7500 for USED cables? Are they joking?

Lmb: So many questions, so little time. But I'll take a flier at a few:

I don't know about recording and mastering engineers, but my sense is that the folks whose business it is to actually study the propagation of signals do indeed think they have a pretty complete handle on how signals pass through cable. For example, silver is only about 6% less resistant than copper. If you plot their relative effects on frequency response, the differences will probably fall well below the known thresholds for human detection. No law that says you gotta accept that (or believe me, for that matter).

My favorite question of yours is: Why some manufacturers, use shielding, twisting, and passive filters on their wire? Would this not imply that different cables sound different simply by design?

My answer: No, it implies that they need a gimmick to distinguish their product from the other guy's, when they both sound the same. (A bit unfair: Shielding can be important in some cases, and I don't want to speculate on passive filters. Why you'd want such filters if they do affect sound I'm not clear on.)

Bomarc, you've just set the stage for the basis of marketing high end cables! All this twisting, filtering and pseudoscientific explanations is what marketers cling to! Power cords epitomize this. Use a little filtering, a 'unique' twisting and then power cords start sounding 'different'...

I've previously posted that power cords should not have any filtering incorporated in them--there's gear specifically for that.

Jon Risch's website sheds a lot of light on this subject. Just pure and simple copper with proper dielectrics and off you go! No need for the Voodoo...

I'd rather make my own cables and spend my saved money on a cable burner.

What is a cable burner?

In its simplest terms, it is used to "break-in" a cable by running a range of frequencies, which may extend several orders of magintude beyond the audio band, through the cable for 24 to 72 hours. I think one of the assumptions is that the free electrons available for conducting electric signals tend to be polarized in a “broken-in” cable. The idea is if a cable sits idle too long, is new, or just doesn't sound like it use to, this device will rapidly condition the cable for use. Conditioning is supposed to make the cable less harsh in the upper octaves and more defined in the lower octaves. This conditioning process is applies to ICs, speaker, etc, depending on the connections on the unit.

This question should cause uproar like the original post. I do not have an opinion here as I have not participated in the process. I would like to do it double-blind.

First of all, I agree that cables should not have filters, unless we want a cable to alter the sound.

The field of science of electromagnet fields tells us through mathematics that whenever an electrical signal passes though a conductor, it generates a magnetic field around the conductor and a force on the electrons in the wire. This is termed EMI. Braiding provides these benefits. Since half of the braid is positive and the other half is negative, the signal currents are in opposing directions. The EM fields created will cancel each other. This configuration radiates very little EMI and is less susceptible to interference.

Secondly, braided wire is used across a broad range of industries. For example, aviation, instrumentation, pro audio, audio, and networking all rely on braiding for improved performance. To answer one question I posed. The difference between CAT3-phone & CAT5-data is the number of twists per foot. Braining reduces conducted, inducted, and capacitive interference.

I have completely refrained from such voodoo dances in my entire discussion. Look at all of my comments in this thread. Then search for information on the Internet (or library) from scientific organizations. Check it out you will be surprised.

The dielectric industry is a big business because the use of dielectrics is very complex. Changes in temperature, interaction with metals, conductivity, and capacitance are some of the variables. The bottom line is all you can do is minimize the interaction. Someone who I have a great deal of respect for, Harvey Rosenberg also had an article appear in Listener in which his cable design was two pieces of wire separated by a couple of wood spacers using Radio Shack termination (i.e. no dielectric).

I assume the cable burner is a sarcastic snub.