is. This only became apparent in SACD transfers of 50s & early 60s Jazz. Yet, even in these, the MMags did better overall...and portrayed what beautiful cymbals they already could capture in those days! Whatever high-frequency sheen they were able to capture in those recordings, the MM842T better allowed the B&Ws to deliver closer to their clean metallic glory. With good modern recordings this was even more obvious.
We also put the 12ga solid copper electrical wire on. Its BASS beats the crap out of both the AQs and the MMags. In doing so this wire exagerates it and shows the lack of finesse and balance further up. Its worst offense (and it also did this at home with my MMGs a while ago); it "sours" piano sound for me. Now, want peppy Rock? This wire may do well.
Anyway, to your comments:
- Cable management becomes another issue all by itself at home. So yes, though I started with similar lengths (which I prefer), I wound up with uneven sets later. It affects thin single Magwire. The MultiMags don't display any imbalance. I now can route them properly and it is easier to avoid touching the ground or other cables.
- Ha ha, I am loving cPlay b38! It came out during the Razoring tweaks tests and I could not use it then. I kept using an earlier version, trying to keep as little variablility as possible. Later, in a way, cPlay b38 came to bless the marriage of the Full-Razoring with the new Stick Bracing (or "Stixbees", per my wife's mock-naming convention). While I still have a psychological thing against the balance controls (in anything), I must say that cPlay's new feature could have done the trick.
- Yes, I can get decent bass with just thin 26ga, properly damped. What I cannot get with it, is the BEST bass nor the BEST 3D imaging that I have heard these MMGs do here. Remember that I don't use the subwoofer much...in fact, I just loaned it to a friend for a few days.
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 00:01:39 09/26/10
(0)
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - Dawnrazor 06:03:03 09/25/10
(1)
- RE: Jvb, that's the first calculator I used in setting up my MultiMag prototypes! - JBen 10:42:42 09/24/10
(2)
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
-
To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]