diyAudio Forums Archive

diyAudio Forums Archive > Top > Other Stuff > Everything Else

Pages: [1] 2

Silver Wire - Click HERE for Original Thread

vdi_nenna

I found a place in Allentown, PA called Hand-Made Electronics. They have silver wire in more gauges then I've seen anywhere. Also many other parts.

Gauge Part No. Dia.-Inch/mm Price,1ft

Flat 12-028-100 .040" x .005" .75
14 12-028-14 .064/1.6mm 3.95
16 12-028-16 .051/1.3mm 2.75
18 12-028-18 .040/1mm 2.25
20 12-028-20 .032/.8mm 1.95
22 12-028-22 .025/.65mm 1.10
24 12-028-24 .020/.5mm .90
26 12-028-26 .016/.4mm .90
28 12-028-28 .013/.33mm .80
30 12-028-30 .010/.25mm .80

http://www.hndme.com/

Eric

I recently purchased 220 feet of 30 ga 0.9999 fine silver wire from <a href ="http://mjsa.polygon.net/~10527">Myron Toback</a> for $25 ($0.10 per foot) delivered (web page not functional, phoned in my order) and 200 feet of 28 ga teflon tubing from <a href="http://www.mcmaster.com">McMaster-Carr</a> for $15 ($0.06 per foot) delivered.

I'm not connected to either of these places, just trying to save some money...

vdi_nenna

Yeah, that's true, but can you find 14 awg? 30 AWG is so thin. I decided not to sit and add tubing to a bundle of wire then twist and twist. A few feet of the proper guage may do the trick to wire up a board or make a set of interconnects. Still cheaper than buying silver cables already made up too.

I personally don't think that buying 220 ft of 30 awg silver wire and making bundles to create larger guages is such a great savings in time, unless the application calls for it.

Eric

True, I didn't price 14ga wire from them, just comparing based on the 30ga I used for interconnects. I don't think I'd want to try to thread that much fine wire through tubing to braid it to a sufficient gauge to use as speaker wire either! I had enough of a hard time making my ICs!

Just wanted to help people be able to shop around... I wasn't looking to cause any ill feelings!

GRollins

Actually, I use Teflon insulated, single strand, twisted pair for interconnect. It's about 30 or 34 gauge. Yes, it's delicate, but it sounds simply wonderful and I didn't have to pull it through anything at all; it's just simple twisted pair. I've always meant to try it with a copper braid shield, but not from any real problem with noise or hum...just something I wanted to try. One of the reasons I haven't been too hot to shield it is that I can argue that the extra capacitance from the braid would do more harm than good--especially since I don't need it.
One other thing I've been meaning to try is a shield using the 'guard' circuit discussed in Horowitz and Hill. Kinda intriguing.
For silver wire without the hassle, try:
http://www.a-msystems.com/physiolog...dsilverwire.asp
They sell Teflon coated silver in a number of guages.
I've got a note to myself that surfaces on my desk periodically, something to the effect to try http://www.medicalbuyer.com. I'll try to verify the address and whether they actually have Teflon coated silver wire.
My feeling has always been that silver is too chemically reactive to leave lying about without a good coating of something. Merely pulling it through a sleeve will insulate it electrically, but will do little to protect it chemically. Silver tarnishes easily (silver sulfide, if memory serves, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was also some silver chloride in there somewhere), and I'm not so sure how silver compounds sound. I'd just as soon let someone else do the Teflon at the factory whilst the wire is clean, so it stays that way. The stuff I've got is still pretty after fifteen years or so; not at all tarnished.
For speaker wire...I dunno. The idea of making a braided Litz wire occurred to me years ago, but it did seem like a fair amount of work. But for interconnect, you can't beat the sound for the price.

Grey

Arthur-itis

quote:

found a place in Allentown, PA called Hand-Made Electronics. They have silver wire in more gauges then I've seen anywhere. Also many other parts.

Gauge Part No. Dia.-Inch/mm Price,1ft

Flat 12-028-100 .040" x .005" .75
14 12-028-14 .064/1.6mm 3.95
16 12-028-16 .051/1.3mm 2.75
18 12-028-18 .040/1mm 2.25
20 12-028-20 .032/.8mm 1.95
22 12-028-22 .025/.65mm 1.10
24 12-028-24 .020/.5mm .90
26 12-028-26 .016/.4mm .90
28 12-028-28 .013/.33mm .80
30 12-028-30 .010/.25mm .80

I'm wondering why you seem to think that silver wire is important?

It doesn't do anything differently or better than normal copper wire. True, there is a slight improvement in conductivity, but you can just go to a bigger AWG in copper and that' difference is gone.

12AWG copper wire for 23-25 cents per foot makes much more sense than wasting money for differences that don't exist.

tom1356

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur-itis

I'm wondering why you seem to think that silver wire is important?

It doesn't do anything differently or better than normal copper wire.

What is your experience with silver wire?

I have been using 30 AWG .9999, insulated with nothing but pure wool tubing, as interconects for a while now. No trouble with tarnish yet. Silver tarnish is second only to silver in conductivity so I'm not too worried about it. Silver sounds far better than copper in every application I have tried it in and that has been a lot.
DIY makes it easy and cheap to try it in your system.
You will be surprised.

badman

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur-itis

I'm wondering why you seem to think that silver wire is important?

It doesn't do anything differently or better than normal copper wire. True, there is a slight improvement in conductivity, but you can just go to a bigger AWG in copper and that' difference is gone.

12AWG copper wire for 23-25 cents per foot makes much more sense than wasting money for differences that don't exist.

I disagree. I've found silver wire to sound significantly different from copper, and different types of copper or sound different as well. Try comparing solid core ETP copper to OCC copper and you'll see the difference, if you're open to it. OCC is much more fast and open, and can be much brighter, if not controlled.

I do agree with you- it does often wind up being a waste of money, as only the best silver is really a great sounding material, and very high quality copper can be had mega-cheap. Most people make due with poor quality silver, as it's easy to find and affordable (relatively)

Magura

quote:

Originally posted by badman

I disagree. I've found silver wire to sound significantly different from copper, and different types of copper or sound different as well. Try comparing solid core ETP copper to OCC copper and you'll see the difference, if you're open to it. OCC is much more fast and open, and can be much brighter, if not controlled.

I do agree with you- it does often wind up being a waste of money, as only the best silver is really a great sounding material, and very high quality copper can be had mega-cheap. Most people make due with poor quality silver, as it's easy to find and affordable (relatively)

2 comments for this:

1) read the article about speaker cables written by Nelson Pass ( www.passdiy.com )

2) Your second statement about good silver being hard to find and expensive is downright wrong. You can get 4 or 5 nines pure (can't remember) silver for less than 1 usd per gram, pretty much anywhere, make that wire, sheet or tube.

Magura:)

ashok

Would anyone know where I can buy OFC hook up wire , teflon insulated if possible.
Thanks,
Ashok.

Mr Evil

quote:

Originally posted by tom1356
...Silver tarnish is second only to silver in conductivity so I'm not too worried about it...

Silver oxide is conductive. Silver sulphide on the other hand, is most definitely not. It's a problem in places with pollution, which means just about anywhere in the western world unfortunately, particularly in cities. To make it worse, it forms more easily on electrical contacts than on non-conducting metal, suggesting that bare silver connectors would be a bad idea for reliability, although wire should suffer no serious ill effects I suppose.

ashok

I found several places with OFC hook up wire.
Made the mistake of not Googling earlier.
Cheers.

Prune

Personally my ear isn't good enough to easily hear differences between cables, but one person has told me that the temper of the silver is more important than the purity (bending messes up the crystalline structure of harder tempers more, or something like that). To this add the fact that triple-nines (i.e. fine) silver is much cheaper than higher purities since all jewellers use it, and I think that dead-soft temper fine silver is the best value if you want a fancy cable. I'm quite happy with my teflon/silver DIY interconnects. As far as gauge, 28 or even 30 is sufficient for line-level signals such as interconnects and hookups (except power amp hookups beyond the first stage).

What gauge is needed for speaker cables, though? Is 18 enough?

Prune

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Evil

Silver oxide is conductive. Silver sulphide on the other hand, is most definitely not.

I've never seen silver sulphide on silver objects. I've only seen sterling silver get sulphur tarnishing, but that's the copper reacting with sulphur, not the silver. Fine silver mostly forms oxides, unless you handle it too much with bare hands.

Arthur-itis

quote:

You say silver sounds better based on what? In double blind comparisons it's alleged superiority disappears.

I've had occasion to compare many different types of interconnects and found no differences when I didn't know which I was listening to and nobody else has to my knowldege.

I see no reason to spend more on wire when I could spend it on music.[COLOR=royalblue]

Prune

quote:

I see no reason to spend more on wire when I could spend it on music.

a) It's simply cool. :cool: That's why I'd never get an Amerikhan car, regardless of its performance. They are simply not cool. :p

b) In a high enough resolution equipment (i.e. as you upgrade other things in the signal path), multiple differences below threshold of perceptibility can add up to a noticeable effect, especially as one's critical ear improves.

Usually I'm arguing the other side, but that's because it seems to be overwhelmingly supported here, and I'm just trying to balance out by being a devil's advocate. :devily:

tom1356

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur-itis

You say silver sounds better based on what? In double blind comparisons it's alleged superiority disappears.

I've had occasion to compare many different types of interconnects and found no differences when I didn't know which I was listening to and nobody else has to my knowldege.

I see no reason to spend more on wire when I could spend it on music.[COLOR=royalblue]

I wont bother to ask you to reference the DBT's you cite.
If you can't hear the difference than you should keep what you have now. That certainly doesn't mean there is no difference.
Silver wire can be a lot less than most commercial copper wires if you are willing to DIY.
I'm willing to bet my IC are less costly than yours.
When you get more music from each recording you will get better value and enjoyment from your music.

badman

quote:

Originally posted by Magura

2 comments for this:

1) read the article about speaker cables written by Nelson Pass ( www.passdiy.com )

2) Your second statement about good silver being hard to find and expensive is downright wrong. You can get 4 or 5 nines pure (can't remember) silver for less than 1 usd per gram, pretty much anywhere, make that wire, sheet or tube.

Magura:)

I haven't read the pass article, but I will soon. For now, I'd just like to reply to 2). I didn't cite purity. I find that the only silvers that really sound good are expensive, pre-insulated silvers. Not gouge my eyes out and pee in the sockets expensive, but significantly more costly than commodity jewelers silver. I do find that the temper of silver is extremely important, softer is better.

Prune

Pre-insulated? That's strange; bare silver should be better as air is a better dielectric than any solid you coat the wire with.

Arthur-itis

quote:

The DBT's were my own plus the expieriences of others.

The fact that nobody who has done a DBT of wire has ever heard any difference tells me that it is likely to be a fuitless search for difference.

Since there is no evidence other than anecdote that copper wire is not as good as it can get in terms of conducting the signal to the device, I beleive I'm getting all the music and all the value that 's possible to get.

YMMV

john curl

Just to offer a little personal experience to this: Silver works great, IF it is pure and is broken in before installation. IF NOT, it may not be worth your while.

badman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
Pre-insulated? That's strange; bare silver should be better as air is a better dielectric than any solid you coat the wire with.

Air dielectric is great... except... it doesn't sound good. The conductors will sulfidize and oxidize, the latter being less problematic. This can be reduced by sealing the ends of the tube, if you're using an 'air tube'. But I've never found air dielectrics to be practical or sound very good.

Prune

Silver doesn't "sulfidize" under normal conditions. The tarnishing sulfides you often see on silver objects is due to the copper content in sterling silver reacting with sulfur. Fine silver or better mainly oxidizes.

In any case, the dielectric that most matters is that between the two conductors, as that's what affects the capacitance. In my case (I'm using the Venhaus recipe), most of that is air, especially if you use a very thin teflon tube like I did. On the outside I wrapped with three layers of teflon tape, and I'm certain that it will take years for any appreciable oxidation to form.

Getting uninsulated silver makes sense because of cost. You think air sounds bad vs teflon? I bet that you cannot in a blind test hear the difference between teflon-coated silver wire vs. bare one in the same cable configuration. And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is - $200 says you can't do it. If you happen to visit the NorthWest, bring cables and call me up.

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
I bet that you cannot in a blind test hear the difference between teflon-coated silver wire vs. bare one in the same cable configuration.

Let's say you can't tell the differenc in DBT, but you can tell the difference when doing it in your usual way of listening. Then what, how good is your bet? ;)

Prune

As long as he doesn't know which cable is actually plugged in, my bet is good. Otherwise what's the point of the bet -- if he can see which cable is being used, obviously the outcome is predetermined -- he knows which one it is and will say so (even if he didn't hear a difference) to get the money.

Peter Daniel

I was rather asking what such bet proves; as it really proves nothing to me. We are not listening to cables under DBT conditions normally, but in the comfort of our listenig chair. I don't care if DBT shows the difference or not, as long as I perceive such difference under other circumstances I'll be using silver wires, as they sound better (to me).

BTW, I had some silver wire which sounded considerably worse than a regular magnet wire (even 2" of it, in an amp). So what I see, doesn't always determine the outcome for my preferrences.

Arthur-itis

quote:

Let's say you can't tell the differenc in DBT, but you can tell the difference when doing it in your usual way of listening. Then what, how good is your bet?

That would be a sucker bet. Sighted non-bias controlled listening tells you nothing about actual differences, since they exist in the eyes of the beholder.

Real difference is discernible with the ears and only with the ears.

analog_sa

quote:

I had some silver wire which sounded considerably worse than a regular magnet wire

Me too. The vendor claimed 5N and very probably that's what it is but all the same it sucks big time no matter how much broken in. The silver hookup wire from DH labs otoh sounds very nice.

badman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
Silver doesn't "sulfidize" under normal conditions. The tarnishing sulfides you often see on silver objects is due to the copper content in sterling silver reacting with sulfur. Fine silver or better mainly oxidizes.

In any case, the dielectric that most matters is that between the two conductors, as that's what affects the capacitance. In my case (I'm using the Venhaus recipe), most of that is air, especially if you use a very thin teflon tube like I did. On the outside I wrapped with three layers of teflon tape, and I'm certain that it will take years for any appreciable oxidation to form.

Getting uninsulated silver makes sense because of cost. You think air sounds bad vs teflon? I bet that you cannot in a blind test hear the difference between teflon-coated silver wire vs. bare one in the same cable configuration. And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is - $200 says you can't do it. If you happen to visit the NorthWest, bring cables and call me up.

Silver does pick up sulfides out of the air, you get more or less of that dependent upon air quality.

I'm not much of a gambler. I can tell the difference between different sorts of silver in my rig, with my listening test methodology, I don't use blind testing, as it is a headache and a half. I find that it's much better, when trying variants such as insulated/non-insulated conductors and whatnot with the same base design, that I relax, do a few swaps casually over the course of a week or two, and note what I hear, then see if my beta-testers come up with similar conclusions. That's plenty of confirmation, as far as I'm concerned, and the two results have a high occurrence of coincidence.

Cables are a pain in the ***, and the devil's in the details.

analog_sa

quote:

That's plenty of confirmation, as far as I'm concerned

Fair enough. But imagine you couldn't hear absolutely no difference between various insulators or conductors. And not even between silver and copper. Or between capacitors, resistors and even whole units such as amps and cd players.

Wouldn't you then be very suspicious of any super hearing abilities claims. I know i would. And i would insist on proof. And the more difficult the proof would be to furnish, the more comfortable i would feel in my denial. I'd also become part of a support group which debunks audio myths.

Prune

Them's fightin' words, analog_sa! :fight:

Turning your argument around, if I was so full of myself as to think I had superior hearing to all those pesky objectivists, then I too might fancy that I could discern all sorts of fine details and aural signatures of resistors and wire. The biggest fool is the man that fools himself.

I think it's quite telling that the tactic you choose was to attack my hearing.

john curl

Prune, I disagree. My favorate resistor costs 10 cents American, can't you afford that much? The important thing about silver wire is that it sounds different than copper wire. It just does. Tough nuts!

analog_sa

quote:

the tactic you choose was to attack my hearing

Certainly not yours. You seem to be genuinely interested and to keep an open mind. Or have i misinterpreted your words?

quote:

b) In a high enough resolution equipment (i.e. as you upgrade other things in the signal path), multiple differences below threshold of perceptibility can add up to a noticeable effect, especially as one's critical ear improves.

Listening is not easy. It requires patience and concentration. Some of the objectivists i know won't be caught dead listening to cables, let alone owing silver wire.

tom1356

quote:

Originally posted by john curl
Prune, I disagree. My favorate resistor costs 10 cents American, can't you afford that much?...

Please elaborate...

john curl

We have found that Resista resistors work very well for even the highest level audio electronics.

tom1356

quote:

Originally posted by john curl
We have found that Resista resistors work very well for even the highest level audio electronics.

Thank you John.

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Daniel
I was rather asking what such bet proves; as it really proves nothing to me. We are not listening to cables under DBT conditions normally, but in the comfort of our listenig chair. I don't care if DBT shows the difference or not, as long as I perceive such difference under other circumstances I'll be using silver wires, as they sound better (to me).

Here! Here! Or should that be "Hear! Hear!"? :)

se

badman

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy

Here! Here! Or should that be "Hear! Hear!"? :)

se

YESSS!!! Now Eddy's in on the game! The fun begins brothers!

Prune

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Here! Here! Or should that be "Hear! Hear!"? :)
se

Well, if a placebo makes it subjectively sound better, why not? I'm not arguing with that, as I've said before. I'm merely arguing that the source of some of these differences is psychological bias as opposed to auditory percetion. This matters because not everyone wants to spend money on placebos.

quote:

Originally posted by badman
YESSS!!! Now Eddy's in on the game! The fun begins brothers!

I'll :drink: to that. *

* And I don't even like beer.

jneutron

quote:

Originally posted by badman
YESSS!!! Now Eddy's in on the game! The fun begins brothers!

Great..there goes the neighborhood..

Cheers, John

Jocko Homo

You realise that they are now made by Draloric. Something else for us to angst over...............

Jocko

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
Well, if a placebo makes it subjectively sound better, why not? I'm not arguing with that, as I've said before. I'm merely arguing that the source of some of these differences is psychological bias as opposed to auditory percetion.

I'm sure some are as well. But how exactly will you know which are and which aren't? A null result in a blind test isn't necessarily absolute proof that the differences are psycholigical in nature. All you can conclude is that an actual audible difference has yet to be demonstrated. Beyond that all you can go by is your gut feeling as to how likely you feel it is that there are no actual audible differences.

quote:

This matters because not everyone wants to spend money on placebos.

Fine.

But what do these people expect? That every cable, tweak, etc. out there be put through a battery of blind tests across a large section of the population?

Ain't gonna happen unless these people decide to get together and start doing the research themelves.

Until then, the way I see it, these people are adults who should be able to think for themsleves and make their purchasing decisions accordingly.

quote:

I'll :drink: to that. *

* And I don't even like beer.

*bbrrruuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrp!* 'Scuse me. :)

se

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by jneutron
Great..there goes the neighborhood..

Neighborhood? I thought we were an autonomous collective? :)

se

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy

I thought we were an autonomous collective? :)

se

"Come and see the violence inherent in the system! I'm being supressed!"

jneutron

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Neighborhood? I thought we were an autonomous collective? :)se

Autonomous collective????

That would mean..yes.....resistors are futile....

Hitten sanfran next week...dere's a hot air balloon in Napa Valley with my name on it..and a drop top....gonna have some fun..

Cheers, John

PS..Sy: don't look up...I'll try to keep my breakfast with me..but, no hard promises..

Mr Evil

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy
...A null result in a blind test isn't necessarily absolute proof that the differences are psycholigical in nature. All you can conclude is that an actual audible difference has yet to be demonstrated. Beyond that all you can go by is your gut feeling as to how likely you feel it is that there are no actual audible differences...

If you take that stance, then it starts to become a religion, not science. There is no such thing as absolute, irrevocable proof, only weight of evidence for and against. A null result from a double-blind test is evidence against, and in the absence of evidence for, it is logical to assume, for the moment, that there is no audible difference.

Psychology is powerful; it can change the entire nature of the universe, let alone a small change in sound.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy
...Until then, the way I see it, these people are adults who should be able to think for themsleves and make their purchasing decisions accordingly...

Of course people can make up their own minds. I myself buy some stuff based on subjective listening because I can't possibly research and test everything, but what annoys me is that a few people seem to think that their senses are some sort of perfect measuring devices, capable of only detecting what is really there, and then they go any try to persuade everyone else that what they hear is most definitely due to a real physical effect, no matter what, and anyone who dares to contradict them must have cloth ears. It's totally irrational and in my opinion rather harmful to progress.

I know full well how unreliable human senses are, and so I will not assume that anything I see or hear is real unless I also have some other way of measuring it, otherwise I would go around painting all the rooms white in the assumption that it really did make them bigger, not just the appearance of bigger!

Prune

Mr Evil, that's the best post I've ever read on this forum.

Eric

In general, I do agree with Mr Evil on this one. Human senses are somewhat unreliable and various psychological factors are also at work here indicating that our sense are not infallible. Despite this, we continue to trust these senses...

Specifically, I built some silver ICs and found their sound to be an improvement over the Monster ICs that I was using before. Will everyone hear the same difference? Probably not. Are my ears "golden"? Clearly not. But I was pleased with the results, so I continue to use my homemade ICs. I have tried other tweaks only to hear no differences. These changes were discarded...

That said, I do have one technical objection to the science vs. religion argument:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Evil

A null result from a double-blind test is evidence against...

Scientifically speaking, it is impossible to prove a negative. To use a religious analogy: Your failure to detect the presence of a soul does does not constitute scientific evidence that one has no soul ;)

<flamesuiton>

Ken L

quote:

Originally posted by Eric
Specifically, I built some silver ICs and found their sound to be an improvement over the Monster ICs that I was using before.

I started using silve interconnects several years ago. A while back, I moved my system around due to a house renevotation. After one move, I realized I had lost some detail and magic. Played around with speaker positioning, etc. No matter what I did, it didn't sound as good as it had.

As I looked around more carefully, I realized I had put a pair of silver interconnects on the CD Player I don't use much instead of the player I was using for a source.

Swapped em around and everything was as it should be.

Easy to hear? Yep.

Will it happen in every system? No.

Do I have "Golden Ears" Absolutely not, can't hear much over 7 or 8K

Was I trying to persuade myself of _anything_? Nope, just wanted the detail back.

Cabling is very system dependent under the best of circumstances. I also think it is a lot easier to discern on interconnects.

Regards

Ken L

Prune

quote:

can't hear much over 7 or 8K

Arthur-itis

quote:

Ken L

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur-itis
Most likely what happened has to with oxidization that was removed by swapping the cables. It was most likely a real improvement but unrelated to silver.

Disagree.

You're saying that in a couple of days enough oxidation occured to diminish the sound and then plugging RCA cables in removed the oxidation that only recently occurred.

My point is that I was not anticpating a change - yet after I noticed that a chang had occurred - when I swapped the cables back the detail returned.

Regards

Ken L

analog_sa

quote:

Do I have "Golden Ears" Absolutely not, can't hear much over 7 or 8K

This is way more than most objectivists are willing to hear :)

IME 'cable sound' does not require extended bandwidth to make itself obvious.

Arthur-itis

quote:

My mistake I must have missed the time involved. Such differences are well known to have happened for the reason I mentioned after long periods of time.

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by vdi_nenna
I found a place in Allentown, PA called Hand-Made Electronics. They have silver wire in more gauges then I've seen anywhere. Also many other parts.

Gauge Part No. Dia.-Inch/mm Price,1ft

Flat 12-028-100 .040" x .005" .75
14 12-028-14 .064/1.6mm 3.95
16 12-028-16 .051/1.3mm 2.75
18 12-028-18 .040/1mm 2.25
20 12-028-20 .032/.8mm 1.95
22 12-028-22 .025/.65mm 1.10
24 12-028-24 .020/.5mm .90
26 12-028-26 .016/.4mm .90
28 12-028-28 .013/.33mm .80
30 12-028-30 .010/.25mm .80

http://www.hndme.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Arthur-itis
I'm wondering why you seem to think that silver wire is important?

I'm quite puzzled why Arthur-itis thinks that originator of the thread thinks that silver wire IS important.

I checked vdi_nenna's 2 posts (in this thread) few times and I was never under the impression that he ACTUALY thinks that silver wire IS important.

Is there anything else going on here? ;)

Prune

quote:

28 12-028-28 .013/.33mm .80

80 cents a foot? From a jeweller you can get this gauge fine silver for under 10 cents a foot.

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Evil
If you take that stance, then it starts to become a religion, not science.

When I mentioned going by your gut, I wasn't referring to science, but rather that of the consumer.

quote:

There is no such thing as absolute, irrevocable proof, only weight of evidence for and against. A null result from a double-blind test is evidence against, and in the absence of evidence for, it is logical to assume, for the moment, that there is no audible difference.

I don't see such an assumption being what I would call "scientific" as such an assumption pretty much precludes any further investigation. I mean, if you're working from the assumption that there is no audible difference, why would you ever bother to investigate any further?

No, I think looking at it from the perspective that audible differences have yet to be demonstrated is the more rational and more "scientific" way to look at it.

se

sss

this thing cant be proven because is measured by humans and not test equipment .
there were millions of blind tests with the same result-no one can tell the difference ,but still those that believe that theres an audible difference (or even can hear it :)) cant be proven wrong .
i think that the guys that believe that theres a difference should buy those 10000$ cables and enjoy :D

:smash:

RHosch

My only problem with the "buy what you want and enjoy" mentality is that encouraging and supporting pseudoscience in audio (indeed, even tolerating it) is ultimately, IMO, detrimental to the pace of progress in the field. Audio is still in the dark ages, or at best is only just now emerging from it. Active speakers still have a bad stigma in most of the "audiophile" world because of all the "bad stuff" going into the signal path (as if passive components weren't just as evil). Digital processing is seen by many as evil as well, who for some reason neglect the tremendous amount of signal processing an untreated room performs. People are convinced by salesmen to spend money on cables, instead of acoustic treatments. Two channels are seen as holy, when in fact they are and always have been fundamentally limited and inaccurate. Many people are more worried about the spikes under their CD players than about the quality of their speakers. Why? Because there is money to be made. Pseudoscience sells. Gimmicks sell. And sadly, IMO, meaningful research in many companies takes a back seat for that reason. The gullibility of the masses ultimately does have an effect on all of us, in a personal way, because the equipment available to us is more expensive and more limited than it otherwise could be.

Prune

While I agree with the rest of your post,

quote:

Two channels are seen as holy, when in fact they are and always have been fundamentally limited and inaccurate.

This is 100%* wrong. You only have two ears, and it is possible to send them all directional information with only two drivers. And no, they do not have to be headphones (though binarual recordings for headphones demonstrate this). The problem is the way things are recorded -- what we have as stereo is barely more than variations in loudness to indicate direction -- and the lack of crosstalk cancellation. The crosstalk I'm talking about here is left-speaker-to-right-ear and the converse. The signal for each of the two speakers can be preprocessed so that each ear hears exactly what it's supposed to; for a (now dated) demo Google for the "stereo dipole". Processed this way binaural recordings can be played over two speakers (with known positions) with full effect. Further, theoretically it should be possible to customize the signal for each individual's HRTF, as the dummy head HRTF will somewhat differ from every person's.

* I was going to say 110% wrong, but that would have been too Amerikhan. :p

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by sss
this thing cant be proven because is measured by humans and not test equipment .
there were millions of blind tests with the same result-no one can tell the difference ,but still those that believe that theres an audible difference (or even can hear it :)) cant be proven wrong .
i think that the guys that believe that theres a difference should buy those 10000$ cables and enjoy :D

:smash:

I don't think the logic is that difficult. If you do a blind test, and no differences are detected, that means that no differences were detected. I'm not being snug here, but that's just what it says. It is NOT proof that differences do not exist.

However, if differences are detected, it means that differences DO EXIST. Note the difference between 'detected' (which leave open the existence) and 'exist' which gives a clear proof.

So blind tests that do not detect differences are non-conclusive. There is always the possibility that the differences DO exist but were not detected. So those that maintain that there actually IS a difference have a case. Plain logic reasoning.

But I must confess, that after many, many blind tests, differences are still not detected, I am doubting whether they actually exist, and the possibility, although logically there, gets more and more remote.

Jan Didden

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by janneman

But I must confess, that after many, many blind tests, differences are still not detected, I am doubting whether they actually exist, and the possibility, although logically there, gets more and more remote.

Could it be possible that the approach and present 'method' of attempting to detect those differences is simply unappropriate?

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Daniel

Could it be possible that the approach and present 'method' of attempting to detect those differences is simply unappropriate?

Yes, of course. But I cannot think of anything more to do than trying to make it as 'blind' as possible and use a setup that comes as close as possible to actual use.

There has been some discussion that the actual switches or relays used for the switch-over would introduce degradations that would suppress the differences. Its possible. But what if the used speaker cables (as an example) would suppress the differences? Does that not mean that even if there ARE differences, there is a very small chance that in a practical setup they would be audible, and the whole point becomes moot.

Jan Didden

Prune

quote:

Originally posted by janneman
So blind tests that do not detect differences are non-conclusive. There is always the possibility that the differences DO exist but were not detected. So those that maintain that there actually IS a difference have a case. Plain logic reasoning.

So blind tests that detect differences are non-conclusive. There is always the possibility that the differences DO NOT exist but were matched by the subjects by chance, coincidentally. So those that maintain that there actually MAY NOT BE a difference have a case. Plain logic reasoning.

/Yet another post by 667 -- neighbor of the beast. :devilr:

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by janneman

Yes, of course. But I cannot think of anything more to do than trying to make it as 'blind' as possible and use a setup that comes as close as possible to actual use.

There has been some discussion that the actual switches or relays used for the switch-over would introduce degradations that would suppress the differences. Its possible. But what if the used speaker cables (as an example) would suppress the differences? Does that not mean that even if there ARE differences, there is a very small chance that in a practical setup they would be audible, and the whole point becomes moot.

Jan Didden

I wouldn't expect relays and switches to be a problem here. I would rather think that the simple idea of doing it "blind" limits somehow our sensory perception, as I believe the ears are not the only sensors involved in perceiveing the outside world.

How it all translates inside our brains can be still a matter of many speculations. That's why I'm very hesitant to chose any side of the coin here.

In other words, I'm not claiming that there are defferences and I cannot say that there are no differences. Presently, it seems to me that I can perceive them, the differences, (under not blind conditions, of course). I'm quite happy about it, as it adds more excitement to my audio hobby. It can be that simple ;)

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune

So blind tests that detect differences are non-conclusive. There is always the possibility that the differences DO NOT exist but were matched by the subjects by chance, coincidentally. So those that maintain that there actually MAY NOT BE a difference have a case. Plain logic reasoning.

:devilr: :devilr: :devilr:

Nice try. We're getting into statistics here. If a difference is detected, that difference exist to a certain probablilty. Depends on the number of trials, numbers of persons etc. I think that particular horse has been beaten to death quite effectively by Thorsten.
So, if you do the test correctly, and you get a very high probability that the detected differences are very unlikely to result from chance, that is s strong case.
But, if you want to be principled, yes, you have a point. You're pretty smart, you know that? How come you're not rich yet?;)

Jan Didden

Prune

janneman, notice the smilie I used? I'm being a devil's advocate here.

Peter Daniel, your other senses are not eliminated. Say we let you look at both cables, if that helps you tell the difference. But at the same time, we can still eliminate psychological bias by dressing the crappier cable up to match in looks the fancier one. The result would be the same.

quote:

How come you're not rich yet?

Because I was born in Bulgaria, and Bulgarians are the laziest people in the world. :sleep:
Not to mention the time I waste on this forum -- I should be working on my thesis instead ... d@mn you guys!

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Daniel

I wouldn't expect relays and switches to be a problem here. I would rather think that the simple idea of doing it "blind" limits somehow our sensory perception, as I believe the ears are not the only sensors involved in perceiveing the outside world.
[snip]

Yes Peter, but that is the whole point of blind testing. You want to try to isolate ONLY the strictly audible differences. You WANT to limit the other sensory perception, or better, you want to disable them, to better be able to search for plain audible differences. The reason this is necessary is because your perception indeed is 'muddled' by a lot of other things, that have NOTHING to do with the audible differences: mood, expectation, knowing relative prices, the looks, the design, the size, peer opinions and probably a lot more that I can think of.

Jan Didden

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
Peter Daniel, your other senses are not eliminated. Say we let you look at both cables, if that helps you tell the difference. But at the same time, we can still eliminate psychological bias by dressing the crappier cable up to match in looks the fancier one. The result would be the same.

The single notion that you are doing it under 'test conditions' might effect the judgement and sensory perception. Unless you arrange it in such a clever setup the the person under the test will not be aware of it. I would be quite happy to take part in such an experiment.

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
[snip]Because I was born in Bulgaria, and Bulgarians are the laziest people in the world. :sleep:
[snip]

Since the point of getting rich is that you can afford to be lazy, you're ahead of us. You don't need it:D

Jan Didden

Prune

quote:

Well, that would be hard, although experiments where the subjects are being mislead of what is being tested are standard in psychology.

I think that Jon Risch's suggestions at AudioAsylum as to how to perform audio blind tests are a good middleground (sorry, I don't have a link to the actual post underhand).

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Daniel

The single notion that you are doing it under 'test conditions' might effect the judgement and sensory perception. Unless you arrange it in such a clever setup the the person under the test will not be aware of it. I would be quite happy to take part in such an experiment.

Hmm. Thoughtfull. But how then are you going to ask the guy/girl for a score, if you don't want to give away that there is a test in the first place?

Jan Didden

Prune

quote:

Since the point of getting rich is that you can afford to be lazy

I can only afford it because my student loan hasn't run out yet. :rolleyes: If HRDC reads this I'm in deep sh!t...

janneman

Hey, Prune, quit changing your posts behind my back! :bawling: 666, yeah, the beast is loose tonigt:hot:
Who is HRDC or whatever?

Jan Didden

Prune

One way to do what PD suggests is to send as presents/samples fake equipment, say a high-end and a low-end cable with the insides switched. The user ends up praising high-end-on-the-outside one, not noticing it's low-end-on the inside, and thus shows that the difference is a placebo effect.

janneman, they are (in)Human Resources Development Canada. They are the main Canadaian agency implementing the socialist cough communist cough policies in this country.

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
One way to do what PD suggests is to send as presents/samples fake equipment, say a high-end and a low-end cable with the insides switched. The user ends up praising high-end-on-the-outside one, not noticing it's low-end-on the inside, and thus shows that the difference is a placebo effect.

I would conservatively estimate this to work as you say about 100% of the time:D

Jan Didden

Prune

Dude, this is not a real-time chat! Quit replying so fast, before I've had a chance to edit my posts! It's much easier for me to proofread once I've posted, and when I go back to change something, I have to Save Changes, read the post, and if something else further on needs changes, go back to the editing screen again, and so on.

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by RHosch
My only problem with the "buy what you want and enjoy" mentality is that encouraging and supporting pseudoscience in audio (indeed, even tolerating it) is ultimately, IMO, detrimental to the pace of progress in the field.

No, the "buy what you want and enjoy" mentality encourages buying what you want and enjoy.

If audio equipment doesn't offer what people want and what people enjoy, then it's ultimately worthless!

What other end does music and its reproduction in our homes serve but our own enjoyment?

se

janneman

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
[snip]janneman, they are (in)Human Resources Development Canada. They are the main Canadaian agency implementing the socialist cough communist cough policies in this country.

...unthankfull (illegal offspring)...:mad:

[Hey, its tongue-in-cheek, OK?]

Jan Didden

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by janneman

Hmm. Thoughtfull. But how then are you going to ask the guy/girl for a score, if you don't want to give away that there is a test in the first place?

Well, I did something like that with one of my amps and didn't even expect any comments on that.

I prepared two versions of the same circuit. The only difference was a shunt resistor. One amp had a Caddock , the other had a Vishay. The person who took the amps to the show was not aware of that. He later reported that for some reason one amp sounded much better (had a bigger soundstage), to the point that he didn't even bother to play the other amp.

After he brought the amps back, I looked inside and changed the resistor (for same value, just different type). Well, the amps began to play similar again (to him).

Another example was using MUR860 diodes in my GC PS. I chose those diodes by coincidence, as I just had them on my shelf. Later, I built exactly same supply, but with different rectifiers. The guy who listened to the original supply for a while, and later was listening to the "new" one, said that it sounds different. I was insisting that everything was the same (as I didn't expect then that rectifiers make a difference), yet after finally checking it closer and changing rectifiers I finally satisfied my "person under test".

Well, all those things happened purely by accident and were not intentional, yet the reaction from people makes me suspect that there is more to it that some people are willing to accept.

janneman

Really Peter? That's interesting. I agree it is probably as blind as you can get. Sh*t. I don't like that. Goes against my 'religion'.
Let me think it over (give me time to get rid of that egg in my face). I mean, you ARE serious, aren't you?

Jan Didden

Prune

I can believe that. Depending on your power supply, diode ringing can be a problem. I used MURs in my DAC, but that's filtered and regulated multiple times so I doubt it makes a difference. Regardless of diode, a snubber across the transformer secondaries would help a lot.
http://www.hagtech.com/pdf/snubber.pdf
I simulated various setups in LTSpice, and it can make a (small) difference in even filtered output. But since the ringing is high frequency, it can couple to things that are not directly connected, by EMI.

Peter Daniel

quote:

Originally posted by janneman
I mean, you ARE serious, aren't you?

Yes, I am serious. I still didn't form my religion because of that, but I prefer to keep an open mind though, just in case there is more to that;)

Prune

janneman, let this not affect your worldview. Many things can make a difference that would initially seem unlikely, such as diodes, capacitors (but I mean as difference between electrolytics and film, say, rather than between different film types which is a bit pushing it), potentiometers (parasitic capacitance affects the frequency response), etc. But come on, some people believe cables are directional (the microdiode nonsense which has been rebuffed), or that silver sounds different, and so on. Now that's a bit much.

Even if someone could really (as in a blind test) hear silver different from copper in the same configuration, I'd bet no one could hear nor measure the difference between, say, three-nines and four-nines purity silver, and yet when I was emailing to Venhaus regarding his silver/teflon interconnect design, he empathically told me that the extra nine makes all the difference... :eek:

RHosch

quote:

Originally posted by Prune
While I agree with the rest of your post,

This is 100%* wrong. You only have two ears, and it is possible to send them all directional information with only two drivers. And no, they do not have to be headphones (though binarual recordings for headphones demonstrate this). The problem is the way things are recorded -- what we have as stereo is barely more than variations in loudness to indicate direction -- and the lack of crosstalk cancellation. The crosstalk I'm talking about here is left-speaker-to-right-ear and the converse. The signal for each of the two speakers can be preprocessed so that each ear hears exactly what it's supposed to; for a (now dated) demo Google for the "stereo dipole". Processed this way binaural recordings can be played over two speakers (with known positions) with full effect. Further, theoretically it should be possible to customize the signal for each individual's HRTF, as the dummy head HRTF will somewhat differ from every person's.

* I was going to say 110% wrong, but that would have been too Amerikhan. :p

OK, fine, in theory at least you can generate cross-talk cancellation signals and also develop specific HRTF for an individual to create surround sound... which would work if you kept you head absolutely locked in a vice, had algorithms available to actually implement this strategy, and also figured in room correction.

I maintain that any practical implementation of two-channel stereo, including any implementation any has ever used in their home to date, is still fundamentally limited and inaccurate. I also maintain that any two-channel system the vast majority of consumers are likely to implement in their home in the forseeable future will still be fundamentally limited and inaccurate. After all, it's easy enough to say that you can generate a signal to do such and such... another matter entirely to actually do it in a practical manner.

That being the case, my original point, being that those regarding two-channel as holy (CURRENT two channel systems, mind you) and multichannel as "processed" are silly, is still a true and valid point.

RHosch

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Eddy

No, the "buy what you want and enjoy" mentality encourages buying what you want and enjoy.

If audio equipment doesn't offer what people want and what people enjoy, then it's ultimately worthless!

What other end does music and its reproduction in our homes serve but our own enjoyment?

se

Well, I suppose we'll just have to disagree. In general, I'm all for the free market system, even when I think the results are less than optimal (and yes, that can happen). On the whole I believe it produces the greatest variety of goods, the lowest average prices, and the most generalized progress. I just don't assume that it works that way in every specific case, 100% of the time.

To be more specific, I believe it quite possible that by "buying and enjoying" what a specific person enjoys it can have an impact on the potential or future enjoyment of others to the same or related products. Since those other persons are not there at the time of purchase, their marginal cost/benefit is not included in the supply/demand equation that achieves an equlilbrium price. i.e., you're buying and enjoying an esoteric cable may have some very small but non-zero effect on my own ability to buy and enjoy a product in the future (e.g., by affecting the ultimate price, or by affecting what is actually available at some time in the future).

You state that if people didn't enjoy a product then it would simply go away in the market system. The same can be said for a hard drug, like crack. Is the guy who loses his wife because of a crack related robbery not affected by the initial crack purchase? Likewise, but on a vastly smaller scale, am I not ultimately affected by an esoteric cable purchase?

It may seem a small effect, and I generally make it a point not to make a big deal out of it (because, as I said, I prefer the free market system with all its mistakes and "government corrections" to the various alternatives), but when you consider all psuedoscientific audio products/sales to all the numerous individuals purchasing the products, the cumulative effect may not be so insignificant. Again, IMO, the progress of the field itself can be slowed by the presence of these types of products. An argument can be made that the inflow of funds into the audio world, from any products, is ultimately good for the field as it provides more funds with which to do real research. I have examined that possibility and find it lacking, just as I find it unlikely that the money crack-dealers put back into the economy offsets the summed marginal cost for all individuals negatively affected by the trade (I don't mean to equate esoteric-audio manufacturers with crack dealers... there are orders of magnitude separating them in degree, but the mechanisms are the same and extreme examples help to make the point more clear and obvious).

I obviously live just fine with this state of affairs (after all, what choice do we really have), and enjoy my audio none-the-less, but it would be irrational of me to pretend such forces do not act to slow progress. That was the point of my post.

tom1356

quote:

Originally posted by RHosch

Well, I suppose we'll just have to disagree. In general, I'm all for the free market system, even when I think the results are less than optimal (and yes, that can happen). On the whole I believe it produces the greatest variety of goods, the lowest average prices, and the most generalized progress. I just don't assume that it works that way in every specific case, 100% of the time.

To be more specific, I believe it quite possible that by "buying and enjoying" what a specific person enjoys it can have an impact on the potential or future enjoyment of others to the same or related products. Since those other persons are not there at the time of purchase, their marginal cost/benefit is not included in the supply/demand equation that achieves an equlilbrium price. i.e., you're buying and enjoying an esoteric cable may have some very small but non-zero effect on my own ability to buy and enjoy a product in the future (e.g., by affecting the ultimate price, or by affecting what is actually available at some time in the future).

You state that if people didn't enjoy a product then it would simply go away in the market system. The same can be said for a hard drug, like crack. Is the guy who loses his wife because of a crack related robbery not affected by the initial crack purchase? Likewise, but on a vastly smaller scale, am I not ultimately affected by an esoteric cable purchase?

It may seem a small effect, and I generally make it a point not to make a big deal out of it (because, as I said, I prefer the free market system with all its mistakes and "government corrections" to the various alternatives), but when you consider all psuedoscientific audio products/sales to all the numerous individuals purchasing the products, the cumulative effect may not be so insignificant. Again, IMO, the progress of the field itself can be slowed by the presence of these types of products. An argument can be made that the inflow of funds into the audio world, from any products, is ultimately good for the field as it provides more funds with which to do real research. I have examined that possibility and find it lacking, just as I find it unlikely that the money crack-dealers put back into the economy offsets the summed marginal cost for all individuals negatively affected by the trade (I don't mean to equate esoteric-audio manufacturers with crack dealers... there are orders of magnitude separating them in degree, but the mechanisms are the same and extreme examples help to make the point more clear and obvious).

I obviously live just fine with this state of affairs (after all, what choice do we really have), and enjoy my audio none-the-less, but it would be irrational of me to pretend such forces do not act to slow progress. That was the point of my post.

fdegrove

Hi,

quote:

But come on, some people believe cables are directional (the microdiode nonsense which has been rebuffed), or that silver sounds different, and so on. Now that's a bit much.

Cables can very easily be directional.

Microdiode nonsense, eh?

I suppose cable microphony is nonsense too, right?

Silver does sound different. Different silver, different sound...Same goes for copper, whatever.

Do you taste the difference between one brand of beer or the other?
You do?
So, why wouldn't materials sound different then?

BTW, it's not that you find silver at the jewelers' for 8 cent a foot that it's going to be the same silver you'll find at a cable store for 80 cent a foot either....Although it could be...
Jeweler' silver is not something I'd encourage people to use for audio anyway.

Just a little anecdote: when I replaced my expensive high-end interconnects (copper) with my own silver I/Cs it had a similar effect as replacing polyester coupling caps with polypropylenes:

Everything sounded faster, quicker and clearer.
As if you'd moved from a seat in row # 20 to row # 5, it's that much more resolving of fine detail.

Maybe it's not to everyone's liking but a difference there certainly is.
I'll never go back to copper wires, not ever.

Come to think of it, I can't recall anyone having tried silver cables telling me they didn't hear a difference....

Cheers, ;)

fdegrove

Hi,

quote:

I maintain that any practical implementation of two-channel stereo, including any implementation any has ever used in their home to date, is still fundamentally limited and inaccurate.

Well...Reproduced music will forever remain just that.
Two channel reproduction of a well recorded event is all I ever wish for on MY stereo.

Unfortunately those recordings using a decent two mike setup are rather rare and most of those are at least 40 years old already.
They are however by far more realistic sounding than everything I ever heard recorded using multi-miking techniques.

quote:

That being the case, my original point, being that those regarding two-channel as holy (CURRENT two channel systems, mind you) and multichannel as "processed" are silly, is still a true and valid point.

Current two-channel reproduction could be far, far better than it actually is now.
Multi-channel is by no means an improvement unless perhaps for home cinema...If that's your kind of thing.
I for one certainly don't need that kind of sonic **** for my own entertainment, thank you very much.

Cheers,;)

carlosfm

quote:

Originally posted by janneman
I don't think the logic is that difficult. If you do a blind test, and no differences are detected, that means that no differences were detected. I'm not being snug here, but that's just what it says. It is NOT proof that differences do not exist.

Absolutely.
There are listeners and listeners.

quote:

Originally posted by janneman
However, if differences are detected, it means that differences DO EXIST. Note the difference between 'detected' (which leave open the existence) and 'exist' which gives a clear proof.

So blind tests that do not detect differences are non-conclusive. There is always the possibility that the differences DO exist but were not detected. So those that maintain that there actually IS a difference have a case. Plain logic reasoning.

Oh yes.

quote:

Originally posted by janneman
But I must confess, that after many, many blind tests, differences are still not detected, I am doubting whether they actually exist, and the possibility, although logically there, gets more and more remote.

Yes, you start wondering...:D

Excellent post, I don't see things like this much often.:angel:

Steve Eddy

quote:

So?

quote:

To be more specific, I believe it quite possible that by "buying and enjoying" what a specific person enjoys it can have an impact on the potential or future enjoyment of others to the same or related products.

Tough.

What, you expect people to buy that which they DON'T enjoy in order to keep YOU happy?

quote:

Since those other persons are not there at the time of purchase, their marginal cost/benefit is not included in the supply/demand equation that achieves an equlilbrium price. i.e., you're buying and enjoying an esoteric cable may have some very small but non-zero effect on my own ability to buy and enjoy a product in the future (e.g., by affecting the ultimate price, or by affecting what is actually available at some time in the future).

Tough.

quote:

You state that if people didn't enjoy a product then it would simply go away in the market system. The same can be said for a hard drug, like crack. Is the guy who loses his wife because of a crack related robbery not affected by the initial crack purchase? Likewise, but on a vastly smaller scale, am I not ultimately affected by an esoteric cable purchase?

WHAT!? Crack cocaine? Losing wives? Robberies?

Good God, we're talking abut AUDIO EQUIPMENT here!

Sorry, I'm not buying this Techno Taliban fascism you're selling.

se

Steve Eddy

quote:

Originally posted by fdegrove
Do you taste the difference between one brand of beer or the other?
You do?
So, why wouldn't materials sound different then?

They probably would if there were the gross differences between wires that there are between brands of beer.

C'mon, Frank. That's a really poor comparison.

Tell me, what differences are there beside conductivity that aren't buried in the thermal noise of the wire itself?

se

carlosfm