[Aether Audio]

Friends,

If you do, you use to be in good company.  I used to think the same thing myself.  "Use good wire and good connectors...and that's it."  Wrong.

I don't expect most of your to understand (or even take the time to read) a lot of the following.  But...if you can even begin to wrap your head around Hawksford's paper - there's hope for you.

Funny thing is, this paper has been out for a LONG time...something like over 20 years I believe.  To be honest, I'm surprised I hadn't heard of it myself before now.  Check it out.

http://www.essex.ac.uk/ese/research/audio_lab/malcolmspubdocs/G3%20HFN%20Essex_Echo_(cables_1985).pdf

If you get the "gist" of it, you'll realize that wires are nothing more than...uh, oh...here it comes...WAVEGUIDES!  I've always known that, but "orthodox" theory teaches us that at audio wavelengths, waveguide propagation doesn't come into play in cables of dimensions commonly used in audio.  But waveguide theory is THE ticket in explaining all of these obscure issues.  And gee, we know a little about those things here at SP Tech.  From top (our tweeter) to bottom (our Revelation bass loading)...
 our designs have been based on waveguide theory from day-1!

Hey, maybe there is something to this waveguide stuff after all.   The fact is, EVERY form of signal transmission takes place by the principles of waveguide physics.  If a designer attempts to ignore it, the design will suffer.  Sorry, I didn't create the laws of physics, I just try to obey them.

Once I finally got my head out of my butt and decided to look more deeply, the science was there all along to explain all these heretofore "tweak-o" issues.  They are (sorry doubters) all real and come into play to some degree in every branch of physics - not just audio.

What is both totally surprising to me and as far as I'm concerned, a "feather in my cap," is that what I predicted below falls EXACTLY in line with Hawksford's paper/theory.  Unbeknownst to me, I had "theorized" virtually everything that Hawksford is discussing all before I ever became aware of his paper.  I just discovered this paper on the web 2 days ago and I am still in awe.  He even goes on to "predict" vortices or "whirlpools" of current forming in the conductor. 

I take it a step further and say that, due to the "curl" of electrons traveling through the magnetic field within the cables (commonly known to take place in free space), that these currents form spiral paths back and forth down the length of a conductor.  These spiral paths look like sine waves when viewed orthogonally and constitute the "standing waves" or resonances that I have discussed/predicted.  These resonances decay in magnitude and time exponentially, just like the reverberation in a room decays after you slap your hands  Hawksford goes on to even use this same analogy!  Man am I smart!   Well, I may not have been "original," but at least I didn't know I wasn't.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=39346.0

Check it out, see what I wrote and compare it to Hawksford.  In private e-mails to some of you I had elaborated further and hence, more finely developed my theory than what I posted in the link above.  Those of you that received those e-mails know this to be true.

Man...I don't mean to be arrogant but...it sure feels good to have been correct.  FINALLY, I have a "theory of everything" audio.  I may be delusional but at least it's nice to have company smarter than I am!

Oh...and for you guys getting my cables...you can breathe a little easier now.

-Bob

PS.  So why am I not rich yet?

[brj]

It always amazes me how similar those equations are to the ones that govern fluid flow... nature seems to have an impressive capacity to recycle, or perhaps conserve, itself.

[Imperial]

Yes, it is strange to talk to the "well educated" know it all people when in conjunction with cables..
And it is also somewhat strange to read you posting Bob.
As this is sort of what I myself have been thinking.

I sort of visualized flow of current as "wind" that blew on the magnetic field that the conductor is surrounded with or contains as signal is traveling.

The cable geometry then became a way of controlling this magnetic field... I viewed it as an extended soapy bubble that was alive with the "wind"/signal that "filled" it
The walls more like a mist than a thin layer...

"noise" was like the sun shining on this bubble, the image of a soap bubble  with its oily sheen of colors that whirled in complex patterns, but now the mist that is the blurry walls of the conductor bubble/vessel.

Have you ever seen a bubble of air travel up water? Seen how it constanly spins inside itself, pushing away the water? It changes shape, but never looses it's volume, but some part of it will seep into the surrounding water, creating small droplets, or pockets of air, that rejoin a bit lower in the bubble, as the drag keep the "cloud" of bubbles more or less together..

The magnetic field in a signal flow is for me viewed as this bubble that travels, pushing to expand the space in front of it. But, signal does not travel!!!
It is merely the walls of the elongated bubble, or the wave that propagates in them that is the signal. signal...

Ah! , This is not my mothers tounge, I'll have to recheck what I wrote later today!
But I just had to write this now, error or no error!

ps: I have not yet read the article you are linking to.
I guess I'm really exited to see if I'm close in my thoughts as well.. Will read it later today!

Imperial

[Big Red Machine]

Where's the info on your cables?  I'd like to know more and I didn't see any on your website.  Also could not open your price list.

[Aether Audio]

Imperial,

Thanks for contributing! 

 That’s a very interesting view of the matter.  I guess at this point in time all our opinions or “hypothesis” are just that – hypothesis.  Until someone can put together a definitive set of scientific tests that verify things one way or the other, it’s all just conjecture on some level.  I’ll be the first to admit my ideas are no more valid than yours or anybody else’s. 

Personally though, I enjoy these little excursions into imagination and thought experimentation.  I try to apply as much known theory that I can wrap my head around, but obviously it’s of limited value.  If I had any real knowledge on the level required to answer such questions, I’d be working for NASA or Los Alamos and making some real $$$.

Statistically though, there has to be something real going on here with cables.  Are there any statisticians out there that can add to this discussion?  In my mind, when you consider all of the cable companies and amount of product sold, that has to tell you something is going on.  If folks weren’t hearing a difference there wouldn’t be such a big market for these things.

Even if I hadn’t heard differences myself, had I really put some serious thought into the matter and approached it without any opinion one way or another, statistics alone would have suggested to me that the issue is a legitimate one.  I simply can’t imagine that so many people from all over the world must be all wrong and imagining things.

It’s sort of like the “free energy of the vacuum,” UFO, Bigfoot or ghost topics.  Most incidences can be explained as being the result of some natural phenomena or human based activity. But there are those few instances that represent a small percentage of total occurrences that simply cannot be explained.  I submit that statistics alone suggests something “unknown” is going on.  What it is, whether it be UFOs or cables, most likely represents a new level of understanding that has not yet been achieved.  As advanced as our present level of science is, the fact that science still can’t fully explain these things suggests that a new paradigm in thinking is called for.

For instance, there is a preponderance of information and experimental data coming in from “rogue” experimenters in “alternative energy.”  It is claimed that empty space is not empty at all, but is teaming with energy that can be tapped into and provide the world with unlimited free and totally clean energy.  One example of a machine based on permanent magnets can be found here: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFGiWiXMHn0&mode=related&search=

You’ll notice that there are no wires or motors attached to the device.  It is nothing more than a rotor imbedded with permanent magnets and 2 “C” shaped stators with more of the same.  How does it work?  Obviously, by magnetism.  But with no external source of power it appears to be breaking the first law of Thermodynamics.  It appears energy is being “created” (not “possible”), as the magnets do not “run down” or wear out and loose their magnetic field.  My eldest son Jason (mostly) and myself (a little – I advise him) have experimented ourselves with such things and have seen similar results.

Where is this “free” energy coming from then?  The only answer is from the vacuum energy of free space – commonly referred to as the “aether field.”  Orthodox science does not acknowledge such a thing.  It may not be long before it has to though, as patents are being applied for all over the world for similar devices.  Rumor has it that ours and other governments around the world have been doing all they can to “cover up” such devices for many years now.  In fact, their efforts go back as far as suppressing some of the results of Tesla’s later experiments. You can easily imagine what free energy would do to the power structure of this world.  The “power elite” would loose their strangle hold on us and “true” freedom would result.  We can’t have that now, can we?  In the past their efforts to suppress this knowledge have been fairly successful, but with the advent of the Internet, they simply can’t keep the lid on it any more.

So…the above is a bit off base with regards to cables, but if there truly are such areas of “unknown” science, then it seems likely that significant differences in cables may actually be real.  Food for thought, huh?

-Bob

[Aether Audio]

Big Red Machine,

The SP Tech website is in sore need of updating.  We disabled the price list page because we had to raise prices and nobody had the time to post the new ones.  We essentially lost our latest webmaster and my son (the former webmaster) hasn't had time to work on it - he builds the speaker enclosures and is swamped.

The cables are not an SP Tech product.  Rather, they are exclusively my own and will be offered by R.A. Smith Ltd....whenever I get my act together, incorporate and get a website posted.

In the meantime you can e-mail me engineering@4sptech.com for the details.  Whether or not anybody likes them is one thing, but I can guarantee they're constructed like no other.

-Bob

[Imperial]

In the physics lab at my old high school  (Norwegian equivalent as we have a somewhat different edu.sys)
in a cabinet on the wall is a lot of small stuff that is used to show how things work...
Among the things in that cabinet is a very small electro motor built by a matchstick, a small thin needle, 3 paperclips and ca 5 meters of really thin lacquered copperwire.  It's all mounted on a small flat piece of wood...
I made it for a project and the little thing works by applying dc and then holding a single magnet close to the tiny engine. It spins some 30-50.000 (maybe even a  lot faster, I don't know)...revs!!! two of the paperclips act as small loops that hold each end of the needle. a 30 second spincycle would burn out the micro sized bearings. Made by coiling a section of the thin copperwire...

The size was some 1/4 to 3/8's of an inch any direction...
It spun so fast that you actually could hear it whoosh!
I was hooked on magnetich fields and curren the first time I started that engine
and it spun so fast that the teacher came over to see what was making the noise!
Boy was that thing ever in perfect balance!!! (The stator coils were made with 5 layers of wire.
It took a REALLY long time to wind them in such a manner so that the engine would spin correctly!
(A crazy little project, but I did learn a lot about magnetic and electric fields.)
I found the drawing to this engine in an old hobby book.
Here is a link to some similar projects one can build. (these motors are not as complex as the one I built.)
http://sci-toys.com/scitoys/scitoys/electro/electro.html

The same year I wrote a paper on Nicola Tesla...about his electrical ideas and inventions...
First I was set to have it submitted on as a top contender from my school...
Then I was told I had failed and would not be graded on that paper... I had not answered the question!!!
Go figure!!! What can you do!!!

Tesla had a theory as you mention that electricity is basically waves that exist within a certain wavelength.
And if driven into this frequency propagates on the earths magnetic field...

When the moon travels in this field it charges this fields, and by building a machine that taps into this, you can send a pulse in this frequency and it can be retrieved back as an amplified signal... and from there converted back to electricity...
The closest circuit I can think of that is sort of in the general area is the Berning Zero hysteresis amp...
(It will give a general idea of using fields to amplify instead of a transformer (Which is a converter by the way!)

In 1985 on Norwegian television a apparatus such as this was demonstrated... it was about the size of 2 stacked large encyclopedia.
It powered a medium sized sportsarena for several minutes I think.

Then some time later it was told that the invention had been purchased by an American company called GM (It's along time ago, but I think it was GM)... and that the inventors had received several hundred millions for it... To not speak more thereof...
If it wasn't all a hoax, that little thing was a working Tesla unit!!!

Today there are some ideas regarding that current and voltage can flow as a wave in normal space using a special carrier frequency. Maybe this is so...
Time will tell.
It's a long time ago, I hope I wrote the Tesla theory/fact correctly... comments are welcome.
PS: The AC grid was invented by Nicola Tesla...
The person trying to pass along his own invention the DC powergrid was Thomas Edison...
I guess we know who won that contest...

Imperial

[JimJ]

If folks weren’t hearing a difference there wouldn’t be such a big market for these things.

A much more likely scenario is that if cable manufacturers didn't diversify their product, they wouldn't have a market to sell in.

I'm sure all the 'patent cures' that were around before the arrival of the FDA worked great too, because there was such a big market for the products?

This is an interesting article with relevance to the original post, make sure to check out the links on the second page.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/silversmith-audio-cables-interview

[eric the red]

wonder what he discovered that they are still using, that's still a secret...

Top secret Gov't photo

[Imperial]

If folks weren’t hearing a difference there wouldn’t be such a big market for these things.

A much more likely scenario is that if cable manufacturers didn't diversify their product, they wouldn't have a market to sell in.

I'm sure all the 'patent cures' that were around before the arrival of the FDA worked great too, because there was such a big market for the products?

This is an interesting article with relevance to the original post, make sure to check out the links on the second page.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/silversmith-audio-cables-interview

Of course GDS as he is known by, is a really smart and smooth talker, that support himself on the "correct" theory and math...
I for one regard him as a good tech dude... with insight into what he has learned, and found to be measurable... A very good promoter of the "science clan" you might say...
A very very stubborn person... (Which of course comes from great conviction and knowledge to give him credit!!)
But I don't think he ever makes an article about cables without making sure that the views presented by himself is the ending statement. So he never leaves it to the reader to make up his own mind.
He forces the belief which is his own with brute logic so it is left no doubt that he does not believe the person he has just talked to and written an interview with.
This is a crying shame!

Bringing him into this thread is not what I think is a good move, as the angle suggested by GDS isn't what is being talked about now.
 

Imperial

[Double Ugly]

Bringing him into this thread is not what I think is a good move, as the angle suggested by GDS isn't what is being talked about now.

Absolutely correct. 

The irony is that Bob Smith (aka SP Pres) shared GDS's beliefs with regards to cables until relatively recently.  It was only in the past year or so that he was ("shocked" I think he said) to hear differences with various types of cables in systems he knew well.  The subsequent research into determining the 'whys' and 'hows' of those experiences led to the development of the cables he offers today.

On a more important note, when you crap on a thread in a manufacturer's circle - particularly one begun by the manufacturer himself - you're messing with a man's living.  Please suppress the urge to do so again.

Thanks.

-Jim

Edited to make the following clearly understood:  I quoted Imperial's comment because I agree with it, and because I was about to express a similar sentiment before I saw his post.  Rather than repeat what had already been said, I quoted for emphasis.

This post is in response to JimJ.

[JimJ]

I have mostly a background in car audio before I got into home stuff - so I know the owners of a few small "upstart" companies like the ones here in the Circles.

I don't think any of them have to resort to using vague and controversial scientific papers, perpetual motion, unexplained science, and UFOs to sell their product. The products sell themselves because of their merits.

If a moderator wants to move this to a general forum to keep it out of the manufacturer's section, that's cool. Or just delete it. Either way, I'm done.

[Big Red Machine]

Email sent for the cable info.  Thanks.

[gitarretyp]

So, i skimmed the essex article over breakfast this morning. My background is in plasma physics but not waveguide/transmission lines, so some of what i say should be taken with a grain of salt, though the math involved is very simple and transparent --i won't comment on the perpetual motion machines other than to say they don't exist...

When i skimmed the article, i mostly examined the math, diagrams and read the conclusion --this is how articles are typically skimmed. I was left rather confused. He's supposed to be treating a waveguide in cylindrical geometry, yet he's using planar equations and assuming there's no variation of E&B transverse to the propagation direction. Thus, this paper only presents standard solutions to an EM wave propagating in a conductor of planar geometry (ie, not a waveguide/transmisison line), not what the author set out to show. You can find similar treatments in any intro undergrad E&M text. His figure 1, a propagating EM wave in his conductor, is even incorrect. A simple calculation shows there's a phase shift between E and B, with E leading B, given by arctan(alpha/beta).

Aside from using the wrong geometry (ie, neglecting variations in the transverse directions), i found it a little unexpected that he treated the conductivity/permitivity as scalar constants. Maybe this is okay at audio frequencies (it's not cool in plasma physics, but the frequencies are much higher). He makes a comment towards the end that Bob paraphrased, "I wonder if current vortices can result, like whirlpools in a stream of water." This comment really makes me wonder about this guy/article. What he's discussing sounds like an eddy current to me. Eddy currents are the source of the skin effect he spends a good deal of the paper discussing. To actually see eddy currents in the examination, he'd need to relax his problem to include variations in the r and theta direction (ie, actually do the problem he set out to do).

[Aether Audio]

Jim J,

OK bud…it doesn’t happen very often, but you have the distinguished honor of managing to piss me off.  You’ve never reared your head around here before and the first time you do, you come out of the gate with a negative slant and a pseudo-challenge.  Obviously you don’t know me, my design principles, or anything about the foundation of all SP Tech products – which I design.  If you did, you would have known better.  Either that or you like to make trouble and would have done so just to get some attention.

Well, you got my attention now.  I was going to leave things as they were, but with the following statement:

I don't think any of them have to resort to using vague and controversial scientific papers, perpetual motion, unexplained science, and UFOs to sell their product.  The products sell themselves because of their merits.

I think I need to correct your thinking.  Remove or delete your post?  Nah…we don’t do that here unless you are demeaning or profane.  What I will do is *DELETE* your argument and its erroneous logic though.

…so I know the owners of a few small "upstart" companies like the ones here in the Circles.

Is that supposed to be a reference to some level of professional credentials?  If you want credentials, I’ll give you a few.  (Friends, I hate doing the following.  Boasting is not my typical modus operandi). 

Before I started SP Tech I worked for 9 years in the engineering department, for the Techron Division of Crown International.  We built audio amplifiers with such high levels of power that they were used in the medical MRI industry (Mostly by General Electric).  40,000-watt amplifiers were the standard size we were manufacturing.

On the first prototype switching power converter that I worked on, I refined the gate drive (IGBTs) circuitry of a 60,000 KVA, 5kHz H-Bridge power converter.  When the early prototypes failed they would short out and blow up like a shotgun going off.  When that happened, the current was so high that it couldn’t be measured.  The magnetic field it produced in the 3-phase 208V power lines was so strong that it would snap the wires against the inside walls of the conduit so hard the walls throughout the lab would shake.  The first time it happened I counted 15 people from throughout the engineering wing that piled in the lab to see if we were all right.

We discovered that the 5KHz transformer was saturating due to core “flux walking,” thus causing a dead short circuit on the output of the H-Bridge.  The top 3 engineers developed a method of sensing core saturation…but it didn’t work.  I developed an implementation that did work and it saved the project.

After that, we moved on to an 8-phase, 2 MHz tracking power converter (we called it the “polyphase buck”) with the same KVA as the previous unit.  By then I was the lead technician and worked directly under the head of R&D – Mr. Gerald Stanley:

http://www.prosoundweb.com/install/commentary/kc/crn/gi.php

He’s the guy that started the entire solid-state power amp revolution by developing the Crown DC 300 – the first high power SS amp in the world.

Anyway…not only was I responsible for helping to make the thing work, but I also had to train all of the production and service technicians.  Before I left I had also developed a mechanical modification that decreased construction time, increased throughput and made serviceability possible, such that it saved the company something to the tune of $2M/year.  The upshot is that I’ve worked in some of the highest power, state-of-the-art electronics in the world…right here in the cornfields of Indiana.

I could go on but it would be superfluous and purely egotistic.  Is there any doubt left in your mind that I have a solid scientific background?  I suspect that there are only a handful of designers out there and particularly here on AC… that have more experience in hard-core engineering than I do.  The bottom line is that EVERYTHING I design is based on the “first principles of science” – they always have been and always will be.

Read the reviews.  Do you think some overly zealous hack with a couple of hair-brained ideas based on pseudo-science could pull designs out of his ass that perform like SP Tech products do?  Get a clue.  In fact, I was so staunchly entrenched in the “science club” that I wouldn’t even consider the effects of cables and such as being anything more than the result of over-active imaginations.  If you had bothered to read my other posts first, you would have known this.

So…for yours and everybody’s information…R.A. Smith Ltd. Cables will be based on solid, quantifiable scientific principles.  They will exhibit low inductance, capacitance, and resistance.  Also, they will address and optimize input and output termination impedance issues.  At such a point in time as I am able to do the testing and documentation, I will provide all relevant performance data and specifications.

The uniqueness of their construction in no way detracts or undermines basic engineering principles or commonly accepted methods of solid cable construction techniques.  At best, my construction methods will be an adjunct to and improvement on these basic principles, thereby offering an increased level of performance.  At worst, they will still be excellent cables by anybody’s standard – even the most die-hard “science club” member’s.  In any case, they will “sell themselves” as I have already clearly stated that I have no scientific evidence whatsoever that the “enhanced” component of my construction method will work, or that the physics it is based on has any bearing in established scientific fact.

Finally, I recognize that there are legitimate errors in Hawksford’s paper and that his approach falls short in several ways.  I see it as more of a “what if” rather than a “what is.”  I will say that I do suspect that buried within his ideas lay a potential nugget or two of truth – even if his methods and development leave much to be desired. 

In the end, if there is any truth in my personal visualizations of any as yet “unknown” physics involved, then my cables, having addressed them, should receive favorable acceptance.  Even if I am totally wrong the same should still be true as they will be built on scientifically accepted principles - regardless.  In the end, all I care about is whether or not folks like them well enough to purchase them – superfluous debates of alternative physics “be damned.”  I’m not out to “prove” anything to anybody.  I’m not out to swindle anyone either, hence…my disclaimer – I can’t “prove” a thing other than that which is measurable.  You can be sure though, that their measurable aspects will be considered excellent by “first science principles.”  I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Now little JJ, go start a fight somewhere else.

-Bob

[Hogg]

Imperial, please don't get me started on Tesla.

The US government has suppressed almost 600 patents of his under "National Security" (before his death he had over 700 US patents, you can now only have access to 144!)

The US Government had most all references to him removed from books starting about the time of his death.  They want us to forget him...wonder what he discovered that they are still using, that's still a secret...

Marbles, to answer your question, "what did he discover?"





On other fronts Malcolm Hawksford and his proteges are quite famous.  Dr Richard Bews and Malcom founded LFD Audio, makers of the Mistral series many have raved about in the past.  I also believe Dr Bews is the brains behind Atlas cables.

                                                                                                          Jim

[Bigfish]

Bob:

Many on AudioCircle are aware I started my journey into the world of better 2 channel music systems back in March.  Until I discovered this Circle I was very frustrated by the magazine equipment reviews and by the member boards on other manufacturer web sites.  What I found here is a group of people who are really sincere about their love of the pursuit of great music reproduction.  Since joining I have sought the advice of several people through PMs and have been amazed at their willinginess to respond to me, a newbie, with solid advice. 

I learned about SP Tech Speakers from recommendations of people on this board like Jim (Double Ugly), Tom S, and Chris (Lonewolfy).  Their comments about your speakers and about their dealing with you convinced me to send you the PM inquiring about the Timepieces.  Later, after our initial converstion, I believe 100% you are a man offering products that are a labor of love.  I cannot wait to receive my new Timepieces and hope to purchase some of your cables in the near future. 

Question:  Do I know that cables change sound quality produced from a system? 
Answer:  I do not personally have the experience but I believe cables impact the sound.  I respect many of the people on this board and they report they hear a sound difference between different speaker cables and interconnects.  I truly believe people would not invest hundreds of dollars in upgrading cables if they did not hear differences.  Foo Foo dust (ie., sales hype) will not sustain the consistent cable market that has been developed.  The differences people are reporting have to be real!

Thank you for the honest, straight-forward advice you provided when I made my purchase and thank you for defending yourself in the above thread.

Ken

[Nick B]

Hi Bob
Best of luck on your new cable offering. I have been fascinated for some time with the issue of cables and have personally experienced significant differences on a few occasions in my system. One of the more intriguing websites on this subject is www.lessloss.com
These guys make a dac and cables. Their explanations regarding the use of conductors, shielding, dielectrics, etc is quite interesting. Now I have no idea whether their reasoning is solid or not, but it's fun to read their perspective on the subject. Maybe when you have some time (not sure when that might be...) you could peruse that site and give your engineering perspective.
Regards,
Nick
 

[Aether Audio]

Ken,

Thanks for the compliments.  I always try to be a “straight shooter” and treat folks with respect – most of the time with even more than they may “deserve.”  Every once in a while someone will come along though that gets under my skin…especially if they attack my integrity.  I may be a bonehead at times and fall short (especially when it comes to estimating delivery times), but I always try to be honest and treat folks fairly and with sincerity.  You don’t need to “thank” me for defending myself – no defense was necessary.  I just felt the need to “swat a fly” that was pestering me.


Nick,

Sorry so late getting back to you – been busy building your speakers. aa  I checked out LessLoss’ cable info.  Looks to me like they’re pretty right on.  Their shielding method seems a little funky though.  It seems to me that it may “give” when flexed more in some areas than others and that could cause some impedance “bumps” down the length of the cable.  I suppose if you treat it gently and don’t move it once its installed in the system, it would be OK. 

Nevertheless, I think they’re a little “over the top” about the shielding issue, as we all know that there are cables that don’t even use shields and are considered to be pretty darn good.  IMHO, basic engineering practices dictate that a good shield is a very good idea though.  I just think going to such extremes is a little excessive, especially if doing so runs the risk of degrading the “smoothness” of the transmission-line’s impedance (which is what a cable is).

As a little “adjunct” to what they’re saying, I would add the following:  They have their “priority list” that outlines factors governing cable performance in order of importance.  Seeing that they don’t offer speaker cables, it all makes sense to me.  But…if you were going to add them too you would need 2 separate lists, as the criteria for each are different – at least in my mind.

It’s all a matter of impedance.  With interconnects you’re typically looking at what we call relatively high impedances.  The output stages of most preamps have an output impedance of 100-Ohms or higher and they feed into power amp inputs of 10-Kohms or higher.  That being the case, the “carrier” of the signal is mostly a matter of voltage.  If you were to measure the actual currents that flow they would be extremely small.  This means that issues that effect voltage are the dominant causes for concern.  In that case, it looks as if the LessLoss guys have it right.

If we were talking speaker cables, that’s a considerably different set of criteria so that list would need revision.  Power amp output stages often exhibit an impedance of 0.1-Ohm or even less (high current sourcing models).  Speakers usually represent an impedance of 2-Ohms  - or higher (let’s hope so anyway).  Such a condition doesn’t really represent a “flip-flop” of the interconnect case above, as the voltages involved are scaled up a lot too.  But…current flow can be increased by 6 orders of magnitude or more.  This means we really need to take a look at how current flow affects things.

If we have significant current flowing in a conductor, significant magnetic fields are produced as a result.  Magnetic fields have a direct relationship with inductance, whereas electrostatic fields are more associated with capacitance and voltages.  In the case of interconnects we should be primarily concerned with the dielectric materials used in the cable, as dielectric constants affect capacitance, which affects voltage.  Not to dismiss the current issue altogether, rather, it simply moves down the priority list.  In that, the LessLoss list seems to be “right on.”

For speaker cables, which are forced to handle both high voltages (relatively speaking) AND high currents, capacitance vs. inductance tend to do a “flip-flop” in order of importance.  Not by a lot though as in all actuality, inductance issues would only lead capacitance issues (in importance) by a relatively small margin.  In my mind, this means cable geometry and conductor materials move up in rank due to the greater importance of resistance and inductance.  Conversely, capacitance and hence the dielectric materials used move down a bit, but they certainly should not be neglected or dismissed.

As an example of what I would consider a “poor” speaker cable design would be those types that treat each +/- conductor as a separate cable.  Such a design permits random spacing of the conductors relative to each other and hence, produces random levels of both inductance and capacitance that the combination exhibits. 

A “good” design would not permit this extreme level of “user adjustment” of the L/C values, which certainly won’t permit their optimization.  This is because the large amounts of insulation used (to cover each conductor) will not permit them to be placed close enough to one another to balance the L/C values (particularly the inductance), which is necessary to achieve the optimal “characteristic impedance.”  Such designs will obviously “work” and possibly still sound good – they just won’t achieve the maximum level of performance they otherwise would.

Well…there you go – another thesis.  I hope I didn’t confuse you or offend anyone by “dissing” his or her favorite cable design.  That was not my intention.  Please remember…this is just “my” opinion.  After all – what do I know?

-Bob

[Robert C. Schult]

Hi Bob.

Side note first: Back to another thread on your Circle here, you mentioned you had been to our place back when. Evidently older than dirt has caught up - you had never been at our place when we were on Ridge street.

The Midnight Silver Edition Gen.III, Poiema!!! cabling and now the the new Alethias! address the parameters you talk about above. Have you ever heard any of our cabling? If not, maybe have me over sometime or invite yourself to our place.

Wudya think?

Kindly,
Robert
RSAD