Speaker wire is it science or psychology

Paulwp: A wire really can affect frequency response. In fact, the scientists would tell you that's about the only thing it can affect--although a RatShak SPL meter is not an appropriate test tool here. Sean's right about 18 vs 12 gauge (although his side-by-side mono test is not the right way to find out)--assuming the cables are long enough the difference will be audible. (18-gauge has pretty high resistance.) As for the effects you say you hear, sibilance is plausible--high-frequency roll-off is a common effect. Imaging is dominated by source material and speaker-room interaction (which is frequency-dependent, so who knows?) Clarity is in the ear of the beholder.

Trelja: I've seen similar measurements, but they don't, by themselves, prove what you think they prove. Just because a difference is measurable (and every cable will measure differently) doesn't mean it's audible. Whether we can hear a frequency response anomaly depends on how big it is, how braod a band it covers, and whether it's a dip or a peak. That said, some cables do affect frequency response enough to be audible. Most of those roll off the high end, which some audiophiles seem to like even though they insist they're looking for something that sounds like "real music." Go figure.

See what I mean? Jostler, there was no need. I said I hear differences, but it's "hard to imagine how wire could impart SUCH A LARGE BOOST to any part of the frequency range." As opposed to a smaller boost (although that I still dont understand) or a cut (which I do think happens). My impression of the Kimber cable jph was talking about is the same as he reported measuring. It sounds a little bright and forward, because, I think, the highest frequencies are attenuated compared to the upper midrange low treble and presence region. But that's just my guess. I have no proof of anything, including whether or not I can hear at all.

Oh, and trust me, if I say I can hear a difference in imaging, the room, equipment and music are the same. Just the wires are changed. But you know, the differences are subtle and may well be imaginary. I have no interest in arguing with anyone about this subject.

Paulwp: I agree that a boost is implausible, but I've seen frequency response plots for cables with HF rolloffs down several dB at 20kHz. Also, I think you're talking about someone's measurement with a consumer-grade SPL meter, which is not a tool designed for frequency response tests. That seems the most likely explanation for the "boost," to me at least.

The rest of my post was meant to try to square what you thought you heard with what cables might actually be doing to the signal (though we're talking hypotheticals here). My point was that cable measurements might very well correlate with at least some of what you think you hear, which would be solid evidence that you were not simply imagining it. That's a good thing.

Jostler, the cable length for the 12 gauge vs 18 gauge need only be 8' - 10' or so. Nothing "fancy" or "trick" going on. It's simple math. The 12 gauge will offer lower resistance with relatively high inducatance. On the other hand, 18 gauge has a higher series resistance but much lower inductance. In plain English, the 12 gauge will sound darker ( far less glaring with digital sources ), have somewhat "pinched" mids, display a rolled off treble response while sounding very strongly biased towards "fullness" or "bottom end". On the other hand, the 18 gauge will produce a far more open and natural midrange with greater air and extension in the treble regions. Bottom end would be quite lean sounding while lacking impact. I did the above test to a salesperson and a couple of customers at a Best Buy ( NO, I DON'T WORK THERE ). All of them could easily identify the differences in cables even though they didn't know which wire was which. For the record, i used the A-B switch on a receiver and not the "rotating balance" method. Sean
>