Stereophile article on speaker wire measurements

[Speedskater]

Possibly the fancy-dancy cables have significantly high inductance than the lighter, cheaper cord; this would reduce transmission of EMI/RFI possibly to the extent the shown on the tuner signal strength meter. However inductance isn't really an issue with speaker cable. See this comment at Blue Jeans Cable ... https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/speaker/index.htm

That's a mis-understanding by Kurt Denke at BJC. Speaker cables can in fact act as interference antennas. They can allow the interference to sneak in thru the feedback loop and cause problems at the sensitive input stage. Retired Audio Engineering Society EMI/RFI expert suggests using twisted pair or twisted quad speaker cables. Note that those are often low inductance cables.

 

[maty]

Leaving aside the video of Danny Richie, I also assumed that the cables should not just make differences in short lenghts as it happens in homes.

But by replacing the typical oxygen free cables (a "cheap" one used in automotive) I noticed a noticeable increase in low frequencies after switching to the Kimber Kable 8TR (with full range speaker boxes). I did not measure the impedances but the differences had to be minimal so another reason had to be: the cable geometry and its greater resistance to RF interference.

Unfortunately today we have interference at much lower frequencies than those used in FM radio. As low as ... 9 kHz, that is, within the range reproduced by the speakers or in which the audio electronics work!

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Leaving aside the video of Danny Richie, I also assumed that the cables should not just make differences in short lenghts as it happens in homes.

But by replacing the typical oxygen free cables (a "cheap" one used in automotive) I noticed a noticeable increase in low frequencies after switching to the Kimber Kable 8TR (with full range speaker boxes). I did not measure the impedances but the differences had to be minimal so another reason had to be: the cable geometry and its greater resistance to RF interference.

right, because you definitely did some blind testing to assure yourself it wasn't just your imagination.

 

[maty]

When the differences are so appreciable there is no need for tests. You know perfectly well if a day is sunny or cloudy. Usually the first reference recording I listen to is Hotel California (Eagles), with about DR15.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

When the differences are so appreciable there is no need for tests. You know perfectly well if a day is sunny or cloudy. Usually the first reference recording I listen to is Hotel California (Eagles), with about DR15.

lol of course you do. Well then with differences that obvious, there must be some simple freq response graphs displaying those obvious differences in dramatic fashion I assume.

 

[Deleted member 2944]

He's just trying to elevate his subscribers on Youtube. Nothing more.

Dave.

 

[tomtoo]

Could look at the video first today. And what does the trick that i can hear the induced microvolt/90MHz+ signal??? So where is the Voodoo that makes this happen???
I had a realy high thought about Dennis, not shure after this video.
Edit says: Thats the same stupid trick, see we can measure so we can hear. Thats Bullshit sry.

 

[Wes]

Thanks, Spocko. How amazing to see drywall mentioned specifically. I find it a real problem - the repeated 8' x 16" "drum skins" combined with the slight "quack" of their flexing don't help at all. But drywall is often required by fire codes, so I back mine with 1/2" construction plywood, and I find the two-layer combination is a huge improvement. Relatively cheap to do, too.

squirt some adhesive in between the layers - there is a product that is made for this and claims it is better...

 

[smallricey]

Hmmm, it seems like nobody read the article and everyone just dismiss the result that clearly shows there are difference between each cables.

 

[tomtoo]

Hmmm, it seems like nobody read the article and everyone just dismiss the result that clearly shows there are difference between each cables.

Nobody says "There are no measurable differences between speaker cabels". Shure there are. But how much influence can this what you measure have on what you hear??? I not see why/how RF behavior of a cable thats used for NF(low frequncy) should have it, show me this???

 

[smallricey]

Nobody says "There are no measurable differences between speaker cabels". Shure there are. But how much influence can this what you measure have on what you hear??? I not see why/how RF behavior of a cable thats used for NF(low frequncy) should have it, show me this???

Donno, but this study is what you got. Just saying what's the point of dismissing it like the whole thread did.

Oh I see you are the guy who responded the scientific method is not valid.
I think the logic is not correct there. The whole study is based on a theory, they are trying to prove the theory is true.
So I think it done it's job by drawing out the phase difference between cables.

 

[tomtoo]

Donno, but this study is what you got. Just saying what's the point of dismissing it like the whole thread did.

Measuring a cable at 3ghz to see differences in a cable thats used for max. 40khz makes absolutly no sense. inherently LF and HF behaves different. Thats why you see coax at your sat-tv and not on your speakers. The higher the freq. the less the current enjoys to stay in the cable. But thats not importent for a cable thats used at max. 40khz. Thats like comparing the behavior of light with short wave. Yes both are EM waves. But they behave different. Couse the frequence of light is much higher. It's like measuring how good a copper cabel transfers light. Would that make sense for you?

 

[smallricey]

Measuring a cable at 3ghz to see differences in a cable thats used for max. 40khz makes absolutly no sense. inherently LF and HF behaves different. Thats why you see coax at your sat-tv and not on your speakers. The higher the freq. the less the current enjoys to stay in the cable. But thats not importent for a cable thats used at max. 40khz. Thats like comparing the behavior of light with short wave. Yes both are EM waves. But they behave different. Couse the frequence of light is much higher. It's like measuring how good a copper cabel transfers light. Would that make sense for you?

Did you read the article or did you just read the 1st figures?
I think It's measured at 125hz, 1k, 4k hz or something by glancing through it.
Also 1st figure clearly says it was an experiment done back in 2008, I assume this is a new article done in 2020.

This is exactly what I am talking about going through the thread. Some weird comments just dismiss the article by not reading it.

 

[VintageFlanker]

If I modify the crossover of my modified KEF Q100, I will change the internal wiring for Canare 4S11. And new DIY speaker cables with Neutrik SpeakOn connectors and Canare 4S11 too.

After all these mods, I guess your Q100s should finally sound great, @maty.

 

[tomtoo]

Did you read the article or did you just read the 1st figures?
I think It's measured at 125hz, 1k, 4k hz or something by glancing through it.
Also 1st figure clearly says it was an experiment done back in 2008, I assume this is a new article done in 2020.

This is exactly what I am talking about going through the thread. Some weird comments just dismiss the article by not reading it.

Did you see how big the influence was on the sine bursts?? Could you imagine what a speaker would make out of it?? This articel correlates the influences of Venus phase with the taste of your cornflakes.

 

[tomtoo]

Did you read the article or did you just read the 1st figures?
I think It's measured at 125hz, 1k, 4k hz or something by glancing through it.
Also 1st figure clearly says it was an experiment done back in 2008, I assume this is a new article done in 2020.

This is exactly what I am talking about going through the thread. Some weird comments just dismiss the article by not reading it.

Maybe you should read it first than come to a conclusion, and not saying others didnt read. I did two times. Than i made my conclusion about it.

 

[tomtoo]

But maybe it was a 1.April joke and i didnt got. Thats possible??

 

[smallricey]

Maybe you should read it first than come to a conclusion, and not saying others didnt read. I did two times. Than i made my conclusion about it.

I only suggested that you did not read the article because the 3ghz experiment had nothing to do with this experiment.
So I'm unsure why you mentioned it in the first place, and it's placed in the first sentence of the article.
So I think it makes a lot of sense to ask the question if you actually read the article or not.

My conclusion is the article clearly show the cable produce different waves, but like you said is it audible? I don't know. That's why I'm here.
Now, instead of scientific discussion I found jokes based on false claim.
Except one guy says wall absorption would make greater audible difference, which I agree.
That's a lot of false claim for 3 pages of comments. I thought this is a science forum not I choose which data I want to believe forum.

What about cables apply to headphone then, it would take the wall factor out of the equation.
Also, even if wall affect the sound greater than cable, it does not discredit this article a bit.
The room has greater affect to DAC are you going to discredit DAC now?

It looks like you do not know the answer either, or maybe you do know the answer but without sharing the experiment to back it up.
So what's the point to dismiss it?

I think the general consensus in this forum is as long as cables are working and you are not running 10meter cable you are good to go.
However, this article clearly disapproves that. Now if you have paper or scientific experiment says it's not audible then please share it.
Again, I thought this is a science forum not I choose which data I want to believe forum.
It's funny to call it an April fool joke when one really have nothing to show.
Maybe that's the 4th July spirit instead? Get drunk and spit out gibberish lol

 

[Victor Martell]

Donno, but this study is what you got. Just saying what's the point of dismissing it like the whole thread did.

Oh I see you are the guy who responded the scientific method is not valid.
I think the logic is not correct there. The whole study is based on a theory, they are trying to prove the theory is true.
So I think it done it's job by drawing out the phase difference between cables.

@smallricey - I see you just recently joined - probably just to comment on the thread - welcome!

I would recommend you get a feeling of the forum by reading a few of the threads - you will understand why the "experiment" is dismissed.

One important part of the scientific method is review - the experts here have reviewed the experiment and commented on its many flaws. Obviously the next step is to redesign the experiment. If not taken, people are right to dismiss it.

v

 

[smallricey]

@smallricey - I see you just recently joined - probably just to comment on the thread - welcome!

I would recommend you get a feeling of the forum by reading a few of the threads - you will understand why the "experiment" is dismissed.

One important part of the scientific method is review - the experts here have reviewed the experiment and commented on its many flaw. Obviously the next step is to redesign the experiment. If not taken, people are right to dismiss it.

v

I just joined to make some posts, but I have read some threads before I joined already.
That's why I know this forum dismiss the audible difference between cables.
Hence, I was hoping to see if there's "scientific" proves to dismiss the article.

Also, like I said, the experiment is designed this particular way to confirm the mathematical equation.
So I would not say the design is flawed in many way. I actually have not seen 1 claim that shows the experiment is flawed.
What I have seen is many false claims and jokes, and that's why I made the post.

Again, the does not prove there's audible difference; however does prove that different wires would provide different audio waves.
Audible or not is another matter. I think for the forum to dismiss it, it needs to show that the audio difference is so slightly insignificant.
However, I'm not seeing that. If it's so readily available, maybe someone could link the article instead of make meaningless poke about it.