"Premium" Speaker Cable- - My Family's Test

[mobile homeless]

You must have been practicing your posts....

...better.

Sadly, Kevin S is a mostly "spec check" type of audio lad that operates within the rebound of information, mistrusting his own ears, not sitting for two or three hours with a handful of cables, trying to hone the differences and articulate them in a quest to understand. I sincerely doubt he has had a handful of drastically different cables in a system that is honed to the point where the insertion of a different type of capacitor would change the tone and presentation. A system where one paper in oil coupling cap in place of a teflon changes the transient response of the snap of a drum stick on a rim. A system where the insertion of a bundle of 8 solid core wires wrapped in an interlocking fashion sound drastically differnt than the same AWG of hypelitz, mulitstrand cable.... where taking your ENTIRE bundle of wire and putting it in a tube for esthetic's sake suddenly changes the imaging to such a degree that you no longer get the hair lift on your arm as youre listening to Billie Holiday run through the 1951 version of Strange Fruit... The JAW DROPPING effect of inserting a set of cable that suddenly matches your system synergy to such a degree, your wife turns her head and says, "JEsus CHrist...is that the cable that Kevin sent?" He has never inserted a NOS 1944 RCA 2A3 tube and heard the liguid magic verses the 2001 Sovtek 2A3....

And yet, he will write yet again...with a staunch, powerful stroke, asking for the proof in the numbers since he cant hear any difference....and since he cant HEAR any difference, no difference must exist.

I have heard the dramatic differences in various cable constructions since I was in my early 20s. After hearing how profound an effect certain designs changed the sonic picture, I began to study things like "The Skin Effect" and the "Maxwell Effect" which all have a root in science, something Mr. S claims to rely on. The affect of impedience and capacitance on the cables and the interaction with different types of amplifiers.... The difference between crossover distortion in the amplifier and the parallel idea of crossover distortion in speaker wire......and of course, series resistance. This are all more technical terms that run along with sonic differences, some very easy to detect, some much more difficult.

And like a high school student trying to witness a cell in a dirty public school microscope, the audio man denies its very existance yet again....

It sure is easy this way. Let the Earth remain flat, my good friend.

But in the end, you are right. WE must listen to the music and let it move us... and none of this really matters, ultimately.

kh

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-18-2002 at 08:04 PM

[Kevin S]

mdeneen,

I think the one thing that bothers me the most is that, to use your analogy, the 99 people who do not have perfect pitch, are being told by the cable companies, and by many of their customers, that in essence, their cables will give it to them. And frankly, most people, after spending their money and having been told to expect a certain result, will be predisposed to thinking they achieved the result, whether they have or not. That type of behaviour is a long understood part of human nature.

And I suspect that the 1 percent of the folks with perfect pitch can demonstrate this in some type of listening test, yet the folks claiming to have this "perfect pitch" when it comes to cables refuse to even take the test.

And frankly, even though what you say about cables being a part of a circuit makes sense to me, until the 1% prove to me that they can hear this change in the circuit, I am going to consider the change inaudible. Not that it doesn't exist, just that it is inaudible.

------------------

L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II

Surround: Klipsch RS-3

Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2

Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132

AMP: McIntosh MC-7205

DVD: McIntosh MVP-831

CD Transport: Pioneer PD-F908 100 Disc Changer

Turntable: Denon DP-72L

Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1

T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905

SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100

Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000

[Kevin S]

Mobile,

Although well written, you post concerning me and your assumptions of how I have reached this opinion I hold is typical of what I previously wrote. Since I do not hear what you claim to hear, either myself or my equipment is in some way defective or inferior. And since I have the audacity to ask folks such as yourself to actually prove that you are hearing these things, I must be a "flat earther". Failing to hear the differences that must exist simply because you say it is so.

I am not qualified to argue the fine points of electrical circuits, and I won't get into some silly conversation about whether my hearing acuity, or my audio equipment is, or ever was, "good enough". And I know that I will never come up with an argument or a test that will prove my point to you. But, and this is a major difference between you and I, I am willing to be proven wrong by folks such as yourself. Just come up with a test of your ability, without peeking at the equipment, and with levels matched, that verifies the abilities that you claim.

Naturally, I do not really expect you to suddenly devise this test and prove your point. But I think that it is a safe bet that if your side of this argument could be made on something more than an anecdotal basis, that it would have been done long ago by someone with the resources and reasons to have done so. The fact that it hasn't should make even the believers out there wonder why.

------------------

L/C/R: Klipsch Heresy II

Surround: Klipsch RS-3

Subwoofers: 2 HSU-VTF-2

Pre/Pro/Tuner: McIntosh MX-132

AMP: McIntosh MC-7205

DVD: McIntosh MVP-831

CD Transport: Pioneer PD-F908 100 Disc Changer

Turntable: Denon DP-72L

Cassette: Nakamichi BX-1

T.V. : Mitsubishi 55905

SAT/HDTV: RCA DTC-100

Surge Protector: Monster Power HTS-5000

[Prana-Bindu]

I love you guys.... No, really.

Ahh the old "I have my side, you have your side" dialectic. The drawing of lines between sides does not help our effort to reach agreement on an issue; it merely provides an artificial barrier between sets of information that hinders the process of understanding. Why can't we all just get along?

I suspect a group of my trained and practiced listeners are never going to get together, design a valid test, and put an end to this controversy. Do you realize how many such folks it would take to satisfy the society of scientific method? How often do you get that many audio dudes together, and how would you know that each participant indeed could detect the minutae at issue? You'd end up testing a bunch of fellers that all claim to be able to hear the difference between cables.... Again, such a test would be severely flawed.

I can certainly understand why one would be capable of calling the differences between cables "obvious". When I first got my RF-3's, I couldn't identify one flaw; they were the shizznat and they rocked my p**per. After a couple of years of listening, though, the difference and lack of coherence between the sounds coming out of the horns and those coming out of the cones is plain as the day is long. It took a while to get from perfect sound to kind of annoying.

I still think perfect pitch can be learned with practice. (barring deaf ears or one-sided conviction, of course) And I sincerely believe that cable differences can be noticed with extended observation. And once you see it, you'll always see it (just like Waldo). Keep tryin' little buckaroo, bless your heart, you'll get there....

------------------

May the bridges we burn light our way....

[mobile homeless]

Just a guick little note here. I appreciate your candor KevinS. I have also enjoyed this thread more than most... although it has been frustrating at times.

Still, you made mention of something that caught my attention awhile back. I made a comment a few threads ago pertaining to the habit of you restating your signature list of components every time you post, even when you post within two entries. I said this was a little excessive. Your rather sarcasitc reply was that you had "set" your signature to do this and up it HAD to come...and there it was....list after list of The KevinS Home Shopping Audio Delight.

I find this ironic, especially given the topic of our discussion and the idea of being able to discern subtle differences or changes. You see, I too have my signature all mapped out in ye olde preferences just as you do; indeed, mine is even in small type so as to not take quite as much space. Even so, my main point is this:

You can UNCHECK your signature when you leave each post; if you look right below where you are writing you see the box checked that says "show signature." Now, your response to me was that you have your signature entered...and there was nothing you could do about it. Well, this is just the kind of attention to detail and perception that is used to discern other qualities. The very fact that once you give out your signature of components in a thread, you can hereafter uncheck the box, thus saving the World at large from seeing that you have a Mitsubishi 55905 TV four of five times within a four post spacing....well...this is something that one might notice...hopefully. Or at least, not respond with a sarcastic reply that states the opposite...very much like this argument you have used with the audible differences of components...or, in your case, wire.

But...then again....that has nothing to do with being moved by music, something I hope can happen despite or because of said condition.

kh

ps- And Kevin, I just realized that in all this, you havent once been curious or expressed any interest as to what wire DID go with Klipsch or even which wire any of us thought was a good deal or had sound that WAS INDEED noticably different than stock generic 12 gauge Home Depot. I find this a bit disconcerting. If it was me, and someone came on here talking of something that DID indeed make a sonic difference, and I had never found it so... I would be VERY VERY curious about exactly what it was..how it was used...what it was made of etc. This distinction, I believe, is a very important one, as it says a little something about where you are coming from. I used to have a prejudice and disdain for horns as I had played with them in PA systems for years in bands...and had never liked the super forward nature that could burn a hole in your skull. OF course, I had never heard them on excellent tube power either as we had always run the beasts on Phase Linear and Crown amps, amps with the subtle nature of a tire iron mated with a 400volt cattle prod. But I opened my mind up to it. Same can be said of SET amps. I had 200w B&K M200 Sonata Monoblocks when I first heard a Cary 300SE 8w 300B amp back in 1989-90. I was FLOORED!!!! It was less watts than my CAR DECK yet made music like nothing I had EVER heard. It was then that I realized I had to RETHINK my preconceptions on POWER... I have met many like you in this journey. Strangely enough, I thought it was getting easier as I hadnt met any SPECS IS SOUND on the net in a few years...at least, not till I ventured into the Klipsch forum. Still, there are a lot of people in here with open minds that are willing to trying new ideas or revisit the old. I get emails every day, sometime five or six inquiring about tube amps or various equipment decisions. It actually is great knowing that people are excited about music...and willing to go where they havent gone before.......

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-19-2002 at 12:45 AM

[Kevin S]

Well Mobile, thanks for the tip about the signature. I do not recall whether my response at the time was meant to be sarcastic or not. I have to admit that I have not paid close attention to the details of the mechanics of posting to this site. I do remember someone had a thread about how should we be using the signature and I don't remember anyone mentioning this ability to turn it off, or maybe I just missed it.

There are many things in my life that I pay less attention to than others. Just as there are things I do less well than others. The fact that I have no aptitude for constructing speakers doesn't mean I therefore must have no aptitude for listening to them. So while I must admit to not paying attention to this particular detail of posting, it does not necessarily follow that I must not be paying attention when I listen to my system.

As for the wire issue, I take no interest in which specific wire is being discussed because it is my general experience that people with the subjective point of view claim to hear differences in all wires. Since I have never heard a difference in any wire I have used, knowing the specific wire being talked about is not really relevant to me in having the discussion. Besides, the discussion I have been trying to have relates to proving that one can hear these differences, which again, doesn't really require any specifics as to which wire.

In fact, one of the perplexing things to me about the subjective point of view is that there never seems to be a situation where a component doesn't have a sound of it's own. Where by my point of view, there could be situations where a component could effect a change (in bandwidth or frequency response for example) that could be heard. Naturally, I would be in favor of testing to see if the change, while there, would in fact, be audible!

The main point I have thought I have tried to make is that people who claim to hear these differences

present themselves as having some special ability that others do not have, yet refuse to either submit these abilities to any type of verification, or to accept the results of those who have attempted to verify this ability, especially since, as far as I know, all of these attempts have shown no real special ability at all.

Finally, it should be obvious why folks with my point of view would be reluctant to enter into these discussions, why you do not run into us very often on the internet and why the internet is a haven for folks with the subjectivist point of view. Each of my requests that I have posted to this board for some proof from folks such as yourself is met with, however nicely written, condencension (sp?), insults on our intelligence, hearing abilities, and our choice of equipment. And no proof.

This message has been edited by Kevin S on 01-19-2002 at 03:53 AM

[mike stehr]

I dunno Kevin, I went from Audioquest Litz

to Cat5 twisted cables.

I can tell the difference, (Less grainy.)

All I am using at the moment is a Yamaha MX-1 amp,

CX-1 pre amp, a cheesy Samsung 709 DVD player,

which has pretty damn good audio, and a pair of

Chorus II's.

(and the Chorus's have Cat5 wired inside them

also, with X-over upgrade.)

Trust me, there is a audible difference from

the cheap internal bell wire and junk crossovers.

From what 'I' can hear.

Can't prove it, and can care less.

I think the possibility of a simple basic

system with as few components as possible,

may be easier to discern the differences in

cables.

And always keep in mind that someone else's

gear sounds great from your house.

Enjoy the music!

[Colin]

The theory of relatively was so far off the mark that 50 people wrote a book together to refute Einstein's claims. When asked about this, the famous physicist replied, that if he was wrong, it would only take one person to prove it.

Yet 50 people, and a whole lot more, keep buying super-expensive cabling. Are they all wrong and you are the only one that is right? Do you think that they don't hear a difference, yet they buy it anyway? Even if the minor level increases or colorations add up to a "different difference," don't you think they perceive something of some value? You don't believe that all super expensive cables sales are simply thrown in as part of a whole new expensive system going out the door, do you?

There are tests which say that cabling does make a difference. Even the ones that dispute this claim make allowances for the differences between poor and good cables: The November 2001 issue of The $ensible Sound magazine, for example, deepens the controversy over high-end speaker wires and good quality amps even further.

Howard Ferstler reports on his use of a line level comparison box, the QSC Comparator, to compare some super quality Dunlavy cables to 18 AWG lamp cord. He concluded that statistically speaking there is little meaningful differences in super expensive high-end audiophile wires. "Super wires," he said, " may indeed deliver performance that is audibly different from cheap wire, if the cheap wire is skinny enough and long, and if you use a special test signal and sit right on top of your speakers. However, when it comes to musical content, if the wire is decently thick, "for all intents and purposes, wire is wire."

oh, and mobile, what cables are good for big old horns and SET amps and why?

------------------

Colin's Music System Cornwall 1s & Klipsch subs; lights out & tubes glowing!

[Randy Bey]

Well what I've used to good effect in SET and big old horns is a lazy man's version of Chris VH's cat5 cable.

Chris's recipe has 27 pairs(!) in in. Braid three together. Braid another and another until all 27 are now 9. Repeat until you have 3. Repeat and you have one.

I was lazy and stopped at 9 pairs braided into one.

With impeccable intelligence, I also ensured a sufficient amount of entropy by introducing a random pattern to the braiding, in effect reducing repetitive and cyclic reflections within the conductors.

The first test, over a year ago, was between these babies and the 20(!) year old 18Ga zip cord I had been using forever.

Oh baby.

Smoother and fuller bodied, yes. The sound lost a lot of edge and the frequency response seemed to even out.

Inspired by this, I eventually, about a year ago, invested in Goertz M-1 cables. These guys are the flat conductors, laying on top of another, like a long, thin capacitor.

Yikes! They were bright and tinny, and since I only had a few days, couldn't break them in. So back they went.

The cats have been in there since, although I have covered them with techflex, which I am not sure is better looking than the rainbow effect I had before. 'More colors than my sock drawer' indeed.

While I personally have doubts as to the validity of 'single crystal 99.999999% pure conductors' I do believe in cable geometries making a difference. I do believe in skin effect. I do believe in dialectric properties.

So, yes, in my opinion, and it's worth no more or less than anyone else's here, cables make a difference.

[TBrennan]

It seems to me that those making claims that run counter to current scientific and engineering thought have the burden of proof, that means those making claims that wire makes a difference. Certainly wire that is not suited for the job would be detrimental to the sound but current thought is that competent wire is competent wire. I took place in wire DBTs while a member of the Praire State Audio Society, a speaker-building club. Nobody could tell differences, evidently all the wires used, including the lamp-cord, were competent at passing the signal. While I'm aware that wires can make a difference I'm also of the view that any wire that does make a difference is likely incompetent and doing something weird to the signal, acting as an EQ so to speak. I have great confidence in the ability of audiophiles to delude themselves, having deluded myself at times (I could tell you several embarassing stories) I figure others are at least as prone to delusion as I am being that I try to be skeptical. DBTs can be scarey things you know, takes lots of confidence to risk upsetting your value system. But this is how we learn and if we learn we're wrong we act like men and put the lesson to work.

[mobile homeless]

The Cable Asylum - ( http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/bbs.html ) did a very wise thing awhile back and made all debate concerning whether wire makes a difference or not not permittable. At first, I thought this really an unsmart move as I dont value censorship of any kind. Yet after seeing what kind of response it brings and how utterly annoying it is to read over and over, I am actually inclined to agree with their action.

It really irks me to no end viewing the posts above. I know it is immature and really unfounded, but there is something so patently annoying about people that deny things that you actually have witnessed, and taken GREAT pains to uncover, and not as a blind-eyed audiophile goon following the masses and hordes who buy into propaganda.

I think it is VERY important to inform the public on wire. Yes, all the ads are NOT true and audio wire operates on a SEVERE LAW OF DIMINSHING RETURNS. Indeed, I have found wire in certain systems costing pennies on the dollar (Radio Shack 18AWG Solid Core) to at times perform as good, if not better, then much more costly wire. Case in point, via my 2A3 Monoblocks, the RS 18AWG solid core twisted in pairs to each post actually sounded more open and natural then my Transparent wire. Previously, the Transparent cable had made a HUGE sonic difference via solid state and high power tube gear. It's Network Filters removed all RFI from the signal and the resulting low end extension was amazing. Listen, my damn wife, who has excellent hearing but has very little interest in audio can hear all these differences, this without even prompting. This has happened time and time again...she will come home from school and after about 25 minutes of talking and/or relaxing, she will say, "The stereo sounds _________ today. What did you do? IT sounds smoother" Or more harsh...or ..you get the idea. The only change that HAD been made in many of these instances, was the insertion of a differnt type of cable.

When I first had my 2A3 amps, I literally discarded and removed over $1200 worth of cable as it actually was not a good match. I was running the DIY CAT 5 as well as the DIY RS 18AWG Solid Core until I got a set of DIYCable IC and speaker wire (based on John Risch/Kevin Haskins designs). This wire was such a HUGE HUGE jump in transparency and clarity, it was JAW DROPPING. My wife and I sat dumbfounded at the difference this wire made, almost as if a major component had been upgraded. This experience has happened to me a handful of times over the last 25 years or so. The kicker is I was just sent this wire to take digital pictures of for a client. Needless to say, I called him up and asked if I could trade some more work for keeping the cables!

Does this prove anything? Obviously, not to the select few within this debate. I think it is important to make the general public aware enough not to just BUY with their pocketbook or the Hi-fi rags as the be-all. Indeed, throwing more money into wire often is not the answer as many simple, well thought out designs can and do achieve better results within some systems, making the big money choices rather superfluous.

As for the DBT, I think this is a VERY flawed approach in that it does not take into account the acuity and experience of the participant. Evidently, only mdeneen and a few others read that interesting article I posted concerning the testing and learning within such a study and the importance of experience.

Selah. BTW, there are tests and scientific studies on "The Skin Effect" and other various wire interactions. I will have to round them up, of course.

I dont know why I cant seem to stay out of this discussion. It draws you in like a super magnet yet is about as rewarding as doing your taxes.

kh

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-19-2002 at 12:10 PM

[TBrennan]

Mobile--- I read the article, it was interesting. DBTs will take things like learning and special acuity into account as soon as people with such skills take part in DBTs, it's as simple as that. But perhaps they have already and simply can't tell a difference. The fellas I participated in DBTss with at the PSAS meeting were certainly experienced audiophiles. This reminds me of the incident down in Florida when a high-end dealer couldn't tell the difference in DBTs between his Pass amps and a Yamaha integrated. Mobile you credit substansial changes in sound to changes in wire, such differences as you claim should be apparent without any special learning or acuity. For all I know I'd hear the differences too but this leads to the disquieting conclusion that the wires are inaccurate and probably deviating from simply passing the signal unaltered and that what is sought is EQ, without the high-end stigma of actually using an equalizer; indeed the search for wire among those so inclined reminds me of fidddling with an EQ; set it one way one day and another the next. I figure that if competent wires sounded better than one another The Gods like Olson, Blackburn, Hilliard, Walker and Lansing would have stumbled on that little fact during their labors. I find the easiest way to deal with this issue is to simply use what engineers consider competent wire for the job intended and forget about it.

[mobile homeless]

Well, that concluding sentence points out yet another drastic difference between us as I have NEVER taken what someone says at completely face value whether it be a known scientist or anyone else. Based on the simple sentence of yours, many great advances in science and culture (as well as back slides at times) would not have taken place, with people taking the words and thoughts of others without further experimentation or observation. I find that last sentence of yours very troubling in general, and if taken to its logical conclusion, a stifling aspect on the education and curiosity that is important within. There have been MANY MANY things, in audio, and elsewhere that are taken for granted that later turns to be bunk. Personally, I have about the LEAST respect for the average engineer's listening skills (although it is a point taken that those in your list are not "average" engineers by any means), in many ways, engineers are the first to rely soley on the specs using this methods to judge reality when these very specs at times shut one off simple observation. You love your Fisher SA-100 over the AV8 after a month or more of exposure... Why? What was revealed during this time? You plop in a Yorx receiver that has an order of MAGNITUDE better specs in the distortion department over your SA-100...yet in an a-b comparison over a week, you would want nothing more than to DROP KICK that Yorx system to the curve as its musicality would be a pale comparison to the ancient Fisher.

Wire is NOT wire. And that is fine if you feel like running lamp cord to your horns. I can tell you right now that if you came to my house, and I did play you some Home Depot 12 gauge (I have an 8ft pair) against my current (and inexpensive to boot) DIYCable.com wire, even you would be shocked. IF you didnt notice the difference, I would be hand you my second EICO as a gift.

As for you comment about wire being tone controls...OF COURSE IT IS!!! All wire with various constructions affect the audio signal and the way it travels. I implore you to read on the affects of The Skin Effect as well as twisted vs parallel wire use etc. These configurations have a POINT...ie twisting wires reduces the effect of RFI (and inductance) which has a noticable reaction with audio circuits.

Simply ignoring all this is very easy. Obviously, you have chosen to do so and feel fine about it. It's just a difference between us. I know that I would have never decided to give horns another chance if I had rested on my experiences over the 28 years of playing in bands and being exposed to various PA systems powered by 200-400w SS Crown and Phase-Linear amps.... Thank goodness I was open to change. It's been a fun ride.

kh

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-20-2002 at 12:06 AM

[Clipped and Shorn]

I just bought the expensive extra 3 year warranty plan and my system sounds noticeably improved, I think it is the archival paper that it is printed on.

I just hooked up my desk lamp with monster cable and the light is smoother and my eyes do not get as tired from reading. Even the reading material seems improved. Long words pop out and short words are more vivid.

All kidding aside, are there some physical explanations for the advantages of special speaker cables? I thought electrons were electrons and copper was copper and as long as you have the correct size wire for the general load you would be fine. I would think the terminals, jacks, and connection points would be the more critical factors in the equation. I was a physics major for a few years until the 60s came along if you know what I mean, so hopefully I would understand the subtlties of the potential explanation. Give it a try.

-mwo

[mobile homeless]

Cable Parameters and Electro Magnetic Fields

by John Risch

It is the opinion of many informed individuals that there are scientific reasons that cables sound different, but there are some that claim that the only factors that can possibly make a difference are the basic lumped electrical parameters of the cable (the inductance, capacitance, and resistance or LCR), and the interaction of these parameters with the audio circuits they link.

On the surface, this seems eminently reasonable, and is the chain of logic most often used by those who are not familiar with the ins and outs of audio physics. As with many things, the reduction of an argument to a simpler and simpler form often becomes a reduction to the absurd.

What is the more complex view? For a first approximation, break down those ultra simple and pure LCR parameters into their actual components, and examine their deviation from the ideal behavior in the real world.

Lets look at inductance first. The simple aspect of too much inductance in a speaker cable can actually cause a direct and inarguable high frequency roll-off, which is more severe into low impedance loads, and with longer cable runs. This point has been argued, and I find it interesting that although many of the ABX pundits want to insist on component matching to 0.1 dB or better, they often dismiss frequency response deviations greater than that when it concerns the inductive effects of speaker cable. This may have something to do with the entrenched notion that ordinary zip cord, otherwise known as lamp cord is perfectly adequate as speaker cable

despite not having been designed for such use, or despite utilizing less than the best audio grade materials in it's construction. Obviously, it would be a true gaff to admit that the "good enough" zip cord had problems due to a fundamental electrical parameter.

The very simple examination of inductance for speaker cables leads to the choice of cable geometry's, the reason that some speaker cables use exotic and highly involved shapes and windings. The braided, woven, flat strips, and the various incarnations of Litz wire are all attempts to minimize the inductance parameter. These more than simple zip cord or coax geometry's cost more to make, require more steps in manufacture and a commitment to more quality control and quality assurance measures.

What other aspects of inductance are there?

Fundamental electrical parameters seldom exist in the real world, none are perfectly pure or isolated from the effects of physical imperfection and less than ideal implementation. For inductance, it is primarily the presence of materials that can interfere with the magnetic fields associated with inductance, or that can distort the value of the inductance with frequency, level or time. These materials are typically going to be ferro-magnetic materials, none of which is perfectly linear, and all of which will add some amount of non-linearity to an inductance value.

This aspect of inductance may seem to be trivial and a moot point, but there are cable nay-sayers that insist that steel core cables used as interconnects are just fine, and that the presence of steel or iron objects next to a speaker cable will not have any effect whatsoever on the cable. So there are cases where this issue can crop up. If we take the magnetic portion of the electromagnetic wave that is the audio signal to be associated with the inductance of a cable, then such things as foil shields in-between the center wire and the outer braid of a coaxial type of cable, steel in RCA jacks or speaker termination's, nickel platings (nickel is ferro-magnetic), the proximity of steel rack legs and component chassis, or even any conductive materials, will involve the distortion or disruption of the inductance of a cable. These kinds of factors can cause the cables inductance to vary with level and/or frequency.

In my opinion, backed up by both listening tests, and measurements, steel in an interconnect can be heard as a detriment, and steel near speaker cables, or in the connectors for either, can be a detriment. Excessive inductance in a speaker cable, such as simple zip cord, can also make the sound dull and lifeless.

What about the capacitance? This is not a pure parameter either, in fact, it may be the most impure of the three basic electrical cable parameters. For interconnects, capacitance is more of a direct threat to cable performance than the other two parameters. A high enough capacitance coupled with a high source impedance, such as a tube based component, can begin to roll off the high end.

While not as strong of an effect as the inductive roll-offs in speaker cables, it is still a factor none the less. Since capacitance is such a big factor for cables, it's deviations from perfect behavior are more of an influence. What aspects are there for capacitance in a cable? There are several deviations from ideal behavior.

The foremost in terms of audio is probably Dielectric Absorption. (See http://www.capacitors.com/pickcap/pickcap.htm for more information) DA is a energy storage effect, which can prevent the full impact of transients, and can blur and garble complex signals. It could be thought of as a form of distorted echo to the audio signal. There are also leakage (insulation resistance, dissipation factor, polar dielectric activity, frequency dependent capacitance, level dependence, etc. All these aspects affect the signal via changes to the capacitance of the cable, or, as in the case of DA, by direct energy delayed signal storage and release.

Once again, I have found the quality of the insulation, that which forms the capacitor in a cable, to have an effect on the sound. Better quality dielectrics intrude less on the music, allowing better clarity and a more cohesive and dynamic presentation.

Finally, the parameter of resistance, which is probably the most misunderstood of the three. Signal conduction is not water through a pipe, I wish that that particular description could have been banned before it was burned into the brains of American students! It conjures up images of the electrons, flowing like a fluid, through the center of a vessel (the pipes), and unfortunately for the reality of it, nothing could be further from the truth.

How does the signal actually travel? An audio signal is an electromagnetic field, traveling along a conductive circuit more like a train on a track than water in a pipe. Wait a minute, isn't the signal inside the wires, isn't it current, and voltage? Well, yes and no. It could be argued equally well that the signal actually IS the EM field, and that the current flow is merely a side effect. The speed of the individual electrons is incredibly slow compared to the EM field, which travels close to the speed of light, so it is the EM field that actually carries the signal information.

Doesn't this make the conductor even less important, if the signal is not actually IN the wire, then why would the wire itself have any effect on the signal? This is because, just like the other parameters, resistance has an ideal that is seldom approached, and the deviations cause the side issues to have their affect. For resistance, we do have a unique situation, we have a paragon, an realizable ideal of zero resistance in the effect called superconductivity. A superconductor would behave in such a manner that virtually no current would flow inside of it, virtually no voltages would be detectable inside of it, as it's perfectly conducting nature would prevent the EM field from penetrating beyond the immediate surface, just deep enough to invoke the super conducting paradigm, and once the superconduction occurred, no further penetration would be possible.

Note that for a true superconductor, the surface of the wire would be of paramount importance for high performance audio use, as it is where almost ALL the current flow would be, and where all of the AC audio signal would traverse. For the EM field that is the actual signal, is influenced and affected by the current flow on the surface (or within) of the wire, if an irregularity were to cause the current flow to be interrupted, the EM field would be correspondingly distorted. What this would mean in signal terms is that the local EM field would be disturbed, probably squeezed together as the disruption in the current flow on the surface of the wire was encountered. This lopsided pinching of the EM field might sound like a ever so minute moment of compression, a bobble or burp in the even and regular flow of the signal. Now one microscopic imperfection in the conductor would not be readily detectable by the most sensitive instrumentation, and I would agree is totally inaudible BY ITSELF, but if the audio signal encounters literally thousands or hundreds of thousands of these minute imperfections in the current flow along the wire, perhaps literally millions in the entire length of the cable, then the significance may be much greater than you might think.

The absolute level of these individual events may be on the order of -150 dB, or even lower. Lets just use this figure for purposes of discussion. So how much of an effect would many of these happening through the length of the cable have? Since the transit time through the cable is so short, the irregularities would all essentially occur at the same time as far as our ears were concerned. Now, how do you add up all these minute signal imperfections? Randomly related "signals" are added up as a power function, that is, doubling up will add to a 3 dB higher level, 10 times as many is a 10 dB increase. What about a million? Well, that would be an increase in the effective level of the irregularities of about 60 dB. Wow! All of a sudden these insignificant little conductive imperfections have become that much bigger in total effect. Now instead of being down below any reasonable level that anyone could argue about, they are now at -90 dB. This is within the realm of possible audibility, especially if they were slightly more intrusive than one might assume. Could they be the "grain" that is sometimes heard, the lack of ultimate clarity that all common conductors have? Could different metals and materials have different levels of irregularities, and hence a different amount of, or freedom from grain?

Several cable companies claim to have developed proprietary alloys for their cab cable conductors, ones that minimize, or even eliminate the typical crystalline structure defects that plague commercial copper. Most commercial copper has irregularities of hundreds of discrete crystals or more per inch of wire. This is just a raw count of what we know of as copper crystals, this does not necessarily reflect the actual amount of potential current flow irregularities.

Purity of the conductor would affect how many of these irregularities in the current flow there might be, as well as the nature of the impurities, as well as the processing of the conductors, annealing, cryogenic treatment, or other proprietary processes or treatments. See my post down below in the copper purity thread re common copper purity levels.

Besides these factors, there are the usual resistance issues of temperature coefficient, voltage coefficient, rectification and other resistive deviations from linearity that affect conductors and connections, soldered or otherwise.

Now the expansion of the basic three electrical parameters to their more actual behavior is already enough to shed some light on the situation with esoteric and expensive cable designs, but this is not the whole story.

There is vibration of the cables to consider, we almost always assume that the cables are as a rock of the universe, without external stimulus, such as the vibrations from the speakers. Even if there were no sound vibrations to impinge on the cables, the cables themselves would provide a mechanical stimulus, as the very act of carrying current will "twang" the wires with a physical shock, and any motion that results will then be translated into a new signal, one which is related to the physical resonance of the wire and insulation system, and no longer related directly to original stimulating signal.

There are further effects, related to voltage electrical fields, interactions with shields and balanced electrical conduction vs. unbalanced (even within the case of an unbalanced line level feed).

Are there scientific reasons for expensive cables?

Yep, sure are.

- Jon Risch

All text above is by Jon Risch and can be seen at his full site at http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/cables.htm. Please take the time to visit Jon's site for other articles on audio.

ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD SIMULATIONS OF AUDIO CABLES

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/emf1.htm

Cable Inductance Explained

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/c2.htm

Characteristic Impedance vs. Frequency

Dielectric constant vs. frequency

ETP copper vs. OFHC copper

Skin Effect

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/c1.htm

f>s>

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-19-2002 at 06:58 PM

[mike stehr]

That John Risch guy really knows his s**t.

Doesn't he hang out at someplace called

the Audio Asylum?

Is this Cable you are using now, a

Belden Coax Recipe, Homeless?

Just Curious.

THANX!

[Randy Bey]

Oh yeah?

I happen to KNOW BETTER. Wire is wire.

Hell, I've used twist ties to good effect before.

In fact, I'm using coat hangers as IC's and I CAN'T TELL A DIFFERENCE.

JR is just another puke spouting off mumbo jumbo.

Randy's Home Theater System:

Optimus SS-120 six channel receiver (120 watts! Times 6!)

Lloyd subwoofer (fits under my coffe table)

Kenwood CD150 CD player (a real keeper)

Sony XA700 speakers (15" woofers!)

[TBrennan]

Mobile---I had an interesting conversation with Kevin from diycable at our horn club meeting last week, interesting indeed. He hopes to have a set of those little Adires with the Eminence horn co-ax up and running for our next meeting too. He also showed off a direct-radiator that sounded wretched--2-8s and a tragic dome, yawn...If the meeting had been at my house instead of Alfredo's I wouldn't have even let the things in the house. Doesn't Risch work at Peavey? If so is that good or bad? :-)

[mobile homeless]

Heh.... ole KEvin. Yeah, I havent heard any of his speakers based on the Adire products but I almost feel as if I have after doing that loonball website. I still have nightmares working with the graphics of those 281 Transmission Line speakers you are talking about. I will say this, the damn things are sure purty, arent they? Hopefully, I'll get a chance to hear the little HE10.1 if he sends a pair this way. I might have to resort to it in the summer when all the tourists flock to my locale as the CW will do nothing but bring the local nazi youth police patrol.

Next time you see ole Kevin, ask him to bring some of his wire. It's damn good stuff for the money; hell, it sure surprised me. I wasnt expecting that much.

kh

ps - Risch works for Peavey? Lord, I knew there was something I didnt like about him....

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 01-20-2002 at 12:25 AM

[minn_male42]

dear randy bey...

to you in your system, yes , wire might be wire...but to many higher quality systems...i.e. separate preamps, amplifiers....certain configurations and/or geometries do perform better.... i am very supportive of the capitalist system...if there is a demand for a product, it will sell...and i don't believe that 30, 40, or more companies can survive in business if they don't provide some benefit...(o.k. my whole line of reasoning is out the window if you bring up bose...)...except for bose....personally i did the diy cat5 cables and i am very pleased with the result...

my system:

klf-30's mains

klf-c7 center

bose am-5 rear (i know...next upgrade)

carver a-500x front amp

samson servo 550 rear amp

rotel rb-850 (bridged mono) center amp

carver ct-26v pre-amp/tuner

sony dvp-nc650v dvd/sacd/cd 5 dic changer

dbx ddp digital dynamics processor

samson e30 equalizer

bbe 362nr sonic maximizer

philips cd burner

jvc hr-s7900u vcr

sony 75es dat deck

pioneer ct-05d dual cassette deck

bang & olufson rx-2 turntable