speakers' cable

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Hello,
I would have a question about speakers' cable.

Many people (not only sellers) are convinced that with a special (and very
expensive) speakers' cable they get a "sound" better, many others think the
simple electric wire is same.

I wonder that's suggestion, or is truth? Are there cables better then
others? What do you think about that?

have a nice day

--
MEMENTO AVDERE SEMPER
Giovanni (Italy)

.




Re: speakers' cable
>Are [their] cables better [than] others?
> Vexator
>
No. Use the fattest copper wire you have available
which is also flexible enough for the application.
At the least this will stand a lower chance of being broken.
If you are running long distances, fatter is definately better.
Any other wire characteristics for audio frequency is nonsense.

:Of course, audiophiles are free to make up their own minds,
:without the aid of science or engineering.
: Chris Foley
:
As happens all the time.  8-)


Re: speakers' cable

>>Are [their] cables better [than] others?
>> Vexator
>>
>No. Use the fattest copper wire you have available
>which is also flexible enough for the application.
>At the least this will stand a lower chance of being broken.
>If you are running long distances, fatter is definately better.
>Any other wire characteristics for audio frequency is nonsense.

---
For looong runs it wouldn't hurt to look at the dielectric constant of
the jacket and the spacing between conductors.

--
John Fields


Re: speakers' cable

>
>>>Are [their] cables better [than] others?
>>> Vexator
>>>
>>No. Use the fattest copper wire you have available
>>which is also flexible enough for the application.
>>At the least this will stand a lower chance of being broken.
>>If you are running long distances, fatter is definately better.
>>Any other wire characteristics for audio frequency is nonsense.
>
> ---
> For looong runs it wouldn't hurt to look at the dielectric constant of
> the jacket and the spacing between conductors.

can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?

--
http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org /

remove 'n-u-l-l' to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: speakers' cable
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 00:26:10 +0100, andy

>
>> On 16 Sep 2004 13:00:16 -0700, jeffm snipped-for-privacy@email.com (JeffM) wrote:
>>
>>>>Are [their] cables better [than] others?
>>>> Vexator
>>>>
>>>No. Use the fattest copper wire you have available
>>>which is also flexible enough for the application.
>>>At the least this will stand a lower chance of being broken.
>>>If you are running long distances, fatter is definately better.
>>>Any other wire characteristics for audio frequency is nonsense.
>>
>> ---
>> For looong runs it wouldn't hurt to look at the dielectric constant of
>> the jacket and the spacing between conductors.
>
>can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?

---
Yes.

--
John Fields


Re: speakers' cable

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 00:26:10 +0100, andy
>
>>On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 16:13:08 -0500, John Fields wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 Sep 2004 13:00:16 -0700, jeffm snipped-for-privacy@email.com (JeffM) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Are [their] cables better [than] others?
>>>>> Vexator
>>>>>
>>>>No. Use the fattest copper wire you have available
>>>>which is also flexible enough for the application.
>>>>At the least this will stand a lower chance of being broken.
>>>>If you are running long distances, fatter is definately better.
>>>>Any other wire characteristics for audio frequency is nonsense.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> For looong runs it wouldn't hurt to look at the dielectric constant of
>>> the jacket and the spacing between conductors.
>>
>>can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
>
> ---
> Yes.

I was wondering about whether I could make my fortune trying to kid
audiophiles that it made a difference to their sound quality, that's all.

--
http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org /

remove 'n-u-l-l' to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: speakers' cable
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 02:56:34 +0100, andy


>I was wondering about whether I could make my fortune trying to kid
>audiophiles that it made a difference to their sound quality, that's all.

---
Sure; it's easy.

All you have to do is come up with some authoritative sounding
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: speakers' cable

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 02:56:34 +0100, andy
>
>
>>I was wondering about whether I could make my fortune trying to kid
>>audiophiles that it made a difference to their sound quality, that's all.
>
> ---
> Sure; it's easy.
>
> All you have to do is come up with some authoritative sounding
> techno-babble liberally sprinkled with musical-sounding crap:
>
> "By soft-drawing the multiplicity of oxygen-free high-conductivity
> copper strands before silver plating them and laying them up as
> cables,  the cubic crystallinity of the copper grains is disrupted,
> allowing the signal to make a more graceful transit between the
> amplifier and the speaker.  This will result in a more accurate
> presentation of the program material on the sound stage with none of
> the harshness associated with granular copper stranding."
>
> And on and on...

how about:

'When NASA were deciding how to convey transmissions from astronauts on
board the space shuttle, they opted for the solution of cylindrically
embedded cable technology to carry signals between the various parts of
their apparatus, thus reducing bounce and scatter at the cable interfaces.
Our engineers have skilfully refined this technology for the audio arena;
our CECT cables are designed to be perfectly matched to the expected
impedance of your high fidelity speakers. No more bounce and scatter.'

--
http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org /

remove 'n-u-l-l' to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: speakers' cable
> 'When NASA were deciding how to convey transmissions from astronauts on
> board the space shuttle, they opted for the solution of cylindrically
> embedded cable technology to carry signals between the various parts of
> their apparatus, thus reducing bounce and scatter at the cable interfaces.
> Our engineers have skilfully refined this technology for the audio arena;
> our CECT cables are designed to be perfectly matched to the expected
> impedance of your high fidelity speakers. No more bounce and scatter.'

Remember to include some technical looking graphs with that.

Andyb
--
The above email address is whitelisted.
If I don't have your address already, I wont see your message.




Re: speakers' cable
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 00:15:24 +0100, andy

>
>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 02:56:34 +0100, andy
>>
>>
>>>I was wondering about whether I could make my fortune trying to kid
>>>audiophiles that it made a difference to their sound quality, that's all.
>>
>> ---
>> Sure; it's easy.
>>
>> All you have to do is come up with some authoritative sounding
>> techno-babble liberally sprinkled with musical-sounding crap:
>>
>> "By soft-drawing the multiplicity of oxygen-free high-conductivity
>> copper strands before silver plating them and laying them up as
>> cables,  the cubic crystallinity of the copper grains is disrupted,
>> allowing the signal to make a more graceful transit between the
>> amplifier and the speaker.  This will result in a more accurate
>> presentation of the program material on the sound stage with none of
>> the harshness associated with granular copper stranding."
>>
>> And on and on...
>
>how about:
>
>'When NASA were deciding how to convey transmissions from astronauts on
>board the space shuttle, they opted for the solution of cylindrically
>embedded cable technology to carry signals between the various parts of
>their apparatus, thus reducing bounce and scatter at the cable interfaces.
>Our engineers have skilfully refined this technology for the audio arena;
>our CECT cables are designed to be perfectly matched to the expected
>impedance of your high fidelity speakers. No more bounce and scatter.'

the only draw back is the hugh lenght of cable required to access the
shuttle from the control center ( but we did manage to keep it just
under 8 ohms)



Re: speakers' cable
On Friday 17 September 2004 09:09 am, John Fields did deign to grace us with
the following:

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 02:56:34 +0100, andy
>
>
>>I was wondering about whether I could make my fortune trying to kid
>>audiophiles that it made a difference to their sound quality, that's all.
>
> ---
> Sure; it's easy.
>
> All you have to do is come up with some authoritative sounding
> techno-babble liberally sprinkled with musical-sounding crap:
>
> "By soft-drawing the multiplicity of oxygen-free high-conductivity
> copper strands before silver plating them and laying them up as
> cables,  the cubic crystallinity of the copper grains is disrupted,
> allowing the signal to make a more graceful transit between the
> amplifier and the speaker.  This will result in a more accurate
> presentation of the program material on the sound stage with none of
> the harshness associated with granular copper stranding."
>
> And on and on...
>
Nah - just use an ordinary "impedance matching 101" lecture, but
dress it up in a bunch of audiophoolese, or make it sound like a
new discovery or something.

Cheers!
Rich



Re: speakers' cable

>On Friday 17 September 2004 09:09 am, John Fields did deign to grace us with
>the following:

>> "By soft-drawing the multiplicity of oxygen-free high-conductivity
>> copper strands before silver plating them and laying them up as
>> cables,  the cubic crystallinity of the copper grains is disrupted,
>> allowing the signal to make a more graceful transit between the
>> amplifier and the speaker.  This will result in a more accurate
>> presentation of the program material on the sound stage with none of
>> the harshness associated with granular copper stranding."
>>
>> And on and on...
>>
>Nah - just use an ordinary "impedance matching 101" lecture, but
>dress it up in a bunch of audiophoolese, or make it sound like a
>new discovery or something.

---
Hey, Rich, get your own act.

--
John Fields


Re: speakers' cable
On Saturday 18 September 2004 04:07 pm, John Fields did deign to grace us
with the following:

>
>>On Friday 17 September 2004 09:09 am, John Fields did deign to grace us
>>with the following:
>
>>> "By soft-drawing the multiplicity of oxygen-free high-conductivity
>>> copper strands before silver plating them and laying them up as
>>> cables,  the cubic crystallinity of the copper grains is disrupted,
>>> allowing the signal to make a more graceful transit between the
>>> amplifier and the speaker.  This will result in a more accurate
>>> presentation of the program material on the sound stage with none of
>>> the harshness associated with granular copper stranding."
>>>
>>> And on and on...
>>>
>>Nah - just use an ordinary "impedance matching 101" lecture, but
>>dress it up in a bunch of audiophoolese, or make it sound like a
>>new discovery or something.
>
> ---
> Hey, Rich, get your own act.
>
Sorry, did you already come up with this one? It wouldn't take much
to make, for example
http://contact.tm.agilent.com/Agilent/tmo/an-95-1/classes/imatch.html
totally opaque to the average consumer.

Specially designed with the latest Computer Aided Technology, straight
from the labs of the National Science Foundation - Precision Impedance-
Matched Cables, only $19.99/foot/pair. ;-)

And use two pieces of welding cable bonded together. :-)

Anybody want to bother to look up the formula for spacing/diameter
for 8 ohms?

Cheers!
Rich



Re: speakers' cable

> >can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
>
> ---
> Yes.

But why in the world would you WANT such
a thing?

Bob M.




Re: speakers' cable
snipped-for-privacy@address.invalid says...
>
> > >can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
> >
> > ---
> > Yes.
>
> But why in the world would you WANT such
> a thing?
>

I thought John Fields answered that question rather well.

--
  Keith


Re: speakers' cable
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 00:26:10 +0100, andy

> can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?

 0 Ohm in the cable is always best.



Re: speakers' cable

>On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 00:26:10 +0100, andy
>
>> can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
>
> 0 Ohm in the cable is always best.

---
But you can't get it...

--
John Fields


Re: speakers' cable
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:45:23 -0500, John Fields

>>> can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
>>
>> 0 Ohm in the cable is always best.
>
> But you can't get it...

Almost, but they are VERY expensive and thick.



Re: speakers' cable

> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:45:23 -0500, John Fields
>
> >>> can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
> >>
> >> 0 Ohm in the cable is always best.
> >
> > But you can't get it...
>
> Almost, but they are VERY expensive and thick.
>

In which case they should appeal to just about every audio nut out there!

And now a new business; great big zero ohm connectors for your zero ohm
cables, only 50 (enter your local monetary unit) each!

I swear I'm in the wrong business!




Re: speakers' cable
On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 01:53:39 GMT, "Captain"

>
>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:45:23 -0500, John Fields
>>
>> >>> can you get cable made with an 8 ohm characteristic impedance?
>> >>
>> >> 0 Ohm in the cable is always best.
>> >
>> > But you can't get it...
>>
>> Almost, but they are VERY expensive and thick.
>>
>
>In which case they should appeal to just about every audio nut out there!
>
>And now a new business; great big zero ohm connectors for your zero ohm
>cables, only 50 (enter your local monetary unit) each!
>
>I swear I'm in the wrong business!

try wireless technology  great "O ohms" characteristics
>



Site Timeline