[JohnR]

Is there really anything interesting to say on this subject? People obviously have their minds made up already...

[DVV]

Is there really anything interesting to say on this subject? People obviously have their minds made up already...

Quite so, John, but the question is how their minds were made up, meaning on basis of what information?

So many Chinese rumours floating around, so many unsubstantiated claims in all directions peddled as the gospel truth.

Speaking for myself, I don't really have a set attitude on the matter. I admit I like massive cables, with lots of conductor matter in them, because it seems logical that if you want it to be able to cart off like 30 amperes in perhaps rare but still existent transients, that current has to travel alojg something a bit thicker than a few hairs.

But whether this will be copper, OFC copper, silver plated OFC copper, a mixture of copper and whatever else, I have no particular opinion on, to be able to say anything I'd have to listen to it first.

Cheers,
DVV

[Dan Banquer]

To tell you the truth John R. I would really want improvement, being the hardnosed engineering type that I am, I would like to see some hard data showing why something works better. Call me to old or to cyniical, but you gotta give me something concrete.

[audiojerry]

To tell you the truth John R. I would really want improvement, being the hardnosed engineering type that I am, I would like to see some hard data showing why something works better. Call me to old or to cyniical, but you gotta give me something concrete.

What do you mean by hard data? In the subjective world of audio, much of what we base our judgements on is by listening. I believe you and Dejan have discussed at length and have had several disagreements about which resistor or which capacitor sounds better, even though there is no 'hard data', or the 'hard data' runs contrary to what you actually hear. I believe you have also discussed  circuit topology and have had varying opinions on which sounds better as well, yet there is no science or 'hard data' to support either side.

Why don't the same rules apply to speaker wire and cable? Maybe some folks do not hear any differences, or else choose not to hear any differences. I'm not trying to endorse bogus or exotic cable design claims. I too have a hard time believing any cable should cost 1, 2 or even 3 thousand dollars a meter, but I also believe that there are some genuine designers who have invested much into R&D resulting in the creation of legitmate architectures that have resulted in significant improvements in performance.

[nathanm]

I vote for not talking about cables ever again!    Please, seriously, can we not talk about cables?!

I should say though, that I was inspired by DVV's past comments somewheres about having thick cords, so I went and made some for kicks.  Did I think they'd truly improve anything?  No.  Did I think they'd look wicked cool and have functionally tight connectors?  Yes.  Did someone comment to me "gee, those will take a reall long time to break in!"  Did I burst a blood vessel trying not to laugh out loud?  Yes.  

So I've got burly10AWG cords plugging into 14GA solid core wall wiring.  Not quite sure how that works, but uh...at least these are really unwieldy and hard to snake around other cables.  But even with the kick ass see-through connectors which are really fly\phat the cable is so heavy that they tend to sag a bit. Oh well.  I wish that you could clamp down IEC connectors instead of just having them held in by spring tension. Those bayonet-style locking plugs would be cool.

[nathanm]

Music is subjective.  Reproduction of audio is objective.

[Dan Banquer]

We are getting a bit off subject here, so if anyone thinks this needs to be moved it's O.K. by me.
Jerry: for the last 10 years or more that I have been involved in the reproduction of audio I have consistently found that specifications do matter. The real problem in consumer audio, ( from what I have witnessed) is not only the misinterpretation of specifications, but also not going deeper into how to interpret them. One of the things I hope to eventually do at audiocircle is to attempt to explain typical audio specifications, what they include and what they don't include. This will not be an easy task, and I am certainly not the very gifted in this area. However I will attempt to respond as well as I am able. I will probably need a lot of Dejans help.

[Audio Al]

Hey Dan,
I want to make a pair of those cables to see if they blow away my current cables or see if there is no difference at all. Are those cables a patented proprietary design? If not, then I hope you don't mind me taking this design, if they sound terrific and jump right into the cable makin' business!
I've already got a company name...KKK... the Krappy Kable Kompany, or maybe Weak Link Audio.  I'll call those bad boys the "Turbo MegaSonics" and market them as "Home Theatre Certified" and "Digital Ready".  I think I'll rate them as 500 watt cables!  I can't wait to get started, this is going to kick serious audio ass!!!  
One other question as you omitted a very important step.  How do I determine which way to mark the cables with an arrow to designate their directionality?  I certainly wouldn't want to hook them up the wrong way.
 

[Dan Banquer]

Hi Al;
        They are certainly not patented, in fact I have already been justifiably accused of stealing someone else's design. Mea Culpa. For marketing purposes I would put your cat purring next to the cables  you plan to market.
WARNING: you may receive a negative reaction from Dog lovers.
WARNING: KKK cable company might have negative conotations on anyone who is not a white anglo saxon protestant (even a lot of those folks might get pissed off). I would suggest a different spelling such as Crappy Cable Company.

[nathanm]

And just look at the size of the ears on that cat!  If anyone can hear the modulation grunge on the 60Hz signal then that cat can!

[Xi-Trum]

In my particular situation, I use 65 cents/ft speaker wire.  However, it is 12 ga multistranded & twisted configuration, , silver plated copper, Teflon insulated and sheathed.  

A friend of mine tried some and put up for sale his Kimber 8TC.  Another friend is using two-5 feet sections of Pure Note Epsilon ($1,100.00), tried my cheapo's and sent them wires for cryo treatment and cable cooking.  If they don't outperform the Pure Notes they will be UNCOMFORTABLY close...

Well, for a long time, I had been using a similar DIY speaker cable design.  In my case, I used 12 GA multistranded/twisted copper wires terminated with Radio Shack solderless banana plugs ($5/pair).  The wire itself costed me a whopping 10 cents/foot.  I had an opportunity to compare my wires to another copper cable costing around $1000 for an 8-foot pair.  The difference in sound?  NONE!!!

However, I no longer use those wires.  That's because I've moved up to 6-GA stranded copper wire that costs 22 cents/foot (from Lowe's).  For this fancy wire, I terminated it with Cardas spade connectors from DIY Cable.  The result:  much better depth and resolution than my previous DIY wire.  In all, my new speaker wires cost less than $30 for a 10-foot pair.

So, if someone out there wants to spend mucho dollars for their cables.  I say:  why not?  It's your money!  

[audiojerry]

Dan, maybe I'm missing the point, which I've been known to do, but I was interpreting some of your statements in this thread to indicate that anything more than stranded 12 gauge copper, or some Beldon 8718 cut to length, is all that is needed, and anyone spending more on anything else is delusional and succumbing to snake oil marketing. Am I wrong about this?

You also made the statement that you must see 'hard data' before you would be persuaded. But didn't you make comments in the thread on amplifier design that you have made decisions on choice of parts like resistors and caps based on listening tests?

Didn't you also state that in some cases your listening tests found that the less expensive part which did not spec out as well actually sounded better to your ears?  Doesn't this conflict with your position of relying on the 'hard data'?

If I am misunderstanding your drift, you can set me straight. The point I was trying to make is that I don't think it is fair to condemn or ridicule those who claim to hear worthwhile improvements with their ''high-end' wire, when you so much as admit that oftentimes listening with your ears has proven to be a better way to judge than looking at the hard data.  

As I said before I am not trying to defend scam artists or peddlers of snake oil, but I don't believe all high-end cable designers fit that mold.

[Audio Al]

Dan,
I wasn't really expecting a reply, my post was for entertainment purposes only.  Although it might have been humorus if you answered my last question and have a theory on how to best determine the molecular alignment of the copper to orient the cables for optimal transfer of the electrical signal.
If you have any more revolutionary and innovative cable "designs"   by all means please hesitate to post them here.
I suggest you contact the head guy over at Analysis Plus cables to argue cable stats.   He claims to have scientific data that proves why his cables sound better than anyothers!

[DVV]

Dan, maybe I'm missing the point, which I've been known to do, but I was interpreting some of your statements in this thread to indicate that anything more than stranded 12 gauge copper, or some Beldon 8718 cut to length, is all that is needed, and anyone spending more on anything else is delusional and succumbing to snake oil marketing. Am I wrong about this?

You also made the statement that you must see 'hard data' before you would be persuaded. But didn't you make comments in the thread on amplifier design that you have made decisions on choice of parts like resistors and caps based on listening tests?

Didn't you also state that in some cases your listening tests found that the less expensive part which did not spec out as well actually sounded better to your ears?  Doesn't this conflict with your position of relying on the 'hard data'?

If I am misunderstanding your drift, you can set me straight. The point I was trying to make is that I don't think it is fair to condemn or ridicule those who claim to hear worthwhile improvements with their ''high-end' wire, when you so much as admit that oftentimes listening with your ears has proven to be a better way to judge than looking at the hard data.  

As I said before I am not trying to defend scam artists or peddlers of snake oil, but I don't believe all high-end cable designers fit that mold.

Jerry, I'm not trying to answer for Dan, or defend him, but I think you don't quite see the meaning behind some of Dan's previous comments. Maybe he wasn't clear enough, we who meddle with such things tend to overlook the fact that most people don't.

I refer to his comments on amps. You can use two components of nominally same value and quality, yet obtain a different sound. In most cases - and I stress the word "MOST" here - if you dig down deep enough, you will find a measurable difference. More often than not, it will be in some complex test rather than simple sweep THD and IM measurements, things like square waves, where the shape of what you see on the 'scope screen will be different, and will thus point the way towards further analysis in some particular field. To use a crude example, if the ringing effect immediately after a sharp transient is longer with one component than with the other, you are free to test it further for side effects NOT stated in its data sheet.

Yet in the end, you may find yourself consciously using the nominally worse component simply because it may actually sound better. This is a dilemma faced by all who sit down to design something of their own.

Even better example - you know I wrote texts on biasing your amp. Well, those meagre 20-30 mA of current that it is biased with when it comes from the factory are most often the spot where overall distorion is least. In other words, by increasing the bias, you also increase distortion somewhat, yet most will agree higher bias produces better sound. But this does not mean you will listen to more distortion overall - this means you will be listening to more of some types of distortion (THDE, IM) but less of some other types (crossover, transient). In other words, you change the distortion spread.

I think this is what Dan is saying. This is why we designer types love measurements, to see how the balance lies electrically, but also to get rid of much myth and magic behind components overall, not just cables.

Cheers,
DVV

[Dan Banquer]

Well Jerry let's see if I can address some of your points. If someone goes out and spends big bucks on cable they are certainly entitled, If they think it sounds better to them they are entitled. In general, if it works for you that's fine with me. What does happen all to often is that someones opinion becomes a fact, and that is where I take issue. Again I have no problems with peoples personal preferences.
When I ask for hard data, whatever the situation maybe, I am looking for an engineering reason why something should or could be better.  When I looked over the Black Gate Cap data sheets They were giving hard data as to why they are better. The reason that I do not recommend them for my equipment is that the lower HF E.S.R. ( Equivalent Series Resistance) does not apply in my equipment because I don't require large electrolytic caps to do HF filtering. I use an AC line filter at the input to take care of most of that. It's cheaper, and gets the HF before it reaches the power supply.
In short; sometimes you can engineer your way out of an expensive solution. Hope this helps. Please try and remember that I do both measurements and listening. I am a fussy p**k.
I think one of the things that bother me about high end is that the tendency is usually to give a very expensive solution. Sometimes this cannot be avoided, many times it can.
If you feel like it give me a call one of these evenings and I will tell some more war stories of the past ten years or so.

[gonefishin]

The real problem in consumer audio, ( from what I have witnessed) is not only the misinterpretation of specifications, but also not going deeper into how to interpret them. One of the things I hope to eventually do at audiocircle is to attempt to explain typical audio specifications, what they include and what they don't include. This will not be an easy task, and I am certainly not the very gifted in this area. However I will attempt to respond as well as I am able. I will probably need a lot of Dejans help.

    couldn't agree more with this.  

  However, I do not think this will be an easy task for you to do.


    later>>>>>>>>

[DVV]

However, I do not think this will be an easy task for you to do.


    later>>>>>>>>

Wouldn't have it any other way, speaking for myself. Dan and I agree on most points, though of course, some differences exist. But I think I can safely say both Dan and Hugh and myself are used to hard battles with what Dan said so well - times when somebody's opinion becomes a fact. Never mind whose, and you can start with us.

Cheers,
DVV

[Dan Banquer]

Jerry: let's see if I can expand on one point a little further.
Let's say we are using speaker cable x that is very capacitive, and rolls off the top end. It sounds smooth and nice to us. Now we take our room which  presently  has no acoustic foam treatment and we give it a live end dead end. Now we go back and listen and we find the top end is muted. We change back to our good old regular 12 AWG cable and find the highs we were just missing have come back.
We now realize that the problem all along was the loudspeaker and room interaction, not the cable. You have no idea how many times I have witnessed the above happen, with some variation, and this is why I am stressing acoustic room treatment with a vengeance. Let's take care of the basics first, and attack the real problem before we go out and spend money on things that only mask the problem. Am I getting across here Jerry?

[Marbles]

Jerry: let's see if I can expand on one point a little further.
Let's say we are using speaker cable x that is very capacitive, and rolls off the top end. It sounds smooth and nice to us. Now we take our room which  presently  has no acoustic foam treatment and we give it a live end dead end. Now we go back and listen and we find the top end is muted. We change back to our good old regular 12 AWG cable and find the highs we were just missing have come back.
We now realize that the problem all along was the loudspeaker and room interaction, not the cable. You have no idea how many times I have witnessed the above happen, with some variation, and this is why I am stressing acoustic room treatment with a vengeance. Let's take care of the basics first, and attack the real problem before we go out and spend money on things that only mask the problem. Am I getting across here Jerry?

Dan,

So you admit there are differences in how cables perform.  

So why not just state to fix your room as best you can and get your cables last?

[Dan Banquer]

I have never said that cables do not "sound different" .  I do however heartily agree with your last point. Fix the room first. I suspect that after one does that, the need for "esoteric" cable drops accordingly.