I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

[SY]

chemistry/alchymia and physicks/metaphysics

Not a stoned philosopher, but I do know a wee amount about plasticizers in vinyl. I'm not interested in getting into crank arguments.

[ThorstenL]

Konnichiwa,

Originally posted by SY


Not a stoned philosopher,

Me iz. Both stoned (I hope) and one who does Philae Sophia (but don't tell my fiancee).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SY
[B]
but I do know a wee amount about plasticizers in vinyl.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SY
[B]

So, in your estimation the thing that makes copper green is da plasticisers? So why is the copper green in red, brown, blue or black sheath after a few years?

Sayonara.

(PS, in case it is not clear, we are talking mains cable....

[SY]

The chemistry doesn't care if it's mains or speakers- or, for that matter, lying on the shelf. Yes, opaque colored cables (untinned) do tarnish, but at a much slower rate than transparent. Anyone with some lamp cord in clear and opaque insulation of similar age that's been lying about the garage can confirm this.

Plasticizers, nucleators, and those funny additives that prevent insulation discoloration during the extrusion process make clear vinyl formulations a more complex brew than the opaque stuff.

[The Paulinator]

My recommendation for the highest quality speaker wire would...... of course..... be none other than daisy-chained Sega Genesis controllers. I find that the 'C' button provides just the right amount of resistance to nullify any problems caused by sunspots. And make sure you suspend the cables from little poles every 3 feet or so, so they don't have to go up too far to get to the speaker connection, that way the electrons won't have to go uphill. And as we all know, electrons going uphill is one of the major causes of muddy midbass.

If the highs seem a bit harsh, you can spray about half a can of that green Edge shaving gel on the binding posts (you should probably put down a paper towel to catch the drips), this prevents any possibility of overload from the flux capacitor (we all know what a new flux capacitor runs these days).

Finally, to really get the most from your music, you want to avoid any reflections from your body. There are two ways to prevent this:

a: before a litening session, wrap yourself in Dacron or, better yet, Acousta-Stuf.

b: (this is my preferred method) Suspend yourself from the ceiling using 12 pound test fishing line (anything heavier causes a crazy amount of reflections) so that you are parallel with the floor in a lying-down position, facing the speakers. Be ready because the fishing line will break periodically and you'll need to catch yourself.

Oh, and one other thing, if you are concerned that your equipment is rated at only 500dB stereo separation, and you want to increase that, simply build a wall down the center of your living room, with one speaker on each side. Then start the music and press your nose to the edge of the wall. (You could use headphones to get this same effect, but who has time for that?)

I just thought I would mention these helpful tips to those of you with the nice cables, CD demagnetizers, and those 600$ speaker wire burn-in machines.

[janneman]

Paulinator,

I wish you would stop pushing these flux capacitors. We all know this is a plot from the Far East to migitate the excess capacity in, err, capacity. The story that they are required to transpose the radiative induction of the connector-cable junction is without any scientific basis. Moreover, BDT has failed to prove any audible differences between installations with or without flux capacitance. Lets keep this serious, OK?


Jan Didden

[jh6you]

When the connection points of the speaker cable starts being oxidized, the sound might come like an "antique" feeling.

JH

[AKSA]

You know, this is a very civilized thread.....

Fact is, the very controversial nature of this topic merely highlights the moral outrage people feel when they are 'forced' to shell out megabucks for 'recommended' cables and interconnects. They eventually buy because the heresay subjectives and the inevitable fad and fashion of audio (like all technologies, even weapons manufacture) is a powerful tide to resist, and most of the population are followers, not leaders.

The truth is many, many people with deep pockets really need others, particularly reviewers, to assure them that the product is good before they buy. The reviewers, bless them, are ever mindful of the advertizing dollar - and this economic observation takes us full circle to the manufacturer and his perception of customer need. Question: whom do we blame for this?

I say (and with some circumspection!) the consumer.......

That said, I like to pursue a middle course, and use wire which I test and listen to carefully which normally costs very little. And I can't say what!

Cheers,

Hugh

[SY]

Paulinator, I would beg to differ, X-Box all the way. Daisy chain dozens of them or you're just listening to sludge. The more X-Box controllers, the better (for my stock portfolio).

[IanHarvey]

Originally posted by Kuei Yang Wang

That is a first order effect evaluation using steady state, single frequency signals

...

Anyway, ahat does that tell us about the effects on using a pseudo randon, noise type signal

Fortunately, that's a question mathematicians have pondered for many years.

It turns out that any linear and time-invariant transformation on a signal can be represented exactly by, in effect, measurement of the frequency and phase response of the system.

Time-invariant simply means that the transformation applied to the signal is independent of the time at which it arrived. Linear, in this context, means that the result of the transformation applied to the sum of two signals is the same as the sum of the transformation applied to the signals individually.

This is significant because the effect of (ideal) inductors, capacitors, resistors, and all sorts of other electromagnetic and mechanical systems are time-invariant and linear. Combining any set of these effects results in a transformation which itself is still linear (& time-invariant).

In other words, if a signal is changed in a way which isn't shown up in the frequency/phase response, any mathematical modelling of it must contain some non-linearity or non-time-invariance. In turn, this means that claims of "unmeasurable" signal degradations really need some explanation of where the non-linearity (or non-time-invariance) comes from.

Cheers
IH

[MBK]

Originally posted by IanHarvey


In other words, if a signal is changed in a way which isn't shown up in the frequency/phase response, any mathematical modelling of it must contain some non-linearity or non-time-invariance. In turn, this means that claims of "unmeasurable" signal degradations really need some explanation of where the non-linearity (or non-time-invariance) comes from.

Ummm... maybe physical (real) resistors, capacitors, inductors etc., are not as linear and time invariant as ideal ones?

Ooops, sorry I just said that