I DON’T KNOW WHAT TO MAKE OF IT.

[Sancus]

OK, I found the thread.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/when-12-gauge-wire-is-not-12-gauge.3/

I hadn't seen that thread before, but it's pretty notable that nowhere is it specified how much (audible) difference there is. If we go by the 'no more than 0.2 ohm' in http://roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm then it would still take many feet of even the coat hanger to cause any audible problem. So the original reply "As perhaps a remote possibility in a poor cable" is correct...

Obviously if you try to run coat hanger 200 feet for your speakers, you're going to have a problem. Or if you use extremely thin wire at those lengths. Or heavily oxidized/broken wire. These are all strawmen though because that's not at all what people are talking about when they claim cables make an audible difference.

Dammit. I could hear a difference, again an improvement. I heard it right away, long before they were finished listening. Not sure whether this was the biggest audible difference of the night, but it was certainly the most impossible. And everyone else in the room heard it too.

My big question about this is like... but why??? Why would you want cable to make anything "sound different", even if that different is better? A basic assumption is that any cable can do nothing but alter the signal. It's not going to change the physical properties of your speakers, or anything. However, we already have way better tools to alter an audio signal with DSP, if we want. A wire is just a really poor tool for doing the same in limited ways.

To me any cable that could actually A/B double blind different from sufficiently low resistance, good quality wire would be considered "broken" regardless of subjective preference for the end result.

 

[Katji]

My big question about this is like... but why??? Why would you want cable to make anything "sound different", even if that different is better?

Because [audiophile] psychosis/syndrome.

 

[IronPyrite]

Years ago, I had a setup which included an Arcam AVR400 receiver, and Monitor Audio GS20 speakers. Both were great components, yet even with the laid-back nature of the AVR400, the metal dome tweeters of the GS20's were too forward and bright. So I added Goertz MI-2 Python cables, which brought good synergy by rolling off the top end. The Goertz MI-2 design has very little inductance, yet LOTS of capacitance, and capacitors are often used as passive high-pass crossover filters.

Funny enough, prior to the Goertz MI-2 cables I started the journey by creating my own speaker cables with singled-strands of 12 gauge magnet wire. Many smaller strands will accentuate the highs, due to skin effect. The single-stranded 12 gauge, on the other hand, accentuated the bass - my, oh my, the speaker cone excursion with heavy bass music!

So will you be able to hear the difference with different cables? Maybe... Will spending loads of cash bring you to audio nirvana? That depends if you do your homework around the characteristics of the cable, what it does to the sound, and what you're looking for in your setup. Beware of diminishing returns and snake-oil claims.

Factors to consider are wire material (and purity), geometry of strands (which may affect inductance, capacitance), total cross-sectional gauge (resistance), and insulation material (affects capacitance). Sadly, the companies who provide lots of detail around the characteristics of their cables, tend to also charge a lot more.

 

[escksu]

I hadn't seen that thread before, but it's pretty notable that nowhere is it specified how much (audible) difference there is. If we go by the 'no more than 0.2 ohm' in http://roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm then it would still take many feet of even the coat hanger to cause any audible problem. So the original reply "As perhaps a remote possibility in a poor cable" is correct...

Obviously if you try to run coat hanger 200 feet for your speakers, you're going to have a problem. Or if you use extremely thin wire at those lengths. Or heavily oxidized/broken wire. These are all strawmen though because that's not at all what people are talking about when they claim cables make an audible difference.

No, the thread didnt mention how audible. However, what amirm said make sense to me, esp. the part about cable interacting with impedance of the speaker.

So, i fully agree with him on 12 AWG and high quality copper (no CCA).

 

[Mart68]

I sometimes alternate between these two cables:



The thick 'snakeskin' one was made by a friend using copper so pure it has to be extruded by vestal virgins. I don't know what gauge it is but it's probably off the chart. It also has the finest banana plugs known to man, gold plated etc etc.

The blue one I found in a skip (No not really , but I bought it used for couple of quid). It has banana plugs of the quality that you might get for free in a box of cereal.

I really can't tell between them even sighted with no controls,

 

[Duke]

Why would you want cable to make anything "sound different", even if that different is better? A basic assumption is that any cable can do nothing but alter the signal...

To me any cable that could actually A/B double blind different from sufficiently low resistance, good quality wire would be considered "broken" regardless of subjective preference for the end result.

So if I understand correctly, you would reject any cable which seemed to sound better than others because that outcome is inconsistent with your beliefs about cables? If so, then I guess you and I have different priorities.

And just for the record, I do not BEGIN to expect you or anyone else to alter their beliefs because of anything I say. I related my experience in response to Chrispy's request.

 

[hex168]

So if I understand correctly, you would reject any cable which seemed to sound better than others because that outcome is inconsistent with your beliefs about cables? If so, then I guess you and I have different priorities.

And just for the record, I do not BEGIN to expect you or anyone else to alter their beliefs because of anything I say. I related my experience in response to Chrispy's request.

Just to back you up, at the possible cost of any credibility I may have here:
A friend was switching out cables in his system. For fun, we were listening as cables were switched out. We were not expecting a difference, and both he and I heard an improvement. Totally not scientific and not blind. My speculations include an improvement from breaking and making connections that may have developed some oxidation, but I really have no idea.

 

[Sancus]

So if I understand correctly, you would reject any cable which seemed to sound better than others because that outcome is inconsistent with your beliefs about cables? If so, then I guess you and I have different priorities.

And just for the record, I do not BEGIN to expect you or anyone else to alter their beliefs because of anything I say. I related my experience in response to Chrispy's request.

It's nothing to do with cables at all, it has to do with my beliefs about electrical signals. I don't want any device in the signal path that is arbitrarily altering the signal in unknown ways. I want the signal that's on the recording. That would apply equally to things like dacs, preamps, amplifiers(tubes), or any black box.

If such a cable existed, I might be curious to reverse engineer it just to find out what it was doing so I could post how to do the same thing with a piece of software for those who care to. But there is a whole universe of signal-altering digital and analog devices out there, widely used in music production, you don't see me adding a bunch of those into my system either.

There's always going to be some personal tuning needed, which I do with DSP, the most effective way to do it. Then I can alter it when I change my mind or learn more, turn it on and off, etc. I don't have to go swapping boxes/cables out or paying for new hardware and the results are the same.

 

[Chrispy]

ok, since your answer is Yes, good. Below is my post:

Actually amirm has already mentioned that cables do not sound the same, this is because of the resistance (esp. from those aluminum alloy ones).


No doubt I mistaken CCA for aluminum alloy, but I did specifically mention the word resistance. So, what do you think amirm was measuring and what is he trying to tell us? Why is he recommending 12AWG?

If you think resistance has absolutely no effect on sound, thats fine with me. I am not here to change your thinking or beliefs.

Yes of course you want to keep resistance to a minimum so you use appropriate cable. Using inappropriate cable may yield audible issues I suppose if that's your point.

 

[Duke]

It's nothing to do with cables at all, it has to do with my beliefs about electrical signals.

My mistake. Let me reword:

So if I understand correctly, you would reject any cable which seemed to sound better than others because that outcome is inconsistent with your beliefs about electrical signals? If so, then I guess you and I have different priorities.

I want the signal that's on the recording.

So do I.

 

[Sancus]

So if I understand correctly, you would reject any cable which seemed to sound better than others because that outcome is inconsistent with your beliefs about electrical signals? If so, then I guess you and I have different priorities.

Yes, of course. This is honestly a very puzzling line of reasoning to me. Your position is effectively "all normal, well made copper cables to spec are inherently broken and are altering the signal in an audible way". To me this is a nonsensical belief, if that were true it would mean there is a major engineering problem to be solved that everyone just somehow isn't aware of.

So do I.

If a cable alters the sound then it's altering the signal by definition. There is literally no credible evidence I've ever seen that the vast majority of cables are broken. We've all been through the null test etc stuff.

E: This doesn't actually have anything to do with sounding better/worse. Sounding better is NOT evidence that a signal-path device is bringing you closer to the signal on the recording. In fact with modern gear I would say it's likely to be evidence of the opposite.

 

[Duke]

Yes, of course. This is honestly a very puzzling line of reasoning to me. Your position is effectively "all normal, well made copper cables to spec are inherently broken and are altering the signal in an audible way". To me this is a nonsensical belief, if that were true it would mean there is a major engineering problem to be solved that everyone just somehow isn't aware of.

Well that's not really my position, but I can see how it looks like it is. I'm going to shoot you a private message, as there's something I'd rather not say on a public forum.

And in the meantime, thank you for a civil discourse, in spite of how nonsensical my position appears to be.

 

[drplinker]

Does this cable effect has more to do the "actual act of switching" & the person doing it than cable itself? I mean physically tightening, ensuring proper contact, rectifying previous mistake with old cable installation...

Cable switch improvements are mere stories IMO. But just because of the places and number of times cable-wonders get mentioned I can't hold back from reading the thread.

I recall reading in some construction standards article about conductivity characteristics changing as copper wires are work-hardened, making case against re-using previously installed/removed in-wall romex cables . This probably is about contractor liabilities and may be affects only the absolute upper limits of conductivity and likely not the case with speaker cables.

Chrispy @Chluke - you may have stated this already, do the improvements go away if you switch back to old cable?
(Sorry)

 

[Chrispy]

Does this cable effect has more to do the "actual act of switching" & the person doing it than cable itself? I mean physically tightening the post, ensuring proper contact, rectifying some mistake made while installing old cable...

Cable switch improvements are mere stories IMO. But just because of number times and people backing the story makes me read the thread.

I recall reading in some construction standards article about conductivity characteristics changing as copper wires are stressed-relaxed, making case against re-using previously installed/removed in-wall romex cables . This probably affects only the absolute higher limits and likely not the case with speaker cables.

@Chrispy - you may have stated this already, do the improvements go away if you switch back to old cable?

I think you're thinking of some else's post?

 

[escksu]

Yes of course you want to keep resistance to a minimum so you use appropriate cable. Using inappropriate cable may yield audible issues I suppose if that's your point.

Its actually supposed to reply to the thread poster's statement:

I was stunned. It wasn’t supposed to be different. All cables sound like same. The measurements prove it. But the difference wasn’t subtle, it was unmistakable.

Even amirm himself never mentioned that all cables sound the same. He went further to explain on the resistance part and measure that resistance do differ and certain cables are to be avoided.

So bottom line is all cables may not sound the same. Its already known that properties like resistance, inductance and capacitance can affect the sound.

I personally dislike silver plated copper cables because they sound too bright to me. I tried it many times and I hated it. So, now I only go for copper ones without any plating.

 

[Chrispy]

Its actually supposed to reply to the thread poster's statement:

I was stunned. It wasn’t supposed to be different. All cables sound like same. The measurements prove it. But the difference wasn’t subtle, it was unmistakable.

Even amirm himself never mentioned that all cables sound the same. He went further to explain on the resistance part and measure that resistance do differ and certain cables are to be avoided.

So bottom line is all cables may not sound the same.

Well, good luck with just anecdotal stuff, lots of unproved claims of audibility out there in audiophilia land....if you're worried about choosing the wrong cable for an application, I suppose it could be a concern?

 

[Beave]

Its actually supposed to reply to the thread poster's statement:

I was stunned. It wasn’t supposed to be different. All cables sound like same. The measurements prove it. But the difference wasn’t subtle, it was unmistakable.

Even amirm himself never mentioned that all cables sound the same. He went further to explain on the resistance part and measure that resistance do differ and certain cables are to be avoided.

So bottom line is all cables may not sound the same. Its already known that properties like resistance, inductance and capacitance can affect the sound.

I personally dislike silver plated copper cables because they sound too bright to me. I tried it many times and I hated it. So, now I only go for copper ones without any plating.

I seriously doubt that the silver plated copper cables measured differently enough to lead to an audible difference.

 

[Doodski]

I seriously doubt that the silver plated copper cables measured differently enough to lead to an audible difference.

The voltage drop difference across a OFC cable and silver coated cable should be so small as to be imperceptible.

 

[escksu]

Well, good luck with just anecdotal stuff, lots of unproved claims of audibility out there in audiophilia land....if you're worried about choosing the wrong cable for an application, I suppose it could be a concern?

The only thing I wanted to do is to point out what amirm said. Thats all. What you think or believe has nothing to do with me and neither am I here to change it.

 

[escksu]

I seriously doubt that the silver plated copper cables measured differently enough to lead to an audible difference.

Its makes a difference to me and thats all it matters to me. So, this is not up for debate or discussion.