Step 3: Build the main network

Transparent's main "network" is simply an inductor measuring 2.5 micro Henries that is soldered into the path of the positive leg of the cable.

To make the inductor, take a two inch long piece of your oak dowel and wind your 14 gauge solid copper wire tightly around the dowel.  In order to get precisely 2.5 micro Henries, you will need something more complex than a multimeter.  I went to my buddy's shop and used his LCR meter to measure mine.

Side note: My opinion is that you don't have to make it too precise because a 2.5 micro Henry inductor really doesn't add very much inductance anyway.  When I measured the cable without the inductor soldered in, it measured 3 micro Henries by itself.  So, without the inductor, if I wanted to add 2.5 micro Henries of inductance, I just needed to lengthen the cable by about 8 feet.  Anyway, back to the instructions.

I found that if I wound tightly, I consistently got 2.35 to 2.55 micro Henries with 18 turns around the dowel.  I think that's a good rule of thumb to go by if you don't have a complex instrument to measure the inductor.

Once you're satisfied with your inductor, use masking tape to hold it in place around the dowel.  Tin the ends so they'll be easy to solder later.
Very, very cool project. Thanks for taking the time to do it right!<br><br>Please continue to share your audio DIY projects. There are others of us out here that dabble in the same area.
<p>I just ran across this topic by chance. I find it very interesting and certainly an interesting approach even if not following the original design to the last nuance. </p><p>I have strong reservations about much about what has been said. It seems we all want to reproduce the 'original' sound (or video) and ensure the best fidelity possible in the process.</p><p>Well, if a musician is in a studio singing into a $1000 mic and that signal goes through a cable (not like an MIT or Transparent, but unbalanced coax) so many feet to a recording console, how do we reproduce that as close as possible?</p><p>I mean all those elements must affect the signal in some way that is vastly different that what the signal encounters leaving a CD player until it is mechanically reproduced in our listening room. Why think only speaker cables make such a difference?</p><p>The recording engineer is also listening through quality headphones or speakers in an environment that is different than any of ours. </p><p>Through evolving technology and engineering we can receive excellent sound in our listening room. Not 'faithfully' reproducing the original signal, but certainly close enough to enjoy what we hear even if it not the same as siting in a recording studio only 10 feet away from the performer, or in a high end theater during a live performance (the best reference for training our ears).</p><p>In the end, all our impressions whether collective or individual are based on experience and the accuracy of our senses not to mention the quality of our loudspeakers and just as important, the acoustic properties of our room.</p><p>Playing around with different 'quality' wire may have some effect, those I suspect it is marginal to such a small degree that trying to split hairs between which is better is an exercise in futility. To be honest I've done it myself at high end dealers, being too cheap to spend more than a $100 a pair of wires, only to find a pair I could put together myself using soft KnuKoncepz wire (wrong spelling methinks) because they have more strands and smaller profile compared with more popular wire for the same gauge and much greater flexibility. These cables do offend some audiophile because they are further from the concept of 8 gauge battery cables. </p><p>Maybe some you have such sensitive and acoustically defining components that changing out speaker cables actually makes a notable difference. I am not saying that is not the case, but for me really stretches the point that any difference can be easily quantified as better or worse. Like whip cream on top of a sundae, I think the topping dissolves into something rather undefinable over a relatively short time. Just my opinion, which is largely based on personal experience which I admit may be lacking. Plus, doing some design on cables in the aerospace industry which really did have to perform 'in the clouds'. </p>
A warning to &quot;noobs in this field&quot; (and others) -- the original item seems to be an Audiophile ( spelt A-u-d-i-o-p-h-o-o-l ) product. Nobody in their right mind spends $12,500 on some 10ft speaker cables, whatever &quot;filter&quot; or &quot;network&quot; is in the middle of it. And if you did, just think how much you'd have to spend on the amplifier, the speakers, the pristine sound sources ... to truly appreciate them.<br><br>And now that it's &quot;for less than 200 bucks&quot; -- it's still too expensive for what it is.<br><br>All you need is some reasonably thick good quality copper wire to connect your speaker and amplifier. Most &quot;improvements&quot; beyond that are just marketing and hype.<br><br>&quot;Burning in&quot; cables is another really strange pseudo-science part of the marketing. It means nothing ... other than a small extra charge on top of the already overpriced cables :)<br><br>Consider that if you were buying the parts to build these in bulk, it would cost even less than it cost you. So look at the mark-up on the originals! Ouch!<br><br>Under the &quot;be nice&quot; policy, it's impossible to say how bogus the original item really is. Nice work reverse engineering it and building it, that helps to expose what you're getting for your $12.5k, but I wouldn't go out of my way to build one of these!<br><br>I'd love to see some proper blind A/B tests of these cables against a 10 foot length of welding cable or ordinary 15 Amp mains cable.
<p>There is some science that supports the OPPOSITE side of your comments. The well-read reader will not be able to scoff at verifiable real-world aspects of burn-in for cables and components. Used equipment of an above-basic-quality generally sounds &quot;significantly&quot; better than new equipment. Why? It depends on the nature of burn-in, some has to do with the properties of insulators around wire (they can seriously color the sound until they are burned-in) some have to do with properties of electronic components in the signal path (capacitors especially will change their dielectric with use). For cables, the dielectric constant varies according to the material and whether it is laying on something (such as wall-to-wall carpeting). </p><p>You don't have to believe what you read on the Internet, but you can research what you want on the Internet and if you do that on this topic you will come to understand that there is a mix of real and mythological effects ...but there are real ones.</p><p>The fact is, electronics change over time.</p>
<p>You are absolutely right. There is a lot of science that applies here to prove the efficacy of cable burning, directional copper wires, energy pyramids and many other devices used to improve the sound of equipment.</p><p>Off the top of my head &quot;the placebo effect&quot;, &quot;marketing and persuasion&quot;, &quot;peer pressure&quot;, and tell me, is it gravity that provides that sinking feeling that you just spent $10,000 on a bit of wire. Or is it something else ;)</p><p>Of course components change over time: But -- degrade or improve? Your call!</p><p>I fully support the original author's experimentation -- and <strong>if</strong> the effect turns out to be real -- then the author has the last laugh over the audiophools (buyers AND sellers), because they spent &lt; $200 to achieve the same ends. That's when the scoffing really starts.</p>
<p>Be careful... There are both excellent and nonsense cables available at many price points. Have you heard a reference-level system with reference cables? You really should be able to hear the difference between legitimate cables costing very little, legitimate cables costing in the hundreds and excellent cables costing much more. There is a difference, but there are also vendors who charge for nothing special ...at all price points. </p><p>Personally, I like solid wire conductors in oversized insulator jackets that are Litz braided. In solid wire, I prefer silver to copper or gold. A cable like that is expensive, but it does not cost $5000 or 10,000. An IC would cost in the mid-hundreds depending on the connectors, and a 6' (shorter is better) speaker cable will cost around $1000 or more depending on connectors (none is better than the wrong metal). It is expensive, but is it necessary to &quot;enjoy&quot; good sounds? No. Is it necessary to hear detail and spatial resolution you can't hear in lesser cables? Resoundingly: YES. (You won't go back.) </p><p>Two important points. </p><p>First, you will likely get ripped-off buying high-end cables unless you really do your homework ...and if you don't get ripped-off you might not have the listening &quot;vocabulary&quot; and experience to understand exactly how much higher-quality information your music is being presented with.</p><p>Second, the big rule here is keep the signal path as short as possible and do NOT add (or subtract) anything from the signal being carried by the cable. It's this second point that bothers me about cables like the Transparent one: You are taking frequencies out of the signal because there are other shortcomings in the wire and/or connectors. ...I would start with better wire (and possibly in a better topography, such as in a braid) before I started adding band-aids to fix the choice in wire. There is a huge amount of informed research on theses topics, just like there are a large number of uninformed statements made by people who lack either experiential learning or a foundation in theory.</p><p>The topic of cables always invokes skepticism and on the other side, over-hype. But there is a great deal to discover in the research which if you put it into practice your sounds will be much more revealing and rewarding. Unfortunately, the rule of weak-links applies here, so get ready to replace gear. I like the path of kit building, because then you can also upgrade the caps and resisters and if you choose &quot;correct&quot;, then you can swap out tubes as well ;-)</p>
Thanks for the compliment MikB. It was a fun project to reverse engineer.
Hi<br>I have a one question. <br>How many Volts must have this resistor and capacitor? <br>Thanks.
What If I needed a longer speaker cable, say 10 meters long? What would vary? Any Idea how transparent makes their XLR interconnects?<br>
<p>hi, if i use 9/4 awg speaker wire for this project, do any of the values need to change for the capacitors, resistors, and windings on oak dowel .?</p>
<p>FYI, Transparent doesn't use your buddy's measurement equipment. They first use vastly more precise equipment that measures down to a 1/100th of a ohm, etc. and they use an entirely different cable than you can buy off the street. They also match the components to the cable and cable length, so just buying off the shelf cable and making an inductor that measures between 2.35 and 2.55 isn't going to be the same thing. I think your winding isn't tight enough, which might lead to the different measurements. Inductors usually have to be tightly wound and to not cause any ringing either.</p><p>I would first find out what test equipment these companies use, examine their actual cable since they have specific cable geometry, dielectrics, winding, and cable mfg which yield a specific end result and then they design the network around the cable and which frequency range they are trying to &quot;neutralize&quot;, if you will. Good try though. Plus, how new is the cable in question that this was modeled after? Do they make the exact same design? They have introduced new product designs over the years.</p>
<p>Here's the flaws in your steps outlined.</p><p>1. You have to use Transparent's actual cable that they use in that specific Reference XL cable. Just buying raw cable does not mean it's the same as Transparent's raw cable. Same thing goes with MIT. You would have to use the exact same cable MIT uses in a specific product they make. 2. Transparent and MIT both have VERY expensive test equipment and they are performing VERY specific tests on the final outcome, and when they use capacitors, resistors, etc. they aren't using off the shelf components, they are using VERY tight tolerance components (MIT actually hand winds their own inductors), and they use VERY expensive measurement equipment, some of which costs about $100K to measure those values to ensure they are tightly matched. So, just buying off the shelf cable and components isn't going to produce the exact same result. Nice try, though.</p><p>Yes, MIT boxes are vastly different than Transparent. Yes, they both use capacitors, resistors, inductors in various &quot;filter&quot; designs, but they aren't the same as one another, and neither is the raw wire they use. </p><p>MIT also has a lot of patents, so no one can market anything that violates their patents.</p><p>Bottom line, don't say that this is a DIY Transparent or MIT cable project. It's just one's idea of how to do something similar, but yet it's NOT the same thing.</p><p>The only way to guarantee the same results is by taking your DIY cable and conducting the series of measurements that either Transparent or MIT conduct on their cables and then proving that they perform the same as yours. I doubt they will. So, just because you feel you can do the same thing for $200, you can't. Impossible. Nice try though.</p>
I agree and yet disagree with the instructable and some posts. Let me explain: <br> <br>First of all, I agree that it's ridiculous to spend 10K plus on speaker cables, even though I'm and audiophile (and yes, have actually been to the transparent factory) <br> <br>The MIT boxes are vastly different than the Transparent boxes. Do not try to compare the two. The MIT boxes are a lot more complicated: <br> <br>http://www.mitcables.com/pdf/TAS_190_Oracle_MA-X.pdf <br> <br>Finally, the instructable fails to take a few things into account: First, even though the transparent cables are outrageously expensive, the &quot;raw&quot; cable used is of very high quality, and is a twisted pair design. If you use high quality twisted pair for your DIY cables, you will notice a significant improvement as compared to the instructable. <br> <br>NOTE: most hi-fi stores that carry transparent will also the raw cable, I just picked up some 14-4 for $2.50 a foot. <br> <br>Secondly, the inductor (and MIT boxes) change with different cable lengths, I'm unable (ignorance on my part) to provide technical detail as to how though. This may be room for experimentation. <br> <br>
Thanks for sharing. Always wondered what was in those network boxes. <br>I wonder, what the necessity is of having that inductor in the middle of the cable? A network box at the end of the cable seems to work fine for MIT cables. Surely that last 5 ft of cable has an insignificant effect. Might be interesting to try placing the whole network at the end of the cable in a separate box, with very short leads to the speaker terminals of course. It would make experimenting and swapping out different coils and caps easier.
Great you researched into this. Thanks so much. My experience in building LAN5, Goertz, cross coax and 6N twin leads, all varies slightly. I also have gold ribbon speakers, very wide bandwidth, no inductance, enabling 5.2 ohm load on the test lines. If you can get a signal generator and scope, view the reflected waves. I see this value coil will attenuate very effectively but will spread the signal down to below 1 MHz. It will round the reflected signal risetime slightly, but will sharpen the image remarkably, from my experience. Certainly, it will make the cable and load very stable. The capacitor will reduce the spike over 2 MHz, but not enough. Try a 0.1 uH for laughs and giggles. I like it. The resistor depends on your speaker, so I have no advice there, it is probably fine just as it is. The entire idea is fundamentally sound (pun intended!). And it is such a fun hobby. Thanks for sharing. Pete
It's basically just a copy cat version of the MIT cables.Before spending the money for parts on this do yourself a favor and go buy some Goertz speaker cables they sound far superior to this type of design.I know I own both types and I also build custom cables;loudspeakers;and electronics.Single conductors far outperform multi conductors in every respect. <br>For almost $200 for the parts I could build myself some self bi amped speakers with only 3 inch long speaker cables.<br>Now that's how you get transparent sound.
I agree with your statement about bi amped speakers... <br> <br>About 20 years ago I was helplessly rtying to make a four way speaker to work properly... even using very tolerant 6 dB/Oct simple crossovers, and with a full electronics lab at hand, I found that the passive corssover was the worst offender in the whole chain of sound reproduction! <br> <br>Later on, I tried the much straightforward process of multi-amplifying with Active crossovers. I still find amazing that most audiophiles spend huge amounts of money and effort pursuing perfection, buying or making a big, expensive and exquisite amplifier, and then throwing into the trash its signal when trying to connect thru a passive crossover with all its unavoidable flaws! <br> <br>Even more amazing is the never ending quest for the &quot;magical&quot; cable, esoteric cones, ethereal sanbags and other &quot;improvments&quot; paid by wealthy people beieving in the black-magic approach to audio! <br> <br>Kudos for saying that bi amplifiying (or multi-amplifying) is the best way to transparet sound! Amclaussen, Mexico City.
I like the idea of making my own high end audio equipment. So let me first say thank you for this insightful project. :)<br><br>Next, since you have equipment to measure micro henries, I will have to assume you know a fair amount about electronic circuits and electrical flow. <br><br>Inserting a capacitor and resistor near the speaker will change the impedance for the amplifier, and ultimately change the relationship between the amplifier and the speaker just enough to have some slight coloration added to the audio, possibly so little most people would not hear it. I think this particular element may have more to do with the improved sound quality than anything else, assuming the wire is thick enough for the wattage it needs to carry. So the question is this; Do you think the effect of this cable could be further simplified to just the resistor and capacitor being attached at the speaker connect point making a &lt;$5 audio upgrade?<br><br>Thanks.
The inductor is used to help attenuate RF signals and the capacitor and resistor(zobel network) help flatten out the the impedance rise at higher frequencies which the amp see's.The problem with zobel networks is there is no generic approach,each loudspeaker needs different values of components to operate correctly.<br>The best sound is achieved by having nothing but the voice coil on the output of the amp and using cables with a single strand of wire less than one foot in length.I generally reject any round wire more than 20awg for high frequencies due to skin effect problems that occur with larger conductors at high frequencies.<br>The longer the wire the bigger diameter it has to be.<br>The amp and speaker should be looked at as one unit.Anything and I mean anything added to the output of the amp colors the sound quality,especially resistors and inductors.<br>I have an instructable in the works to show everyone how to achieve ultra high resolution sound with minimal money.
Hello.<br> First of all, great instructable, clean and well done.<br> <br> And now, the questions! :)<br> I'm not American, so I have some problems in understanding what is a 12/4 wound high strand count copper speaker wire. What are the measures and characteristics of the cable (I live in Italy, so we have different measures)<br> Another thing: I looked on eBay for a 2.5 micro Henries inductor (I don't have the right equipment to test it and I'm also a bit lazy (: ), but I only found inductors with a much higher inductance. Is it better or I must use a 2.5 micro Henries inductance? I'm really a noob in this field so I kindly ask for an explanation.<br> <br> Thanks and keep up with the good work!
Hello Garu,<br><br>If I were you, I'd just wind an inductor as I described in the project. 14 gauge solid copper wire wrapped tightly around a 1/2 inch dowel 18 times will be very close to 2.5 micro Henries. And as I said in the instructable, it really doesn't add that much inductance anyway.<br><br>12/4 wire is wire that comes with four conductors that are each 12 gauge. I'm not sure how that translates to your measurement system in Italy. High strand count refers to how many strands of copper there are in each of the four conductors. The wire I bought had 259 strands per conductor.
It's better to have LESS inductance in low impedance loads such as loudspeakers not add to the inductance that's already in the wire configuration already.Yes even a straight wire has inductance.<br>Better to move the amp close to the speaker use short connection,flat wire is best, and low capacitance cables(preferably balanced ones) going to the amps.
12 Guage in AWG (American spec) is the same as 4mm/sq in European spec, so just used 4mm/sq wire with a high strand count.
Excellent. Thanks Fred!
I am shocked by the price difference of the original product and the remake. Did you also compare the cables listening to them? Is there also an instruction for the transparent interlink? Thanks for this instruction. It opened my eyes.

About This Instructable