Swimming in IEC Cables!
in [Commodore]
|
From: James on 8 May 2010 13:48 On May 8, 3:58 am, Wolfgang Moser <wn0...(a)d81.de.invalid> wrote: > > Ok, from Wikipedia I now know that AWG means American Wire Gauge wich in > short describes the "size" of the wires. What was your main reason to go > one step up? Just getting a bigger cable for a "better feeling", or did > you want to reduce the cable's resistance (Ohm / m)? Throwing my .02 in: 26AWG more closely matches the original Commodore cables, which were fairly resistant to temperature extremes. Since Jim doesn't know where these will end up, specifying cables that can better withstand California summers (can exceed 50 degrees C) or Alaskan winters (can be below -40 C) are a good thing. The reason I mention this: I just paid a US$287 repair bill for my home air conditioning system. The problem? A tiny wire (about the size of a telephone conductor wire) broke in 3 places after almost 20 years of being exposed to Kansas winter and summer temperature extremes. :( -J
From: Jim Brain on 8 May 2010 17:15
On 5/8/2010 3:58 AM, Wolfgang Moser wrote: > Hi Jim, > > > A while back there was a discussion about the IEC bus cable where I > proposed an overkill version of such a cable. It was a 7-wire cable with > additional shielding. One of the wires was connected with the shield > wires and connected to the shield of the DIN plug, only its shield and > no dedicated pin. You're saying there would be two wires attached to the shield, an uninsulated shield wire and an insulated additional wire? If so, I'm not sure what they would gain you. As it is, these cables have 7 wires. 6 for the signals and a separate 26AWG stranded wire for the shield. > This means the cables could become very long. My self-made IEC bus > cables are always shielded and I'm using a 2,50m long cable since 12 > years now without having had a problem ever. Well, perhaps Joe Forster > had to relax some fine tuned hgih speed serial protocol speeders a bit > maybe. I think at some length, the fact that IEC signals are not differential will be the limiting factor, as there would be crosstalk on the cable. > Ok, from Wikipedia I now know that AWG means American Wire Gauge wich in > short describes the "size" of the wires. What was your main reason to go > one step up? Just getting a bigger cable for a "better feeling", or did > you want to reduce the cable's resistance (Ohm / m)? 28AWG is rather thin, and I know IEC cables can suffer some abuse (being pulled by the cable, not the reliefs, etc.) So, I thought a bit more bulk in the signal wires would bulk the cable up a bit and give a bit more strength. But, no, I'm not naive enough to think 28 versus 26 will somehow "improve" the signal :-) But, now that you mention it, I could do another order and spec out some gold flash coated DIN connector, gold covered copper wires, oxygenated wire channels, etc. I'd sell them for $50.00 a cable: Brain Innovations "Monster IEC Cables", for premium digital Commodore signal transmission! (Please, oh please, dear reader, do not seriously believe such cables would do anything but deplete your bank account quicker. While it may have made a bit of difference in the days of analog signals - though I'm not convinced the difference was measurable - digital signals do not care about such things. They are digital, so even the most nominal of cables will happily sends 1s and 0s.) Jim |