Questions about Resolving Systems

I know this will be subjective but what makes a resolving system?

Does it mean it has great detail?

How do you know if you have a resolving system?

Is that only for system that employ high end components?

I am just trying to get a better understanding.



@lanx0003 - there is no Phase issue with the helix cables

  1. due to it’s longer neutral conductor because the neutral is a thicker gauge, which balances the resistance of both neutral and signal conductors to the same level (approximately)

However - If you are of a belief that that the "negative Polarity signal" only travels down the negative conductor you are mistaken

  • both +ve cycle and -ve cycle parts of the signal travel ONLY down the signal wire - this can easily be seen using an osciliscope
  • the neutral wire is just that - NEUTRAL - , because it is connected to the neutral sides of the connected components, which in both components should be at ZERO volts.
  • There is no phase implication between the signal and neutral conductors in any cable

The phase implications that impact sound quality and imaging is between the signal conductors in the cables that convey left and right channels. any phase difference between the L and R channel will alter the image dramatically

  • a pair of Helix interconnct or speaker cables will maintain phase accuracy providing a stunning image

Hope that clarifies things - Steve


Thanks for the links. The uncanny is an interesting topic. The term gets applied to CGI graphics, which can be simultaneously impressive and disappointing. I'll admit I didn't see the connection to my post at first, but the idea that something is so right in some ways but so wrong in others I think is on point. CGI graphics come to mind because they allow portrayals of people and animals that can do thing that no Muppet could ever do, and yet they don't move quite right and so it's really weird - really bad sometimes. I'll take the Muppet because it fails more broadly and evenly and better allows me to suspend my disbelief. The ways it does move are perfectly in alignment with real physics and real human motion of the Muppeteer. 


I love the example of the muppets because they align with something Steve Guttenberg likes to say — namely, "abandon the quest for perfect realism," or words to that effect. What we want is something that pleases us. We might call that "comfortably real."

Your post made me consider that there are lots of ways a system can be comfortably real, and that involves (as you put it) "alignment with real physics and real human motion." Another way of describing such alignment is "natural" or, more humbly, "the way I move, too."

Your post also made me consider that there are things a system does in obvious and overt ways which also create other non-focal aspects. We could call these the "fringe" or background that makes us feel at home. None of this is unusual for an interior decorator, who understands that colors and placement of objects — however much we’d call them environment or background — are critical to making a house feel like a home.

What we may be making explicit, here with audio, is that same kind of thing. Music that makes us feel "at home."

Steve, thank you for the educational information.  This sounds a good diy project.


I'm coming around to that realization more and more, that ultimate realism isn't a realistic goal, but there are certain presentations that come across as enjoyable and appropriate, as you say they make me feel at home. I've run in to paradoxes where I can clearly say that one speaker sounds better in most ways than another, but I actually prefer to use the lesser speaker because I can adjust to its faults better.