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.
Why do we have to repeat everything again (and again)?
1.
I've told you not to hold
your breath for the cables formula. I did offer to calculate for all, for free,
what cable they need. For some, who had a problem to get the DF, I walked the
extra mile to contact the manufacturer and get the information.
I reserve my right, not to give away my
formula, at least not for free.
If you think it worth for you, pass me an
offer on the privet massaging (-:
2.
Nelson Pass is not arguing
with me. You do. I've told you to bring your own say, not others. You claimed
you did measurements to prove me wrong! Where are they? Please show us what and
how you measured what, and the results.
3.
On my side, there are six
guys (five on this thread) that tried it out and came back with results and impressions.
I may say that they were all happy with the results.
Please refer to the excel table I posted
earlier.
What would support my claim, if not an evidence
of six people who had a recommended cable by some dealer, replaced by a
calculated cable, and their report of the improvement in sound?
Not to say, that they invested in that cable,
less than US $ 100.- for a result that mostly is unheard of, in this hobby.
There are two things that do connect my claim:
I show (by calculation) the right cable to use and once it is used, the owner's
report of what it improved.
It is a bit unfair, after some claimed that
all it matters is sound and how we hear it, that you come to claim, it is not
good for you and that you want scientific prove.
I'm afraid that it would get into par. 1 of
this post, why it was not added. Let's keep it that way for now.
As far as this dialog is getting, everything on your summery post has been
said already, done and dusted. Why anyone would want to read it all over again,
nor re write it?
Watch your language. That's way it was flagged.
I'm tiered reading pages on pages of links others wrote. I've told you that you
may post your own. I don't read nor refer any more to other (like Nelson pass)
articles.
It must be a triumph for you to complete an entire research in quantum mechanics and come up with a tangible result of some measurements.
What was my recommendation for a speaker cable for your setup?
Did you try that out and listened, just as some other guys here did, and came back with some very flattering and enlighten experiences?
What measurements? May we see some of those results, how they were measured (test setup)?
What was the reference cable to show a fundamental difference, to prove your case?
To say, everybody can. To prove some real data behind this would be more challenging. For you, a bright scientist in quantum mechanics, it must be easy.
Nelson Pass is not the subject of this thread. If I will go deeper into
that concept, you think you can keep up representing Nelson Pass's theory? I
don't think so.
Don't get me other's says. Bring yours. This thread is pretty much got
the attention and cooperation I hoped for. You and your dear friends are now here
just to do damage and keep me busy with your crap that you dig and fish over
the web.
So, unless you come up with some real stuff of your own, you better save
your time.
"With all the respect to Mr. Nelson Pass he went the wrong path." - Now that's rich, have you any idea what he has accomplished?
"No one here approved his cable sounds better than other, but mine did." - Nelson Pass doesn't make cables. You have stated 6 people have tried your "secret formula", only the ones that have shared their results on this thread have standing. The others are hearsay. Why don't you reveal your formula? Educate yourself: https://www.passlabs.com/#
Sorry for the "0" on length. The new value is 0.00369
ohms and not 0.25 ohms as you say. Anyway, what about my Q:
"From where do you take this information about cable thickness and massive
amount of impedance?"
Regarding Interconnects, it's another thread...
I use XLR, no Litz. The entire Pro industry use XLR, at length of 100
meters and longer, no loss! On 2m, it is perfect.
At material = Cooper, Fr. = 0.02MHz (20KHz), Length = 2m, Diameter = 20mm,
Z = 0.00012 Ohms!
At 2mm, Z = 0.00143 (>10x worse or higher impedance).
The skin effect is about full power of a 0 AWG @ a Fr. of 250Hz @ 150Amp's.
It doesn't need that kind of current at any Fr. Or power. A 1,000W power into 8
ohms would require 16 Amps.
Not to say, that in Audio most energy above 10KHz are harmonies, with
substantial less power than the basic Fr. (-20dB less = x100 times less).
For some reason, those who tried it out were very happy with the
results.
“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? 🍎
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.
My say doesn’t claim anything new or unknown so far to the electronics or electricity science. I just say that there is a relation between amp’s property’s (DF) and the speaker cable required resistance. On the fly, many tried to get me down from this idea, with variety of says, most common urban myths of the cables industry, till we got to Quantum mechanics. I’ll give that the benefit of the doubt, it was funny. For those who gave it a try, with a moderate budget of under US $100.- ended up embracing this idea and very happy with the results.
The audio industry had many claims since it was introduced. Some were well done and stayed. Others came and gone. At the time they were in fashion, some made a lot of money. Money we paid for listening and purchasing that idea. The same was with media and standards. Like the Mini Disc and the ATRAC coding method (SONY). Some made an impressing comeback: LP and tube amplification.
Ok, you caught me, geoff and I are in the cable business. Our company has developed a formula based on common sense and practical application. Wire that can actually bend and not possibly rip the connectors out of the gear. Wire that would complement the looks of our listening environment. Wire that 99.9% of the world's audio enthusiasts use today and will in the future. Wire that sounds great and won't break the budget. Wire that one doesn't have to buy tools to build. Wire made by people that don't demand that we know all and if you disagree, you are a liar. Wire that will actually stay in the system for more than a month or so. Wire that doesn't claim "a scientific fact that some guys went the extra mile to try it and returned to share their impression". Wire that helps one dial in a system that is emotionally satisfying, not so called "
scientifically" correct. Isn't that, after all, why we build these systems?
Why would you doubt members or my integrity? We have nothing to gain or lose.
There is no money or profit involved. It is a scientific fact that some guys
went the extra mile to try it and returned to share their impression. Most also
showed some gratitude and appreciation. Sorry for you and some others, who try
for long to undermined this idea and write any possible post to go against it.
I should be the one to be subspecies with your perseverance and
tenacity, that you are driven by some industry agendas. Even thou you denied, there
is no way for someone to spend so much time and energy for a crusade like
yours.
"My say to Mr. geoffkait implied he could make them (one or both)…"
It is not "geoffkait implied". It is "what I said to Mr. geoffkait implied that he could make them..." b4icu's statement implied that geoffkait could do something. He did not say that geoffkait implied something.
Kids, each one to his own room and do the homework.
"...a bad management decision to launch it in spite of very low temperature that day..."
I know nothing about Space Shuttles but was the low temperature at the launch site really that crucial for something designed to, minutes later, be in temperatures that are hardly ever, if ever, observed on Earth’s surface? I am not trying to make this into a Space Shuttle thread, although it is becoming one, but it seems illogical to a complete layman.
What am I missing here? Where was that low temperature?
" For the right cables (what you call 0 AWG): it works. We have 3 more guys who did it and are very happy with the results. Sorry you missed it. The count is on 6 so far."
Well, one is a ’friend’ of yours, two are are ’friend’s’ of another member here and are not available to answer questions from us. I would put that in the hearsay category and should not be included on the chart. I am sure you will disagree.
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?
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.
For the right cables (what you call 0 AWG): it works. We have 3 more guys
who did it and are very happy with the results. Sorry you missed it. The count
is on 6 so far.
b4icu: "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 read that and my heart sickened. What kind of negative insinuation is that on Geoff? That’s just sad and completely uncalled for. And you got upset about my reference to a comedy show! Challenger was launched out of specification that morning, despite warnings by engineers. Politics overrode that position. Enough said. Go peddle your nonsense in another universe, please.
After your say: "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, than skid into quantum physics)" and the members comments on that, it will be a while till you show your face here again.
The audiophile spell of the cables industry goes very far with you. I’m impressed you are deeply convinced of their nonsense to explain phenomenal sounds that exist only in your imagination. It is like religion: They convince you to believe in something you can’t hear (directionality), as religion had convince us to believe in something we can’t see (God)!
It is time for you to open the first audiophiles full’s church / synagogue / mosque. It seems that if you charge 10 cents per donations, you can become a milliner in no time.
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.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
