Any recommendations on the best quality socket <-> ADSL modem cable? Need
only be around 2m or so.

"Sean Inglis" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:69ou6tF33nk3hU1@mid.individual.net...
Belkin do them. There will be other retailers but I do know the BT Shop
sells them.


--
Peter Crosland

On 23/05/2008 23:19, Sean Inglis wrote:

I'm surprised Russ Andrews haven't spotted this market opportunity :-)

Preferably you want a cable using twisted pairs, unlike the thin/flat
cables typically used for modems/phones, not much point in shielding as
your line isn't shielded from the exchange to the master socket.

Sean Inglis wrote:
For that length, I'd expect the main factor affecting signal quality to
be how well the connectors mate.

Alex

Sean Inglis wrote:

The one that comes as standard with your modem or router is unlikely to be
twisted pair but simply 'flat cable' like a phone extension. These are
basically 'OK' but not optimal.

Twisted pair types are available, I have one myself but you're likely to have
to shop around to find one. Mine also has a screen / shield overall too.

Graham

Andy Burns wrote:

LMFAO !
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudicati..._ADJ_44177.htm

Ad
A catalogue, Russ Andrews The Big Book 06/07, selling home entertainment
electrical accessories, made various claims about their products.

Issue
A customer challenged the claims:

1. "The key to success of our PowerKords is KIMBER's unique cable weave which
has proven to dramatically reduce Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) already on
the mains supply and to reject further pick up of RFI ...", because he believed
the PowerKord cable would have little affect on conducted electromagnetic
interference;

2. "... Distortion levels inside equipment is vastly reduced, letting you hear
a sound that is vastly clearer and purer, more detailed and far more dynamic
....", because he believed the Signature PowerKord cable would have little
affect on measurable distortion in hi-fi equipment, and

3. "... eliminate system sound fluctuation and help to create a super-quiet
noise floor, allowing more believable dynamics, deeper bass and lower high
frequency distortion ... Listen out for a quieter noise floor (expect more
dynamic music and greater detail) and a much more cohesive musical sound ...",
because he believed the advertised spike-protecting devices would have little
affect on the noise floor in hi-fi equipment.


The CAP Code:
3.1;7.1;19.1

Response
1. Russ Andrews explained that Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) was an
unwanted electrostatic and/or electro-magnetic field, which gave rise to
varying levels and types of background noise in an audio system. They said
normal twisted wires found in most cables made them susceptible to RFI, but
they believed that a woven cable containing several wires, where each one
repeatedly crossed each other, reduced RFI. They believed the degree to which
RFI could be reduced was dependent on the number of times the wires crossed.
They provided the ASA with a number of research papers as substantiation for
the claim.

Russ Andrews said it was a recognised fact within the audio industry that
removing RFI would bring about an improvement in Hi-Fi equipment performance
and that weaving a cable was a recognised technique to reduce it's
susceptibility to RFI. They believed that variations in sound quality were a
matter of subjective assessment by the listener and therefore not capable of
objective substantiation, but maintained that the difference made by the cables
was significant. They sent a number of magazine reviews and customer comments
as anecdotal evidence.

2. Russ Andrews said it had not been their intention to imply that the
Signature PowerKord would have an affect on measurable distortion levels in
Hi-Fi equipment. They explained that the claim was the result of a
typographical error, which had not been spotted at proof reading stage. They
apologised for the error and said they would take steps to avoid a similar
mistake in the future.

They said mains borne noise was a recognised problem in audio reproduction and
believed it was an acknowledged cause of sound quality degradation. They
believed it was not possible to measure such degradation objectively using
conventional Harmonic Distortion techniques. They maintained that mains borne
electrostatic, electromagnetic and harmonic noise and spikes passed through the
power supply by a variety of mechanisms to pollute the inherent noise
characteristic of the amplification path. They said noise on the input, the
output and the power supplies compromised the ability of the amplifier to
follow faithfully the signal resulting in audible degradation. They believed
any listeners would characterise it as distortion although it would not appear
in conventional distortion measurements.

3. Russ Andrews said their SuperClamp Ultra and MegaClamp Ultra were designed
using industry standard voltage clamps to reduce spike activity on the mains
Live and Neutral lines and to clamp voltage variations between Ground and
Neutral. They believed that spike activity was one of the causes of the sound
quality of a system varying from time to time and day to day and was well
recognised in the Hi-Fi world as the cause of dissatisfaction with Hi-Fi
equipment. They said it was easy to hear but impossible to measure. They
included a selection of customer testimonials to support the claims.

Assessment
The ASA sent Russ Andrews' substantiation to an independent expert for
analysis.

1. Upheld
Our expert noted that, although the claim in the catalogue stated that the
cable would reduce the RFI already on the mains supply and reject further pick
up of RFI, the evidence sent by Russ Andrews concentrated almost exclusively on
the ability of the cable to prevent new RFI. He said the research papers did
not address the issue of conductive interference and did not include supporting
measurements and did not appear to have been peer reviewed or have other forms
of independent validation. He said one of the papers discussed the effect of
RFI on speaker, rather than the mains cable. Our expert considered that the
magazine articles did not provide evidence for the performance of the cables
because experimental details for the perceptual measurements were not given and
some of the reviews related to speaker cables and not mains cables. We
considered that the testimonials represented customers' opinions and therefore
did not constitute robust scientific evidence. Our expert disagreed with Russ
Andrews assertion that sound quality variations were subjective and not capable
of objective substantiation. He said, in the field of audio, the ABX test
method was well established and probably one of the most commonly used. We
considered that the evidence submitted was not sufficiently robust to show that
PowerKords was proven to dramatically reduce RFI which was already on the mains
supply and stop further pick up. We concluded that the ad was misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1
(Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Comparisons).

2. Upheld
Our expert believed it was possible to measure distortion, and noted Russ
Andrews had not supplied any evidence to show that Signature PowerKord cable
could reduce distortion levels. We acknowledged that the wording in the ad had
been used in error and welcomed Russ Andrews assurance that they had taken
steps to prevent a similar mistake in the future. However, we considered that,
at the time the catalogue was published, the ad made a misleading claim.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1
(Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Comparisons).

3. Upheld
Our expert considered that Russ Andrews had not supplied any supporting
evidence to prove that the noise floor in the audio signal chain was lowered by
the advertised devices. He said it had shown that the noise floor on the mains
supply could be reduced, but this appeared to be common modes. He understood
differential modes were actually more significant than common modes and
believed the devices were not dealing with the biggest cause of mains supply
spikes. He said no evidence had been provided to show that spike-protecting
devices affected audio signals, as opposed to mains voltages. The expert
believed it was possible to test the noise floor of a system objectively
without perceptual testing and believed this could be done for both a standard
mains cable and the Mega/Super Clamp Ultra and the results compared. We
considered that the evidence submitted was not sufficiently robust to show that
spike-protecting devices would eliminate system sound fluctuation and help
create a super-quiet noise floor. We concluded that the ad was misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1
(Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Comparisons).

Action
We told Russ Andrews not use the claims again unless they could substantiate
them with robust scientific evidence.

Graham

On Sat, 24 May 2008 08:50:58 UTC, Andy Burns
<usenet.april2008@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:

Oh God...I can see it now...

"Cleaner, brighter bits with sharper edges, using our new
beryllium/oxygen cables with copper coating. Virus-resistant insulation,
pairs twisted by hand by virgins..."

--
Bob Eager
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

"Sam" <ask@ng.invalid> wrote in message
news:2gif345ve0s29rij5rose22pvv4rmg080k@4ax.com...
Care to provide some evidence to substantiate such a sweeping statement? I
have never known a Belkin cable fail or not provide good performance.

--
Peter Crosland

Peter Crosland wrote:
decsribing an amplifier with 'flat frecueny response to 1MHz' and
'unmeasuarable distortion.

It was known as the APOW* design

*A Piece of Wire.

Not a difficult challenge Peter. I dismantled one of these a
while ago to see why it wasn't working.
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/infoweb/belkinout.jpg

As you can see here:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/infoweb/belkinin.jpg
Whoever designed this wants shooting. The connections to
the busbars are crimped and spot-welded, fair enough.
But the full load current (this item is protected by a 13A
fuse) is routed through the surge-protection PCB (yes, I know,
w-tom needn't contribute) with the aid of two blobs of
best lead-free solder.You can see just how "dry" the neutral
joint was.
WTF? Why not crimp and spot-weld the mains directly to
the busbars and wire the PCB in parallel IYSWIM?


--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

Fair comment but it is not a data cable! My point was that I have always had
good service from Belkin cables rather than anonymous ones. Having seen the
ADSL modem cables I am amazed that Belkin should put such a product on the
market. Quite out character for them. Would anyone like to suggest another
branded range of cables that might be suitable.

Peter Crosland

IME it is Pace boxes that do that. I have had them put
an audible buzz on the line, no doubt it would kill ADSL too.
I put it down to storm damage, but IIRC the SKY modem
continues to work.

--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

Peter Crosland wrote:
Fraid my experience with the Belkin Fast Modem cable, supposedly for DSL
actually cut my speeds by at least a third, whilst the lead i bought from
ADSL Nation, although it is over length did help to increase my speeds (when
moving over into the Max DSL product.

The construction is questionable, for instance, why use a screened cable
when it is not earthed at any point & so can't do it's job properly. If my
memory serves me well the actual wires/pairs didn't appear to have any twist
as such (most probably relying on the inefficient screening).

That's my pennies worth, diving into a thread, late as usual...

Alex Fraser wrote:
that would depend heavily on the each actual installation. I've seen cables
trapped under Freeview boxes (yes the DSL didn't work) wrapped around the
power lead to an expensive halogen desk lamp (no not mine, that's
acompletely different story) & everytime the light was turned on the DSL
dropped & the story goes on.

The twists in the external cable is normal enough to 'shield' it from most
interferrence, the places were it becomes horrendousely noisey is in the
premises where it is being used...

Eeyore wrote:
hope the screen is connected to something or else it's as much use as a
chocolate fireguard....

kraftee wrote:

I assume it's there mainly to look 'pretty' (as the insulation on this one
is clear).

Graham

Sean Inglis wrote:

Thanks to all, and it's surprising how opinions differ.

I went for a 2m decent quality one from ADSL Nation in the end.

The one I have in there now is some bit of old toot I had stuck in a box, so
it might make a bit of difference (or at least eliminate it as a source of
problems)

Sean Inglis wrote:
please post the results, sync before and after etc...
thanks

tony h wrote:

This is the information I have as of now, I'll post any changes when my
magic cable turns up :-)

Connect Mode ADSL
Modulation Multimode
Profile Type MAIN
Activate Line true
Coding Gain auto
Tx Attenuation Dmt_0DB

DSP Firmware Version E.67.5.33
Connected true
Operational Mode G.Dmt
Annex Type AnnexA
Upstream 448000
Downstream 4192000
CO Vendor BCLA
Elapsed Time 22 day 10 hr 53 min 45 sec

Peter Crosland wrote:
There is quite a large part of the Belkin porfolio which rest on the laurels
of the good things they do actually produce, as I am finding out running
around with REINS problems. Belkin (routers) are at the top of the tree
followed closely by SKY digiboxes (no particular make) on a stopped line
(you'd be suprised how often that scenario can happen)...