Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[John Roberts {JR}]

MDM, wrote on Sat, 13 June 2009 09:16

the big difference in my experience is to stay away from multi-strand wire. I believe that the problem lies in the fact that the thin strands which are bunched up are connected to each other because they are touching but they are subject to false contact throughout the length of the wire, because of oxidization, dirt and other reasons. in the end, you get the sum of the various contact-distortion caused by each individual strand. you can hear this on old guitar cables which 'crunch' when you handle them. solid copper does not have these problems I have yet to try silver but I probably will. one very quick way of hearing a difference in imaging when changing wire on speakers is to try ordinary phone wire, or multi strand phone wire.. you can also wire three or four (or more) insulated phone wires in parallel to get a lower impedance. I've found that it is superior to run-of-the-mill multi-strand 'speaker wire'

NO..

When doing your personal experiments, make sure the different wires you are comparing have the exact same DC resistance or you may be creating audible frequency response variations due to the impedance of the loudspeaker, forming a simple divider with the impedance of the wire.

This isn't really unexplored ground. Behavior in and around electrical conductors have been very well understood for a very long time.

JR

[zmix]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 13 June 2009 12:03

....this isn't really unexplored ground.

[Jim Williams]

This isn't really unexplored ground. Behavior in and around electrical conductors have been very well understood for a very long time.
JR
[/quote]

Years ago the AES had an article on speaker wire and sonic diffences. They used lot's of stuff to listen to and test. They even included 12 awg auto battery cables!

The winner was a 32 strand data cable of solid core copper (no silver wire was evaluated in the article).
Interested readers should look it up.

[John Roberts {JR}]

Jim Williams wrote on Sun, 14 June 2009 10:43

Quote: This isn't really unexplored ground. Behavior in and around electrical conductors have been very well understood for a very long time. JR Years ago the AES had an article on speaker wire and sonic diffences. They used lot's of stuff to listen to and test. They even included 12 awg auto battery cables! The winner was a 32 strand data cable of solid core copper (no silver wire was evaluated in the article). Interested readers should look it up.

I dedicated one of my "Audio Mythology" columns back in the '80s to the subject of speaker wire and as I recall I referenced an AES Journal Paper by Greiner http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=2892

My recollection from his paper was that it was simple DCR and zip cord was just as good as funny wire.

Are you thinking of a different paper, since I don't recall anything remotely like that from his paper?

I am too lazy to dig out my original of his AES paper and too cheap to buy it, From a later BAS article

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:ocuog58vu-oJ:www.bostona udiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-08-07-8004.pdf+aes+journal+spe aker+wire+Greiner&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

starting on  page 25

From BAS

These data support our original contention that a speaker cable should be as large as possibleto minimize resistive losses, constructed in such a way as to minimize capacitance, and as shortas possible. Regular No. 12 or No. 10 stranded wire fits this description well

JR

[Tomas Danko]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sun, 14 June 2009 21:06

Jim Williams wrote on Sun, 14 June 2009 10:43 Quote: This isn't really unexplored ground. Behavior in and around electrical conductors have been very well understood for a very long time. JR Years ago the AES had an article on speaker wire and sonic diffences. They used lot's of stuff to listen to and test. They even included 12 awg auto battery cables! The winner was a 32 strand data cable of solid core copper (no silver wire was evaluated in the article). Interested readers should look it up. I dedicated one of my "Audio Mythology" columns back in the '80s to the subject of speaker wire and as I recall I referenced an AES Journal Paper by Greiner http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=2892 My recollection from his paper was that it was simple DCR and zip cord was just as good as funny wire. Are you thinking of a different paper, since I don't recall anything remotely like that from his paper? I am too lazy to dig out my original of his AES paper and too cheap to buy it, From a later BAS article  http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:ocuog58vu-oJ:www.bostona  udiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-08-07-8004.pdf+aes+journal+spe aker+wire+Greiner&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us starting on  page 25 From BAS These data support our original contention that a speaker cable should be as large as possibleto minimize resistive losses, constructed in such a way as to minimize capacitance, and as shortas possible. Regular No. 12 or No. 10 stranded wire fits this description well JR

Dan Lavry once took some time to spend figuring out some similar issues, and you can read about it here:


http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/3979/2699/

[John Roberts {JR}]

Indeed,  I addressed it as mythology almost 30 years ago... and I wasn't alone or the first.

Some myths are hard to kill when there are companies that profit so handsomely from consumer ignorance. These companies promote these myths out of simple self interest and are rewarded for their duplicitous misdirection.

It is much harder to get wealthy selling generic zip cord, and consumers don't enjoy learning that they were fooled.

JR

PS: Now horsey just stay dead, and well stop flogging you.

[bruno putzeys]

@MDM the "strand contact distortion" etc story predicts measurable levels of distortion. No such distortion has ever been measured (not for lack of people trying), thus blowing the hypothesis clean out of the water.

[xpulsar]

I love it!

  This question Always gets everyone going. I constantly have a back a forth about overpriced cable with the studio owner I work for. Based on many of my own experiences that almost all of the other things in your signal path make up most of the quality of what your are hearing.(I.E. Acoustics,Mic,Pre,Recorder,Mixer,amp,speaker,Acoustics).
I simply cannot believe that spending $300 and up on 3 meteres of inter connect cable will make enough of a difference over putting that money towards improvements in : (Acoustics,Mic,Pre,Recorder,Mixer,amp,speakers,Acoustics.

-Collin

[Jim Williams]

Wire is the last thing anyone should worry about. Only after the entire recording chain is reviewed and reworked do those sonic differences become apparent. Otherwise the resolution of the equipment will wash out most wire differences.

Then again, after one has done all they can to improve circuits, power supplies, etc, the wire is last. Then it becomes important. Wire changes make little differences in low end audio gear.

[EP]

Jim Williams wrote on Sat, 20 June 2009 07:43

-snip- Wire changes make little differences in low end audio gear.

The beguiling thing is that basically the exact opposite has already been stated here by those taking say 'the other side of the argument'. (ie that wire may alter a poorly designed, 'low-end', audio circuit or interface but is irrelevant in a high-end well implemented audio circuit or interface). That's why these threads get so much action...

Erik

[bruno putzeys]

Underlying this difference of opinion is a difference in presumption:

The first camp will say that what matters is the kind of conductor and insulator, and never mention how the construction might be involved in determining the circuit parameters of the cable.

The second camp says that what matters most is the electrical/electromagnetic behaviour of the cable (and perhaps electromechanical too), as resulting from the actual geometry and basic physics, and might note that material properties hardly figure in the equations.

The first camp will indeed conclude that if the material makes the sound, the difference between two cables will always be the same regardless of the context in which they're used, in which case you won't be able to hear it through a low-quality signal chain. Usually they won't be able to say what the physical specifications of the conductor and insulator are other than directly concluding (for no apparent reason) that they have to be solid-core silver with "teflon" .

By contrast, having identified the relevant parameters, the second camp will note that good circuit design can immunise equipment against most types of interference coming in via a less than perfectly constructed cable. Usually they'll also be able to say exactly what those design techniques are and why they work.

Had expensive equipment necessarily always been well-designed, and cheap equipment badly done, the issue would've been settled long ago. However, it is precisely boutique gear that often flouts proper design practice, and a significant fraction of mastering studios use unbalanced wiring "for reasons of minimalism". Go figure.

[Kees de Visser]

An "interesting" discovery as shown on the Stereophile forum.
I don't know the origin of the pictures. It could be an older version since this model looks a bit different on the transparentcable.com website.
FYI, their speaker cable retail prices vary between $200 and $43000.

[John Roberts {JR}]

I always liked polystyrene capacitor dielectric for filters. Never tried it in wire.  

JR

[KSTR]

"Specialized Bi-Wiring adapter" that retails for about 140EUR:

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/6453/biwiringad2modemfd8. jpg

[David Bock]

the post about the Transparent Cable is old news and should not be considered part of this discussion. No one referred to it before you brought it up, so it only functions as a distraction.