John Dunlavy On "Cable Nonsense"

Here's my 2 cents worth...
First off let me say that I am a believer in that cables do make a difference (not always for the good) and that bi-wiring also makes a difference (also not always to the plus side of things).
This past weekend I spent some time with a pair of cable designers who I have come to know over the last 5 months. These guys make cables that have separate cables for transmit and returns as opposed to all cables being in the same jacket - typical stereo cables are 2 cables per channel and bi-wires are 4 cables per channel. We tested a prototype cable (bi-wire version) that was constructed in a different configuration in that the return wires were made slightly different in terms of the internal wrapping of the materials. The transmit wires were configured exactly the same. Using the same system (older but high end Sony cdp, Copeland preamp and amp) but using three different pairs of speakers (Duntech, B&W 803 S2 and a pair of DIY (vifa & seas drivers) I was able to tell each and every time when the return wires had been changed. I found what can best be described as an "aggressive" verus a "laid-back" sound when the cables were swapped. There were about 6 listeners there and we all were able to distinguish the differences although personal tastes lent to a discussion on which way sounded best. Some times I preferred the "laid-back" version while others preferred the other.

In a nutshell it can be said that I am a believer in cable differences but respect the right of those who believe that they don't make difference from a purely scientific standpoint or have tried but have noticed no difference. I am no electrical engineer but do have a background in ultrasonics (so I have some knowledge on how sound and electrical signals move through time and space) but it was my experience that there was a significant difference each time, audible to a number of people - I can't explain it scientifically but I know what I heard and the only thing our group of testers could not definatively agree on was which version sounded the best.

I am glad for the differences expressed in these forums as it allows for one's own experiences to be be heard (read) and it would truly be a boring world (audio and otherwise) if we all were of the same opinion...

Steve - maybe my explanation was not specific - there are 2 cables per side in a NON-biwire version. One for the positive speaker/amp terminal and another separate cable for the negative speaker/amp terminal. Totally separating the cables negates any cross-talk between the signals or so it it my understanding. In a bi-wire version there would be a total of 4 cables between the amp and a speaker - two positives cables attached to the positive HF and LF binding posts and both being attached to the positive terminal on the amp. This is also done for the negative side as well. Hence the need for 4 cables per speaker in a bi-wire version. E-mail me privately if I have still not provided you with a clear understanding of the cable configuration.

Plasma - these guys do everything by hand but do not extrude (hopefully the correct term) the copper themselves. They take solid core copper wire provided by a supplier and they wrap a number of them in a proprietary design with specific type(s) of insulation. They are what I consider all built by hand. The only thing they purchase "pre-made" is the copper - the rest is all performed manually.... So to disagree in this particular instance - terminating the cables by hand is NOT the only manual labor involved in the construction of these particular cables. As far as debunking my claim of hearing the difference you cannot for you were not thereto witness whether there was an audible difference or not - I stand by what I heard but truly wish I could offer a scientific reason for the difference.

Doc - the copper used is supplied with some type of coating on it and is single stranded solid core. From this point the cable is "braided", "twisted", whatever one would call it using materials in between each strand. This process is proprietary in nature and I am unaware of the exact winding scheme but I can tell you that it is all wound by hand. A final outer sleeve is installed and then the terminations are soldered on. Economies of scale are not realized at this time as these guys are doing it as a sideline and therefore are not relying on it for daily income. The prototype "return" cable I mentioned earlier differed in internal construction but I can attest that each and every time the difference was audible. So in the end, I guess these guys qualify as Category #3 but the entire cable is hand constructed less the coating on the copper as supplied from the copper source. I would imagine that the DIY people here can appreciate what goes into hand constructing cables but as I am not one of them my explanations may leave out key technical terms and I apologize for that. I believe that Paulwp has coined some of the phrases I was looking for in my original post and I thank him for that. Bottomline is that in my experience there was a distinct difference when the negative post cables were swapped - but only as a result of the fact that these cables differed in construction. If I have the chance to do this "test" again I would take the time to single wire the speakers (not bi-wire) and alternate the different negative post cables to see (hear) if there are any differences. If any of you guys happen to pass through Alberta this summer please advise and I will arrange the same demo so that my experience can be refuted or corroborated. I thank the recent posters for the opportunity to offer my cable story without what had been expected (many negative votes...)