Speltz Anti-cable needs break-in period?

...and 19 minutes. And 53 seconds. About.

Late in the game for posting to this thread, but I wonder if anybody above who found the Anti-Cables a bit light in the loafers used them untwisted (i.e., spaced apart), which as I understand the electrical theory of the situation could make individual-lead speaker cables such as these sound weaker in the bass. (I haven't tried the Anti-Cables myself, but do own Au24.)

Tgrisham sez:

"With my Von Schweikert VR-4JRs, I use the Speltz anti-cables. I have tried twisted and untwisted and found the bass more defined and quicker using untwisted."

This would seem to jibe with the recommendation for twisting to achieve max bass response, but apparently with your speakers, in your room, the other is preferrable for your tastes. At least it's nice to have the choice. I still wonder about the guys who posted before who found the Anti-Cables too weak in the bass, but I believe the Speltz website makes this topic pretty clear.

Of course, using cables that roll off the treble as a reference (something I believe many 'garden hose' and/or networked cables do) will make a cable that doesn't do this sound less bassy by comparison. (And the opposite effect could possibly have something to do with why Tgrisham finds the extreme treble "more natural" with the cables untwisted, although that description doesn't tell us in what way the HF sounds less natural when the cables are twisted.)

I agree with Tgrisham and Tvad on the point about 'break-in' and dielectric; the use of the relatively sparse dielectric seems like it should be a mitigating -- not exacerbating -- factor in this area.

Actually the Anti-Cable website basically seems to suggest what Sean says: that twisting the runs may ameliorate top end roll-off by lowering total inductance. I was apparently misremembering when I implied that Speltz's site suggests twisting will do the same for bass response.

I tried researching further on the web, to locate whatever reference I was remembering about twisting, inductance and bass response, but couldn't find it again. I did, however, find seemingly contradictory claims surrounding this topic -- and that was looking mostly at independent technical writings and those posted on manufacturer's websites, not those of non-technical audiophiles (such as myself) in forums such as this. (There seems to be similar disagreement over the importance of characteristic impedance.)

So it's hard to know what to make of this. I guess the best thing to do is listen and compare, twisted vs. untwisted. The one time I tried separate-lead speaker cables, I twisted them together as recommended by that manufacturer (the cables sounded rolled-off in the treble and bass-heavy, so I didn't buy them, but I also didn't try them untwisted to compare). A lot of the online papers I read were written by technophiles whose larger agenda was often that fancy audiophile cabling is snakeoil and a ripoff, and who also claim inaudibility for different variables which I personally believe I have heard. Whereas of course the manufacturer sites are mainly trying to sell a product.

As the for the effect of dielectric pigment, given the arguments presented above, why should gray 'sound better' than black? Or red 'sound worse' than clear or white? In any case, it seems to me that the whole point of the dielectric in Anti-Cables is that it's as minimal as possible, in which case so should be the 'audibility' of its pigment.