I am in agreement with a lot of Irv's comments about the Analysis Plus papers, shown
here and
here. However, I would rate the quality, intelligence, and technical persuasiveness of those presentations MUCH higher than that of the vast majority of cable-related marketing literature I have seen, which in many other cases drives my BS meter to full scale or beyond.
One major reason for that, among several, is that the factors they discuss are generally presented in a QUANTITATIVE manner, as opposed to just describing an effect and saying that they have found it to make a significant difference. (Irv, with respect to your question about the frequency of the square waves shown in Figures 5 and 6 of the first reference, the number "10" shown above the figures is presumably microseconds per division, so they are 20 kHz square waves. The figure at the bottom of page 2 of the second reference, the pdf document, appears to confirm that interpretation).
Regarding the resistance figure shown for 100 feet of 12 gauge wire, 200 milliohms (0.2 ohms) is in the right ballpark. It is actually about 0.16 ohms according to this
wire gauge table.
More generally, I would make the following points about the resistance rise at high frequencies which they depict as resulting from "current bunching" and skin effect.
1)Although they indicate that all of their cables are designed based on similar philosophies, that resistance rise has no relevance to analog interconnect cables, for which cable resistance is utterly insignificant with respect to the load impedance. And in most cases it will also be insignificant in relation to the output impedance of the component driving the cable (to which it adds, since the two impedances are in series).
2)For speaker cables, I suppose it is conceivable that a rise from 0.2 ohms per 100 feet to 0.5 ohms per 100 feet at 20 kHz, which their cable avoids, when extrapolated down to more typical lengths might make a VERY slight difference in the upper treble region in some systems, especially if speaker impedance is low at high frequencies (as in the case of many electrostatics). The impedance of dynamic speakers, on the other hand, generally rises significantly in the upper treble region and beyond, and in those cases I can't see how a rise of 0.3 ohms per 100 feet at 20 kHz would make the slightest difference.
3)It should be kept in mind that resistance, and therefore the significance of a given percent variation of that resistance as a function of frequency, can be reduced by simply going to a heavier wire gauge.
4)It should be kept in mind that the effects resistance might have in a speaker cable or analog interconnect cable, if any, will be directly proportional to the length of the cable. The shorter the cable the lower the resistance, at 20 kHz and other frequencies as well as at DC.
All of that said, as I indicated earlier in this post I do give their papers excellent marks compared to those of most or all of their competition, and if I personally were shopping for cables in their price range (which I'm not) I would certainly put them at the top of my list of candidates.
Mapman, thanks for the kind comment in one of your recent posts.
Regards,
-- Al