# speaker cables question- go expensive or hardware store wire?



## sharkane (Oct 4, 2007)

Hi, all. 

As mentioned in a different thread I am buying a Swan Diva speaker system this weekend and am doing a re-organization of my system in anticipation of my Pioneer SC-LX85 amp next month.

At the risk of igniting that most rancourous of debates, I was wondering about opinions regarding whether there is any benefit in changing my speaker cables. I am currently using 8 or 10 gauge speaker wire (forget which) from Radio Shack ( looks like a two wire, flat lamp cord but with clear plastic covering. I have Banana clip connectors on the end.

I've read articles which state that there is a discernible difference in sound quality with the "monster" sized cable and others which state that in trial listening panels the participants couldn't notice differences between $3000 cables or thin strand hardware wire.
So, what do you all think? Stick with what I've got as good enough, or think about upgrade? Let the debating begin, but please keep it civil , as I know this is a prickly subject with many people.

Kane


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

Hi Kane,

This thread covers the same topic. Have a quick read and see if it answers your question.

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/remotes-cables-accessories-tweaks/48943-speaker-cable.html

Cheers,
Bill.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

sharkane said:


> I've read articles which state that there is a discernible difference in sound quality with the "monster" sized cable and others which state that in trial listening panels the participants couldn't notice differences between $3000 cables or *thin strand* hardware wire.
> So, what do you all think? Stick with what I've got as good enough, or think about upgrade? Let the debating begin, but please keep it civil , as I know this is a prickly subject with many people.
> 
> Kane



Of course 12AWG is going to do better with a 20' run than 22AWG attempting to push a 100 watts or so:sarcastic:

Are those articles in accredited journals like PNAS?

I have three standing challenges:

1. Compare stone cold a Parasound to Crown (pro audio) amp. If you can pick the audiophile amp 9/10 times 
it's yours

2. I have some Belden 5000ue 12AWG speaker cable and some $260 MIT EXP2 14AWG 'music interfaces' with 
4 'articulation poles'. If you can pick the audiophile cable 9/10 times the MIT's are yours

3. I have offered to send two burned in and two not burned in IC (RCA or XLR). Randomly labeled. $100 to charity and ears only evaluation and listen anyway you want for 30 days. Will post an encrypted zip file prior to shipping with the legend.

You will be fine with your standard cable. If you must, find a place with a hassle free return policy, try all their expensive cables in a blind a/b (no sighted listening) and keep or return what you want. They are your ears.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

It's not worth spending the extra money on premium speaker wires. It is important the know how & where you are running them. If "in wall" use properly shielded wire. You don't want to pick up noise from electrical wires or the such. You have plenty big enough wires for almost all applications, let us know if they are shielded & are the in-wall.


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

The only two links you need:

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

http://www.monoprice.com


----------



## mojojojo (Aug 7, 2011)

eugovector said:


> The only two links you need:
> 
> http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
> 
> http://www.monoprice.com


/thread.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

That Russel link is always trotted out in these threads and is hardly an unbiased view. I suppose his attempts at humor feed many peoples' confirmation bias. And why is the focus almost always on speaker wire and not interconnects? Is it because they are bigger? Because they are in plain sight?

A lot of the bottom dollar cables ends up turning green from oxidation and/or a chemical reaction from the cheap PVC dielectric that is often used. That really puts a damper on power delivery.

Here is the best info I have seen on wire. In my personal experience, it's spot on. The Truth about Speaker Cables?

Get some cables, experiment, and listen for yourself in your own system. That is the only way to know for sure.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> You will be fine with your standard cable. If you must, find a place with a hassle free return policy, try all their expensive cables in a blind a/b (no sighted listening) and keep or return what you want.


In the end, cable differences are quite small comparatively. Good info on the hassle free return policy, never buy a tweak like this without being able to get your money back if not satisfied. 

Blind testing, meh. That will "show" you that almost all cables, amps, CD players, Blu Ray players, DACs, etc, etc... sound the same. Not a good metric for discerning small audio differences. You might be feeling a little off that day, hungry, thirsty, cold, warm. Many factors can foul up a supposedly "controlled" test like this. This is your home, not a lab.

Long term listening over a period of time. Blind if you like, but do it long term and even out the uncontrollable effects of the human condition in what is far from a lab setting.



> They are your ears.


Most important factor of all.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

14 awg wire is all you will ever need unless your running more than 1000watts or going more than 300ft in distance. Go get a spool of wire from monoprice.com or your local home depot and rest assured you did not get taken to the cleaners.


----------



## I=V/R (May 25, 2011)

Home depot is Ill advised. I was going to get wire from there but needed about 100' for the 3 cables I made. Was going to cost about $40. I got the same wire from an electric supply warehouse for <$15!


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> Blind testing, meh. That will "show" you that almost all cables, amps, CD players, Blu Ray players, DACs, etc, etc... sound the same. Not a good metric for discerning small audio differences. You might be feeling a little off that day, hungry, thirsty, cold, warm. Many factors can foul up a supposedly "controlled" test like this. This is your home, not a lab.
> 
> Long term listening over a period of time. Blind if you like, but do it long term and even out the uncontrollable effects of the human condition in what is far from a lab setting.


Anything that is likely to either sound different (or not) due to missing out on that routine afternoon snickers bar shouldn't be worried about.

Check out Audioholics Speaker Cables landing page. There are a ton of well thought out articles, measurements and interviews.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

I=V/R said:


> Home depot is Ill advised. I was going to get wire from there but needed about 100' for the 3 cables I made. Was going to cost about $40. I got the same wire from an electric supply warehouse for <$15!


Agreed. HD is good when you need it NOW, but otherwise, there are almost always better options. (like Monoprice)

Be sure to get the right stuff if you running lines inside walls.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> Anything that is likely to either sound different (or not) due to missing out on that routine afternoon snickers bar shouldn't be worried about.


When looked at singularly, perhaps. But...

For some folks, the aggregate of small differences like these summing into a larger difference as a whole is worth pursuing. 1+1+1= 3.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> When looked at singularly, perhaps. But...
> 
> For some folks, the aggregate of small differences like these summing into a larger difference as a whole is worth pursuing.


Aggregate differences in mood, hunger, amount of sleep one had the night before is symptomatic of how they perceive and I would argue not what is actually being produced by the speaker.

What you are suggesting would change what the listener perceives they are hearing on same cables day in day out years down the road. You don't need to change cables to see if your setup sounds like garbage. Just have a really bad day.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> Aggregate differences in mood, hunger, amount of sleep one had the night before is symptomatic of how they perceive and I would argue not what is actually being produced by the speaker.
> 
> What you are suggesting would change what the listener perceives they are hearing on same cables day in day out years down the road. You don't need to change cables to see if your setup sounds like garbage. Just have a really bad day.


Not a good reason to ignore small incremental system improvements, but definitively a good reason for long term listening over spur of the moment "have the wife throw a sheet over it and do the switching" blind testing.

On the flip side, notice the latest trend of people slapping up room treatments pell mell? Lots of congratulatory back slapping over that one. "Yes, it does sound better!" Clear case of expectation bias.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

The good old placebo effect.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> Not a good reason to ignore small incremental system improvements, but definitively a good reason for long term listening over spur of the moment "have the wife throw a sheet over it and do the switching" blind testing.
> 
> On the flip side, notice the latest trend of people slapping up room treatments pell mell? Lots of congratulatory back slapping over that one. "Yes, it does sound better!" Clear case of expectation bias.


You could have the same system for 10 years and it can sound different with the same cables. That is the point I am trying to get across. You don't need to swap _anything_ out to hear a difference. 

Lets ask this: If what you perceive to hear from your system over a 6 month period is subject to mood swings, hunger, sleep or any other myriad of external events whether environmental or psychological how can you ever with any certainty say what wrought the change?

The term 'having a bad year' comes to mind. 

Sorry, just not buying. It sounds like something one tells one's self to convince them of something.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

The very best reason (and maybe the only reason) to buy expensive speaker wire is because that is what you want to do.

If buying exotic speaker wires is a persons worst vice then they are doing pretty good.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

chashint said:


> The very best reason (and maybe the only reason) to buy expensive speaker wire is because that is what you want to do.
> 
> If buying exotic speaker wires is a persons worst vice then they are doing pretty good.


The problem with that statement is that most people who buy expensive wire have no clue that spending that money elsewhere like on better speakers or a better receiver will yield much better audible results.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> Sorry, just not buying. It sounds like something one tells one's self to convince them of something.


I've nothing to sell. If you don't believe that small improvements summed can add up to a larger worthwhile difference, that's cool. My experience has been different.

There is room for both views in this hobby. I encourage the OP and anyone else to try it for themselves.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> The problem with that statement is that most people who buy expensive wire have no clue that spending that money elsewhere like on better speakers or a better receiver will yield much better audible results.


That is kind of an extreme view. I would hope that anyone buying upscale cable is already satisfied with their speakers and power amp. There are exceptions of course, but saying "most people" is an over generalization.

The view that folks buying tweaks like this don't have a clue what they are doing is a stereotype that doesn't hold true.


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

tesseract said:


> That is kind of an extreme view. I would hope that anyone buying upscale cable is already satisfied with their speakers and power amp. There are exceptions of course, but saying "most people" is an over generalization.
> 
> The view that folks buying tweaks like this don't have a clue what they are doing is a stereotype that doesn't hold true.


I would guess that the majority of people buying the upscale cable are not the well informed enthusiast but either the extreme audiophile looking for an infinitesimal upgrade to an exquisite system (I think this is the group tesseract is referring to), or the complete novice who listened to the salesman pitching the wire with the highest profit margin (Tony was lamenting their sorrows, I think).


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

phreak said:


> or the complete novice who listened to the salesman pitching the wire with the highest profit margin (Tony was lamenting their sorrows, I think).


This makes sense, and is unfortunate. There certainly are salesmen who will sell you wire over better speakers.


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

Peoples who say expensive speaker cable sound different are either peoples who bought them and they want to justify the expense or peoples who are selling it.

I studied electronic (a long time ago, but the audio range is still the same) and audio signal is at the very bottom of the frequency spectrum, so capacitance and inductance can be ingore (for speaker wires), you will have a much more difference by just moving your speaker (cost = 0).

Save your money and hire an audio specialist who will make mesurements of your room and make recommandations like speaker placement, room treatment, etc and this will make a much. much. mu.. bigger difference than any speaker wires could do, some of those wire are so expensive that an audio specialist would probably cost you less.

Sorry if I hurt some ego, but to me expensive speaker wires are just snake oil, if you are affraid that corrosion will change the sound, just thin the ends with silver, even if silver coorode with time, the silver oxide is just as good a conductor, so oxidation is not a factor. Also do not forget that most salesman in audiio are trained by Monster cable rep. and I listen to one of them once and he was saying that high frequency are not traveling across the whole conductor (skin effect). Yes skin effect occur at high frequency, but audio range is nowhere near that.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

informel said:


> Peoples who say expensive speaker cable sound different are either peoples who bought them and they want to justify the expense or peoples who are selling it.


Are you saying this is the case in each and every time? If so, then the fallacy below could just as well be true.

_Saying that cable doesn't make a difference is said by people who have not experimented with various cables in their own home, or those that want to convince themselves that they "saved" money._



> I studied electronic (a long time ago, but the audio range is still the same) and audio signal is at the very bottom of the frequency spectrum, so capacitance and inductance can be ingore (for speaker wires), you will have a much more difference by just moving your speaker (cost = 0).


Capacitance and inductance can be ignored? There are plenty of EE's that will disagree with you. This isn't a football game, with all EE's on one side. I'll refer you once again to the RAM link, and a link within that link.

http://www.ramelectronics.net/howto-av.ep#speakercables
http://www.audioxpress.com/reviews/media/504hansen1203.pdf



> Save your money and hire an audio specialist who will make mesurements of your room and make recommandations like speaker placement, room treatment, etc and this will make a much. much. mu.. bigger difference than any speaker wires could do, some of those wire are so expensive that an audio specialist would probably cost you less.


Strawman argument. So this means that you cannot tweak your system with cabling as well? Money "saved" can only be spent on consultation and treatments? 



> Sorry if I hurt some ego, but to me expensive speaker wires are just snake oil, if you are affraid that corrosion will change the sound, just thin the ends with silver, even if silver coorode with time, the silver oxide is just as good a conductor, so oxidation is not a factor.


It appears you are saying that corrosion is acceptable and will not change the sound. 

No one here has said or implied that wires need to be expensive. 



> Also do not forget that most salesman in audiio are trained by Monster cable rep. and I listen to one of them once and he was saying that high frequency are not traveling across the whole conductor (skin effect). Yes skin effect occur at high frequency, but audio range is nowhere near that.


Most salesmen are trained by Monster? Citation please, just saying so doesn't make it fact. Besides, you should not pigeon hole every cable manufacturer by what a Monster dealer has to say.

Do you feel that DACs, CD players, DVD/Blu Ray players and amps basically sound/look the same in comparison to each other?


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

tesseract said:


> Capacitance and inductance can be ignored? There are plenty of EE's that will disagree with you. This isn't a football game, with all EE's one one side.
> 
> http://www.monoprice.com


first inductance: speakers have a nominal impedance of 2, 4,8 ohms ( I know this is just nominal and varies a lot over frequency), you would need a big coil of wire to have sufficient uH or mH to influence the audio signal.

capacitance: OK 2 parrallel conductors make some capacitance here, but still you would need a long run to affect the signal significantly 



tesseract said:


> Strawman argument. So this means that you cannot tweak your system with cabling as well? Money "saved" can only be spent on consultation and treatments?


Let me re-phrase this, I know some peoples that spend a lot of money on speaker cables and do nothing about the room, they would see a bigger improvement by starting with the room deficiencies.



tesseract said:


> It appears you are saying that corrosion is acceptable and will not change the sound.


this is not what I said, what I said is that silver oxide conduct as much as silver itself.



tesseract said:


> No one here has said or implied that wires need to be expensive.


OOOOPPPPs, you are right, excuse me for my mistake



tesseract said:


> Most salesmen are trained by Monster? Citation please, just saying so doesn't make it fact. Besides, you should not pigeon hole every cable manufacturer by what a Monster dealer has to say.


You are right, I do not have citation, also I did not say that Monster cable where bad, they are very good cables, all I was saying was that the rep goes from one audio store to the other and train peoples on their product (nothing wrong with that). All I wanted to point out was the fact that he mention the skin effect on high frequency. I did mention to him privatly that he is not lying; just not saying the whole story, he just reply with a smile (I saw that like an acknowledgment to my sentence).


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

This always turns into a squabble.
When you are below 1 GHz you don't get the lumped element interaction of transmission line theory.
Without that any other argument just falls apart.
So even if you only use 20KHz for any calculation you just can't work up an engineering case to support better sound than plain copper speaker wire provides.
For those who have done the imperical listening tests and have heard a difference all I can say is God bless you and keep right on believing you hear a difference.

FWIW a rank beginner is just as likely to be able to hear a difference in wires on a HTIB as an experienced audiophile is with their turntable and tube amps.


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

chashint said:


> This always turns into a squabble.
> When you are below 1 GHz you don't get the lumped element interaction of transmission line theory.
> Without that any other argument just falls apart.
> .


I like that answer, strait to the point!


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

Moving forward, a couple of questions, please.



informel said:


> Save your money and hire an audio specialist who will make mesurements of your room and make recommandations like speaker placement, room treatment, etc and this will make a much. much. mu.. bigger difference than any speaker wires could do, some of those wire are so expensive that an audio specialist would probably cost you less.


1. If I might ask, which audio specialist have you employed to tackle your room issues?


2. Also, still waiting for an answer to this question, if you don't mind. 



tesseract said:


> Do you feel that DACs, CD players, DVD/Blu Ray players and amps basically sound/look the same in comparison to each other?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

chashint said:


> This always turns into a squabble.


There will be no squabbles here. We can have differences in opinion, and differences in personal experience, and discuss them in a civil and respectful manner. Please read the rules very carefully and post in the spirit of cooperative discourse. If you do not agree, make your point, but be careful to frame opinion as such, and to support claims of fact with evidence.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

informel said:


> I studied electronic (a long time ago, but the audio range is still the same) and audio signal is at the very bottom of the frequency spectrum, so capacitance and inductance can be ingore (for speaker wires), you will have a much more difference by just moving your speaker (cost = 0).


While this is largely true, there are effects of capacitance in speaker wires, but they are very small. With some very wide band amplifiers, oscillations outside of the audible range can create audible effects or even amplifier damage. For most systems, it really does not make much difference, but you need to be careful about assuming too much.



informel said:


> Also do not forget that most salesman in audiio are trained by Monster cable rep.


Simply untrue. What is true is that most audio sales people are just like other sales people and will say whatever is helpful in making a sale, and will repeat whatever they hear that is consisent with the belief that their product does what the manufacturer wants buyers to believe.

The vast majority of differences in performance can be explained by placebo effects and expectation bias. That said, the notion that there are no differences in cables, amplifiers, and other products is just as faulty, however, as the extreme claims on the other side. We should spend more time identifying where there ARE differences and under what conditions. The result would be that there are far fewer differences than salemen and manufacturers would like us to believe, I am certain.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

lcaillo said:


> While this is largely true, there are effects of capacitance in speaker wires, but they are very small. With some very wide band amplifiers, oscillations outside of the audible range can create audible effects or even amplifier damage. For most systems, it really does not make much difference, but you need to be careful about assuming too much.


Please reference one audio amplifier (that is not malfunctioning) that is documented to oscillate under any conditions at any frequency.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

The point, chashint, is not that he was wrong, but that there is often more to the story. While we can largely ignore the effects of capacitance and inductance at audio frequencies there might be other variables that are meaningful. My suggestion was that one should not assume too much. Sweeping statements about what can or cannot make a difference may be mostly correct yet still have some caveats. In fact they usually do.

Oscillations in amps due to load are extreme cases, but back in the era where the trend was to build extremely wide band amps we did run into some that would oscillate when driving some loads. Rarely would one under normal circumstances today would likely experience this.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Any improvements in the sound quality that people have "heard" when doing A/B blind tests is very very likely because the size of the awg was increased to the proper size and or the use of good connection like banana plugs at the speakers and amp/receiver. As long as copper stranded wire of sufficient awg (14 is plenty) is used there will be no improvement audibly facts and many many tests have proven this. 
What sounds good on paper and nice suffocated words mean nothing in the real world. We dont need to beat a dead horse.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

Tests have only proven that the differences are so small that they are difficult to discern. The same is said about differences in electronics. For instance, it is often stated that there is no audible differences between CD players.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

tesseract said:


> The same is said about differences in electronics. For instance, it is often stated that there is no audible differences between CD players.


Thats not the same as its dependant on many different things including the DACs, motor design and other things. The signal over speaker wire is analog and is not subject to many of the differences in processing that a digital signal goes through.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Thats not the same as its dependant on many different things including the DACs, motor design and other things. The signal over speaker wire is analog and is not subject to many of the differences in processing that a digital signal goes through.


The method that has been used to come to the conclusion that there are no audible differences between CDP's is the same, blind testing. 

My point is, this doesn't mean there are no differences, only that the differences are small. For some people, small percentages are worth chasing. For others, not.

My suggestion to anyone that wonders about these differences (such as the OP) is to have a listen for yourself. Don't just sit and wonder, try it. Get some cables, try a few CDP's, listen through a few amps/receivers. If you like, throw a towel over the item, have somebody switch things out for you, and listen blind (be careful plugging and unplugging powered gear!).


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

My suggestion would be to focus on enjoying the music. IME, much time, money, and effort are wasted on tweaks that are minor at best.


----------



## JoeESP9 (Jun 29, 2009)

chashint said:


> Please reference one audio amplifier (that is not malfunctioning) that is documented to oscillate under any conditions at any frequency.


I personally observed this on a scope with an Adcom GFA-545 (mine) and braided CAT-5 (DIY) speaker cables. Stereophile reported the same thing using Goertz cable and an Adcom GFA-7805. 

Adcom amps are particularly susceptible to HF oscillation when working into reactive loads because they are not bandwidth limited. There are other amplifiers that are wide bandwidth designs. It's possible and highly probable they have the same characteristics. According to the Stereophile article Goertz was/is aware of the problem with some wide bandwidth amplifiers. That's why they had a solution ready. 

Most amplifiers are bandwidth limited and consequently can't develop HF oscillation.

Note: A Zobel network (suggested by Goertz) cured Stereophiles problem and mine. 

BTW: The oscillation is inaudible and robs some of the amplifiers available power. It didn't seem to cause any harm to my Adcom GFA-545. It did however reduce the available power before the clipping indicators lit.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

Spectral is another DC to light amplifier prone to oscillation. The warranty on at least one of their designs is void unless you use the cable they have spec'ed.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

sharkane said:


> So, what do you all think? Stick with what I've got as good enough, or think about upgrade? Let the debating begin, but please keep it civil , as I know this is a prickly subject with many people.


Upgrading wire is purely aesthetic, although if having better looking wire makes you enjoy your system more, go for it. Just don't expect it to sound any different.

Let's say a cable introduces a distortion factor of 1
a dac probably introduces a distortion factor of about 100
a preamp probably introduces a distortion factor of about 1000
an amp probably introduces a distortion factor of about 1000000
...

and then your room goes and introduces a distortion factor of around, i dunno, 1000000000000000000000000000000 and your speaker probably 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Now if your interest in this hi fi hobby revolves around chasing that '1', have fun with it but do realize that's what you're doing. Otherwise, get to the stuff you feel you can definitively feel happy about improving.




> Please reference one audio amplifier (that is not malfunctioning) that is documented to oscillate under any conditions at any frequency.


Actually, getting many cheap receiver amplifiers to oscillate isn't actually all that difficult. You just need a speaker that has a reactive phase angle around 75 degrees ;P

Sometimes people blow tweeters from amplifiers oscillating at ultrasonic frequencies because of those exact phase angles... they don't even hear the tweeter go bye bye.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

How funny is that, Adcom recommends 16 guage zip cord for runs of 25 ft or less and to fix very expensive cables Stereophile added... a 0.1;uF capacitor in series with a 10 ohm resistor across the speaker terminals... absolutely makes me laugh out loud.
Nothing could go farther to prove the point of speaker wires not affecting the sound than this does.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> Tests have only proven that the differences are so small that they are difficult to discern.


The testing I have read about does not treat the matter in such 'coached wording' you used. Lets try not to put spin on it. 

The tests have proven that people are merely guessing.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I have trouble following that logic, but we won't go any further down that road. The fact is that the sound difference in cables, if any, is minor compared to others that may be affected by the end user. GranteedEV may have exagerated the point but it is still the most relevant information in the thread. It is very difficult to justify significant expense on cables, but large changes can be made with similar investments elsewhere, or with no investment at all.

Extreme arguments on either side of an issue are almost always proven to be wrong, to some degree, or at least worthy of qualification. Let's reign in the rhetoric a bit guys.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

lcaillo said:


> My suggestion would be to focus on enjoying the music. IME, much time, money, and effort are wasted on tweaks that are minor at best.


And THAT - is assuming they're even tweaks and not a step backwards. That's a real problem with the audio hi end - some of the things people use actually have an _adverse_ effect on fidelity. Just because there's a tiny difference, doesn't even mean it's an improvement. Sometimes if a cable does in fact sound "different" , it's likely just a way to capitalize on the idea that people are searching for the perfect cable, and the bigger the difference, the easier the sell. In reality that cable might be bloating up your bass response or rolling off your high frequencies. One thing we know about something like typical 14awg home depot cable, is simply that there's no ulterior motive. I've yet to see Home Depot cable with a capacitor box on one end.

Here is a very educational article on just how cable/loudspeaker/amp interface CAN effect sound. 

http://sound.westhost.com/cablewhitepaper.htm

Here's an interesting excerpt:



> Many cable manufacturers deliberately add a lot of capacitance to their cables. For example, you will find a box at the end of MIT cables, which contains capacitors. Alpha Core (Goertz) cables are made as a sandwich with two ribbon conductors very close together, and this type of construction produces high capacitance and often, amplifier instability. Woven wires are close together so have high capacitance. These types of high-capacitance cables are best avoided when operating ESLs.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> The testing I have read about does not treat the matter in such 'coached wording' you used. Lets try not to put spin on it.
> 
> The tests have proven that people are merely guessing.


How is that "spin"? Measurements show a difference, so there is a difference, and it is small. Feel free to browse through this link for examples. http://kimber.com/products/loudspeakercables/


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> Upgrading wire is purely aesthetic, although if having better looking wire makes you enjoy your system more, go for it. Just don't expect it to sound any different.
> 
> Let's say a cable introduces a distortion factor of 1
> a dac probably introduces a distortion factor of about 100
> ...


These 0's and 1's are pure speculation and not a solid metric. 



> Actually, getting many cheap receiver amplifiers to oscillate isn't actually all that difficult. You just need a speaker that has a reactive phase angle around 75 degrees ;P
> 
> Sometimes people blow tweeters from amplifiers oscillating at ultrasonic frequencies because of those exact phase angles... they don't even hear the tweeter go bye bye.


Perhaps this is why some cables have Zobels?



GranteedEV said:


> And THAT - is assuming they're even tweaks and not a step backwards. That's a real problem with the audio hi end - some of the things people use actually have an _adverse_ effect on fidelity. Just because there's a tiny difference, doesn't even mean it's an improvement. Sometimes if a cable does in fact sound "different" , it's likely just a way to capitalize on the idea that people are searching for the perfect cable, and the bigger the difference, the easier the sell. In reality that cable might be bloating up your bass response or rolling off your high frequencies.


This is quite true, and another good reason for long term listening to judge the effect of the change. If you miss it when it is taken out of the system, it was probably an improvement. 

It is true that people use gear as a tone control of sorts, and that is their prerogative. I believe that ALL gear has this effect, so anything we have assembled is the sound that we choose, for better or for worse. Some people prefer to believe that the speaker/room interface is all that matters, and that is fine, too.

Think on this. If a cable can take your system a step backward... then cable is also capable of taking it a step forward.



> One thing we know about something like typical 14awg home depot cable, is simply that there's no ulterior motive. I've yet to see Home Depot cable with a capacitor box on one end.
> 
> Here is a very educational article on just how cable/loudspeaker/amp interface CAN effect sound.
> 
> ...


Educational, or misleading? The author has made a statement that is unsupported by fact. Measurements to back his allegation of added capacitance would be nice. If one really wants to know how MIT cables work, reading what a detractor with no facts has to say isn't going to lead to understanding. He even goes so far as to suggest that MIT cables cause amplifier instability. Once again, an unsupported allegation, and in fact is in direct opposition to the what the cables are designed to do. Spectral amplifiers need the spec'ed MIT cable to keep them in check, the warranty is void if you do not use them. Fact.

The networks are, in part, a Zobel network. Some of them prevent EMF from returning to the amplifier. They all prevent oscillation. Home Depot wire does none of these things, but at least the PVC insulation helps to ensure that it does turn green over a period of time.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> These 0's and 1's are pure speculation and not a solid metric.


Absolutely. They are not a solid metric. Good observation. 



> Perhaps this is why some cables have Zobels?


To hopefully correct for issues in an arbritrary, unpredictable loudspeaker's electrical behaviour? Um.. well we all have our opinions. Mine is that cables that don't behave as cables, are not cables, but "mystery boxes". If a loudspeaker requires a zobel filter, i'd prefer my loudspeaker manufacturer provide one, but that's just me I suppose. 



> Another good reason for long term listening to judge the effect of the change. If you miss it when it is taken out of the system, it was probably an improvement.


Assuming the individual is only interested in listening to equipment, not as transparent a reproduction of the source content, absolutely! 

The assumption here i that i'm conceited enough to think my ears and brain and emotions define what is accurate.



> Think on this. If a cable can take your system a step backward... then cable is also capable of taking it a step forward.


Um, i don't agree with this logic. If you start with a clear glass, the only thing you can do is to make it "not clear". Now I understand many subjectivists aren't particularily interested in accuracy of any sort, so we have a difference in opinion. But to me there's "correct" and "incorrect" so to me, you can't go from correct to "more correct". 



> If one really wants to know how MIT cables work, reading what a detractor with no facts has to say isn't going to lead to understanding. He even goes so far as to suggest that MIT cables cause amplifier instability. Once again, an unsupported allegation.
> 
> [The networks are, in part, a Zobel network. Some of them prevent EMF from returning to the amplifier. They all prevent oscillation.


The "network box" isn't the problem, it's the idea that it's part of the cable that i take issue with. Alas, you're probably correct on their function. 



> Home Depot wire does none of these things, but at least the PVC insulation helps to ensure that it does turn green over a period of time.


yes, how unfortunate for 20 dollars worth of cable to eventually corrode after decades of use :T

Anyways, obviously we have a difference of perspective, and I'd prefer to not discuss this matter with you. It seems to me that you're passionate on these matters of manufacturers selling zobel filters disguised as cables, whereas I'm not particularily interested in them :T Like I said in my post earlier, if these things interest you, enjoy yourself.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> To hopefully correct for issues in an arbritrary, unpredictable loudspeaker's electrical behaviour? Um.. well we all have our opinions. Mine is that cables that don't behave as cables, are not cables, but "mystery boxes". If a loudspeaker requires a zobel filter, i'd prefer my loudspeaker manufacturer provide one, but that's just me I suppose.


Why not Zobel the amplifier instead? There is more to the networks than a simple Zobel, perhaps if MIT made speakers they would be included.



> Assuming the individual is only interested in listening to equipment, not as transparent a reproduction of the source content, absolutely!


Assuming?



> Um, i don't agree with this logic. If you start with a clear glass, the only thing you can do is to make it "not clear". Now I understand many subjectivists aren't particularily interested in accuracy of any sort, so we have a difference in opinion. But to me there's "correct" and "incorrect" so to me, you can't go from correct to "more correct".


Subjectivists are not interested in accuracy? 



> The "network box" isn't the problem, it's the idea that it's part of the cable that i take issue with. Alas, you're probably correct on their function.


The networks are not well understood, so it is understandable to give pause. I let my ears decide for me.



> yes, how unfortunate for 20 dollars worth of cable to eventually corrode after decades of use :T


Change decades to months.



> Anyways, obviously we have a difference of perspective, and I'd prefer to not discuss this matter with you. It seems to me that you're passionate on these matters of manufacturers selling zobel filters disguised as cables, whereas I'm not particularily interested in them :T Like I said in my post earlier, if these things interest you, enjoy yourself.


The network is only a Zobel in part. My interest in the matter is to portray an accurate account of networked cables with facts, as they were misrepresented in this thread. With that done, I'll drop the matter as well. :T


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> Why not Zobel the amplifier instead? There is more to the networks than a simple Zobel, perhaps if MIT made speakers they would be included.


Whatever it is, a well designed system won't require additional mystery boxes in the chain.



> Subjectivists are not interested in accuracy?


Subjectivists with a really, really really good ear AND sense of acoustic memory who have 20+ years of live music experience INCLUDING intimate knowledge of the acoustic space, and instruments, and recording techniques being reproduced, possibly qualify, and the rest can't by definition. If your ear is trained by the sound of listening to speakers, how possibly can you qualify accuracy? Most of the truly experienced and impressive subjective listeners I have met (and I'm not conceited enough to claim myself on their tier), don't seem to subscribe to a lot of what a lot of subjectivists seem to subscribe to. 



> Change decades to months.


Well i'm trying hard as I can, and I'm not seeing any green stuff through my semi-clear PVC cable :huh:



> The network is only a Zobel in part. My interest in the matter is to portray an accurate account of networked cables with facts, as they were misrepresented in this thread. With that done, I'll drop the matter as well. :T



Sorry, I didn't mean to spread inaccurate non-facts about the mystery boxes being marketed as wire.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> Subjectivists with a really, really really good ear AND sense of acoustic memory who have 20+ years of live music experience INCLUDING intimate knowledge of the acoustic space, and instruments, and recording techniques being reproduced, possibly qualify, and the rest can't by definition. If your ear is trained by the sound of listening to speakers, how possibly can you qualify accuracy? Most of the truly experienced and impressive subjective listeners I have met (and I'm not conceited enough to claim myself on their tier), don't seem to subscribe to a lot of what a lot of subjectivists seem to subscribe to.


My ear is trained by the many instruments that I've learned to play over the years, and the others that I have sat next to and played along with. Love of music drew me into this hobby, not gear worship.

Is there such a thing as pure subjectivists or objectivists? They seem like stereotypes, to me.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

I would like to note that the cables I suggested are very solidly constructed and start at around $33.

I feel that small differences summed add up to a large difference. I think we can all agree that the audible effects of cable differences are small. The point of contention comes in when we disagree on whether that small difference matters. This is a personal choice and there is no right or wrong.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> I think we can all agree that the audible effects of cable differences are small.


No, I can't actually agree with that. Audible effects of cables are _possible in specific scenarios_, but that doesn't mean all cables have audible "effects" at all, cables vis a vis audiblity is a widely contested issue for a reason. But we can agree to disagree.

Now I'm talking about cables, not cables + mystery boxes,


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> How is that "spin"? Measurements show a difference, so there is a difference, and it is small. Feel free to browse through this link for examples. http://kimber.com/products/loudspeakercables/


I said people couldn't reliably hear the difference in the tests I referred to. So the context should be obvious.

If you design a measurement instrument that can go granular enough you can find differences in even the same make of cable. Just put a scanning electron microscope on them and you will see a lot of differences. See in that respect you are indeed correct.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> Perhaps this is why some cables have Zobels?


Then they cease being cables. They are something else, but they are not cables.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> No, I can't actually agree with that. Audible effects of cables are _possible in specific scenarios_, but that doesn't mean all cables have audible "effects" at all, cables vis a vis audiblity is a widely contested issue for a reason. But we can agree to disagree.
> 
> Now I'm talking about cables, not cables + mystery boxes,


In your experience, what are the deleterious audible effects of what you have named "mystery boxes"?



GranteedEV said:


> Actually, getting many cheap receiver amplifiers to oscillate isn't actually all that difficult. You just need a speaker that has a reactive phase angle around 75 degrees ;P
> 
> Sometimes people blow tweeters from amplifiers oscillating at ultrasonic frequencies because of those exact phase angles... they don't even hear the tweeter go bye bye.


This problem isn't limited to receivers.

If oscillation were defeated, it would be a clear case of an audible difference being realized. The tweeters still work. :T


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> In your experience, what are the deleterious audible effects of what you have named "mystery boxes"?


I don't purchase mystery boxes....so I have no experience with them. End of the day, an unmeasured, undocumented mystery box is a mystery box, and a mystery box is something whose effects are unpredictable, and thusly, impossible to be positive in a system setup for superior performance, because it is changing the amp/speaker designer's _intended_ signal path. The way a passive crossover intereacts with the drivers is very dependant on their electrical behaviour. A passive crossover is used to address frequency response, impedance, phase, and time delay. Anything you're adding above that, is by definition affecting the loudspeaker's behaviour with respect to those parameters. if it makes an audible difference, and if it doesn't, then it's a waste of money. An optimist might say that it could possibly be a good change, but then that's essentially saying the loudspeaker's behaviour was lacking in certain respects, in which case, why was that loudspeaker chosen?

When you address your room for example, do you treat it with measurements, documented bass traps, reflectors, absorption panels, and diffusion panels? Or do you experiment with mystery foams at random spots and sticking your speakers laying down sideways in random unsymmetrical places as close to walls? There are intended and unintended applications and procedures for tools. I don't use a jackhammer to fix my MP3 player, I use a screwdriver and a soldering iron. "Could" a jackhammer fix my mp3 player? I dunno, and I don't see any reason to try.



> If oscillation were defeated :T


And the most sensible way to do this, is to not purchase amps that will oscillate, and speakers that will cause amps to oscillate


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> I don't purchase mystery boxes....so I have no experience with them. End of the day, an unmeasured, undocumented mystery box is a mystery box, and a mystery box is something whose effects are unpredictable, and thusly, impossible to be positive in a system setup for superior performance, because it is changing the amp/speaker designer's _intended_ signal path. The way a passive crossover intereacts with the drivers is very dependant on their electrical behaviour. A passive crossover is used to address frequency response, impedance, phase, and time delay. Anything you're adding above that, is by definition affecting the loudspeaker's behaviour with respect to those parameters. if it makes an audible difference, and if it doesn't, then it's a waste of money. An optimist might say that it could possibly be a good change, but then that's essentially saying the loudspeaker's behaviour was lacking in certain respects, in which case, why was that loudspeaker chosen?


The purpose of the networks is not to alter the speaker crossover parameters, and there is no data that suggests this happens. The above is speculation unsupported by facts or measurements. 

The intended purpose of networks is to negate the effects of the cable's capacitance and inductance before it reaches the speaker crossover, and prevent back EMF from returning to the amplifier on some models.



> When you address your room for example, do you treat it with measurements, documented bass traps, reflectors, absorption panels, and diffusion panels? Or do you experiment with mystery foams at random spots and sticking your speakers laying down sideways in random unsymmetrical places as close to walls? There are intended and unintended applications and procedures for tools. I don't use a jackhammer to fix my MP3 player, I use a screwdriver and a soldering iron. "Could" a jackhammer fix my mp3 player? I dunno, and I don't see any reason to try.


No, I use carefully placed foam to knock down flutter echo in my room. Speaker positioning is in the recommended vertical orientation.



> And the most sensible way to do this, is to not purchase amps that will oscillate, and speakers that will cause amps to oscillate


How does the average Joe go about determining which amps and speakers these are?


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> How does the average Joe go about determining which amps and speakers these are?


Simple. Look at complex impedance (Z-Chart) and Powercube measurements! :bigsmile: In the absense of a Z-chart, avoid the speaker plain and simple. Never trust a manufacturer spec... i've seen 8 ohm speakers with 60 deg phase angles. Never trust just your ears at a hi fi shop, because reproducing those exact conditions is virtually impossible.

Powercubes are harder to come by. As you probably know i'm huge on power cube measurements. Of course if the speakers aren't a problem, then there is no problem. The average joe doesn't need to be able to read these, if he's getting help at a good forum - and it's the job of people who do know how to read them, to help the average joe out :T

If the average joe misses out on getting meaningful help, then he's probably not on a successful path to getting the best sound out of his system, because sound reproduction is a science, and you need either trained professionals putting your entire system together for you, or to have help from those who at least somewhat do understand the science!

JMO


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> Simple. Look at complex impedance (Z-Chart) and Powercube measurements! :bigsmile: In the absense of a Z-chart, avoid the speaker plain and simple. Never trust a manufacturer spec... i've seen 8 ohm speakers with 60 deg phase angles. Never trust just your ears at a hi fi shop, because reproducing those exact conditions is virtually impossible.


This sounds like a personal goal (nothing wrong with that), not something that is feasible or even necessary for everyone in every situation, as it limits choices only to speakers meeting this arbitrary standard. 

I do trust most manufacturers' data, it isn't all suspect. We have seen questionable third party testing data as well. There are no absolutes here.



> Powercubes are harder to come by. As you probably know i'm huge on power cube measurements. Of course if the speakers aren't a problem, then there is no problem. The average joe doesn't need to be able to read these, if he's getting help at a good forum - and it's the job of people who do know how to read them, to help the average joe out :T
> 
> If the average joe misses out on getting meaningful help, then he's probably not on a successful path to getting the best sound out of his system, because sound reproduction is a science, and you need either trained professionals putting your entire system together for you, or to have help from those who at least somewhat do understand the science!
> 
> JMO


I agree. As no one person has a monopoly on knowledge, a community such as this is a great resource to draw from.


----------



## Gregr (Nov 2, 2010)

I love it!!!
Ya know there is one big problem with articles and papers and research in general..., in each case you are offered the opinion of one or several. And who is testing their work for bias or ...???

I just have one question. If there is no difference why are so many inteligent and knowledgeable people spending the extra money and in some cases the Loooooong dollar to upgrade cables of all sizes. 

I used to use MonsterCable speaker cable 8-10 gauge. I am now using MIT EXP1's and I love these cables. I sold one pair to try Kimber and wish I had not done that. I will never sell the other cable pair of MIT EXP1's but I am going to upgrade to 

Furutech OCC (6N copper cable - Professor Ohno's continuous casting) double shielded using Al foil and copper braid for shield, soft cotton for separating and padding copper wires. Max Resistance 7ohms per KiloMeter. Inductance and capacitence are no consequence. This is expensive cable to construct but the price is reasonable and I cannot wait to have the extra change.

Greg


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

Gregr said:


> I love it!!!
> Ya know there is one big problem with articles and papers and research in general..., in each case you are offered the opinion of one or several. And who is testing their work for bias or ...???
> 
> I just have one question. If there is no difference why are so many inteligent and knowledgeable people spending the extra money and in some cases the Loooooong dollar to upgrade cables of all sizes.
> ...


You have already convinced yourself that you will hear a change. So you will.

I have a pair of the EXP 2's. They are yours if you can blind tell me 9 out of 10 times if you are listening to them or my run of the mill Belden's. I mean the cost more than 20X the price of the Belden so they should sound better easily. Easily enough for you to pick them out.

Additionally if you can, I will pay your air fair, 3 nights stay, rental car, meals. If not you pay all that.

There is a Chris Wiggles thread were an intelligent and knowledgeable person couldn't pick his cables between some monster and Magnum OPUS speaker cables. I believe the price disparity was in the 100's to 1 ratio.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> This sounds like a personal goal (nothing wrong with that), not something that is feasible or even necessary for everyone in every situation, as it limits choices only to speakers meeting this arbitrary standard.


A speaker with phase angles beyond 60 degrees either way or impedance dips below 2.5 ohms, has some serious design issues. If a person is going to purchase such a speaker, they deserve to know the consequences. Jungle Jack does, which is why he runs parasound amps that are unconditionally stable into any load.

Else a person is on an unsuccessful path. Now if a person is going to stubbornly select the amp based on their feelings or budget, and not the amp's capabilities, the speaker they choose absolutely has to have a documented z chart. Good first party manufacturers will provide this data at request, as well as third party reviews. If they don't, they have something to hide. An amp is a solution to a problematic speaker, and vice versa. A zobel (which may not interact with the speaker as intended) only addresses one issue with problematic amps and/or speakers and i think it's naive to think this will give satisfactory results.


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

I bought Belden cable for all my connection needs (speaker, analog interconnect, video, cable, sat) from a distributor. I DIYd the ends as required.


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

Andre said:


> I bought Belden cable for all my connection needs (speaker, analog interconnect, video, cable, sat) from a distributor. I DIYd the ends as required.


Sounds like your approach is similar to mine--- ask a question and go with the option that most experienced people say will be OK. In other words take the cheapest route that experts will argue about. If everyone is encouraging you to increase the budget for speaker wire maybe you should. When most say Home Depot/Monoprice/Belden, I'll keep the extra cash in my pocket


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

phreak said:


> Sounds like your approach is similar to mine--- ask a question and go with the option that most experienced people say will be OK. In other words take the cheapest route that experts will argue about. If everyone is encouraging you to increase the budget for speaker wire maybe you should. When most say Home Depot/Monoprice/Belden, I'll keep the extra cash in my pocket


Not to mention that world class production studios use the likes of Belden/Mogami/Canare/Gepco etc...


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

Belden probably makes 70% of the cable for all the esoteric companies changing only how it looks on the outside. The company adds the pixie dust once they put in the velvet bag and kevlar imprinted shipping box...


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> A speaker with phase angles beyond 60 degrees either way or impedance dips below 2.5 ohms, has some serious design issues. If a person is going to purchase such a speaker, they deserve to know the consequences. Jungle Jack does, which is why he runs parasound amps that are unconditionally stable into any load.
> 
> Else a person is on an unsuccessful path. Now if a person is going to stubbornly select the amp based on their feelings or budget, and not the amp's capabilities, the speaker they choose absolutely has to have a documented z chart. Good first party manufacturers will provide this data at request, as well as third party reviews. If they don't, they have something to hide. An amp is a solution to a problematic speaker, and vice versa. A zobel (which may not interact with the speaker as intended) only addresses one issue with problematic amps and/or speakers and i think it's naive to think this will give satisfactory results.


Of course you should match low impedance speakers with a beefy amp, no one is disputing that or making claims that a Zobel will fix it. It was the demand for third party info as a universal condition for purchase that I was contesting.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> Of course you should match low impedance speakers with a beefy amp, no one is disputing that or making claims that a Zobel will fix it. It was the demand for third party info as a universal condition for purchase that I was contesting.


It doesn't need to be third party info, it can be first party, but it has to exist in an adequate format. I've seen too many speakers, even from big name manufacturers, that don't tell you a thing.

I think a lot of the online manufacturers "get it" - Ascend, Philharmonic, SVS, BESL. A lot of the more popular B&M speakers do make the effort to get quality 3rd party reviews. 

Where else, we should exercise due diligance and expect that the company has confidence in their product and nothing to hide, and will provide this critical information with no fluff. The amp/speaker electrical mating is as relevant with respect to classical impedance, as it is to the oscillation with reactive phase angles that mystery boxes supposedly fix- both are part of the same fundamental issue that should not be hidden.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> I think a lot of the online manufacturers "get it" - Ascend, Philharmonic, SVS, BESL.


So now we are to automatically trust these guys? :scratch:



> A lot of the more popular B&M speakers do make the effort to get quality 3rd party reviews.


It is a common assumption that audio manufacturers seek out third party reviews, or should. While it does indeed happen, it is usually the other way around. A reviewer asks for a test piece. 



> Where else, we should exercise due diligance and expect that the company has confidence in their product and nothing to hide, and will provide this critical information with no fluff.


Agreed, but it is not necessary to assume that manufacturer specs are never to be trusted. And I don't believe there is a running conspiracy amongst B&M speakers to withhold test speakers from third party testers.



> The amp/speaker electrical mating is as relevant with respect to classical impedance, as it is to the oscillation with reactive phase angles that mystery boxes supposedly fix- both are part of the same fundamental issue that should not be hidden.


The networks do defeat amplifier oscillation, among other things. There is no reason for supposition or to label them with the moniker "mystery box".


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> The networks do defeat amplifier oscillation, among other things. There is no reason for supposition or to label them with the moniker "mystery box".


So, the 'music interfaces' aren't out there to improve the SQ. They are out there to fix amp and speaker design flaws.

Why wouldn't the speaker designer put a LCR network on their cross over to avoid those problems? Or do they list compatible amplifiers that you have to use?


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

tesseract said:


> The networks do defeat amplifier oscillation, among other things. There is no reason for supposition or to label them with the moniker "mystery box".


I'll stop calling it a mystery box if someone shows me a documented technical analysis of what they do, I've heard from one very knowledgable source that it's a bunch of capacitors to roll off the lows, another source is now saying that it's a zobel filter among other things, SO all I'm really experiencing is 'a mystery'. I feel it's an undocumented mystery box, until I see evidence to the contrary.


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

GranteedEV said:


> I'll stop calling it a mystery box if someone shows me a documented technical analysis of what they do, I've heard from one very knowledgable source that it's a bunch of capacitors to roll off the lows, another source is now saying that it's a zobel filter among other things, SO all I'm really experiencing is 'a mystery'. I feel it's an undocumented mystery box, until I see evidence to the contrary.


Wow, a little demanding aren't we? Those mystery boxes are proprietary information. Would you expect a subwoofer manufacturer to publish measured specs for their products? How about amp manufacturers revealing the distortion produced at specific gain and load? Next thing you know, you're going to be demanding that the Colonel turn over his secret recipe.

Oh wait, they do. Everyone except KFC that is.

[/sarcasm and irony]


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> So, the 'music interfaces' aren't out there to improve the SQ. They are out there to fix amp and speaker design flaws.


No.



> Why wouldn't the speaker designer put a LCR network on their cross over to avoid those problems? Or do they list compatible amplifiers that you have to use?


This was discussed earlier in the thread.



eugovector said:


> Wow, a little demanding aren't we? Those mystery boxes are proprietary information. Would you expect a subwoofer manufacturer to publish measured specs for their products? How about amp manufacturers revealing the distortion produced at specific gain and load? Next thing you know, you're going to be demanding that the Colonel turn over his secret recipe.
> 
> Oh wait, they do. Everyone except KFC that is.
> 
> [/sarcasm and irony]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

GranteedEV said:


> I'll stop calling it a mystery box if someone shows me a documented technical analysis of what they do, I've heard from one very knowledgable source that it's a bunch of capacitors to roll off the lows, another source is now saying that it's a zobel filter among other things,


Your very knowledgeable source got it wrong. Try here. http://www.mitcables.com/contact-us.html



> SO all I'm really experiencing is 'a mystery'. I feel it's an undocumented mystery box, until I see evidence to the contrary.


If you really want experience, try one of these lending libraries, you can ask questions and borrow some to try/test for yourself. 
http://equusaudio.com/
http://thecableco.com/default.aspx




I'm done discussing networks. I stand by the well constructed and inexpensive recommendation I made to the OP. :T


----------



## Ares (Nov 23, 2009)

eugovector said:


> Wow, a little demanding aren't we? Those mystery boxes are proprietary information. Would you expect a subwoofer manufacturer to publish measured specs for their products? How about amp manufacturers revealing the distortion produced at specific gain and load? Next thing you know, you're going to be demanding that the Colonel turn over his secret recipe.
> 
> Oh wait, they do. Everyone except KFC that is.
> 
> [/sarcasm and irony]



*Ingredients used in KFC chicken recipe*





*white* *flour
*
*salt
*
*garlic salt
*
*paprika*.
*thyme*.
*basil*.
*oregano*.
*celery salt*.
*black pepper*.
*dry mustard*.
*ground ginger*.
*MSG* (Accent).
Even the Colonel's secret recipe isn't a well kept secret any more.


----------



## hgoed (Mar 22, 2010)

I just skimmed this thread, but I'm pretty sure I've seen this discussion before somewhere. I guess I wanted to ask, what if my cables are more pure than the ones used in the mixing studio, or by those who QC the product of the mixing studio? Will the sound be too forward?


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

hgoed said:


> I just skimmed this thread, but I'm pretty sure I've seen this discussion before somewhere. I guess I wanted to ask, what if my cables are more pure than the ones used in the mixing studio, or by those who QC the product of the mixing studio? Will the sound be too forward?


What do you mean by "more pure"? Why would this bring the sound forward?


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

Ares said:


> *Ingredients used in KFC chicken recipe*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But that's just the ingredients, what about the proportions? Maybe we should take this to PM. The Colonel has eyes everywhere and can still strike, even from beyond the grave.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

hgoed said:


> I just skimmed this thread, but I'm pretty sure I've seen this discussion before somewhere. I guess I wanted to ask, what if my cables are more pure than the ones used in the mixing studio, or by those who QC the product of the mixing studio? Will the sound be too forward?


This thread is supposed to be about speaker wire not interconnects between audio equipment. Its becoming V E R Y long winded.


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

tesseract said:


> Your very knowledgeable source got it wrong. Try here. http://www.mitcables.com/contact-us.html


If you know what these boxes do, why not just share it? I don't think that MIT wants to be bothered by every Doubting-Thomas in this thread, myself included.


----------



## hgoed (Mar 22, 2010)

I'm sorry for how I came across, I was being facetious. I was trying to make the point that, depending on how much effort one puts in thinking about the issue, there are too many factors to consider to come to a conclusion based on more than faith, and I'm pretty sure everyone's is allowed.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

eugovector said:


> If you know what these boxes do, why not just share it? I don't think that MIT wants to be bothered by every Doubting-Thomas in this thread, myself included.


I have made an honest effort to share what I know, my explanations haven't been enough. Therefore I have given avenues for Doubting Thomas(s) to further their interests... if information is truly what they are seeking. 

I have talked to MIT on the phone and communicated by email, up to the Vice President of the company. Your fears are unfounded, drop them a line. :T


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> I have made an honest effort to share what I know, my explanations haven't been enough. Therefore I have given avenues for Doubting Thomas(s) to further their interests... if information is truly what they are seeking.
> 
> I have talked to MIT on the phone and communicated by email, up to the Vice President of the company. Your fears are unfounded, drop them a line. :T


So does MIT maintain that their LCR boxes will improve ANY speaker/amp combination. If not how do they know with the thousands, maybe tens of thousands of combinations possible, if your combination can have a marked improvement? I can't pick my EXP2's out blind vs my Belden. Doesn't matter if it is my Parasound/Behringer (EP or A500)/Crown or my Statements, ZDT3.5's, PSB, Polks, AR's. I even had my wife randomly switch out the EXP2 after a month and didn't know she did it 11 days ago. The Statements STILL sound great. 

That is 20 combinations of speaker and amp right off the bat. 

I tried to get into the MIT lending program that they offered better than a year ago (I think it was more than a year). A lot of people at AVS forum didn't get any response.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

jinjuku said:


> So does MIT maintain that their LCR boxes will improve ANY speaker/amp combination. If not how do they know with the thousands, maybe tens of thousands of combinations possible, if your combination can have a marked improvement? I can't pick my EXP2's out blind vs my Belden. Doesn't matter if it is my Parasound/Behringer (EP or A500)/Crown or my Statements, ZDT3.5's, PSB, Polks, AR's. I even had my wife randomly switch out the EXP2 after a month and didn't know she did it 11 days ago. The Statements STILL sound great.
> 
> That is 20 combinations of speaker and amp right off the bat.


Why not direct your questions to MIT? You and I have had this discussion for years now. It puzzles me why you spend all this time with me and none with the manufacturer.



> I tried to get into the MIT lending program that they offered better than a year ago (I think it was more than a year). A lot of people at AVS forum didn't get any response.


Not true, emails were sent out from MIT and this was discussed in a thread that you started and participated heavily in. I still have my email. A summary:


"_Hello _____, and thank you for taking the time to fill out our questionnaire for the MIT Cables Lending Library! Due to the overwhelming response to our offer, we at MIT have found that we are unable to handle all of the inquiries in a timely manner. To avoid further delay, we are turning your request over to our independent representative, Mr. Joe Abrams and his MIT affiliate online company; Equus Audio. Joe is now in possession of the entire selection of "loaners" intended for this program. 

We apologize for the lengthy period of time this has taken, but we are sure that turning the MIT Lending Library program over Mr. Abrams will help to expedite your receiving cables to audition._"


I've given you the lending library information a couple of times in open forum. You made excuses for not contacting them. :dontknow:

The contact info appears, once again, earlier in this thread. :rubeyes:


----------



## Gregr (Nov 2, 2010)

Hi Jinjuku,
What if I don't hear a difference or a change? Does that mean you are right or wrong? If you truly think about it, there are so many variables that occur in the last 10 or so feet of electronic signal from the wall duplex and the additional 10 or so feet from the speaker to your ears it is tough to know what to expect.

I have never used speaker cable that did not play music and pretty much one is very much like the other. What I expect in cable I buy as an upgrade is "detail". I have this crazy idea that if I can get the cymbals to play correctly then the frequencies below will be right and frequencies above the cymbals will have their best chance to play accurately. When I get that to happen it sounds like the electronics just steps out of the way. The music sounds effortless and the soundstage expands, each instrument is easily followed and sounds natural. Now if I can get the brass to give me the vibration that I hear in concert but is always smoothed out in digital and most analog recordings. 

Based on what meager knowledge I have which includes experiential information..., there is no "detail button". Somebody not to long ago might have said - the "loudness" button produces more detail. Ha! Ha..., ! Anyway, I don't know how speaker cable makes music sound better without imparting a musical signature. I am not interested in better sounding music, I want an accurate reproduction of the recording. 

And, I took a 10' length of Belden Blue tube, soldered 1 RCA from the pre-amp sub out and 2 RCA's on sub end, replacing the 10' Monster sub interconnect and brought my sub down, I'll say a full octave to 39hz. I am guessing but it was very noticeable and the guess of a full octave is not far from being exact.

Then there are Psychological set points. After tasting, smelling, hearing the same sensory info for even a short amount of time we become de-sensetized to original stimulation. When you first plug any cable in it will sound different and probably better then what you have been using. Sales people have it so easy. 

So much to write about. But I am sure you have heard it before. I will say, I am sure the tweeks I am adding are cummulative and I believe if recordings were consistent I would be able to show improved detail. 

Greg

Greg


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

Gregr said:


> I have this crazy idea that if I can get the cymbals to play correctly then the frequencies below will be right and frequencies above the cymbals will have their best chance to play accurately.


The key to getting cymbals to play correctly, is the RAAL Ribbon Tweeter on a good crossover and low diffraction cabinet:










This tweeter will actually sound correct on any cable!!!



> And, I took a 10" length of Belden Blue tube, soldered 1 RCA from the pre-amp sub out and 2 RCA's on sub end, replacing the 10' Monster sub interconnect and brought my sub down, I'll say a full octave to 39hz. I am guessing but it was very noticeable and the guess of a full octave is not far from being exact.


I see. So prior to adding the IC, your subwoofer made no bass below 78hz?


----------



## Gregr (Nov 2, 2010)

Jinjuku,

Who would judge me when I say, "I do hear a difference"? Am I being truthful? If the judge has the "Golden Ear" and claims he does hear a difference and you and I do not hear the difference he describes. This could go on and on and still not resolve the original question (should I buy new or keep the old 8-10ga). I would use the old cables for a while and then try the new cables. Try one old and one new for awhile..., or not.

I do think its funny that with all this agreement on all speaker cables and amps sounding indistinguishable one from the other that many of us have spent some big numbers on electronics. Is that just to impress the wife or girlfriend? Or girls just trying to impress that certain guy? You are on the right track.

MIT does make for sale the LRC (network boxes). 

Q. What is SQ? is it related to QTS, QES, QMS, EQ, QT? Sometimes Forums can get as bad as lazy journalists. I think computer geeks who write for mags are the worst. They never tell you what the acronym is.

I wish you all peace and safety in your homes.

Support the Arts!!!

Greg


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

GranteedEV said:


> The key to getting cymbals to play correctly, is the RAAL Ribbon Tweeter on a good crossover and low diffraction cabinet:


Nice speaker, Is it one of your build or is it a commercial product?


----------



## gorb (Sep 5, 2010)

informel said:


> Nice speaker, Is it one of your build or is it a commercial product?


They are from Vapor Sound.

Starting at $3495 a pair :gulp:


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

tesseract said:


> Why not direct your questions to MIT? You and I have had this discussion for years now. It puzzles me why you spend all this time with me and none with the manufacturer.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Honestly I must have stopped participating in that thread prior to what you posted. Or I simply missed it. Will have to call.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

Gregr said:


> Hi Jinjuku,
> What if I don't hear a difference or a change? Does that mean you are right or wrong? If you truly think about it, there are so many variables that occur in the last 10 or so feet of electronic signal from the wall duplex and the additional 10 or so feet from the speaker to your ears it is tough to know what to expect.


Uhg...

Q: *What if I don't hear a difference or change?*

A: Then statistically speaking you can't reliably pick between two cables. You use the less expensive one. It's like physicians prescribe the smallest dosage that effectively treats the condition.

Q:*Does that mean you are right or wrong?*

A:None of this is about right and wrong. It is about separating expectation and bias from listening experience. It's about a merits driven approach to spending your audio $$ (especially for the newb) in a manner that is offering the biggest return on their investment. 

NRAQ: *If you truly think about it, there are so many variables that occur in the last 10 or so feet of electronic signal from the wall duplex and the additional 10 or so feet from the speaker to your ears it is tough to know what to expect.
*

Response: Most major variables that affect SQ have been dealt with at this point: Properly sized power cord, filtration in the amp, proper input and out biasing etc... at 20-20Khz Resistance, Capacitance, Inductance of a cable doesn't even manage to sit out the game on the sidelines. It doesn't even make it into the ball park.

Your real problem comes from "it is tough to know what to expect". STOP. You shouldn't expect anything. Just get what you want to try out and throw a towel over it and what you currently have. If you can't pick it out statistically then you know all you needed to know.



Gregr said:


> I took a 10" length of Belden Blue tube, soldered 1 RCA from the pre-amp sub out and 2 RCA's on sub end, replacing the 10' Monster sub interconnect and brought my sub down, I'll say a full octave to 39hz. I am guessing but it was very noticeable and the guess of a full octave is not far from being exact.


Not sure if you know what you are saying here. A full octave above 39Hz is 78Hz. Are you saying your sub started it's F3 at 78Hz?



Gregr said:


> Then there are Psychological set points. After tasting, smelling, hearing the same sensory info for even a short amount of time we become de-sensetized to original stimulation. When you first plug any cable in it will sound different and probably better then what you have been using. Sales people have it so easy.


I have two sets of IC level cable. I can terminate with wither XLR or RCA. I will burn in one set for 100hrs with Pink noise. The other set will be unplayed.

I will randomly label both and post a password protected zip file with the the labeling key. You have 30 days to perform any ears only evaluation that you prefer. Since 'When your first plug any cable in *it will sound different*' (your words here) Post back which of the two out of four I sent you sound different. Simply group them correctly. Loser donates $100 to charity of winners choosing.




Gregr said:


> So much to write about. But I am sure you have heard it before. I will say, I am sure the tweeks I am adding are cummulative and I believe if recordings were consistent I would be able to show improved detail.


I have heard it all before just like cops and therapists. So you believe (a faith based system) that _*if*_ your recordings were consistent that you would be able to show improved detail?

How are your recordings inconsistent? So you can't actually vouch for improved detail with all the cumulative minor tweaks. So you are in the realm of merely a faith based approach to audio re-production.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

The late arrivers certainly added a chuckle to the thread.


----------



## peterselby7 (Nov 29, 2008)

Cables can make a difference, but only to the extent that they suffer loss due to resistance on the conductor or are wound into strange geometries producing odd results related to inductance and capacitance. I really hate the conversation about wires and audio in general. It usually just ends in someone getting mad. If all data were based on simple answers such as why you should use 12 guage speaker wire or better yet which you should use 12 or 14 guage speaker wire? This would be a lot easier. Just calculate the loss for a given length and diameter of cable and be done with it. But what about dielectric resistance causing insertion loss? I'm sure some will claim this is inaudible too?


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

peterselby7 said:


> But what about dielectric resistance causing insertion loss? I'm sure some will claim this is inaudible too?


Describe what you mean about dielectric insertion loss.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I would assume that he means the portion of attenuation due to dielectric loss. I would argue that dielectric loss is not generally significant at audio frequencies. It is certainly a concern at RF frequencies, but not audio.


----------



## FLAudioGuy (Sep 21, 2011)

chashint said:


> Describe what you mean about dielectric insertion loss.


Have we found someone who can hear RF? Tell me, if your hearing is 0dBFS at 10MHz does that mean your ears are more accurate at 5MHz? Inquiring minds... LOL dielectric insertion loss LOL


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

lcaillo said:


> I would assume that he means the portion of attenuation due to dielectric loss. I would argue that dielectric loss is not generally significant at audio frequencies. It is certainly a concern at RF frequencies, but not audio.


Oh come on lcaillo. :bigsmile:
Where is the fun in that ? :innocent:
This thread was going pretty good a couple of weeks ago. :T


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Its interesting what the term RF means to different people, when I hear RF, L band barely qualifies and 10MHz is the time base frequency to phase lock the test equipment to each other.


----------



## FLAudioGuy (Sep 21, 2011)

chashint said:


> Its interesting what the term RF means to different people, when I hear RF, L band barely qualifies and 10MHz is the time base frequency to phase lock the test equipment to each other.


Well, technically, we ALL hear RF since our own hearing range falls within the VLF spectrum of 3Hz-30kHz. Time and again it has been shown that typical speaker cables do not affect the audible spectrum to any 'discernable' extent. No one can hear 'dielectric insertion loss'. If you feel that you can, please immediately go see a board certified audiologist, have your hearing tested and post the results here for open scrutiny. Ears are the farthest thing from an accurate 'test instrument'.

Even at 10 meters (30ft) length, cheap 1mm^2/18awg wire has only a negligible effect on volume (~1dB) and only a _slight_ effect in the upper frequencies above 15kHz due to parasitic inductance. Keep in mind most cable runs from an amplifier to speaker are less than 5 meters (15ft). Something that can have an audible effect re speaker wires is separating (unbinding) the cable into two strands. Did you think cable manufactures only made parallel wire runs for _convenience_ sake? No. Whereas parasitic capacitance has no audible effect, parasitic inductance _can_. Taking a cable with, say, 8uH (microHenry) inductance and separating it can increase it to 40+uH, which certainly _may_ be audible to some people.

So, the only thing to be concerned about is ohmic loss in a cable of insufficient ampere capacity for the length you require. But, even then, this will only show up when you reach loud levels and will have absolutely no effect on the FR of the cable. If you doubt that, go measure all of your electrical wall outlets and put your thinking cap on. Besides all of this, the tiny effect that speaker cables have on SQ is swamped by the effect of the crossover.

Anyone can make a 'super cable' out of simple Cat 5. It is very cheap per foot length, very wide bandwidth and readily available everywhere. Strip the ends and connect all the solids together and likewise all the stripes. Use several parallel runs as required for amperage capacity needed.

*MY OPINION HERE*: I believe that any longtime audio reviewer who has tested hundreds of different audio components over the years knows exactly what the truth is because it is utterly impossible to escape that truth after so much hands-on experience. Truth asserts itself loud and clear, again and again. IMHO, audio "journalists" who report night/day sonic differences are most likely a bunch of hypocrites and are being intellectually dishonest. Cheers! :T


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I think journalists are no different than anyone else and are subject to placebo effects and expectation bias. People perceive differences all the time that have nothing to do with actually performance differences. That does not make them hypocrites, necessarily. It may make them unscientific, inconsistent, or inaccurate, but this is not unique to audio. The same thing happens in all fields. Many scientists have no idea how their decision making is affected by their personal bias and beliefs. It can make them wrong, it can make their work essentially worthless because of assumptions that are no accounted for as variables, but not necessarily dishonest.

Please reel in the vitriolic language and condescending tone. You can express your ideas without such.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

lcaillo said:


> Please reel in the vitriolic language and condescending tone. You can express your ideas without such.


I've found the one thing that puts everything in perspective is to hold the person making substantive claims prove it with a blind fold. That generally solves problems right then and there. It's been my experience that they won't.

I did this on a thread at Polk Forums and found out the subjectivist were all talk when it came to the benefits of 'burn in'. Also did this at AVS with the same result. It's a nice and sealed up box that they can't get out of.


----------



## FLAudioGuy (Sep 21, 2011)

lcaillo said:


> I think journalists are no different than anyone else and are subject to placebo effects and expectation bias. People perceive differences all the time that have nothing to do with actually performance differences. That does not make them hypocrites, necessarily. It may make them unscientific, inconsistent, or inaccurate, but this is not unique to audio. The same thing happens in all fields. Many scientists have no idea how their decision making is affected by their personal bias and beliefs. It can make them wrong, it can make their work essentially worthless because of assumptions that are no accounted for as variables, but not necessarily dishonest.
> 
> Please reel in the vitriolic language and condescending tone. You can express your ideas without such.


I did state that it was my opinion. Anyone is free to agree or disagree.

In response to your post, I do think that the majority of scientists in whatever field of endeavor hold themselves to a higher standard than audio journalists and set parameters for their tests accordingly. Scientists also subject themselves to peer-review and open industry publications and cite prior art and draw logical conclusions based on evidence, not whimsy. In the name of science, most try to be as accurate as possible. Yes, some have drawn incorrect conclusions based on flawed test methodology or some cases even fiscal objectives. When found out, they certainly do suffer public and industry ridicule and shame. When do we hold journalists to the same standards?

Many people hear different things when comparing products but cannot place their finger on _why_ there is a difference. Most just assume a difference is a _good_ difference. Especially where sighted comparisons are concerned and they have expectations of increased gooey goodness. Surely a $100/ft cable sounds better than a $1.00/ft cable.

Unless you are studied in electronics, electro-dynamics, theory, practical application or some other engineering discipline that relates to audio, you are simply guessing. Why is it that in other fields such as automotive engineering, medicine, aviation or architecture we (generally) trust the science but in audio we don't? We have companies that make teeny tiny speakers that reproduce faithfully a live concert (according to them) and alarm clocks that somehow spread ions on the audio system that make everything time coherent and take all the harshness out of the speakers? I tell you, some manufacturer is laughing all the way to the bank.

So many audio enthusiasts fall victim to the advertising machinery and unfounded, untested and grotesquely inept designs they may as well throw their money down the drain. I think it is our responsibility to show the myths in this industry as myths and help people make the best scientifically sound monetary expenditures as we can.

I do believe there is a place for some subjectiveness in audio. We are, after all, supposed to connect to the music in an emotional way. Speakers and headphones are two areas I think are applicable among others. Feel free to read my other posts here in various threads.

Ban me if you want to, I half expect it now. Cheers, everyone! :T


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

We are not interested in forcing other users into a rhetorical corner or box. Many have beliefs that you may not think are sustainable under scrutiny. They are completely free to have their own view, no matter how wrong others may believe it to be. We can discuss these differences of perspective and priority without being self-righteous and condescending. 

If someone who believes that they hear differences in cables wants to do blind testing they can. Most do not and are satisfied with their subjective assessments. We have no reason to believe that because we think they would fail to identify the differences under blind testing that those people would be interested in subjecting themselves to such tests. Their assumptions and perceptual context simply do not prioritize that type of listening test. Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant. It is a personal preference. You are welcome to your opinion on that preference, but you will have to be respectful in stating your different perspective.

That's how we do things at Home Theater Shack.


----------



## FLAudioGuy (Sep 21, 2011)

For the record, I was *not* deriding anyone in particular. I may have tagged the wrong prior-post as it was PETERSELBY7 who first brought up 'dielectric insertion loss'. If you read his post again, you will find that essentially, he agreed with what I had to say.

My apologies to anyone who has taken offense with my words or tone. Cheers! :T


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

With respect to scientific research, even the most diligent fields with substantial peer review fall victim to assumptions and bias in research. The motivations for choosing a research topic often have more to do with the perspective of the investigator than anything else. Scientists often subscribe to a theoretical framework that defines the nature of the questions that they ask. Personal bias often affects the variables chosen for manipulation and control or the choice to ignore others.

Certainly the field of audio is not on a par with peer reviewed scientific fields of study. The point is that even in the most respected areas there is still an effect of personal bias and belief on the resulting research. It is inevitable. Even the most "objective" objectivist with respect to audio is affected by his own belief. Ignoring one's own biases leads to similar mistaken assumptions as those of the subjectivist, albeit on a different scale. It also makes it impossible to see the value in subjective assessments. That value may be meaningless to you, but it is essential to many who take great pleasure from this hobby.


----------



## FLAudioGuy (Sep 21, 2011)

Why is it that of all my post what was picked out was what I clearly stated in bold as being my opinion and nothing in regards to the remainder of my post? Is there a technical error of mine that needs pointing out? I have the math and science to back up my assertions as to the OP's original question. My belief is substantiated by measurements, mathematics and biology not baseless conjecture. Conjecture, true but not baseless conjecture! If there is credible evidence to the contrary, anyone is free to post it. Is mathematics and biology not credible science?

Certainly everyone can believe whatever they want to but the OP's question to us was whether or not he should spend money on 'high-performance' cables or go with less expensive ones. If such a question was raised, clearly expense is an issue. Several posters have indicated the same thing I did. I tried to go further by showing some evidence to back it up with. If you want me to post the math, I can easily do that. I even gave an example of a very inexpensive alternative.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

FLAudioGuy said:


> Why is it that of all my post what was picked out was what I clearly stated in bold as being my opinion and nothing in regards to the remainder of my post?


The manner in which you chose to represent your point of view was abrasive and against forum guidelines. I suggest you reread them.
_
"Please be polite, courteous and respectful of other members, as well as all products and services discussed. There is no need to be condescending or overly critical"_



> I even gave an example of a very inexpensive alternative.


I gave what I feel was a great inexpensive cable recommendation. Why has this gone unnoticed?


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

chashint said:


> Its interesting what the term RF means to different people, when I hear RF, L band barely qualifies and 10MHz is the time base frequency to phase lock the test equipment to each other.


Sorry to quote myself, instead of writing... 
'when I hear RF' 
I should have written 
'when I hear the term RF used, in my occupation L band barely qualifies as RF'...

I did not realize the post could be interpeted to mean I was hearing RF frequencies at 10MHz or in the L band.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

FLAudioGuy said:


> *MY OPINION HERE*: I believe that any longtime audio reviewer who has tested hundreds of different audio components over the years knows exactly what the truth is because it is utterly impossible to escape that truth after so much hands-on experience. Truth asserts itself loud and clear, again and again. IMHO, audio "journalists" who report night/day sonic differences are most likely a bunch of hypocrites and are being intellectually dishonest. Cheers! :T


You know... if this entire 'opinion' is taken in context I see nothing fundementally wrong with it.

Even if you want to disregard the truth about speaker wire.... how do you explain the same 'journalists' hearing differences in sound depending on which little metal disk the DAC is setting on ?

Or the $$$$ gold plated power cords... which these same 'journalists' also extol the virtues of.

FLAudioGuy's opinion has merit.... as long as he does not try to disagree with me :bigsmile:


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

As I have said many times, one can express opinions and state facts without being snarky, condescending, or abrassive. One can be completely correct yet say things in a way that does not contribute to civil discourse. This does nothing but polarize and does little to convince anyone of anything. We simply choose to not go down that road. We have all seen how those kinds of threads work out on other forums. 

Enough discussion of the matter. The rules are the rules and they will be applied to the letter. If there is any more discussion of the rules, moderation, or how they are applied, I will be happy to do so privately. Let's get the thread back on topic.


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

To offer my 2 cents worth of humble opinion on the issue, I strongly feel that if budget is an issue go with the recommended wire gauge for your power level in a reasonable quality product such as Monoprice, Belden, RCA, Home Depot, or whatever else is accessible. On a low budget system the speaker wire is the least cause of any undesirable audio conditions. At the other end of spectrum on a hundred thousand dollar bleeding edge dream system, if someone sees sparkling bling bling between their amp and speaker which gives them goosebumps translating into a subjectively apparent audio difference which is interpreted as being an improvement, I applaud. No animosity. Congratulations. 
In the middle ground, where I suspect most enthusiasts fall, respectful debate is welcome. I think everyone agrees that the most basic science shows a inexpensive cable to be acceptable within the listening range and ability of most people. It seems that feathers only get ruffled when discussing whether or not some benefits may be heard by some people, and whether those benefits are objective or subjective. On that note I wholeheartedly side with the moderators of this forum in saying calm down, do everyone a favor and listed to some good music or get absorbed in a great movie until your blood pressure drops back down to normal. We are all here because of our common respect for audio/video pleasure. Sometimes we just need to respect each other. 
I personally use Monoprice speaker wire, but if anyone in my neck of the woods has the hundred thousand dollar bleeding edge dream system with sparkling bling bling between their amp and speaker please invite me over for a movie. I will be respectful, appreciative, and I'll bring the snacks.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

lcaillo said:


> If someone who believes that they hear differences in cables wants to do blind testing they can. Most do not and are satisfied with their subjective assessments. We have no reason to believe that because we think they would fail to identify the differences under blind testing that those people would be interested in subjecting themselves to such tests. Their assumptions and perceptual context simply do not prioritize that type of listening test. Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant. It is a personal preference. You are welcome to your opinion on that preference, but you will have to be respectful in stating your different perspective.
> 
> That's how we do things at Home Theater Shack.



Correct, most do not and yet they are here at boards like this 'dispensing their brand of wisdom'. The only problem is it is not wisdom, it is not hard won experience. It is cable roulette with zero consistency or controls in place. It is a FAITH based approach. 

I can't agree with *Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant*. I have personally seen people that THINK they know what they are talking about convince someone they needed to purchase a $2-3K Sunfire TGA 5XXX series amp to drive their RTi A(9 or 12's forget which). The person had a high end Pio SC AVR and a relatively small room. The OP didn't hear any difference. Their next suggestion? Get $300+ cables. A few thousand dollars later is not irrelevant. 

Faith and belief had no business in the recommendations. Solid and basic science did how ever. Let me know if you want the link to the thread.


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

Ears are the farthest thing from an accurate 'test instrument'.



Read more: speaker cables question- go expensive or hardware store wire? - Page 10 - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com 

I beleive everyone hears differently, and sees differently for that matter. If it were not so then there would only be one setup that makes everyone happy, and this forum wouldn't exist. Listen to different components and find your happy cost-quality medium and enjoy, don't try to quantify it to others, state your experience and let it be. If you make decisions using strickly using math and measurements you are missing the point.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

Andre said:


> I beleive everyone hears differently, and sees differently for that matter. If it were not so then there would only be one setup that makes everyone happy, and this forum wouldn't exist. Listen to different components and find your happy cost-quality medium and enjoy, don't try to quantify it to others, state your experience and let it be. If you make decisions using strickly using math and measurements you are missing the point.


Which is why people go speaker shopping. I have never in 24 years of doing this ever took someone cable shopping. No one is going to debate that one speaker can sound unlike another. I've yet to see a dedicated audio store where they have an A/B rig for changing cables.


----------



## peterselby7 (Nov 29, 2008)

It seems I have been incorrectly quoted several times on this thread.

For the record, I said; "But what about dielectric resistance causing insertion loss? I'm sure some will claim this is inaudible too?"

The dielectric causes resistance on the conductor. Its a scientific fact. Whether its audible or not I leave up to you to do your own testing and draw your own conclusions. (if you are objective; you can do your own testing and see if it matters to you, for your ears on your system; because it may not make any difference in your particular situation) This is always a possibility in any kind of testing.

But, even if you cannot hear a difference does not mean that it cannot be heard by others or on other systems or equipment. Possibly the stereo system is not capable of the resolution necessary to hear the phenomenon (I'm not speaking to anyone in particular). 

I did blind testing with 2 other listeners and our accuracy was over 90% proving (to us at least) that music did sound better without the insulation and the additional insertion loss that it causes. We didn't find much of anything else to merit spending money on expensive wires. So my opinion is that the original poster should use solid core romex house wire for speaker cable. This is what I use. I've done plenty of testing (blind and measurements too) to convince myself that its as good as anything available. The only twist I would add into it is that it can sound better with no insulation on the wire. But this is dangerous and not practical. 

Some of you will disagree. I'm not interested in convincing anyone of what I simply wanted to learn for myself. That's all this was for me, an experiment. I was curious if there was any real merit to cables at all. 

The only thing I found that made much of a difference across the board was the removal of the insulation. Again, this was just based on my own experiments and blind testing, your results may vary according to what playback equipment you use for the blind tests and who's ears are involved.


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

I have. It was a comparison between "radio shack" wire and those from a company called "Streetwire". They talked allot of tech in the end I didn't hear a noticeable difference, others must have since the cables were selling, or it could be just "Bling", this was years ago and the store is now gone. I have also asked and had a bored salesman change out a power cable for a mark levinson amp to see if the $750 "accessory" that comes packed in a wooden crate made a difference. It didn't to me, he seemed to think so. 

Point is, it one of those issues where you will not find a consensus, the audio equivalent of discussing religion.


----------



## peterselby7 (Nov 29, 2008)

jinjuku said:


> Which is why people go speaker shopping. I have never in 24 years of doing this ever took someone cable shopping. No one is going to debate that one speaker can sound unlike another. I've yet to see a dedicated audio store where they have an A/B rig for changing cables.


I agree, compared to speakers, cables are a bit of a waste of time (IMO). The speakers are and probably always will be the weakest link.


----------



## jackfish (Dec 27, 2006)

$40 Dayton SCP-6 speaker cable certainly looks good and is competently constructed. So, there may be other desired attributes than just sound quality. This cable doesn't sound any different than the good quality 14 gauge bare-end wire I was previously using, but it looks nicer and the banana plugs make installation easier.


----------



## jinjuku (Mar 23, 2007)

peterselby7 said:


> I agree, compared to speakers, cables are a bit of a waste of time (IMO). The speakers are and probably always will be the weakest link.


Quite true. I am running some Statements. I would say w/o reservation one of the best DIY designs out there that I would most likely have to spend north of $10K to acquire something I found better. 

It still isn't worth adding $300 cables nor $2K-$3K of amp to them. It would have to be better speakers. 

As a matter of fact I have a pair of EXP2's from MIT. Market on them is $279. I have a system that _*IS*_ high resolution. Not just enough, but IS high resolution. The standing offer is come and listen to some almost $300 cables vs some $10 cables. You come in cold and a/b them 10 times. Pick the 'audiophile' cable 9 out of 10 and they are yours.


----------



## Gregr (Nov 2, 2010)

Hi,

I'll just throw in my understanding of Zobel. It is my understanding any time there is movement in electric circuit that change is measured in several ways but inductance is a result of change as well. In the speaker box changes in current, voltage and voice coil motion is controlled with resister and capacitor run in parallel just before the driver the effect is to reestablish speaker impedance by neutralizing inductance. 

Couldn't the same be said of speaker cable. the MIT zobel neutralizes inductance. I have MIT cables EXP1's I don't know much about the box I read it is a six pole network. are these six different impedance settings. I know there are IC boards, caps, resisters, diodes. My box is sealed but I've looked at some of the shotgun network boxes.

I really like my MIT cables. I brought them to a friends house on night and plugged them into his DCM Time Window speakers and they sounded lousy. They were out of phase and muffled. I unplugged them immediately before they picked up any bad habits. 

They have been in my system for 4yrs now and sound fantastic. They were a great buy on eBay. I am glad I bought them.

Greg


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Several posts have been removed. I will be monitoring the thread very carefully and it will be closed if there continue to be posts that are off topic and focus on the behavior or opinions of others.

State your opinion on the original topic, state your experience relating to that topic, state the facts as you know them, and discuss those statements in a civil and respectful manner. You do not have to agree with others to remain civil. 

From the rules:

*We can not emphasize enough the importance of keeping the bickering, arguing, flaming, bashing... "and things like these" ... away from here. Provoking and eliciting threads, posts and links that might create issues are also prohibited. If you and another member (or members) have issues with one another, DO NOT bring those issues to this forum. It will absolutely NOT be tolerated.

Personal attacks of any nature are strictly prohibited. These forums are no place for negativity of any kind. We are here to discuss home theater, audio and video related topics. Let's make friends and have fun while doing so... and be different than the typical home theater forum.

Please be polite, courteous and respectful of other members, as well as all products and services discussed. There is no need to be condescending or overly critical, not everyone will be as smart as the next person. If you can help, please do so, but remember, we all start learning somewhere and none of us are perfect. If you are the home theater, audio or video aficionado king daddy audiophile, we are glad to have you around, but please be humble and considerate to those of less fortunate knowledge. If you call a member dumb, stupid or an idiot (or anything resembling those) you will be on your way to being banned. Something to remember is unless we are the smartest human being on the planet, there is always going to be someone smarter than us... and we are always going to be "less" smart than at least a few others. Therefore, if you just absolutely must call someone stupid, consider looking in the mirror and go at it all you want... but keep it off this forum.

We simply can not over emphasize enough the importance of any member, under any circumstances, "publicly" reproaching our staff by calling our status or our decisions into question... in any form or fashion. If you want to be banned, this is the quickest way.*

Read more: Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com - Forum Rules


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

By far, the general concensus of most here at HTS is that basic wire is sufficient and expensive speaker wire is not going to result in improvements in performance.

There are also many who believe that there is value in expensive cabling and who experience a difference in sound.

We will be respectful of those experiences and opinions, whether one believes them to be "real" or the result of placebo or expectation.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

lcaillo said:


> I would assume that he means the portion of attenuation due to dielectric loss. I would argue that dielectric loss is not generally significant at audio frequencies. It is certainly a concern at RF frequencies, but not audio.


Here is an article that tries to examine di electric loss:

http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/dielectric-absorption-in-cables-debunked


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

GranteedEV said:


> Here is an article that tries to examine di electric loss:
> 
> http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/dielectric-absorption-in-cables-debunked


Good article, I studied electronic a loooong time lddude:ago and all of this make sence.


----------



## informel (Jun 21, 2011)

Gregr said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'll just throw in my understanding of Zobel. It is my understanding any time there is movement in electric circuit that change is measured in several ways but inductance is a result of change as well. In the speaker box changes in current, voltage and voice coil motion is controlled with resister and capacitor run in parallel just before the driver the effect is to reestablish speaker impedance by neutralizing inductance.
> 
> ...


There was already an answer here about the Zobel and other boxes, good amp (even average amp) should have no problem driving well design speakers.

The important thing is to be happy with your purchase


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

lcaillo said:


> By far, the general concensus of most here at HTS is that basic wire is sufficient and expensive speaker wire is not going to result in improvements in performance.
> 
> There are also many who believe that there is value in expensive cabling and who experience a difference in sound.
> 
> We will be respectful of those experiences and opinions, whether one believes them to be "real" or the result of placebo or expectation.


In my experience, I have found that there are differences in all cables, regardless of price. I have listened through expensive cables that I didn't care for, they now live in a box in my closet. I need to get rid of some of these cables, and speakers, and other gear...

There are plenty of inexpensive cables to try, and I encourage people that are curious about this to experiment.


----------

