New Speaker Wire Recs

[mas]

Well I think the issue is more than the green is the oxidation which would lead to impurities in the copper making it not as conductive as possible. Agreed they should have taken a VOM and measured the resistance over the course of the 2 wires to see if it makes a difference, but the green insulation isn't as worrysome as on the wire itself (which my monster cable does isn't that sacrilegous to them?). However if the cable has a solid colored insulator you would be unable to tell unless you cut into the wire / redid the ends. But again there is more conductor to transmit the electrical current on (in the 12 gauge) so that will affect the wire (plus heat). I need to crack out my audio engineering book lol.

Copper corrodes.

I would be willing to bet that, except to the degree that corrosion between the conductive surfaces of the connectors can act as an insulator, the net resistance doesn't change much at all.

(And its time that the cartoon inspired notion that current flows by virtue of electron 'flow' and not by magnetic field 'charge' should die the death it so rightly (or 'wrongly') deserves. But then that tired notion comes each time the length of cable issue is raised!)

Neither Monster, Home Depot, or any of the other myriad companies have developed a copper that is better than copper.

And yes, I have some Monster sourced cable that has turned green and the net resistance hasn't been affected. But then I couldn't care less who sourced it. Its not a Monster issue, its a copper issue.

And before anyone start touting other materials, silver corrodes even more readily and gold is a relatively lousy conductor. So if you have concerns, once or twice a year clean the contacts and wire ends and if you are really industriuos, reat them with Cramolin or DeOxit or whatever they are calling it this week.

But this topic has lasted far longer than is justified.

[Groomlakearea51]

But this topic has lasted far longer than is justified.

Thanks alot!! and I was preparing my well researched, lengthy, erudite (but sufficiently obfuscated..) post on the different copper alloys, their conductivity, properties, etc.. Oh well, back to sleep....

[erikill]

Agreed copper is copper - but the purity can make a difference in terms of corrosion. Copper has gone up in price lately since it is a great conductor which is why I wonder if to help reduce the price increases purity could be dropped - not sure if this is true or not.

Magnetic fields? LOL the electrons flow on the surface of the conductor. The EMF is the cause of the flowing current. Right hand rule.

I think I'm gonna try the Blue Jeans cable 12gauge - it's not clear and the grey will match the carpet well. And at the end of the day my 200' will cost less than the 10' of Monster ultra magnus super wire.

[mas]

Agreed copper is copper - but the purity can make a difference in terms of corrosion. Copper has gone up in price lately since it is a great conductor which is why I wonder if to help reduce the price increases purity could be dropped - not sure if this is true or not.

Magnetic fields? LOL the electrons flow on the surface of the conductor. The EMF is the cause of the flowing current. Right hand rule.

Nope!

And Marshall - what I was referring to is the continuing misunderstanding of the notion of current, electricity, electron movement, etc - where not only are the terms misused, but the concepts very poorly understood. (But of which I know you are aware as we have talked about this before!)

A great site that attempts to address this - and is WELL worth wading through - is

http://amasci.com/miscon/energ1.html

Check it out. And the confusion is much more extensive than you might think...

Electrons do not flow at the speed of light in a wire. The velocity of electrons is on the order of inches per minute! The overly simplistic notion that all current consists of electrons that flow only about the surface (eg the skin effect) is not correct. Sure there is a skin effect, but the notion that this plasma layer and EM field are composed of 'flowing' electrons - as it seems many erroneously think (and which has been so utterly misrepresented by Monster market BS) - is a crass and erroneous oversimplification. And even if one wanted to make a case for this in a DC circuit, it wouldn't make sense in an AC circuit. In other words, the conventially held model is incorrect - and EM fields are not comprised of electrons - and using it to rationalize more behavior is simply adding to the confusion.

And SO MUCH MORE!

And we won't even get close to discussing such phenomena as electromigration - which has been a reliability headache for years - where current 'pushes' the atoms in small wires out of place and creates voids that can break te interconnect wires on an integrated circuit - resulting in IC failure.

The nature of this topic goes far beyond the space we have here - and will upset so many notions that it will make the introduction of the time domain look routine!

So, instead of listening to me, wade through the referenced web sites and links and please put aside your old classical notions as he tries to knock you up side the head sufficiently to jog the old ideas as if they were a victim of electromigration - at least enough to allow some new ways of imagining the nature of electricity, current , charge and energy flow to become better understood.

Please, as the classic debates here regarding how 'signal' flows through wires along with electrons is simply nonsense. How's that for being blunt?

[]

[Groomlakearea51]

Now that's blunt!!![] But you are fun to listen to, especially when I get you going!!! LOL - just kidding.[A]

You are right about the reference sites. As an example, I spent days researching copper alloys and their properties some time ago, and arrived at the conclusion that "Home Depot Audiophile Department" speaker wire was about as good as anything else... Most of the high end wire boys don't tell you which alloy they are using. They all buy the alloy in wire spools from commercial alloy suppliers.

For the most part, most problems related to speaker wires (other than some absurdly small gauge or really cheap insulation...) relates to the terminal points and how they are connected to the amp and the speakers. That's a "weak point", and since it's "mechanical" in nature, anything other than a really good connection will cause problems.

Now here's an old "connection" trick that you can dissect for the troops. Way back when I was at the "lil' children" stage of my upbringing... I watched an electrician wire a house in the neighbrohood we had just moved into. Our house was "brand new", but all around us the developer was still building the other houses. Every time he cut and stripped a wire and thus exposed the copper, he would lick his forefinger and wipe the copper off with his fingers before he connected the wire ends to the terminals, or spliced the two pieces together. I asked him why he did that, and I still remember to this day what he said, "Spit solder, boy. Makes the wires connect better". I saw this several times later during the late 60's and early 70's while on active duty, mostly in old gray sergeants working on generators, vehicle wiring, etc. back in the day. One old timer told me that because your salival is slightly acidic, it causes the copper surfaces to make a better connection wherever the actual wire "touches" another contact point.

Comments on that "old time" trick? Is the new version of that "trick" a tiny drop of de-oxit?

[erikill]

Mas,

No offense - but how many Electronmagnetic classes have you taken and how recently just wondering where you are getting your info from. My degree is in Computer Engineering specializing in chip design. Unless concepts have changed within the 2 years since I graduated and the accredited professors completely full of crap I will have to respectfully agree to disagree.

Additionally some website which you sent that claims to know all about electricity I don't hold so much weight for - unless its IEEE or another organization which is recognized in the community. I'm sure I can find IEEE stuff to refute that site. Anyone can make a so-called know all website.

[Arkytype]

Mark,

Thanks for the website link---I had forgotten about Bill Beaty's work.

To Erikill and others who may or may not be educated beyond their intelligence---blindly accepting the pablum that is taught with respect "The Standard Model" and other physical properties in today's physics/electronics classrooms will only perpetuate an unquestioning and/or accepting mindset.

Science is as much about the politics of Science as it is about the doing of Science. We know next to nothing about the nature of electricity and gravity. Sure, we can purport to measure and quantify physical effects and deduce a physical Law, but until we challenge the status quo with experiments that question the entrenched science priesthood, nothing will change. OK, I'll get off my soapbox.

Here's another web site started by a contrarian like Beaty---one who not only questions established science dogma but offers proof or solutions---not just talk. http://www.mileswmathis.com/

Miles Mathis is someone I would call a rennaissance man. He certianly has an interesting bio. After perusing his artistry, click on the Link to my science website, http://www.milesmathis.com where you'll find over 700 pages of thought-provoking works with over 70 papers.

Finally, here's a link with some interesting info on so-called oxygen-free copper.

http://www.angelfire.com/ab3/mjramp/golopid/ofc.html

Lee

http://www.mileswmathis.com/

[Groomlakearea51]

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

A simple, but practical explanation/ viewpoint on speaker wire by the former Director of Acoustic Research at McIntosh Laboratories (as in Mac amps, etc.).

[mas]

Gee whiz, so since sound travels at 1130 feet per second, it simply follows that air molecules are traveling at the same velocity. Right?

Wrong.

So it is with electron flow...

By your logic, I would avoid sitting front of your speakers. And who do we sue for initiating multiple Hurrican Katrinas in our cars and listening rooms. And no wonder iPods can cause hearing loss!

And just what happens to all of those 'extra' electrons in a DC circuit when they all reach the load? So the load just can't hold any more...

And electrons are not EM fields. And EM fields are not comprised of electron clouds.Just as sound energy is not constituted by air molecules.And then you might want to explain AC by virtue of your notion of electron travel as they don't 'travel' at all.

And you should be intimate with the concept of electromigration, as it is the MAJOR source of chip failure.

And since you mention it, how many EM theory classes have I taken? I have you trumped in the subject area by an additional 3 degrees. Plus I have paid IEEE far too much money for a worthless magazine and chapter meetings of interest only to those with an interest in power transmission. And how many courses in quantum mechanics/electrodynamcs and solid state physics have you taken? Not trying to be flip, but therin the classical models all get tossed where they belong. And therein lies the source of the misconception.[]

[erikill]

Mas,

Ok obviously my last post you had to throw in your 2 cents to bash me when I tried to be civil - no where did I mention air or anything else. I agree to disagree and trying to not bash but DISCUSS speaker wire recommendations.

And energy is neither created nor destroyed hence in AC why you have a common return line. Hot and common. No where have I said anything you have said about electronics being EM fields - one is created due to the flow of electrons which is the fundamentals of electromagnetism. They flow which is what the return is on the common. Why do you have a ground wire and a grounding rod?

I'm well aware of electromigration - and it sucks since one of my old PCs is on its way out.

Please list out your additional 3 degrees that you have on me since you threw it in - IEEE in college was what you wanted to make of it - in my case primarily Intel or AMD. I have taken a class in quantum mechanics and solid state (required for my degree). I designed several processors where all this needs to be taken into account - 80 hr projects. Well Ohm's law is broken with electromigration. Speaker wire isn't nanometers thick.

My final point - you keep referring to this guys website. Sorry because some guy says it doesn't mean its true. Can I make a website saying mas didn't pay his IEEE dues last year does that make it true. Case in Point.

[mas]

Mas,

Ok obviously my last post you had to throw in your 2 cents to bash me when I tried to be civil - no where did I mention air or anything else. I agree to disagree and trying to not bash but DISCUSS speaker wire recommendations.

And energy is neither created nor destroyed hence in AC why you have a common return line. Hot and common. No where have I said anything you have said about electronics being EM fields - one is created due to the flow of electrons which is the fundamentals of electromagnetism. They flow which is what the return is on the common. Why do you have a ground wire and a grounding rod?

I'm well aware of electromigration - and it sucks since one of my old PCs is on its way out.

Please list out your additional 3 degrees that you have on me since you threw it in - IEEE in college was what you wanted to make of it - in my case primarily Intel or AMD. I have taken a class in quantum mechanics and solid state (required for my degree). I designed several processors where all this needs to be taken into account - 80 hr projects. Well Ohm's law is broken with electromigration. Speaker wire isn't nanometers thick.

My final point - you keep referring to this guys website. Sorry because some guy says it doesn't mean its true. Can I make a website saying mas didn't pay his IEEE dues last year does that make it true. Case in Point.

Bash you? Huh? You challenge me on how many classes and I simply responded with degrees. Since I "threw it in"? LOL! After you initiated the peeing contest why? Civil indeed. And IEEE in college? I wasn't talking of a student chapter. And yet again, we run into another situation where we are supposed to lead with our resume before a statement can have credence. Yawn. [|-)] And all because we had the audacity to wander so far out onto the ledge to question the classical model of electricity. ...Talk about living on the edge! LOL! I can't believe that this is even an issue!

You evidently missed the analogy between electrical fields and acoustic energy and the distinction between energy and what is commonly assumed in simplistic cartoon conceptions to constitute the energy.

And why do you have a ground rod? Simply put...safety! A ground is NOT a necessary pre-requisite for a circuit!

And electromigration is not a phenomena that effects systems by attrition. A fuse yes. And it occurs in larger crystaline structures as well! And Ohm's law isn't violated - to the degree that is applicable.

Look, here is the fundamental problem. You are persisting in using classical models in a valiant but fundamentally flawed attempt to explain quantum phenomena. While convenient, they are not accurate. And I can't believe that we have to address this fact yet again on this site.

You want to compare degrees. OK, if you want. Start with 2 degrees in physics, where everything after sophomore physics was ALL quantum sourced. And in graduate school we were quantum slave labor... Ohm's 'law' was left far behind in sophomore circuits where the electrons are 'things' that hold hands and all skip down the wire...And 2 degrees in Comp Engr. and an MS in CE-Info Assurance..as well as tenure at IBM developing internals for the RS6000SP and PSSP. Examples of the 'little box' that some might recognize as ASCI White and Blue Gene. Oh, and the unit that Intel develops on as well.(and they use exotic copper and aluminum interconnects - where bit error raqtes are critical.

...And lots of other stuff in directed R&D for DOE as a principal developing new state of the art methods in resonance ionization spectroscopy that actually directly resulted in the resolution sufficient to succesfully identify of one atom. I think we even ha cause to deal just a bit with those 'things' called electrons.

And all of this is necessary(???) to say that all you have to do is worry about minimizing resistance (and reactance to the degree possible) in interconnects. Yup, those degrees were sure worthwhile.[*-)]

And as far as your claiming that "(I) keep referring to this guys website. " I listed the url and suggested you read it. That's it. He has some good points regarding the problems with taking the classical models too far. Not by virtue that its on the web, but by virtue of understanding the material. He points out lots of the inconsistencies that may not be readily apparent. Is he the last word? My goodness no! But if you understood what was going on in SS physics you should realize that the notion of electron 'particles' jumping frm atom to atom is not all there is to 'electricity' and certainly not to EM fields and electrical energy! Limited to that understanding, its a miracle that we were able to move beyond the incandescent light bulb. And according to that notion, magnetism must really be confusing.

But you might just want to focus on the difference between rates of electron flow measured in inches per minute and the velocity of electrical energy 'near' light speed. And you might want to jettison the old notion of electrons as being 'things' carried over from the obsolete Bohr model. So what moves now? Or do we get to listen to the cloud theory of electrical current. And why do we have to listen to the 'paqrticle theory at all? Why not the wave theory? Descriptive convenience doesn't necessarily infer accuracy. Especially when they seem mutually exclusive!

You see, in the past we have refered to many websites and sources. Be it Nelson Pass' 'real world' tests to many others. But the point is, while you may be new to this discussion, esoteric discussions about wire are about the last thing that many of us want to discuss again and again and again...and again. These perenniel excursions into absurdity are not only a waste of time, but we have been there 100s of times. ..only to listen to the next guy show up with some astounding 'new' discovery consisting of some new marketing brochure.

And go ahead and make a website that says I didn't pay my IEEE dues. I won't argue, as I am going to let it lapse after $2500+ for the basic IEEE plus a like sum for the Computer society utterly wasted. Case in point. It would have been better spent on exotic cable. And you don't even get a card whose type doesn't migrate to the plastic sleeve in your wallet.

You don't need to debate me. I get very bored with this topic pretty easily anyway. Put down your classical model circuits books and find a quality quantum based text. Like Bohr's model, the cartoon image of electrons as particles traveling down the wire goes down in flames. Quaint, easily to imagine. Yes. Accurate? No.

And sitting on the edge of the classical /quantum models and debating which is accurate is moving backwards. And mixing the two in an attempt at greater further understanding is not productive. And it certainly does not reflect an understanding of what quantum has to teach!

And any class in quantum should have made his fact readily apparent, even if not well understood.

But when all is said and done, for speaker wire, your primary consideration is resistance. Less is more. Period.

And with luck, you find wire with low reactance. And exotic wire offers little advantage in either. In fact, the differences in most exotic cable is an increased variance in reactance that results in a perceptual difference. But I spend less specifically to avoid exactly that! But feel free to make it as complex as you imagine. And buy whatever you like. Just don't be surprised if many of us don't 'buy it'. And even more of us are tired of such a stimulating topic.

Just buy the cheapest appropriate guage copper cable. And if it turns green you can easily afford to clean the contacts or replace it. Especially as you will only notice it via visual inspection and not by sonics... Unless cleaning contacts once a year is too complex - and then you can always 'move up' to the higher resistance of gold! [*-)]

[Travis In Austin]

Mark,

Thanks for the website link---I had forgotten about Bill Beaty's work.

To Erikill and others who may or may not be educated beyond their intelligence---blindly accepting the pablum that is taught with respect "The Standard Model" and other physical properties in today's physics/electronics classrooms will only perpetuate an unquestioning and/or accepting mindset.

Here's another web site started by a contrarian like Beaty---one who not only questions established science dogma but offers proof or solutions---not just talk. http://www.mileswmathis.com/

Miles Mathis is someone I would call a rennaissance man. He certianly has an interesting bio. After perusing his artistry, click on the Link to my science website, http://www.milesmathis.com where you'll find over 700 pages of thought-provoking works with over 70 papers.

Finally, here's a link with some interesting info on so-called oxygen-free copper.

http://www.angelfire.com/ab3/mjramp/golopid/ofc.html

Lee

http://www.mileswmathis.com/

Those are some interesting sites. I am still going through Beaty's site, he seems to be saying there are a couple of ways to looks at things, neither is right or wrong, EM vs. electrons, it depends on what terms you are using, and how you define it (electricty).

In his definitions section, this guy got my vote:

"The electric fluid flowing through the wire is the negative one,
directed, therefore, from lower to higher potential... The next
important question is whether the structure of this negative fluid is
"granular," whether or not it is composed of electric quanta. Again a
number of independent experiments show that there is no doubt as to
the existence of an elementary quantum of negative electricity. The
negative electric fluid is constructed of grains, just as the beach is
composed of grains of sand, or a house built of bricks. This result
was forumlated most clearly by J. J. Thomson, about forty years ago.
The elementary quantity of negative electricity are called electrons."

Travis

[mas]

Travis,

This will quickly degenerate in to the duality of particle/wave - of wavicles.

And we quickly descend in to quagmire that existed prior to quantum.

Classical models quickly break down and become meaningless once we approach near massless 'things' moving near the speed of light.

And persisting in holding onto such concepts is not of benefit. Nor is it easily understood in non-mathematical terms, as we enter a world defined by non-linear probablility.

We again enter into the seemingly mutually exclusive world of quantum, where the quantum model litereally seems to contradict the classical models and where what we have generally considered common sense in a material world breaks down and becomes anything but. That is the source of the terms "quantum leap" - as the 'rules' break down and must be replaced with new rules that violate our common assumptions.

If one wants a 'simple' non-mathematical explanation of electrons and their interactions, may I suggest Feynman's QED, perhaps the best 150 pages in modern science.

And discover why the characterisitic terms that dominate quantum are drawn from sources such as Alice and Wonderland and why 'strangeness' is a legitimate trait.

But sitting on the edge of the classical model and quantum and trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together is not a fruitful (nor a fun) endeavor.

...And why Sir Arthur Eddington's comment on Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle: "Something unknown is doing something we know not what" is both accurate and insightful - despite its sounding utterly fantastic.

What is frustrating is that so many still want to debate the concepts introduced by quantum almost 100 years ago.

Wire is pretty simple for the frequencies we which we deal. Buy copper wire with the least resistance feasible with the least reactance. The wire tables provide a good guide for gauge vs length. Its a simple as you choose to make it.

[Groomlakearea51]

Ok.... enough of the QMech properties of "strange", "charm", etc. but.... as Mas said,

"Wire is pretty simple for the frequencies we which we deal. Buy copper wire with the least resistance feasible with the least reactance. The wire tables provide a good guide for gauge vs length. Its a simple as you choose to make it. "

I corresponded with Roger Russell, and he kindly gave me permission to quote him in regards to why we should carefully consider spending a bazillion or so on so-called esoteric speaker wire.....

"We have been told by advertising that the exotic speaker wires offer fabulous advantages over ordinary lamp cord. It would seem reasonable that using this same wire for lamps would also enhance their performance. In the same vein as wire literature, you can have your light bulb reproduce light faithfully, finally allowing you see light the way it should be seen and bring out the natural performance of your table lamp. It may offer greater warmth, detail, brilliance, definition and speed by providing wider bandwidth and reduced skin effect. Just imagine what it might do for your electric razor and microwave!" - Roger Russell - http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Oh well, back to the frontal electron bombardment system cleverly disguised as Klipschorns.....[H]

[Islander]

What is frustrating is that so many still want to debate the concepts introduced by quantum almost 100 years ago.

Some concepts take an awfully long time to become obvious or believable to the man on the street. Newton's theories are leading edge for some folks.