Directional interconnect cables

Lupinthe3rd - It does not make sense to you because it does not make sense. Believing that a wire terminated at the ends in a metal conductive pin and socket is directional is evidence of a complete lack of understanding of even basic electrical theory and a willingness to buy into any idea that someone proposes that is backed by a misapplication of scientific principles. In order to make a cable directional you would have to add a component that had an inherent directional attribute - like a diode or a polarity sensitive capacitor. Doing that would affect sound if done correctly, but it is not an effect you would want (of course adding the polarity sensitive cap would, with sufficient voltage, give a very time limited change as the cap would fail). You can create your own directional cable with a simple nondirectional cable and a ball point pen (to add the arrow).

An update and caveat - Lupinthe3rd - however, the proper way to connect any shielded cable to connect the shield to ground at only one end, not at both ends, connecting the shield at both ends can cause problems if the two 'grounds' thus connected are not at the same potential. Realize that in most instances when connected a preamp to an amp the two grounds will be at the same potention so terminating the shield at only one end won't matter. This is not necessarily the case when running cable betweeen different systems that are housed in different locations (such as different buildings. If the directional cable has the shield terminated at only one end then that is of value, but again that should not add significant cost to the cable and again you can make your own cable or buy cable with a shield connected at both ends and reterminate one of the ends (and use the ball point pen). So the cables are not entirely snake oil - just don't pay a lot for the directional cable as opposed to the nondirectional cable.

I am assuming that Kijanki's entire post was intended as a joke, however for those who may take it seriously, the following:
Whether Copper oxide was ever used to make diodes does not support the notion that wires are diodes. The comparision is merely an example of faulty reasoning - "copper oxide can be used to make diodes, wires are made from copper, hence, wires are diodes." Socrates would love that one. The next time a diode goes out in a piece of electronic equipment, don't buy another diode, just grab a piece of glass (silicon) and tape it to the pcb. Diodes don't just magically appear because they are composed of an element that can also be used to make diodes. We are then in the realm of alchemy. The last bit of faulty reasoning I heard on this site as to new and exciting diode manufacturing techniques was that diodes were created by the extrusion process in manufacturing wire, I guess that theory was that the process created a taper and that resulted in a diode - kind of like a funnel I suppose - make up the science as you go along approach. Furthermore, what happens inside a wire is well defined, complicated or not, with regard to the effect the wire has on an electrical signal transduced to sound. Whatever deep quantum mysteries lurk within the realm of the eerie wire are of no significance when it comes to listening to the end result or in measuring the audio frequency signal at the ends of the wires. Surely the remark as to the speed of current flow within a wire was intended as a joke, and if not, even readers with no technical or scientific background will realize that this is an incorrect statement. One thing I have always wondered with the mysteries beyond the realm of science argument is how we are able to repeatedly make reliable complicated electronic equipment if there is so much to chance as a meaningful probability that a wire will act as a diode. Wires are not diodes, diodes are diodes, wires conduct equally well in either direction.

While the proffered definition of drift velocity is not incorrect, the net velocity of an individual electron, it is not of particular interest in sending an electrical signal through a wire. Interesting view of current "the the velocity of electrons requiered to move a few A of current inside a copper wire is only a few mm per second". While the net velocity of a single electron may not be a few mm per second, the meaninful aspect of current flow is not the drift velocity. Current is defined in terms of velocity or rate of charge flow, with an electron of a certain charge in coulombs. Current = dq/dt, with the current in amperes, q or charge in coulombs and time in seconds. The current flow, or the flow of charge carried via electrons, is what is important in a determing the effect of the electrical properties of the conductor on that flow, and finally on the signal that gets turned into sound. The drift velocity is not really applicable to that discussion and more than talking about the spin of the individual electron.

scientists still cannot fully understand mechanics of the (fill in the blank). True, but meaningless. Using scientific knowledge to do something or accurately predict an outcome requires judgment - selecting the principles that have a meaningful effect. For example, while it was shown that time is not a constant (as opposed to the speed of light) that result is of no consequence in building a bridge. Suggesting to a group of engineers engaged in the task of building a bridge that we should take into account the non-constant nature of time in the design would properly be met with incredulous looks and a recomendation to avoid sharp objects. What the "science doesn't fully understand ______" line is is a marketing tool, nothing more. The classic technique, well demonstrated here and for many years across many disciplines, is to take a scientific principle and misapply that principle to arrive at the desired conclusion. Drift velocity of an electron, copper oxide once used in semiconductor material, and "extruded diodes" are nothing more than such misapplication in this instance. Do some of the scientific principles expounded in marketing hype have meaning when properly applied ? Sure You had better take into account skin effect when working with RF. Silver as opposed to other metals is meaningful in some applications - I once build a preamplifier to deal with less than 10 microvolt changes with the signal of interest embedded in electrical activity several orders of magnitude greater than the signal. Had to use ceramic spacers and silver solder to take advantage of the low noise and high CMRR of the active device. So silver rather than some other metal was important in that application. Misapplication - silver wire vs copper to move around tens of millivolt and larger signals between cd players, preamps and amps, talking about skin effect with audio frequencies over 20 feet of wire, applying drift velocity to support an idea that cables are directional. No, man does not completely understand anything, but that philosophical fact is just not important in this application.