How to select a good Speaker Cable

Mr. au_lait

You are good.

Mr. phastm3

2x 0 AWG

Mr. tomic601

What is the relevance of your post and IF issues on  Aerospace equipment, to speaker cables or it's calculation?
NONE!!!

If RF/IF do have effect on audio in airborne/military equipment / systems, MIL STD 810 should take care of it. The Audio issues in airborne equipment is mainly by blocking radio channels with noise.
Absolutely irrelevant to home audio. 

However, I'm thankful for your sharing what you did in the past 30 years of your life. 

I guess you never checked my recommendation of calculating (for you) he #AWG and you put such a cable to test and listen to it, playing with your sound system.

Hi
No data on Spec sheet. However it's a tube Amp...with low DF.
I would guess that the DF is 20 or lower, so a #16 AWG for 6' would do the job.

Mr. estereo

Thanks
McIntosh is keeping to build tube like Amps, mostly utilize an output transformer on the output stage. That is a 1/2 of the way, even if the drivers of that transformer is SS, the output is still a  transformer!
105 as DF is moderate (low) and it will not be much of a change.
However, I'm looking forward to see it works for you.

#1 AWG

Mr.  jollygreenaudiophile2

You quote my say, no comments and than you have a say that is irrelevant. 
Nice trying. No big deal.  

Mr. mahlman

I do not use Voodoo or other kinds of magic  to get to a better sound.
I use physics, and mathematics (Electronics) to calculate and build a cable. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. 

Directional: Sound is an AC signal. It's nature to flow 50% of the time in one direction and the other 50% of the time in the other. (Nyquist theory, that all AC signals can be broken down into sine waves, is the basic of digital Audio!).
When you claim on a cable it's directional, which  50% of the time it benefits, and which  50% of the time it doesn't?

Cooker: the melting point of Copper is:  1,085 °C
In the process of making a cable, it is melted. Once it solidifies, the metal structure is set. No heating under that melting point would change that.
So is the other direction: Cryo treatment. No effect on conductivity.
When using supper conductivity, in extreme cold: (close to the 0 Kelvin = -297 °C) it is not a copper conductor, but composite material. None apply to Audio. They are used in supercomputers or cold fusion attempts.

Do you have more Speaker cables sales BS?  
It's fun to crash them, one at a time. There are so many. The latest is called: Geometry.
It will expend for Quantum physics, String theory, Singularity quiq to come and maybe lean over older fashioned religious blessing or cursing, to get ignorance to the a new hight.

No.

A solid conductor at 0 awg is irrelevant.
The one I use has over 4K strands and is relatively flex for a #0 awg cable.
Also there is no reason to use one over the other electrically.
They still do the same job over the Audio FR range.

I know I'm on the right track.
Every time I (or someone else) tried, it worked!

Mr. hilde45

Not yet.
All the cables thing was absolutely free.
I provided the calculation, some advice and all the rest was done (DIY) by those who had the will to pioneer the idea.
As you can see, some sharing of their comments is attached...

If someone would ask for a cable, I might do it. Never did it for sale or money.

However, I did developed some methods, to include one to use the same product, for #0 awg, 2x #0 awg and 4x #0 awg.
I made one #4 awg and one #0 awg for friends, for the cost of materials and shipping. (one is local (Israel) so no shipping, one was in Vancouver BC, Canada).
Now I'm building a #0 awg (10ft. / 3m long) for domestic demo.

Mr. djones51

As you can see above, I’m not selling anything. I’m offering an idea for free. Mostly for a DIY project that cost below $100.- In this hobby it’s a small and insignificant amount that no other investment of $100 would do so much improvement to your sound quality.

For the calculations, sorry but you are wrong. It looks that you are determined to go against me, no matter what!

The speaker’s impedance is non relevant in this case. The Speaker Cables (even though they called so) are an extension of the Amp. and not of the load (speakers), when analyzed.

It can be a
Magi 1.6 or III, with 4 ohms and 86dB/w/m SPL efficiency (hard to drive) or a
Klipsch Forte-II with 8 ohms and 99dB/w/m SPL efficiency.
The same apply for both. It was checked and tested.

Mr.  djones51
It's getting a bit annoying...
If you are not going to bather with my idea, why do you keep nudging on endless errores issues?

Most Amp's on the market will not deal with a load as low as 1 ohm and will shut down. For most 8 ohms rated speakers, the impedance is between 3 ohms and 30 ohms.
Running 50' of speaker cable is not recommended.
Buy a long XLR cable and place the Amp. as close as possible to the speaker.
Most speaker cables out in the market, used by sound owner is about 10ft, give and take 2ft.
The best would be to use two monoblocks as close as possible to the speakers (even put them back to back and use very short jumpers. The distance between the power Amp's and the Pre. can use XLR balanced cables of extended length if required.
It is essential to lower the cable resistance and one good way doing so is shorten it. The other is getting it thick.
It's your choice which suits you.

Mr. grm

May I contribute my 2 cents to your happiness?

1. What Amp. do you use (more as what is it’s DF)?
2. Bi wire is a way to connect two relatively thinner wires instead of one thicker. On Spice (SW) analysis, the results of connecting one cable of #7 awg ( 0.4982 ohms / 1000 ft.) is equal to connecting two #10 awg, of the same length ( 0.9989 ohms / 1000 ft.).
The problem is, that it’s hard to find ready made #7 awg cables, but more common to find #10, #12 or #14 awg cables.
3). 15’ is a bit long for a speaker cable. As longer it gets, so is the resistance increase. So #10 awg with that length might be no so good of a cable.

Please pay attention, that I do not say a thing about prices.
A simple DIY project and cables + accessories, cost less than $100 can work for you. That’s way less than $220 or $5k!
I never thought that cable prices should be high.

Mr. glupson

You and the others here, who have all ignorant says about my idea, without having the knowledge and never tried it, is an insult.
It's like you would come to a ped lock party, empty handed, but keep criticizing the food and beverage that all others brought. What kind of a person does that?

I have no idea why you do it, what kind of a person you are and what is it for you to gain, by doing so?

I can tell you that "all" who tried it, was pleasantly surprised from the results.
The sound improved, the bass got clear, tight and strong, like a hidden subwoofer been added, and the mid and highs got crystal clear. It was like the speakers got a new life, and a heavy cover was removed from them. The sound improved by so much.
None of them wanted to go back to their thing (#14-12 awg) cable.  

Mr. sgreg1

Thanks. I do take length into my calculation. Length and DF.
The outcome is the thickness (# awg).
The thing is, that the Amp's DF and required cable length are a given.
The thickness is the outcome.

None balanced cables (interconnect cables) over 3ft. are a bad idea.
Try to avoid it.

Mr. glupson

Says who?
The one that have an interest? Someone who is Making Speaker Cables, a Dealer, a Salesman?
They would benefit from that (If: " skeletons are better left in the closet").

You say: The Audio hobbyist should be treated as mushrooms:
Kept in the dark and feed with crap...

I say: let’s light Speaker Cables issue up, get some sense in it, and enjoy from a way better sound.
All have the right to know the truth and enjoy from it.

As for the skeletons:
Mom say: Johny, you can play with grandma, but when you are done, return her skeletons to the  closet
:-)

As some issues on cables and speaker cables were pointed out (directional and cooker), I feel that the obvious need to be said:

All cable stories ever been told by speaker cables makers or sales rep's,
are a lie. An ugly lie, to enhance sales over clients ignorance. 

The fact is, that none of them ever came out with a reasonable say what cable we need, or why cable A is better than cable B. A shame.
An entire industry sale a product, that they have absolutely no idea what
it should be to fit a customer's sound system.

This is the situation even in those very moments, I'm writing those lines. 

Sorry, there were quite a few who made a cable and posted very positive replies. A #0 awg, is more like your thumb rather your arm. A #4 awg is way less.
Is that is your excuse? I hope you don't want to hear such a say: "its  too thick to be conveniently connected", from your doctor before a surgery.
It is unaccepted. If so many pioneers could easily overcome that problem, all can. Bizzare? a thin cable, good for all, cost an arm and a leg, is  Bizzare!
Some methods were offered, practiced and successfully implemented.
If that is your requirement, just say so. 

Mr. estereo

Even though the calc. apply, I would not bother to invest in thick cable in your surround speakers with "Long Cables".
As 25' is a significant length, you will need way thicker cables than #8 AWG for that distance. It may also cost you a lot. 
I recommended #8 AWG for DF=105 and 6'
For 25' ( 4x as long), you will need #0 AWG! 
I also tend to think that the 7.1 ch. is an HT receiver. 
This is a mediocre amplification, not that much worth the effort. 
 

I need the required cable length too. The speakers data (Load) is not required.
Thanks.
DF of 106 is relatively low...

Thanks
https://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm

For 15’ (4.57m ~ 5m), and for a DF 100 (106): a #4 awg cable is recommended.
The Bi wire of #10 awg (equals to 2x #10 awg in parallel) is:
1 ohms per 1000 ft, each so it equals* to 0.5 ohms for both.
But a #4 awg (as required has a resistance of 0.25 ohms!) So now you have only half of the recommended conductivity.

*:
Bi wire never did the Job. It’s a good trick to make double the money over speaker cables :-)
but not good for anything. They invented a BS theory for it, most fall in.

An analysis with Spice simulation SW shows (used by all analog design engineers),
that the single 0.5 ohms (per 1000 ft) does a better job than two of 1 ohm in bi wiring.
Thats, because most of the current goes to the low Fr. (woofer) and only
a small portion to the High. So now, with the Bi wire, only 50% left for the low, while most of the current flows there. A single wire of 0.5 ohms would hold better that current, than a 1 ohms cable.
I would say, if you go for a #4 awg, drop the bi wire.

Tube Amps have low DF so cables won't change the sound a bit.
If the cables are meant to end up with a tube Amp. don't bother at all.

Mr. dekay

What Amp has a DF of 3?
I assume it’s a tube amp. None of this discussion is applicable in that case. For a DF of 3, a phone line cable may do.
DF of 3 equals to Ro = 8/3 = 2.67 Ohms.
For a SS Amp’s DF as high as 200 (PASS Labs), Ro = 8/200 = 0.04 Ohms.
For a DF as high as 700 (Luxman), Ro = 8/700 = 0.01 Ohms.
For the last two, the cable’s resistance (in series and need to calculated twice (for the + and -)) is significant.
For 2.67 Ohms - Not much.

Mr.  riley804

Yes. But it was 2 years ago. It's time to undust it again...

Sorry Mr. djones51
There are many articles on the web, claiming other. None is saint.
At the time your link has no test data, no evidence of people who tried it and reported of the difference in sound - I do.
Pleas try not to send me read long and none relevant articles.

The truth about low DF (20) is that it is mostly common in Tube amplifiers, Amps with output Transformer (like McIntosh). or old (70’s) SS amps. Yes, when the DF is that low, the speaker cable has no significance. But when it goes above 200, as most SS power amps do, it matters a lot. Exchanging a poor #14 or #12 cable with the right cable makes a significant difference.

Mr. djones51

I’d kindly asked not to refer me to web articles. There are so many out there, with different ideas. So what?
None are yours. It is your choice which one to addaped, and which one do reject. So it is for myself.

This idea here is mine. So as the articles won’t keep up the discussion, let’s leave it out from the beginning. Thanks.

For the inductance, if you read what DF is, and how it is calculated,
than you may see, it is ignoring the inductance and capacitance and use pure resistance values. Even though, if you look into a power amp’s schematic, you will find a few from both on the output stage!

The DF value, as so, is a pure number (just as dB) as it is the ratio between a constant 8 ohms (resistance, not impedance) and the internal Ro (output resistance) of the Amp. as so, the value (lets say 400) is a pure number. no values.
A thick cable comes assingles and not pairs, molded in a flat or round synthetic compound. You can drop the inductance. A #4 or #0 cables resistance is so low, that if there is any inductance, it is negligible.

On top of all said, did you ever gave it a try?
Because for those who did, it made a huge difference.
If you didn’t, why won’t you try it and then come back to the discussion.
That would make more sense.

Mr. djones51

The AWG STD : https://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm
Shows a ratio of 1:10 between a
#10 wire: 0.9989 Ohms / 1000 ft. and a
#0 wire: 0.0983 Ohms / 1000 ft. resistance.

There is an additional decimal zero there!

It makes no matter of how long is a cable, the ratio remains the same.
For a 10ft cable, that has two wires: a + and a -, ( = 20ft in total),
For a #10 it is 0.9989/1000*2*10 = 0.020 Ohms.
For a # 0 it is 0.0983/1000*2*10 = 0.002 Ohms.
Same ratio as with 1ft. or 1000 ft or any in between.
10 times lower resistance is significant for a DF of 700:
Ro = 8/700 = 0.011 Ohms.
Take a #10 cable of 10 ft long: 0.020 + 0.011 (DF) and you get a new DF of only 258! You Just lost 442 or 63%.
Just by using a thin cable, you gave up 63% of your investment, as far it regards to the DF quality. about the same in sonic quality too.
Those who tried, rather than argue, reported so.
Not all DF call for the same #AWG. For a DF of 200, #4 will do.

Mr. twoleftears
Not all amps and length call for a #0. It may go less, but also more!

Your link to Amazon is a good start. Some did it in 2018 and here is what they had reported:

1).

Pass Lab 250.5 with Magnepan III's.

I replaced DIY 5 foot 16 AWG silver ladder line.  Have previously used a variety of commercial Helix design, solid flat wire and braided multi-stranded wires insulated and in multiple sleeves.  Alll 12 AWG, 5 to 8 foot length.  Costs ranged from $400 to $2,000.

I purchased 25 feet of 0 AWG form a supplier on eBay for $45 ($12 shipping) and four brass (supposedly gold plated) battery connectors ($7.49).

I constructed four five foot cables in just over one hour.  Battery connectors were converted to spades with a cold chisel and wire cutters, cable was cut with a hacksaw and insulation stripped with the hacksaw.  Spades were connected to Pass Labs 250.5 terminals (PL does not supply banana plug receptacles).  I attached banana plugs to a two inch piece of silver plated 8 AWG wire.  I hollowed out a holle in 0 AWG wire with a punch and did not remove insulation.  I then inserted the stripped 8 AWG wire in hole and secured the assembly with a hose clamp around the insulation at the cable’s end.

The cables were attached to my thirty year old modified MG IIIa’s.  

The results are stunning.  The amount of undistorted energy filling the room, is jaw dropping.  I keep turning up the volume to levels that previously irritated my ears, and experience no irritation.  In the modified lyrics of B.B. King, “The shrill is gone.”  My wife is hearing new detail in cuts she has listened to many times before.

In my case, b4icu57, you were absolutely correct, thank you (except for the part of you doubting ribbon speakers would be improved with installation of your design).  I can’t wait to try the cables in one of my other systems that employs cone speakers.

I am sure every case is different.  Nevertheless, I encourage other hobbyist to test your theories.

Thank you for your generosity and patience.
All good wishes 

2).

My cables arrived today. They're beasts!

As suspected the forks won't sit in binding posts without an adaptor. I'm currently using banana plugs. Here's an image of the before and after cables: https://imgur.com/a/De0LmuG (credit card for scale).

I hooked them up and there's a definite improvement. The sound is more transparent. I need to listen more but I'm happy with this investment. I'm going to replace the bananas with some bolt on ones: https://uk.farnell.com/staubli/22-1053/banana-plug-50a-4mm-screw-m4/dp/1085560, that'll give me a better connection. The current plugs are on tight, but it'll be nice to get a stronger hold. The stiffness of the cables means that there's actually very little weight on the binding posts as the cables stand up straight from the floor.

Thank you b4icu. As you said to me, where else can I get that level of upgrade for that money.

Amp: Classe CT-5300
Speakers: B&W 802 Nautilus
Previous Cable: 4mm / 12 awg, 2.5 m

Cost is £25 for the 5 meters

New cable: 0 awg, 2.5 m (I was recommended at 4 awg but was told 0 would be fine)

Impressions:

More detailed, more transparent. Like another layer has been peeled back from what was, in my opinion, an already transparent system.

Either way, b4icu said he’d recommend a cable that would give me an improvement. I tried it, it did. I don’t see the problem.

And now he’s two for two.

3).

Mr. Wilson, who exchanged a Transparent Audio Laboratory 14 AWG 12 feet long cable, that costs about $250, with a 0 AWG 2.5m long cable:

Amp: Emotiva 250W/Ch.

Speakers: Vienna Acoustics Beethoven.

 

"My initial impressions: It’s like having new speakers. The sound is pure and clean. Minute details are suddenly apparent. The range is amazing. Highs, mid-tones and a new bass that I didn’t know my speakers were capable of. I wonder now what I need the new … subwoofer for!

It feels that for all these years my speakers were being chocked and suddenly they can breathe and have their full voice.  

To say I’m happy about my new speaker cables is an understatement. I’m thrilled. Thank you for building these superbly engineered cables to unleash the full potential of my home sound system".

 4).

It improved the sound quality of my speakers (B&W 802N). Sounds are clearer and less congested. Continued listening and swapping back and forth reveals the same result. Others have said the same, including my wife.

For the £150 or so it cost me I would heartily recommend it.
I upgraded from Van Dam blue speaker cable.

5).

Below is SAM’s DIY cables sound impression.

My room is quite big so I have an issue of insufficient bass.  I recently added a pair of Rel 212se to pair with my Wilson Alexia driven by Passlabs 350.8 and I thought that it has made my day.  I have top to bottom and the music flowed v nicely with the Kharma Grand Ref speaker cables. The 1st impression upon installation of the DIY cables was wow 😮 it sounded very musical.  While the music sounded sweet with Kharma, the DIY cables sounded more realistic.  Soundstage was equally wide and the overall music has more drive.  Bass notes were drier and has better separation / weight.  As lack of good bass was my issue, I was pleasantly surprised.  The high extension seems to have lessened and sounded less sparkle, but sufficient and overall adequate.  The mid's and vocals seems to have taken to be more backward staging.  Therefore the presence of the mid's is where it is weak in.  Overall, this set up sings and I feel that the flow of music is more realistic and enjoyable and the Kharma is now in the box.

6).

Below is JOHN’s DIY cables sound impression.

I have been chasing for a better hifi system all the time. I have gone through numerous changes of preamps, amps, turntables/cartridges, phone amps, CD transports, DAC, interconnect cables and speaker cables over the many years in this hobby.

My present amps are Pass Labs 160.8 mono blocks (damping factor 200) driving Magico Q5 speakers with Ansuz Speakz C2 speaker cables. My 1st impression after installing the DIY 4AWG 2 meters length cables was the system sounded very pleasant and musical. Bass response was enhance and tighter and I noticed more excursion on the woofers motion.   The soundstage was equally wide but with more body presentation. The high is a notch less which is good as it is less edgy especially on vocal. I am very happy with the new DIY cables that I decided to retired the Ansuz in the box.

7).

Below is my DIY cables sound impression.

My interest in hifi date back to late 60s with Dual system. Bought JBL4315 speakers and Harman Kardon Citation 16 pre and power in 1970. I still have the Harman Kardon power amp in mint condition. Like John, I have gone through numerous changes in both equipments and cables in my hifi system over the years, trying to chase after that dream system.

Now I am using 4 Telos 600 mono blocks bi-amp to the Kharma Exquisite Ref 1 E Signature speakers with 2 pairs of Kharma Enigma Signature Loudspeaker cables for the last 10 years. My 1st impression of the DIY cables which cost less than USD100 was overwhelming. It sounded musical and not bright to the point of edginess especially on female vocal when I play loud to around 90dB region. Soundstage is wide with overall presentation very dynamic and full. Lost a wee notch on the sustain on the treble resulting in quicker decay of the high notes or less sparkle. However with the diamond tweeters of the Kharma, the extension of high is still more than adequate.

The best takeaway for me on the DIY cable is no edginess of vocal (hurting my ears) when I play loud. Like my friends, I retired the Kharma cables in the box which I have been using the last 10 years. I may try to parallel the Kharma with the DIY cables after spending some extended time with the DIY cables.

All our high-end cables are 2 metres in length with no spec on the gauge or size of

the cables.

SAM’s Kharma retail price USD 8,000 for 2M pair.
JOHN’s Ansuz Speakz C2 retail price USD 8,400 for 2M pair.
KHIAK ‘s Kharma retail price USD 17,000 for 2M pair.

Mr. djones51

I stand behind my calculations. 
Rather than do a comparison of the difference (R #10 awg - R #0 awg), 
Do R #10 awg / R #0 awg.
The ratio is 1:10
your DF 700 Ro is not correct: 8/700 = 0.0114 or 0.011 ohms, rounded.
It is significant.
Just read the sharing of those who tried it (if you have the time and the patient to read the thread of 2018:)
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/no-one-actually-knows-how-to-lculate-what-speaker-cable-they-need
It's all there. People, that rather argue the numbers gave it a fair try.
The results are interesting: They claim that it makes a difference and a BIG one! 

Mr. fuzztone

Which model of tara labs did you purchase? How much did you paid for it?

The Omega (#4 awg) or the The Grand Master Evolution ( $000 awg) ?
Your favorite brand is thinking that the thicker the better. So this is a good start.

They do not link the need of such thickness with length or DF, but it well related to the price.
My recent check (about 4 years ago) suggested a price of $32,000.- for the Omega, at my local dealer.
I made my friend a pair of #4 awg (PASS LAB 250.8) for material cost:
Less than US $75.-
Up’s that’s a bit cheaper than the Omega...Yes, it came without a fancy box, nor fishnet sleeve (-:. 
I really don't think it makes a difference when he cleans the dust over the cables, once a while.

Now I’m into assemble a #0 awg, so he asked me to have it for a demo.
The material BOM is about to arrive till Aug. 5th. 
Even though the calculation shows that #4 awg is enough, I would be happy to see if a #0 awg improve the already good sound he has (B&W 802D).

Mr. andy2

Tube Amp. have a low DF (less than 20) so the cables are insignificant in that case. Not at 20kHz nore any other Fr.
Above there is a guy who has an Amp. with a DF of 3 !!!

It is very significant when using a fine SS Amp. with higher DF's (above 200, up to 700 or 1000, before getting into D class with DF's of 2000 and above).

Mr. jaybe

Look at my post, a bit above - posted at: 07-18-2020 10:50pm
with plenty of reports that people who tried it, shared their sonic experience with us.
It is all taken from a thread of mine in 2018, here:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/no-one-actually-knows-how-to-lculate-what-speaker-cable-they-need

You may read it all, if you have the time or take my post here as recommended. Enjoy...

Mr. millercarbon

Who or what is the  Kenjit Society?
Google didn't bring up anything relevant. A link could help.
As I didn't certified them, I assume it's mutual.
Is that like a 3 michelin stars of the speakers cable industrie? 

Mr. audiofool1

Your Nordost Heimdall 2 spec 
https://www.nordost.com/norse2/heimdall2/heimdall2-speaker-cable.php
calles for a 18x22awg = (52.9392 ohms per 1,000m) / 18 = 2.941 ohms.
That is the equivalent of ~ #9 awg. (a bit less).

For a 2m cable for a DF of 4000 (very high!) an 8 x 0 awg is required!
That is a very hard one to find or make. 

Mr. cooperjack

What kind of a joke is this?
Are you a sales agent of this firm?
Is there any guideline to tell you what cable you need, regardless of what information is required for that?
Do you think that one cable for all works?
What makes one cable of this firm any better than another, or some other maker's cable?
Is the cheep price going to make you forget the bad quality?

Mr. jaybe

#6 awg is required.
May I please ask, what is the # awg of your current cable?
Thanks

Mr. cakyol

Your flowchart is funny / wrong.
Nice try.
Well, the resistance of a conductive wire as copper, is:
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circuits/Lesson-3/Resistance

R = p x L / S
When p is the constant resistance of the material (copper)
L is the length in Meters
S is the cross section in square millimeters.

As so, when a given cable's length increase, so is its resistance.
The way to compensate on length (to keep the same resistance) the  cross section need to be higher.

so, the same calculated resistance, is effected by the cable length - in a linear relation. Double the length (from 7.5ft. to 15 ft.) the R (resistance doubles too.
To keep it the same S need to Double too.
If you ref. to the AWG table, the increase in # AWG number (from 7 to 8)
is not half the resistance. If you would like to have 1/2 the resistance, from a #12, you would need to use #9 awg. and if you need 1/2 of that it would be a #6.
So it gets 1/2 the resistance every #3 awg steps.

Yes, it's better to keep the cables short.
If the length is a must (too far from Amp), you step into thicker cables.
If you can use monoblocks, place them back to back to the speakers, and connect them with very short jumpers (10" of less), is the best.
Never seen one on a demo!

Mr.  ericnicky

Sorry sir. A DF of 20 is so low that for 2m, you may use any ordinary cable (#14-#12 awg).

Mr. stevea11757

Thanks.
The best to make your 0/1 awg cable is to use a short but thinner cable on the ends. I used #8 awg. For the length, 10cn (4'') is good.
In person, I prefer banana plugs over spades. I used the Nakamichi type from eBay:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/8x-Nakamichi-Gold-Plated-BFA-Speaker-Audio-Banana-Plug-4mm-Connector-Bananen/281702195511?hash=item4196c26137:g:Q3QAAOSwu1VW6rf~
Connecting the short #8 awg to the Nakamichi banana plugs:
used soldering.
Connecting the  short #8 awg to the  0/1 awg cable: 
I use an industrial type of spade. I purchased a crimping tool for that size! and the spade is cramped over the  0/1 awg cable.
The connection between the short cable and this large spade can be done also by soldering (before crimping). You ,at yose alo a different methode:
Dril a short jile, for the  #8 awg cable to enter, about 2 cm deep.
Insert the  #8 awg cable into that hole.
Use a small hose band to tight it up - and you are done.
An isolating sleeve (shrinking) would be nice on top of that.

Please be kind to update me on progress, as well to share your impression from your new sound. Thanks.

Mr. drivingwatts

For symmetry, try to keep both cables for same length,
even if one is a bit longer than required.
Speaker's data is not required.
They are not a part of this "Speaker Cable" calculation.

For a DF of 150 and 6’ it should be a #6 awg cable.

Mr.  unreceivedogma

Good for you.

There is tell, of a guy in Russia, who thought the russian made shoes were very good, till he purchase an imported pair...

Usually it is common to think that the better is the worst enemy of the good. In your case, this say was put to sleep.

Mr. djones51

You've got it wrong, not me.
The #12 awg is not any more "Normal" or #0 awg crazy. It's of what the cable makers got you to think.
It is only because it was more difficult to handle a  #0 awg cable and very easy to handle a  #12 awg.

So, keep using a bad cable at a time, it is difficult for others to make
a good one.

All who tried it out, were very happy with the results.
It did a significant improvement and difference.
The calculations were always correct and fit the results.

If for some reason, you are from the cables industry, I can understand you concern. It is time for the people to wake up and buy the right cables, not those you recommend.

Mr. echols8

For low DF as your Amp has, a simple wire (#14 to #12 awg) would do.

I so not think that one model will sound better than the other. Really not.
Till you move to a high DF Amp. and not a tube or tube alike (McIntosh),
I would not invest in cables at all.

Mr. donpepe

You are good.
The DF of your Amp. is relatively low, (see my answer above to Mr.  Mr. echols8).

Mr. nwres

For your DF=105 and cable length of 6tf. an #8 awg is recommended.

Mr. moscoe

For DF of 800 and 6 ft (2m) you need a 2x0 awg cable.

Mr. djones51

Is this going to be like this forever?
I’m happy you skipped this time the "being rude" part. Thanks.

As per the AWG STD table: https://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm
What table do you use? (link!)

The given cable resistance (Ohms per 1000 ft. raw - just "Copy - Paste" on the numbers!):

#16 the resistance per 1000 ft is given as: 4.016 ohms
#12 given as: 1.588 ohms
#8 given as: 0.6282 ohms
#4 given as: 0.2485 ohms

For a 6ft length, you need 12ft cable:
A red (+) of 6tf and a black (-) of 6 ft.
6ft + 6ft = 12 ft.

The calculated resistance for the 4 cables is:

(#16) 4.016 ohms / 1000 x 12 = 0.048 ohms
(#12) 1.588 ohms /1000 x 12 = 0.019 ohms
(# 8) 0.6282 ohms / 1000 x 12 = 0.0075 ohms
(# 4) 0.2485 ohms / 1000 x 12 = 0.003 ohms

Very different from your calculations:

8 awg = .459 Ohm resistance @ 6ft
12 awg = .466 Ohm resistance @ 6ft
16 awg = .480 Ohm resistance @ 6ft

I have no idea from where your numbers are coming from?
You need to check your calculator’s battery, and replace them. :-)

As so, your DF to cable comparations are all errores.

But for the sake of science, this is not accounting (using only addition and subtraction of numbers),
we (Engineers) use also multiplication and divisions and more...
Then we get the ratio: a/b and not only the diff. of a-b.

I think that by this example, we are pretty much done.

Mr. djones51

You are tiring me out Mr. djones51.
Consider this answer to be the last !

Haven’t seen any explanations of your source for the AWG table or the errores calc.

A 105 for DF is not that much of a DF. But as this is what it is, let’s do it:

105 DF = 8/105 = 0.076 Ohms as Ro.
If using a #16 awg cable (6 ft) = 0.048 ohms as R cable.
Add the DF (Ro) and the cable (R):

0.076 + 0.048 = 0.124 ohms

0.124 ohms equals to a combined DF of 8 / 0.124 = 64
So, by you using a #16 you are losing 40% of the original DF of that Amp (105).
Is 40% still insignificant?

But why 105?

Do it with a DF of 400 ! (there are guys gere with Amps of 800 and even 4000)

400 DF = 8 / 400 = 0.02 ohms.
With a # 16 awg you lose 70% and so on...
(you claim its insignificant, so I take the liberty of using a #16 awg) .

Is that significant enough for you?

Most of cables out there are of #12 awg, for the convenience of making them,
rather of: being significant for the task...
Would you like that attitude when sitting on the dentist chair, or at a bypass surgery? That would be a first.

With a #12 awg, you about to lose 50%!
I can understand that you can cut your loss in advance, if you go to gamble Vegas or buy some shares.
It's a game with chances to WIN but also to LOSE.

Is 50% loss on the sound is insignificant for you?

Sticking to your thin cables,
you only lose! (unfair)

No WIN !!!

Mr.  madcow

You need a #4 awg cable for 9 ft and Df=210.