[Solved] Choosing Cables for Equipment: CCA vs. OFC - Comparing Cost, Quality & Performance

I am thinking about choosing cables for my equipment (no matter what for this topic)
I am not a professional in this field, but I have reviewed several opinions that it is not worth investing in OFC cables because there is no difference compared to CCA.
And here the question arises, because CCAs are a bit cheaper (they are not a lot of money, but why overpay)
I do not know myself so I am asking for simple answers
Here is what interests me
http://www.avstore.pl/kabel-jack-2rca-wireway-5m.html

Many thanks for the tips!

It's easy to choose copper wires (not necessarily oxygen-free), it's a complete crap.

adam_anton wrote:

(no matter what for this topic)

More important than you think ....

adam_anton wrote:

it is not worth investing in OFC cables because there is no difference compared to CCA.

The truth is that Aluminum CCA is not comparable to copper (copper is much better)
If someone writes that there is no difference, he is either deaf or has very cheap equipment.
The better the equipment, the more you will feel the difference of the cabling.

Good quality cables are the basis of high-end equipment, because bad (too thin, although copper, or thick but aluminum) cables can sound like crap in a plastic Chinese housing.

I support the previous speaker, with one clarification: Not so much the thickness of the cable as the quality of the screen should be a determinant of quality. So what if the OFC cable is a super copper, thick wire, and the screen is made of a few threads quite freely wrapped on a "hot" wire?

398216 Usunięty wrote:

It is not the thickness of the cable, but the quality of the screen that should be the determinant of quality

I support screening, I forgot. But the thickness is also important, because what if the sound is clean and undistorted, since the cable is of good quality, but too thin and large, the loudspeaker is not able to show what it can do.

mbbakus88 wrote:

since the cable is of good quality, but too thin and large, the loudspeaker is not able to show what it can do.

Wait ... are we talking about a speaker cable? There is no screen in the speaker cable. The photo from the link posted by the author suggests that it is a signal cable, and in this case the thickness is much smaller than that of the speaker cable.
Someone made a mess of something ... Who?

398216 Deleted wrote:
Wait ... are we talking about a speaker cable? There is no screen in the speaker cable.
You've seen few speaker wires

slawmog wrote:

You've seen few speaker wires

Apparently ...

398216 Usunięty wrote:

Wait ... are we talking about a speaker cable?

I assumed in advance that we are talking about the loudspeaker due to the fact that I have not seen the photos and the author was talking about the equipment, so I associated it with audio ...
So what cable are we talking about? The author provided a link to the 2x rca jack3.5 cable. Amplifier cable ...

exactly, it's about connecting to an amplifier, but still the conversation is about quality between CCA and OFC. I read somewhere that several testers did an experiment in which the participants saw no difference in sound quality between a cable from OFC and ... a cable made of a hanger -.-

adam_anton wrote:

I read somewhere that a few testers did an experiment where the participants didn't see the difference in sound quality

Gentlemen, it all depends on what equipment it is all about.

I will say this:
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE -> Technics SA GX-100 -> Tonsil Perfect 150 - The cable doesn't matter.
AIM SC808 7.1 -> NAD C356BEE -> Elac BS 62.2- A colossal difference in sound quality in favor of OFC

Added after 11 [minutes]:

adam_anton wrote:

CCAs are a bit cheaper

As you said yourself, it is not a lot of money.
I even use the cheesy loudspeakers Radiotechnika s-50B and the Dixon ma-240 amplifier, which I cannot listen to but I am forced to do in the near future (I cannot afford the equipment at the moment), I bought the Melodika MDMJ2R cable for 1.5m and I paid PLN 80.
Why? Because the cable is the basis of PLN 80 is not a fortune, and if I get some decent speakers and an amplifier with a card, after connecting it will not turn out that the cables can not do it.

Summing up, if the equipment is not audiophile and you do not intend to buy a better one in the future, take CCA. If music is important to you and what it sounds like, do not hesitate and buy OFC because the difference may be PLN 10, you can buy a decent cable for PLN 30, and if you ever connect something better, you will not be disappointed.

Just don't go after people to solder this cable for you

An OFC cable can only be heard when the loudspeaker coils are OFC too (after all, the coil, not the cable, is the main part of the load resistance), and also ALL connections inside the equipment are OFC.
OFC is approx. 3% better than "ordinary" copper, you can hear it - you can see - and feel it! But the connections are not OFC welded, but soldered - DANGER, tin!
Of course, tin is significantly worse than OFC (almost 7 times!), So the connections with tin "can be heard" even when the equipment is turned off.
It's like a chain, a piece of string: the chain will have the strength of a string, nothing more!
The installation between the power plant and the receiver has the same decisive influence on the sound - there are even aluminum wires there!

The great sound of OFC comes from the wonderful sound of the "clinking coin" that can be squeezed out of stupidity ...

Apparently, this ailment is incurable!
I would like to remind you that this is a technical forum!

ROTFL

Rzuuf wrote:

The OFC cable can only be heard when the speaker coils are also OFC

And finally, someone exhausted the topic. I believe that a better answer will not sound like that. But that doesn't change the fact that aluminum oxidizes faster.

As for me, the biggest disadvantage of the CCA cable, which I accidentally bought a whole reel, is that soldering it is very difficult, if not impossible, sometimes, as with the first "touch" of the soldering iron, it will not be possible to combine this vain later trial with rosin paste or other fluxes. The thin top layer of copper will "peel" and then it's like trying to braze pure aluminum. As all connections are to be twisted or "crimped" it should not be a difference, aluminum has a slightly lower conductivity than copper, you can give a slightly thicker cable, sometimes it will be better for the overall "strength" of the installation and maybe for the "appearance"

macmazur wrote:

The thin top layer of copper will "peel" ...

This thin layer will not "peel", it will just dissolve in the tin! Probably my colleagues have already seen the "eating" of copper tips without a protective layer (Weller uses galvanic iron coating) or with a damaged covering (eg by filing the tip with a file).
To be sure, it is good to solder such wires with tin solder with the addition of copper - such solder can be prepared even on a kitchen gas burner!

In addition: CCA cables are not intended for audio applications, but who will forbid the rich ...

Hi. I came across this topic by accident while looking for cheap loudspeaker cables.

mbbakus88 wrote:

To sum up, if the equipment is not audiophile and you are not going to buy a better one in the future, take the CCA. If music is important to you and how it sounds, do not hesitate and buy OFC because

I don't really understand what's going on with the better sound of the wires, can someone explain? The cable is used to conduct signals, the smaller the energy losses flowing through the cable, the better, more faithfully the music flowing from the speakers will be played. With some basic knowledge of physics, practically each of us can count the wires. For example, a cheap 4mm2 stranded wire can be purchased on a well-known auction site for PLN 2.5 per 1m. Assuming that we need 2 x 2.5 m of cable per column, using the calculator: https://calcoolator.pl/resistance_length_diameter_conduct.html, we will calculate that the resistance of the cable for 5 meters will be 0.021 Ω. Simplifying the calculations by treating the speaker impedance of 8 Ω as resistance, we have a power loss on the cable of 0.021 Ω / 8.021 Ω, i.e. we lose 0.26% of the signal converting it to heat dissipated on the cables. With oxygen free copper, the loss will be maybe 0.25%. Can anyone hear the difference? Changing the seating position in the room, hanging a picture on the wall, moving the speaker and especially the "bass-reflex" hole away from the wall will have a 100 times greater impact than the cable used. A much bigger problem is the acoustics of the room, sometimes a small shift of the loudspeaker can completely change the distribution of sound amplification and attenuation points, significantly affecting the impression received by the music listener.

There are a few other factors that come into play here that are not so easy to calculate. Copper is mechanically stronger than aluminum - bending when disconnecting, moving, etc. At first glance, it's nothing, but after some time (and the wife's desire to keep all corners clean) it may turn out that after three months we have to count with the need to shorten the wires. Added to this is resistance to weather conditions and (more so) reaction with the insulation material, or rather the chemistry that migrates from the insulation. Coating aluminum with copper... In most cases, apart from the color, it has nothing to do with copper.
Further - the end of the cable should be cut - aluminum, as a rule, very quickly covers a layer of non-conductive oxide - additionally it reacts with copper, which speeds up this process even more in many cases. Copper is very easy to solder and, if necessary, terminals/connectors can be soldered - aluminum needs to be tightened (admittedly, aluminum can be soldered, but ... but it will never be such a solid connection as in the case of copper. As for all this, we will take into account a much larger cross-section aluminum against the same resistance per meter ...

And finally, one more thing - CCA cables were created when problems with copper started (price increases on stock exchanges) and the main argument was the lower price - no one mentioned higher resistance - why?

Agree 100%, I wanted to refer more to the "difference in sound " between copper and oxygen-free copper. I do not take CCA into account because it is a "scam" - selling aluminum for the price of copper. It does not change the fact that even the use of CCA will not affect the sound of the speakers. Most sellers of speaker cables omit the information that CCA is aluminum, usually in the description you will find information "the cable is made of high-quality materials". CCA wires will be difficult to solder, less resistant to bending and stretching, and their cross-sectional area must be almost twice as large to match copper. Coating an aluminum wire with copper does not change much either rather, it is supposed to convince us that we are buying copper. From what I remember, it is only at high frequencies - well above the acoustic ones, that the current begins to flow on the surface of the wire.

Tomasz S wrote:

. From what I remember, it is only at high frequencies - well above the acoustic ones, that the current begins to flow on the surface of the wire.

Yes Sir. You've brought up another audio-voo-doo myth The skin effect applies to definitely higher frequencies and is certainly not relevant for the audio frequency range.