It could be there is only a small percentage of the population that notices how cables affect sound. Out of those perhaps few people, only a few percent of them may care about it. That said, in a diy audio forum or other hifi audio forum there may be a much higher percentage of such people. Of course hi-fi forums are likely places for such people to end up.
Regarding the people who object to the idea that cables affect sound, there seem to be two drivers of those objections. One driver is that people who don't hear differences are likely to believe their own perceptions over the claims of other people The other driver seems to be that there is a lot of vastly overpriced junk in the high end cable marketplace. That overpriced junk is seen as an evil threat to the wallets of unsuspecting newbies.
In addition, there is a problem from the scientific perspective in that there hasn't been enough high quality research into what people can and can't hear, nor enough research into a practical theoretical basis for reliably designing good, low cost cables that can well satisfy the ears of those people who do care about cable sound. In other words, there has not been enough research to scientifically separate good value high performance cables from overpriced junk cables.
IMHO for speaker cables the situation should not be too hard to resolve. Again IMHO, well made star-quad speaker cables that are mechanically stable and use dielectrics with low DA don't have to be expensive if manufactured in volume. Such cables can work quite well for home hi-fi cable lengths. Proprietary listening tests show they are likely to be preferred over other cables notwithstanding cost. A number of cables of that basic type which may work quite well are available from mainstream cable manufacturers. Maybe someone could do a 'shootout' comparison of them, along with a comparison to 6" of Romex. The latter comparison may be the one that matters most.
IMHO the situation with line level and phono level cables is more complicated. Will leave that alone for now.
Regarding the people who object to the idea that cables affect sound, there seem to be two drivers of those objections. One driver is that people who don't hear differences are likely to believe their own perceptions over the claims of other people The other driver seems to be that there is a lot of vastly overpriced junk in the high end cable marketplace. That overpriced junk is seen as an evil threat to the wallets of unsuspecting newbies.
In addition, there is a problem from the scientific perspective in that there hasn't been enough high quality research into what people can and can't hear, nor enough research into a practical theoretical basis for reliably designing good, low cost cables that can well satisfy the ears of those people who do care about cable sound. In other words, there has not been enough research to scientifically separate good value high performance cables from overpriced junk cables.
IMHO for speaker cables the situation should not be too hard to resolve. Again IMHO, well made star-quad speaker cables that are mechanically stable and use dielectrics with low DA don't have to be expensive if manufactured in volume. Such cables can work quite well for home hi-fi cable lengths. Proprietary listening tests show they are likely to be preferred over other cables notwithstanding cost. A number of cables of that basic type which may work quite well are available from mainstream cable manufacturers. Maybe someone could do a 'shootout' comparison of them, along with a comparison to 6" of Romex. The latter comparison may be the one that matters most.
IMHO the situation with line level and phono level cables is more complicated. Will leave that alone for now.
Last edited:
Could be, maybe, possibly... etc. Anything new?
Where are those people? Can you quote one, just one?
You've been claiming that for years without citing a shred of evidence.
So does low price zip cord from hardware stores.
Too bad such listening test can't be directly experienced by others who weren't there.
Not according to engineering measurements and corrective compensation circuits already described in this forum. I have linked to them before in other cable threads, nothing new.
The skin effect will theoretically not cause harmonic distortion in the audio cable only in the case of a sine wave and a linear load. However, computer models with a high-resolution master oscillator perfectly demonstrate a significant increase in distortion at the load terminals, even with a simple increase in the resistance of the audio cable.
The skin-effect modulates the cable resistance depending on the signal frequency.
Thus there is a non-linear impedance of the audio cable as a result of the skin effect.
The skin-effect modulates the cable resistance depending on the signal frequency.
Thus there is a non-linear impedance of the audio cable as a result of the skin effect.
Last edited:
I so much want to respond to this, whether the difference between star-quad and 12-ga zip cord is -40dB or -180dB (when connecting a particular amp and speaker, and a side rant on the misleadingly named "32bit DAC" - there'll be a 64bit one with a 360dB range any day now, mock my word) ...
I'm afraid I could become like the late Arny K (poster here for a short time), who was the first person I recall reading on the Usenet newsgroup rec.audio.tech, circa 1996. Someone was asking "my 12 gauge stranded wire won't go into this hole for the speaker connector clamp. I do NOT want to go to a smaller gauge wire, what can I do?" Arny responded "Solder on a 1-inch solid 14 or 16 gauge piece of wire that fits in the clamp hole, and put shrinkwrap around the joint. A 1-inch piece of 16 gauge won't add any significant resistance to 10 feet of 12 gauge."
It was perfectly reasonable advice, I liked it and I've since used it several times. Unfortunately, Arny was often cantankerous and got involved in many online arguments over technical details, and well, tended to get insulting to those he saw as fools.
Look for my StarQAM16[TM coming soon] speaker cable, shipping any day now ...
What did engineering measurements and corrective compensation circuits say that confirms low price zip cord won't work quite well as speaker cables?
Sure. So does the crowding effect at high current densities, yet another 2nd order effect.
It is easy to find references on the magnitude of all these effects, wikipedia is a good start. Do your due diligence and plug in some numbers (and don't forget to compare cables, not a cable with an infinite conductor). You will quickly realize you are back to the always new question "what is audible"?
The zip cord thread is: Zip cord for speaker test
Measurements posted starting around: Zip cord for speaker test ...Post #203 ...First efforts at compensation starting around Post #210. The discussion and further findings continue to the end of the thread.
Although its only one aspect of cable performance that is investigated, good star-quad can eliminate the need for lumped compensation.
Beyond what they found, IMHO there is more to the story but at least that thread can be a start to more careful thinking about cable.
Measurements posted starting around: Zip cord for speaker test ...Post #203 ...First efforts at compensation starting around Post #210. The discussion and further findings continue to the end of the thread.
Although its only one aspect of cable performance that is investigated, good star-quad can eliminate the need for lumped compensation.
Beyond what they found, IMHO there is more to the story but at least that thread can be a start to more careful thinking about cable.
Last edited:
The dual channel FFT measurements of speaker cable effects that Jon Dunlavy and I did in the mid 1980s were precipitated because the distributor of Monster Cable in Australia sent me a sample of Monster Powerline, a star quad speaker cable. At the time I was Technical Manager - Sound at the Adelaide Festival Centre. I was already aware of the star quad configurations because the pioneers of radio used star quad to mitigate inductance prior to the invention of coaxial cable.
So I took samples of Canare 4S11, Monster Powerline and Olex (an Australian electrical cable) ordinary duty 4 conductor (3ø+N) circular cable, to Duntech Audio, to which John Dunlavy added conventional figure-8 cable, spaced apart figure-8 (similar to Naim) and his own proprietary cable. The cables were all chosen to have approximately the same cross-sectional copper area and hence very close to the same loop resistance. The cables were ~3m long IIRC.
Differences introduced by the cables were easily measurable on the HP dual channel FFT. All of the star quad configurations outperformed the figure-8 cables by a large margin, with barely discernible differences between Olex, Canare and Monster.
Ordinary duty 4 conductor (3ø+N) flexible circular cable is as cheap as anything and when wired correctly in star quad configuration (diagonally opposed conductors paired) is a low cost or no cost upgrade to any decent amplifier loudspeaker combination, especially larger speakers and longer cables. It is no surprise that all of the professional audio cable manufacturers make circular four conductor loudspeaker cables e.g. Belden, Klotz, Eurocable, Canare, etc, etc.
And what about Monster Powerline? It was no better on the FFT test than the equivalent sized Olex ordinary duty flexible circular 4 conductor (3ø+N) electrical cable for 1/10 of the price.
Last edited:
It's odd that you suddenly abandon the sound quality aspect of audio cable evaluation.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.