Cable Controversy

@psag: Couldn’t you have posted something less controversial, like religion or politics?

I just came to this section to seek advice on cables myself, having recently upgraded my amp to a Bryston 4BST and preamp to a Krell KRC-3.

To expand on your request for a ’sit down and talk with an experienced listener with intact hearing..." permit me to submit a modest proposal as a spin-off of your idea.

What about a cable "crowd-sourced pass-around" program?

- Solicit trustworthy volunteers from AGON who are willing to participate.
- Seek donors among the participants here who no doubt have cables hanging around.
- Solicit product from vendors to include in the experiment.
- If security is a concern, we could require a deposit from each participant and refund when the cables are passed to the next recipient.
- Require each volunteer to catalog his equipment
- Establish parameters for the characteristics we use when describing audio (i.e. "ambience", "warmth", etc) but have a quantifiable metric for each on a scale from 1-10.
- Set up a BLIND SURVEY via website where results can be gathered and later tabulated.
- Once the cables have all been passed around and data collected, we could analyze the results, compare it to the equipment sets, and hopefully come up with some reliable, more empirical results which members here - both current and future - could use as a guide to finding what’s right for their needs.

As a freelance marketing consultant who is also a music and audio enthusiast, this project would be of great interest, and I would be happy to do the work of setting up the survey.

Just a thought.

Cables make aa difference sure but there is so much to do with components first that imp are the key to getting you there first.  Each system and your ears have to do with what you will prefer kinda like as vs tube sound but just go with what you prefer. Happy listening

There is a difference to my ears. If not to yours be happy!

Vandersteen makes great speakers...musical and spatial!

Then you are all set!  There is a certain sense of satisfaction and certainty once you find what works for you and how you perceive sound.  I supposed I am there with speakers more so than cables as I have owned and own Vandersteen speakers for 30+ years now.  The Treo CTs that I recently purchased are by far the greatest realization for me of Richard Vandersteen's design prowess.  What sounds like music to him sounds so to me as well.  Couldn't be happier.

Hifiman5, yes...various MIT CABLES over the years and many many many alternative cable designs used as well.  After awhile you start to learn what consistently seems to grab you and compel you to listen over and over again!  Only MIT and Transparent cables have ever done that for me.

When the system, or some part of the system is flawed and/or colored, we seek to correct it by using different flavors of cables. In contrast, when the individual components are well-balanced, full-range, and neutral, we naturally gravitate towards high-quality cables that have all the same virtues. At audio shows, in the best rooms, we see a clustering of high quality components, transducers, and cable looms that share these virtues. As a general rule, you do not see in these rooms a mixing and matching of different brands of cables and pricepoints.

@dave_b When you mention "flexible designs" can we assume you have owned a variety of cables over time all manufactured my MIT?

I've owned much gear and cables of all variety in many systems and in various environments.  After 30 years, one thing has survived the test of time...my choice of cabling.  Now, more than ever, MIT delivers true audiophile performance.  Large spacious sound stage, oodles of low level detail, micro and macro dynamics to die for, tone beyond reproach, extreme extension/control and flexible designs which adapt to various systems!  Simply the best

Regarding resistance, in many and perhaps most circumstances it is indeed likely to be the most important parameter in the case of speaker cables, and also power cords. It might also be at least marginally significant in the case of digital interconnect cables.

Under nearly all circumstances, however, it will be of little and probably no significance in the case of line-level analog interconnects and phono cables, because it will be a totally insignificant fraction of the impedances of the components that are being connected, especially the input impedance of the destination component. In those cases capacitance and perhaps shielding will often be the most important parameters, depending on the impedances of the components that are being connected, the length of the cables, and several other variables. Although if ground loop issues are involved in an analog interconnection, that can be affected by the resistance of the shield or other return conductor in the cable.

Also, given the many component dependent variables that factor into the sonic effects of a cable, I agree with those who maintain that a cable that may be considered to be inferior to another in terms of its intrinsic sonic quality may perform better in many applications than one that is supposedly superior intrinsically.

Some relevant comments I posted on 12-15-2012 in this thread:

If an interconnect having relatively high capacitance is compared with one having relatively low capacitance, and if everything else is equal, the higher capacitance cable will produce a duller and more sluggish response in the upper treble region if used as a line-level interconnect (especially if it is driven by a component having high output impedance), due to the interaction of cable capacitance and component output impedance; while the exact opposite result will occur if those same two cables are compared in a phono cable application and driven by a moving magnet cartridge, due to the interaction of cable capacitance and cartridge inductance.

It is easily possible for digital cable "A" to outperform digital cable "B" in a given system when both cables are of a certain length, and for cable "B" to outperform cable "A" in that same system if both cables are of some other length. The happenstance of the relationships between cable length, signal risetimes and falltimes, cable propagation velocity, component susceptibility to ground loop-related noise, and the happenstance of how closely the impedances of both components and the cable match, all figure into that.

Regards,
-- Al

From a purely scientific perspective cables are primarily and overwhelmingly a function of their resistance. Can the type of conductive material, insulation material, capacitance, the rest of teh audio gear and some other variables effect the overall sound, of course. However, all aspects other than sheer resistance or lack thereof are dwarfed in comparison (to resistance).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_wire

From perspectives other than scientific your guess is as good as mine.

@psag   I would encourage you to rethink your last post.  Look at manufacturer's systems that they set up at audio expos...they use the same gear from show to show and that does include cables.  From their own extensive research they have assembled a synergistic system that they believe shows their products in the best light.  In fact, the system components used by the same designer at shows can vary from one product in their line to another.  They know there is no "absolute sound".  They are looking for components that play the best together for the particular product they are endeavoring to showcase.

Cabling is not necessarily tone controls, more like, filters.
As in filtering out specific information, filtering in specific information.

Agree with hifiman5, disagree with psag.  I believe cables ARE tone controls...without question. 
Everyone's perception of what "sounds good" is different.

 Let's say someone prefers a certain flavor of sound. Cable A might take them further away from that flavor, while cable B may bring their system closer to it. All components have their own flavor as well. They're like ingredients in a recipe. Certain ingredients work well together, some don't. Depends what you want it to taste like. Also, too much of one ingredient can ruin the meal...just like cables.
I have one friend who has two different model pairs of interconnects. The ones going to his preamp are five times as expensive as the ones going to his amp. Why? Because while the first pair has tremendous air but is slightly thinner in bass, the second pair brings that needed bass to the signal. (there's more to it than that but I'm just trying to make this long, borring post shorter, lol).

 There is no right and wrong, just right and wrong TO THAT PERSON, IN THEIR SYSTEM.  

"As many people have been quick to note here, the sound a cable brings to a system depends on that system."

Has certainly been said here many times, and accepted by many as dogma.  Personally, I'd prefer not to think of cables as 'flavors' or tone controls, to be used to balance out a system. Rather, I evaluate cables for their inherent 'quality' (for lack of a better word). Another way to look at it is that a well designed and executed (high quality) cable loom will sound great in any neutral, high quality setup.

@devilboy  If you are advocating a double blind cable test of, let's say interconnects in YOUR system where you, the listener get to judge what sounds best to you in your system and setting, then I am all in with ya.  As many people have been quick to note here, the sound a cable brings to a system depends on that system.  I would love to have someone like The Cable Company bring a half dozen interconnects and speaker cables of the same length but of varying designs and costs to do such a test on my system to see what sounds best on it.  If only...

@cleeds, maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. I wouldn't be surprised if manufacturers used blind testing within their own company to test out their products amongst other companies. I meant that they wouldn't want US to do it.

devilboy

The audio industry would obviously NEVER back blind testing. (At least the companies who make the expensive, pretty ones).

You're mistaken, because the industry is already using blind testing. In particular, Harmon uses it extensively and has a pretty elaborate setup for it.

devilboy, your statement is well articulated and very likely completely true; not only where cables and equipment are concerned, but in source material as well. The same lack of double blind testing has been indicated in cases where different digital formats and/or sample rates within the same format are used (i.e. dsd vs pcm, 16 bit vs 24 bit, etc.). I highly doubt anyone can tell the difference - blindly - between between PCM 16bit and something "better than that". 

To quote Stereophile magazine founder, Gordon Holt, from an interview in 2007:

“Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me..”

I've always been a firm believer in blind testing. We, as audiofools, listen first with our eyes, then with our wallets. After taking both factors into consideration, it is then that we use our ears just to "verify" what our eyes and wallets have told us about a product. Let's say an amplifier has a fancy faceplate, or a speaker cable looks like it came off a suspension bridge, and both of them cost 5 times as much as another amp or speaker cable. We go into the listening session with a preconceived opinion of what we will about to hear. Before we begin to listen we'll think the fancy, expensive stuff MUST sound better than the cheaper ones. This happens subconsciously and very quickly, but it's in the back of our minds. We may or may not realise it, but it's there.

I believe that if you compared audio products blindfolded, many times, you would pick out the "uglier" and cheaper products over the more pretty, expensive ones. The audio industry would obviously NEVER back blind testing. (At least the companies who make the expensive, pretty ones).

Here comes another old, classic debate...to double-blind or not double-blind?  No sarcasm randy-11.  

First, if you can't hear the difference in cables using a double blind test, then you should not waste money on them.

As Buffalo Sproingfeld put it:

Confirmation Bias Strikes Deep
Into Your Life It Will Creep
Starts when you're always afraid of testing
The man come and take your wallet away.

Hey, what's that sound???

Some credit is due to Harry Pearson for his Absolute Sound concept, which centers on recreating a facsimile of a concert experience. I think the concept of Absolute Sound has been changing to something more objective and reproducible. But in terms of evaluating cables, we are still in the stone age.

@andrei_nz
regarding your 4 points.... 1) yes  2) yes...if the purity of the conductors is comparable and both employ the same type dielectric.  3) yes...only if , as you said, the DIYer knows what they're doing  4) don't disagree, but... the "magic ingredient" argument can be made about any component.  Every designer seems to have their "thing".

@jafant   My system is listed here on AGON. 

My four cents worth.  (1) Cables can (but not always) make a difference; (2) Good quality silver is always better than good quality copper; (3) DIY is the way to go if you know what you are doing; (4) Buying Commercial cables: They all have their 'magic ingredient' so that they are apparently all better than each other!  Buy from a company that has a three-tier pricing system, not a four-tier system.  The tiers are (a) cheap, (b) medium, (c) expensive, (d) silly.

What gear, including cabling, is in your system -hifiman5?

@devilboy  - This conversation takes me back to the "original" audio press argument over whether or not something called "The Absolute Sound" existed.  Back when Harry Pearson was at the helm of TAS he asserted that "the absolute sound" of a musical event as reproduced by our systems was what the audiophile quest was all about.  I think we are both in agreement that there is no "absolute sound".  The most we might, as audiophiles and music lovers hope for, is to put together a sound system that reproduces music that sounds as much like the real thing as our ears are capable of perceiving.  

As much as I think I am close to that realization, I am certain I could find plenty of audiophiles who would find my system "colored" in some way as their perception of reality or "good sound" is different.  Example...I have been embracing the Vandersteen sound for the past 30 years.  My ears like the version of reality that RV employs in his designs.  I know audiophiles who embrace the electrostatic sound of Martin Logan speakers.  While I hear many virtues in the sound those speakers produce, my ears don't connect that sound with what I hear when listening to live unamplified music.  My Treo CT speakers do that for ME, but it certainly is not "the absolute sound".

@hifiman5,....... VERY interesting, I must say. Never thought of it from that perspective.

stringreen
3,852 posts
08-01-2016 9:28am
That’s why (for instance) changing the wire in your speaker cabinet is like designing a new speaker. I spoke to Vandersteen who agonizes over all the different wire that goes into his speakers to make them what he wants them to be.

I would be quite interested to know if Vandersteen agonizes enough over wire inside his speakers to worry about wire directionality. Or if ANY speaker manufacturer considers wire directionality. I will give Tannoy props for cryoing their flagship speaker's crossover network, at least that's a step in the right direction.

That's why (for instance) changing the wire in your speaker cabinet is like designing a new speaker.   I spoke to Vandersteen who agonizes over all the different wire that goes into his speakers to make them what he wants them to be.

So devilboy... according to your position there is no faithful reproduction of music.  It will be colored by the very microphone and microphone cables as it is recorded.  No argument about that from me.  My point is all we can do in this endeavor of ours is to minimize the damage to the musical signal as it passes from one component to another and then ultimately to the transducers to which we listen.  Heck, many would argue that even hearing a performance live in a music hall of some sort is colored by the acoustics of the hall and your relationship to the hall based on where your seats are located within that venue.  This is on my mind as I just purchased tickets for a live show last evening and was thinking about how our location in that hall will impact our listening experience.

Something else just occurred to me. For the sake of argument, let’s use the number 100. It could be more, it could be less, but let’s just use 100.
Using the seven components I listed in my last post (transport, digital cable, dAC, interconnects, preamp, interconnects, amp), that means there could be as many as 700 different manufacturers of 7 different components in the chain. I don’t know how to do the math, but I’m assuming the possible combinations would reach into the billions.
Think about that.....
By the time the signal leaves the amplifier, it could, theoretically, have billions of different sonic signatures that differ from what’s on the cd. Now, hifiman5 wants to put a fancy speaker cable on the amp to be "faithful" to the cd?

This was my whole point from the get-go. I understand your point, hifiman5, but with all due respect, I think you failed to understand mine. "Faithful" goes out the window the moment the music sees the first link in the chain.  

Not to mention the speaker interaction with the amp.  You may have a speaker cable that's close to faithful of what's leaving the amp, but it may sound like crap going to speaker A, but on speaker B it sounds wonderful.  

So, finding a cable that works well with amp and speaker is the real goal.  

@hifiman5, one more thing regarding your post, specifically your use of the word "faithfully". You say you want to transmit the signal as faithfully as possible. Ok. Faithful to what?

Let’s say you purchase a cd. You take this cd home and you want to get the music from the cd to your ears as faithfully as possible.
Great, however your very first link in the chain is adding its own sonic signature to the signal. Every step of the way, something is coloring the sound somewhat:

1) cd player/trasport
2) digital cable
3) DAC
4) interconnects
5) preamp
6) interconnects
7) amplifier

So, now hifiman5 wants to reproduce the signal as faithfully as possible. I ask again, faithful to what? The cd? Pa-lease. You’re already so far away from what’s truthfully on that cd that you cannot be close to it at all. The only thing you can be faithful to at this point is get the sound as close to what’s leaving the amplifier. Now, you want to add some boutique speaker cables between your amp and speaker to be "faithful" to the cd? Gimme a break.  The damage has been done. 

@hifiman5, I think you need to read my post again.  

Regarding your post, you say "the wire in the amp is one of many designed for a specific purpose" (or more realistically, price point).  Also, when your binding post broke, you followed someone's advice and replaced the conductor.  That's fine.   Replace the conductor with whatever you want.  Replace it with something that's $1,000 per inch.  MY point was, in order to hear the most truthful representation of your new and improved amplifier, theoretically, you would need that same conductor going to your speaker.   You repeat the word "faithfully" numerous times in your post, also mentioning the word "integrity".  The only conductor that will do so, is the one in your amp.  NOT some boutique cable costing thousands of dollars.  Obviously no one will do this, I'm just trying to make a point.  

When used properly, cables can balance out a system very well.  If an amp is too warm or dark sounding for the owner, he/she may add a cable that livens up the highs or opens it up a bit, and vice versa.  That's the beauty of cabling.  

Thank you for ending your post with, what I consider to be, the most annoying, misunderstood line in audio.  

I agree that, in theory, the role of cable is to deliver signal 'faithfully' (for lack of a better word), with as little degradation to the signal as possible.  Audioquest for one espouses this type of philosophy in some of their ads. It would stand to reason that I would like the Audioquest sound, but there are other wires on the market that sound better to my ear, in my system. I have no idea whether my wires of choice are more faithful (than Audioquest) to the original signal. Perhaps they are introducing good-sounding distortion into the playback chain.

Good points all around guys! Keep the information on cables/cords a-flowing.

devilboy says "For example, in the amplifier/speaker relationship, if you really want to hear what your amplifier sounds like, your speaker cable should be exactly the same wire that is inside of your amp going to its binding posts. Right?"

Uh wrong.  I have read much in the ongoing discussion of the role of cables in an audio system, but I don't recall ever hearing that argument before.  Open up your power amplifier and look around a bit.  You will find several different types/gauges of wire in there geared to a specific task that wire is designed to accomplish.  The wire going to your binding posts is just one of that many designed for a specific purpose.  Is that wire important?  You bet.  After breaking a binding post on my amp, I took it to an audio designer who also repairs and modifies equipment.  When he saw the cable in my amp, he recommended that he replace it with a cable with a purer conductor and superior dialectric that would more faithfully and effortlessly transport the signal (music) to the new binding posts.  I followed his advice.  Did he send 16 feet of that same wire home with me to be used as speaker cables?  Of course not.  That wire was not designed to faithfully transport the music signal for such a distance.  

All I have been trying to accomplish with the wires in my system is to faithfully transport the music signal from one place to another with as little negative impact as possible.  I do agree with you that different cables do alter the resulting sound of a system.  And cables can't create something that isn't already there in the music, but.... they can, do to their relative quality of transporting a signal, preserve more or less of that music signal's integrity.

"found a cable that gets out of the way of the music". Give me a break. 
I guess I can't give you a break after you made the statement quoted above.  That is EXACTLY what the goal of all the cables in a system should be.  Get out of the way and let the music flow!

I see the topic of discussion on this thread is dealing with balanced cables at the moment so forgive me if I take a slight detour from that.  However the OP asked about cables in general, and requested to hear "voices of experience and sanity", so here are my two pennies.

It is my opinion that the community is greatly mistaken about cables.  While I firmly believe that different cables sound differently from one another, I am equally convinced that audiophiles are wrong about what the cables are actually doing in a system.  For example, in the amplifier/speaker relationship, if you really want to hear what your amplifier sounds like, your speaker cable should be exactly the same wire that is inside of your amp going to its binding posts.  Right?  All these high end cables we put as the interface between amp and speaker that give us tremendous air and expansive soundstage, etc., are all DOING SOMETHING to the signal to give us the ILLUSION of air and expansive soundstage.  Anyone who believes that expensive cables are unlocking something magical from your amplifier is a fool.  You can't get something from nothing.  If you have some generic wire inside your amplifier and speaker, insert a $4,000 speaker cable between them and VOILA!  Now you have successfully unlocked the amplifier's full potential.  Or, my favorite, "found a cable that gets out of the way of the music".  Give me a break.

So just to recap:  Yes, I believe different cables sound differently from on another, but it's because they are manipulating the signal to give you the illusion of more this or that.  They DO NOT unlock your amplifier's greatness.  If you truly want to know what your amp sounds like, use the same wire inside your amp as speaker cable.  

This is what makes most sense to me.

Even for short runs, I believe the benefit of eliminating cable-induced noise would outweigh any theoretical losses from restoring phase.

psag OP349 posts07-29-2016 9:49amOk, but even for short runs, I don't agree that a single ended cable will outperform a balanced cable. There may be exceptions, but in general, I think its accepted that balanced cable is an advance oversingle ended.

Not true. If you start with the condition that cmnr is not needed in your application as dictated by your particular environment (i.e., because of short runs, low emi/rfi, etc.), then the benefit of a balanced system is zero (by definition) yet the inclusion of phase inverters in the signal path to achieve balanced has a negative consequence. 

Each application should be evaluated on this basis. As I said earlier many very well regarded electronics manufacturers eschew balanced for this reason.

As an aside, it always amazes me how the 6 db delta alone in balanced output is mistaken by some for an improvement over single-ended cuz the person fails to properly adjust the volume in a properly designed experiment. I am not saying this is applicable here but it happens (a lot).

Psag, I, like you, believed balanced were the best solution.

Then I  got the opportunity to compare a 2 meter Kimber Kable silver balanced IC to a 1 meter KLE Innovations gZero3  single ended IC on a very  nice Ayre/Magic system.

The gZero3 sounded better with respect to clarity, dynamics, bass extension, bass control,  Imaging and neutrality. They were also free of any colouration.

Not only did it surprise me, it surprised the owner of the system.

Just another person's observation 😊

But it made me change my view of single ended cables, which is all I use now.

BTW, KLE Innovations only make Single ended cables because they believe them to be superior for shorter cables.

Just another opinion.

Ok, but even for short runs, I don't agree that a single ended cable will outperform a balanced cable. There may be exceptions, but in general, I think its accepted that balanced cable is an advance over single ended.

Psag, I guess I was not clear. That is the same point I was trying to make. For short runs cmnr is inconsequential ergo inclusion of a a phase inverter is a net loss (all else held constant).

"Obviously, many well regarded designers believe the benefits of a single ended topology significantly outweigh the benefits of common mode noise rejection"

That's news to me. Quite different from the commonly expressed view that for short runs, balanced cable offers no real advantage over single ended cable.

Atmasphere,

Interesting post. Your views certainly are in contrast to many of your peers. Obviously, many well regarded designers believe the benefits of a single ended topology significantly outweigh the benefits of common mode noise rejection (a view with which I strongly concur as is evidenced by my Soulution preamp). But saving that arguement for another day, I don’t see how you can claim that a cable's sound is not impacted by variables other than cmnr. Even at the most fundamental level, you must acknowledge capacitance and inductance are frequency dependent and as such can be designed into a wire to filter analog signals to taste?

Stringreen

The design of your Ayre amplification obviously does not meet the balanced standard!

EEGADS....my system is all balanced and can tell you that all balanced cables sound very different from each other in my system.

OK Atmasphere

Which brands meet the balanced standard, and can use pro XLRs for best sound?

ARC, Pass Labs, John Curl’s, BAT......???

In contrast: Regarding balanced cables, at least one experienced poster and equipment designer has stated here that all balanced cables perform identically, once a few basic design parameters are met.

I know I subscribe to this.

And its not because I can't hear differences in cables! I used to play the cable merry-go-round a lot in the old days. I knew Robert Fulton who, more than just about anyone else, founded the cable industry. So I've been playing with high end cables since the late 1970s.

I first got exposed to the technology in high school. I had been recruited to play bass in a local college orchestra as they were short that year. While at a concert, I noticed the Neumann U-67 mics hanging over the orchestra and traced the cables back to their source, the inputs of a Crown reel to reel run by a local engineer. Over the years I saw this done many times in various venues. So of those resulted in LPs.

Here is the thing about balanced. What is happening here is that nearly all recordings are done using balanced lines between the microphones and the microphone preamps. The reason is long ago the industry developed a means of preventing the cables from having an effect on the sound.

So when it came to working on a preamp years later, I realized that if one were to get the maximum benefit possible the interconnect cables would have to be taken into account. So instead of a single-ended preamp, I developed a balanced line preamp so you could use balanced cables at home and get the same benefit.

A number of cable companies sent us balanced cables, so we had plenty of cables on hand to do comparisons. At first we used a balanced passive volume control driven by a balanced phono section. As a control, I had a set of interconnect cables that were decades old. Using this setup, we auditioned the cables. The high end cables had various strengths and weaknesses but overall sounded pretty good. The control cable made the system literally sound like it was broken.

After that we introduced an active line section to the auditions that supported the balanced standard. The standard (now known as AES file 48) outlines how a cable should be driven- its operating parameters so to speak. Using this line section (and the amps being able to accept a proper balanced line) what we found is that not only did all the cables seem to sound better, we also could no longer tell them apart, including the control.

The whole point of the balanced line system is to eliminate cable artifacts. That is why it was created. Now you would think that is a good thing, that audiophiles would want that. But there is this thing called the Veblen Effect. That is the idea that if you spend more for a thing, that it should be a better thing. This certainly extends to cables! You can spend a lot on a balanced interconnect (length being irrelevant) and **if the system into which it is going supports the balanced standard**, the result will be that it will not sound particularly better or worse that a much less expensive cable. I've seen this and demonstrated this many times. 

But take away that support of the standard and this is no longer the case! And no mistake- this applies only to balanced lines (there is no way that you can get single-ended cables to be sonically neutral, so you always have to audition them until you find the right one for your system). The thing is, most audio manufacturers in high end audio don't seem to recognize the balanced standard, although there are a few that do. So that means that even if you have a balanced setup you may still have to audition the cable. It shouldn't be that way. But high end audio is what it is.

The fact is that speaker cables can have a huge effect (BTW, the lower the speaker impedance the more profound the cable impact) so its to your advantage to keep them as short as possible. By using balanced lines you can keep the amps near the speakers and the rest of the system where you want it, and actually get *more* resolution (even though the interconnects might be quite long) and impact, as that is what you get from short speaker cables.