I’m getting a bad feeling. 😥 Damage Control! Damage Control!
No one actually knows how to lculate what speaker cable they need
It goes back to cable manufaturars, mostly provide no relevant data! to sales and the users. None will answer this!
Whay do you think that you own now the optimal cable to your setup?
I think I've figured it out.
Whay do you think that you own now the optimal cable to your setup?
I think I've figured it out.
Showing 50 responses by geoffkait
“In science, there are ways to deal with claims. Some are proven right others to be wrong. History will tell if any other came earlier to claim the same. On both, I never had a guy on this thread to prove me wrong. All claims were of "different" nature. The so called jumper cables is not exactly what I claim, as some need less thick and other more thick cables, as per their equipment.” @b4icu That’s true, nobody here proved you wrong. But, and here’s the kicker, you didn’t prove anybody wrong here, either. You know, like wire directionality and conductor purity, for example. And there’s a reason for that. In science, you cannot prove a negative. Hel-loo! Be that as it may, you haven’t even proved yourself right. How about them apples? 🍎 |
conradnash @geoffkait , absolutely. While the logic and absolute-ness (in audio, indeed!) might not be agreed on by everyone, I’m an advocate of trying it and seeing how I get on. If bi-wiring has claims to work (ignoring any bi-amping, whether active or passive) then swapping the cable for one double thick run instead of two thinner runs should achive a similar effect. Maybe that’s what’s being seen here? Either way, agreeing that bi-wiring might work but this can’t seems like a contradictory argument. >>>>Sorry, no offense intended, and I realize some will probably accuse me of shooting fish in a barrel 🐟🐟🐟🐟🐟 but you don’t have any more idea what bi wiring is than b4icu. |
b4icu OP248 posts12-13-2018 1:13am You’ve got it so wrong Mr. stevecham. The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster was a combination of a bad management decision to launch it in spite of very low temperature that day and a rings and gasket technical issue that been fixed from that time on. Nothing personal. My say to Mr. geoffkait implied he could make them (one or both) with his out of this world technical attitude. I did not called him names as you did to me. Huh? What in the world are you going on about? I implied what? When? Where? Who? |
b4icu OP246 posts12-11-2018 3:40pm Mr. geoffkait Where is Mr. Dill to help you out of this mess? All the sudden when he is most needed, he is gone. I’ve seen here some of your best friend’s comments on your say and showed it to my ex-terrestrials guests. They smiled and said: This one we kind of seen coming… They also asked me if you worked for NASA at the time the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster (January 28, 1986)? That could explain a lot… >>>>I suspect you’d be much better off leaving humor to someone else and sticking to your thick cable schtick. My best friend from school was Director of the Rogers Commission to Investigate the Shuttle Disaster. Did you go to cheese school? 🧀 do you think the moon landing was a hoax? Do you think the moon is made of cheese? Speaking of NASA they use very pure metals for their fuses. Do you think that means they’re gullible? NASA has been exploring advabced fuse technology ever since they used special fuses to protect micro circuitry on the GEMINI program. |
b4icu b4icu OP239 posts12-11-2018 11:05am Mr. geoffkait Directionality can explain nothing. There is nothing in electrical science to explain such a thing in cables. It exists only in audiophiles minds that were talked into it at the time they were set up by the industry, with that excuse. So is the BI (Burn In), metal purity and all that long and annoying list of urban myths. >>>>I think I see your problem. You believe science explains everything. Directionality is just one example where inquisitive audiophiles are actually ahead of all those big brains who write the science and electronics text books. Perhaps you’re just assuming there’s no scientific explanation, have you even looked? I doubt it. You looked, you didn’t look, I actually don’t care. What I’m sure you won’t find is a chapter in any text book with the title, directionality in wire. You’re obviously looking for a fast and easy explanation. I’m confident I’ve read more science text books than you have. Be that as it may, they are many audiophile examples of things science supposedly can’t explain or they actually can’t explain, that I could give you here but it’s probably beyond scope. Oh, what the hell, I’ll list some anyway. PWB Silver Rainbow Foil, Schumann Frequency Generator, Mpingo disc, Shun Mook Original Cable Jacket, PWB Red x Pen, Cream Electret, Clever Little Clock, The Intelligent Chip, crystals for audio apps, Teleportation Tweak. If you’ve never heard of these audiophile devices or concepts I’ll understand. |
What we have here is failure to communicate. This whole “misunderstanding” regarding advanced audio concepts like directionality, burn in and purity of metals can probably best be explained by quantum physics. You see, think of me as an electron in a higher energy shell and you’re a lower energy electric orbiting in a lower energy electron shell. It takes too much energy for you to get to the higher energy electron shell, up where I am. |
b4icu, maybe there’s a language or communication problem but I already explained it to you - the differences in sound between cables, ANY cables, even between cheap cables and very expensive cables, can be explained SOLELY by directionality. If you wish to be the proverbial ostrich with his head in the sand that’s your prerogative. Besides, I actually do not (rpt not) define the high end strictly by price. It is all about sound, not price. Sometimes price is correlated to sound quality, sometimes it’s not. So I’d appreciate it if you don’t put words in my mouth. |
conradnash30 posts12-10-2018 3:35pm@geoffkait Regarding directionality, while I’m skeptical, I hope I’ve shown that I’m always willing to experiment and to find out for myself. If I’ve understood you correctly, all wire is directional and the difference between the "right" way and the "wrong" way (or maybe "most appropriate" and "least appropriate" ways) should be audible. My questions to you are: - do I need to get all cables the "right" way around to hear the benefit, so will it only work if I have the power cable, the interconnect, and the speaker cable all the "right" way around? Or will just the speaker cable be enough? >>>>All cables, fuses in the system do not have to be in the correct direction to hear effects of one test but the more cables and fuses that are correct the easier it will be to hear the effect of reversing one cable or fuse. Some wire obviously cannot be reversed, e.g., transformer wire, capacitor, internal wiring of electronics or speaker. Not sure how you can have a power cord reversed since plugs prevent experimenting. Audioquest controls direction during manufacturer but I think they’re the only one. - would you expect a difference on only the positive leg of the speaker cable? Given that the negative leg is returning to the amplifier, this should be less audible, right? In the same way that the return path of an AC signal is heading back towards the amp and is therefore less audible/important. >>>>>I am pretty sure the plus and minus on each speaker operate push/pull AC, so both legs are directional. That’s why if you reverse the legs the speakers still play music but the music is in reverse Polarity. - should the change be immediately obvious or do I need a burn in for the directional crystals to settle or something? >>>>>The change should be immediate. If unsure if better or worse, repeat. The more cables and fuses that are correct the easier it will be to hear the next one you reverse, and so on. I’m asking as this is a very easy experiment for me to try. Given my new 0AWG cables I can flip the positive, negative, or both cables with reasonable ease. If I only need to get the positive "right" then I only have one cable to flip. If I have to get both "right" then one of the four combinations should sound better than the others. I guess one combination would sound worst (both "wrong"), two would sound similar (one "right" and one "wrong") and one should sound best (both "right"). >>>>>>If cables are brand new I’d give them a while to break in before making any judgements regarding direction. Or save them for last. The issue I foresee when you have two cables involved like ICs is one could be the opposite direction of the other, especially if you cut them yourself. The odds for any cable being “right” by accident is 50%. So, it makes it tricky to test, as you rightly assume. I have no idea if all conductor strands in your thick cable are in the same direction, they probably are - it would make things pretty impossible if they weren’t. If there is any writing on the thick cable jackets you can use that to keep the cables consistent since the jacket was most likely put on as the bare twisted wires came off the assembly line, but that’s a guess. You have to make some assumptions. Am I right there? If so, I’ll try it when I get home and let you know. My guess is it should only take 10 minutes. >>>>>I think that for interconnects or fuse it should take ten minutes. Speaker cables might be trickier. |
I already explained why wire is directional in both DC and AC circuits. Several times. You have twisted what I said to suit your own imagination. I do not (rpt not) represent Audioquest or any other cable company. I only represent myself. Why would anyone have to represent some company to resister a different opinion? Hel-loo! You act as though you never heard of fuse or cable directionality. Which is OK. But directionality of cables and fuses has been well established, documented and experienced by *many tens of thousands of customers* since Audioquest and other progressive cable companies first started controlling cables for directionality twenty-five years ago and since high end fuse companies first determined fuses are directional. More than 80,000 Aftermarket Fuses, most of which I dare say are for AC circuits, have been sold since they were first introduced fifteen years ago. Wake up and smell the coffee. Finally, you are still mistaken about what I mean by directionality. I do not (rpt not) mean wire acts like a diode, not at all. What I mean by directionality is simply that wire, all wire SOUNDS BETTER in one direction than the other. You would be hard pressed to observe any other phenomenon by reversing cables or fuses other than a change in the sound. Follow? |
b4icu Audio signal is an AC (Alternated Current). An audio signal as complex it may be can be simplified by a set of sine waves (of different frequency and amplitude). This is what the Nyquist sampling is about and all digital sound (CD, PCM and on) is based on. A sine wave is a symmetrical wave (above and below the zero voltage line). So is the energy (Integral) of its positive and negative value (Sum equals to zero). As so, every half wave, the current flow one way and the other half in the opposite way. If a cable would be directional or have a directional property, it would be a disaster to one half. >>>>>Let’s not make this so difficult. The sound is worse when the current goes in one direction, but that direction is back toward the wall outlet.🔜 So it can be ignored. The ONLY DIRECTION that matters sonically is the direction toward the speakers. It’s not rocket science. 🚀 That’s why all wires in cables should be controlled for directionality, you know, if you’re at all concerned about the sound. When the cable is in the wrong direction it IS a relative disaster for the sound. Oh, it will work, but it just sounds worse. It’s an audiophile thing. It’s the reason fuses sound better in one direction vs the other, also why Audioquest controls directionality for all their high end cables AND power cords. |
Not sure I go along with the presumption that Kimber 12TC are “high end cables.” I guess we need to define what high end cables means. Kimber does have good name recognition going for him, however. I’ll give him that. By the way sales of fake Kimber 12TC cables appears to be rather brisk on eBay. Maybe I’m missing something. On another subject I’m not sure why people assume that a given set of components have a certain predictable level of sound quality or that photos of a system reveal anything about how it sounds. There are way too many variables to be able to make such judgements. |
The cables that were replaced by the dudes you mentioned were not (rpt not) high end cables, or they did not (rpt not) have pure metal connectors. Just because you say they were doesn’t make it true. For example we already know the cables the guy in UK was using were not (rpt not) high end cables. Those Blue things. |
I’ve been buying high end cables for forty years and never spent as much as what it costs for the extra thick car battery type cables. The whole premise that audiophiles are being duped into paying great amounts for cables is ridiculous and simply not true. Of course, their are some audiophiles who buy very expensive cables. This is especially true since the Great Depression. Just like some people buy Ferraris and Lamborghinis. But they’re outliers. They don’t represent a trend or average or anything. Most people have learned to be financially conservative. We buy used. Hel-loo! I don’t see too many audiophiles buying $100,000 turntables, either, these days especially. You’re the only one who’s not happy. Everybody else is happy. Where’s the beef? 🐂 Cable manufacturers have provided more bang for the buck by evolving the whole cable technology, you know, by incorporating very pure metals, advanced geometries, long crystal copper, advanced welding techniques, cryogenics, controlling wire directionality and establishing data for cable burn in. What’s not to like? Revel in your time! 😀 |
b4icu No speaker’s cable maker, have a tiniest clue of what cable we need. They also do not know why one cable sounds better over the other. They have no idea what are the electrical (engineering) values that make one cable better over another. An absolute groping in the darkness. For that reason, they "invented" a lot of preposterous pleas to cover the misunderstanding and ignorance: directional cables, cryogenic treatment, cooper purity, skin effect, burn in and more. None would hold a scientific confirmation or any evidence. No other field using wires got such an attention. From NASA and space programs, to the highest level of airborne and military equipment, life saving medical equipment or cell phones. Only audio cables did. >>>>>>>What a drama queen! In the first place you act as though all cable manufacturers are colluding or choreographing some sort of conspiracy designed to trick young naive audiophiles. But that is far from the truth since cable manufactures - in reality, not your paranoid fantasy - tend to develop and evolve their own theories and manufacturing processes over a long period of time based on their own experience. They rarely agree with each other. Many cable makers employ cryogenics, but some don’t. Most cable makers probably don’t control directionality. And there are many differences in purity and type of metal conductor among and within cable makers. You appear to be, judging by your own words, the poster child for anti audiophile naysayers. Further, there is no requirement for “scientific confirmation,” as you call it. The most obvious mistake in your reasoning is that audio is the only field that is interested in how cables sound. capish? So you can throw out all the other things, military, NASA, hospitals, whatever. Follow? If you told the military or NASA they must use uber thick cables as you suggest they would laugh you out of the office. |
For your info, b4icu, I’m not one of those runny nose, naive, gullible teenagers you’re trying so hard to protect. As far as the relative costs of silver and copper cables your facts seem to be as screwy as always. Maybe your calculator is broken, who knows? As far as MIL Standards go, they are irrelevant to the discussion and can be ignored. But you get an A for name dropping. |
conradnash I went with Van Dam cable as that’s offered by Mark Grant Cables, a well known and well respected cable maker (in the UK at least). its also the cables they use in Abbey Road studios, who also happen to use classe amps and B&W speakers. >>>>One can only hope Abbey Road studios doesn’t employ Van Damme Blue cables in the recording chain. 😀 One can’t help wondering if Abbey Road is cognizant of cable burn in. Probably not. Nevermind. |
b4icu OP Mr. geoffkait What a story over nothing. Your first par. refers to the burn-in (BI) process without calling it by that specific name. Burn in to a cooper cables! I’ll ask you again (asked you already on the BI thread, you avoid from answering with your perfect manners): What is a burn in? How long does it takes? When is it required and why? Your second par. You do a statement, as you are the absolute authority to define what cable is hi-fi, hi-end or extra-hi-end, and what cable is not (trash cable). You are actually bringing here the lord’s word on cables grading. You are the messenger. If you would understand the original old testimony it its original language (Hebrew) you would know that the miss translated word "Angle" to English is "Messenger" in Hebrew. From your extensive postings on my thread and other’s threads, you are none of the two for sure. Just kindly remind you, that cooper as an element has fixed (k) conductivity (ρ). It is 1.68x10-8. Or 1.59x10-8 for Silver and it is only 5.3% better than cooper (I know this will make your day…). A wire (cable) has a resistance (R cable) that is: R = ρ x L/S L is the lengths in meters and S is the cross section in mm^2 I assume that your judgmental approach is based on the cables isolator look, the color and a scale of reputation given by the firm that you are doing all this for. Your Third par. You go into some lyrics about the sound. The sound of music…That is fascinating observation, that all the sudden you can tell what someone’s system sound’s, in someone’s room you never heard with any cable, of what it sounds like now with a blue colored thick cable, in incredible detail. I’m impressed Mr. geoffkait from your lyrics, but I don’t like the tune, the rendition. You’ve got my attention and I got suspicious. For the amount of time and effort you put into your crusade, you must have a motive and maybe a sponsor. >>>>>A few comments. One, the numbers you give for copper and silver are actually their respective resistance, not conductivity. Thus, the resistance for copper is higher than for silver. From what I gather from the review of the Van Damm Blue cables they are very average in terms of sound quality. Almost ANY cable compared to them would seem fantastic. Lastly, I included the cable burn in comments by the reviewer to suggest that unless the Van Damm cables were properly burned in they would sound even worse than if they were. Yes, I know the difference between crap sounding cables and high end cables. I doubt that you do, however. |
Rather quickly this review of the Van Damm Blue speaker cables popped up in my search. Interesting, no? Apparently anything would sound more transparent than Van Damme Blue cables. Perhaps even coat hangers. (Everything is relative. - Albert Einstein) “Sound (Blue series cable) Taking into account this cable was deemed to be unused and fresh off the reel, it required some running in to let it settle down. It VAnDamétook what seemed to be an exceptional length of time to become listen-able so I would advise new owners to be a little bit patient when first installed and not to make hasty judgments at first hearing. Given that the Blue is not considered to be a “hi-fi” cable in a domestic setting and aimed more at being a rugged studio workhorse, it was evident from the sound that refinement is not at the top of this cable’s priorities. I wish I could point out to you where exactly its strengths and weaknesses lie, because one CD track where I was listening to it would sound fine, another less so and variations in between, so I will try and pick out the reliable consistencies that I experienced. Midrange was certainly congested sounding, with female vocals having a lack of air and grace that I know is there in the recording. Treble had a slightly steely edge that was prevalent with cymbals in particular, while bass didn’t have the rich fullness that a cable of this diameter should be delivering with ease in my opinion. It is a listen-able cable nonetheless and I wouldn’t condemn it out of hand as I know there are many folks out there that own and enjoy the sound it makes for them.” |
Audioquest checks in on the dodgy subject of bi wiring, http://www1.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/learning_modules/Understanding-BiWiri... B4icu, by the way, as instated previously, you don’t seem to know what bi wiring actually is. |
On the other hand, who really cares what SPICE says about bi wiring. None other than John Atkinson of Stereophile reports otherwise. So, this appears to be one of those talkers vs doers type arguments. 😬 Or, perhaps a measurements vs listener argument. 😛 “Some audiophiles feel that bi-wiring produces an audible improvement over standard single cabling. For example, John Atkinson, writing in Stereophile, states that he observes "subtle but important" differences, particularly in reduction of treble hardness and improvement in bass control in one review.” And this from Definitive Technology, “Does doubling the connections double the sound quality? Bi-wiring is intended to minimize impedance differences between high and low frequencies and its impact on the overall sound you experience. The result is an improvement in the midrange that many enthusiasts believe is significant enough to justify running the additional cable. You may not double the quality of your playback, but you will likely notice a major boost in clarity.” There’s also this from Polk Audio, who knows something about speakers, ”What is it? Bi-wiring is the using separate speaker wire connections to split the signal between high and low frequencies. What does it accomplish? The theory behind bi-wiring is that it can elevate a great sounding speaker and produce subtle, enjoyable, improvements in overall sound quality. In a sense, bi-wiring is to speaker connections as “star grounding” is to electronics connections. When a piece of audio equipment uses a single circuit grounding point for all electronic sections as opposed to connecting them in a “daisy-chain” fashion, this is referred to as “star grounding.” The integrity of each ground path is maintained by individual connections to a low impedance point. The same concept is applied when bi-wiring your audio system. Each “section” of your speaker is independently connected to the low impedance point (output transistors) in your receiver or amplifier. The effects of bi-wiring have been described as “lifting a veil from the mid-range” and that “voices seem clearer, more distinct, and less muffled.”” |
b4icu OP Mr. geoffkait Well done. You reached 11,881 posts. Yes, this is the way to have 12,000 posts soon. This may explain your reluctant nagging since I opened this thread. Clock in a digital audio device is jitter related. What jitter has to do with a speaker cable? Do you even understand what jitter is? Why it is of any concern, how much jitter is audible, and when does jitter becomes valid? You are accusing me of: " So, just because you declare these things irrelevant, hotshot, doesn’t make it so". At a time you just bring up things without supporting them by any technical background or sense, I doubt you if you understand them at all! Good luck chuck with the 12,000 posts. Must be the achievement of your life time. Do you collect any other points? Wal-Mart, Safeway, Gas station? Must be a lot of fun. >>>>Wow! Let me point out it was you who misspoke technically when you stated the conductivity of silver is 9% greater than copper. Why you would assume you’re the only one who understands technical things here is simply bizarre. Can I suggest you might not be quite ready for prime time? |
b4icu What "buying spots and clocks" has to do with this? You found out that all the rest, like directional cables, burn in, cryogenic treat and skin effect were un useful so you dig the buying spots and clocks In a forgotten drawer, never yet used with speaker cables, maybe it will work now? >>>>So, just because you declare these things irrelevant, hotshot, doesn’t make it so. Nor does ignoring metal purity enhance your self proclaimed expertise. Maybe if you close your eyes and hold your breath and stomp your foot they’ll just go away. We see this sort of thing from time to time, where someone is working in a vacuum without access to or ignoring all the advancements that have been made in cable performance, fuse performance, and power cord performance. It’s called Stove Piping. 🏭 I did not create reality. |
b4icu Geoffkait - You can not chalange me on technical arguments, so you push it to none relevant subjects. >>Two things. I can spell challenge and non. And I pointed out your technical error regarding the relative conducting capabilities of silver and copper. You were off by 30%. Looks relevant to me. “Little errors lead to big errors.” |
A real skeptic has curiosity and investigates and tries to get to the bottom of things. A real skeptic can sometimes change his mind, you know, based on experience or evidence. An overly skeptical person, on the other hand, ✋refuses to change his mind for any reason, even in the face of contradicting evidence. I.e., his mind 🧠 is closed on the subject. Capish? That’s where the P word comes from, you know, the word that’s been uh, outlawed. |
People are free to believe what they wish to believe. But I wouldn’t expect audiophiles as a group, who demonstrate a good amount of skepticism, to necessarily automatically buy into any hog swallop that might be tossed their way, but I also suspect skeptics like yourself are outweighed by the great numbers of audiophiles who do hear directionality and have for twenty years. Time to wake up and smell the coffee! ☕️ |