I have to comment on this since this often has been the cause of misunderstandings. I would pay money for things that really influence the sound quality. Cabling (if it's not about extremely bad quality) doesn't influence the sound quality in an audible way. So a cable and adapters with decent quality is absolutely sufficient. No "premium" quality necessary, believe me.

I'll agree to disagree then

Cabling does very much affect the sound quality, albeit in mostly a subtle way. The quality of the materials right through the build, length, gauge etc are all factors.

That said, I tend not to get silly about the amount I spend on cable, but I always try my best to get the best cable (or quite often make it myself) I can for the job. I never buy anything cheap...

Regards. Rimmer

List of significance for sound:

1. Loudspeakers / Headphones
.
.
.
.
.
2. Quality of sound source (if it's at least a decent soundcard)
3. Sound setup (EQ, other effects, technically correct volume settings...)
4. Quality of amplifier
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5. Quality of analog audio cable
.
.
.
.
.
9999. Other Voodoo stuff like quality of digital audio cable which has 0% influence on sound quality

"Cabling does very much affect the sound quality, albeit in mostly a subtle way."
What way is that? I've never heard any such difference. Voodoo, indeed!

In a cheap cable, under that plastic jacket .. there's wire.
In an expensive cable, under that plastic jacket ... there's wire.
The only real difference is in the connectors.

Cheap cables have connectors that are pure crap (as in flimsy connectors and flimsy strain reliefs). Not good. Aside from that, there's not much difference.

I can only recommend that you guys therefore buy cheap copper compositions. There is nothing more wrong in my opinion in ignoring the differences in the quality of a signal chain and cabling considerations. How do you guys feel about the flow of electrons when it comes to cable marked with a direction arrow? Everything from the stuff used on hifi interconnects or speaker cable to the stuff they lay for telecommunications? Just interested more than anything.



Regards. Rimmer

Mac is right, only the connectors matter, they should be firm and not loose, there must be a good contact.



Voodoo. How do electrons know in which direction they need to flow?



We're talking about short interconnections. Small length - almost no impact; long length (not relevant for inhouse conncetions) - some impact.

Not to mention digital signals - for digital signals there is only a "does work" or a "does not work", no decrease in quality possible.

I wasn't going to join this part of the discussion because it's OT from the starting subject.

I don't have any real experience and don't buy into the argument that oxygen free speaker cables are better as loved by so many audiophiles.

I do know from experience that more expensive cables used for analogue signals are superior to cheaper cables, usually because of the connectors, wire gauge, construction - pair twists, separation, and screening.

Then comes the digital discussion. There are different grades of 'category' types of data cable, examples CAT3, 5, 7 and so on, with different construction to provide for the different bandwidths. As you may guess the higher spec CAT cables are more expensive.

So my guess is that all cables are not equal.

CAT 3/5/etc cables are a different story. The signal frequencies are VERY high, in a range where cable characteristics influence the ability to carry the signal. There is a difference between CAT 3/5/etc. Rightly so, because they're intended for different purposes (10 Mbps vs. 100 Mbps vs 1000 Mbps).

But the discussion here focused on analog audio signals, where frequencies are ultra-low. A cable's transmission-line characteristics are negligible in these circumstances (low-frequencies, short cables, low impedances).

Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-end_audio_cables

As for oxygen-free copper cables ... Wiki claims a difference of about 0.1% in conductivity. That's beyond negligible. The claimed benefits of oxygen-free copper is a marketing fantasy, invented to spur sales of high-priced goods by preying on ignorance. When your business stands before people who have lots of money and little information, you can pocket a tidy sum.

When buying cables, just be sure the cable is rugged enough to endure in your intended application. A band on the road needs to use rugged cables because they'll be pulled, twisted, stepped on, and otherwise abused. At home, when wiring a piano to an amplifier, the cables may go untouched for months or years, so ruggedness is no issue.

Again. I'll agree to disagree. Buying quality cable does make a difference on a number of levels other than durability. The gauge of speaker cable for instance will vary the frequency spectrum. The shielding on unbalanced cable will make a difference. The length of the cable (and this should be discussed when claiming all cables are equal) makes a lot of difference.

The whole cable making industry aren't trying to have everybody over. Granted there are times where spending £100 on a meter of monster cable will be a waste of time if the equipment you are using is incapable of benefitting. Spending £10 on a cable from a crap electrical shop that sells at a 500% profit is another example of a waste of money. Buying a crappy length of thin gauge cable and saying it's exactly the same as a quality screened equivalent is not good advice...

Regards. Rimmer

Yes, it is. It is good advice because it helps you to keep your money for things that really matter.

Rimmer, I don't think anyone is trying to compare two different kinds of cable.

There's no point in comparing expensive shielded cable with cheap unshielded.
Nor is there any point in comparing dirt-cheap shielded cable with expensive unshielded.

Instead, compare cables with like-functions.

Hi, an old thread I know, but a very interesting one!

To the original poster, Oblacone, did you get the CN42? I did, and I've been so very happy with it. The new action and sound modelling Kawai brought in with the CN series is really very good - the differential key weighting between bass and treble is particularly nice. And the sustain is awesome - hit a hard chord with sustain on the CN and listen to the decay - you get 15+ seconds - it's great.

There are negatives on the whole, but it's a top digital piano. Weirdly, the replacement CN43 I think is not good - the build, detail, finish and the 'ivory' key feel seem to me a bit of a step backwards.

Anyway, CN42 - two main negatives - the control interface is really a bit dire - it works, but it's not intuitive by a long chalk, and very awkward on the fly. And given it's got a USB jack I think that the sequencer should really allow step recording (bar by bar, note by note). A smaller negative is that the left pedal dampens way too much (this is definitely an opinion thing - others may disagree!).

I've had Roland before (heavy and plodding), and Yamaha (don't like the feel - well, at this price point, £1000-1500) - Kawai wins for me.

The other discussion here is with cables - someone mentioned that electrons don't know where they're going - absolutely right. I build my own amps (hifi amps) and cabling for me is all about RFI rejection and amp output impedance - the problem is that the two somewhat fight each other. If you choose a more expensive cable it really should be to manage these two aspects better than cheap cables - but even then, you need to know what source and speaker characteristics the designer expected to be attached to his amp! I personally like NVA cables (Nene Valley Audio).

Anyway, Kawai CN42 very good! Oblacone - what did you go with?

Forever13, congrats on the purchase of your CN42!

Regarding the CN42 vs. CN43:



The CN42 and CN43 share the same finishes (although black has replaced cherry as the third finish type) and offer very similar cabinet designs. As for the Ivory Touch key surfaces, I actually prefer the appearance (slightly creamy colour) and texture of the new RH keyboard action, but this is obviously a very personal point.

Anyway, glad you're enjoying your piano.

Cheers,
James
x

Glad to hear you're enjoying your CN42. But, that statement sounds odd. Unless it's a chord in the upper scale range perhaps? If I hit a chord hard with sustain pedal in the lower register on my CN33 it goes on for more than 1 minute. Faintly after about maybe 30 40 seconds, but it's still..............going.................................................................................still.....................there........................................and......................yup....just