The most detailed speaker cable??

Dunno really. One thing one could do is spectrum analyse what is on the source matl, what exits the final amplification stage, and compare to measurement of what's coming out of the spkrs, I suppose.

I guess most people would probably just sit & listen, hoping that the perceived acoustic differences (if any) would be significant and repeatable. The problem (and I agree with an earlier comment of yours) is that many speakers inside a room are notorious distorters anyway...

Empirically however, it's quite easy to effect some change just by changing the type of wire connection in the amp-spkr circuit... now, if the resulting amplitude response (and power response, I guess) seems to favour certain frequencies that were lacking before, it's perceived as more "revealing" (although, all that usually means is strengthening of upper end frequencies + some bass...).

Audio is one of my escapes, and I'm quite content to dabble in the voodoo and black magic aspect of it. I'm finding good arguments on both sides here, but by in large I won't let the science of playback limit my experimentation.

I agree with Rsbeck that many root problems in audio can be solved by changing components, but I also believe some problems can be solved by changing cables as well. Changing a component isn't always practical nor always desired. Sometimes one might be completely enamored with a component except for one small characteristic. I've found that as a final tuning device a cable change can sometimes take care of that.

I know some people don't agree that a cable should be used as a tuning device, that one should choose cables that pass along as much of the signal as possible and buy a warmer sounding amp if that's the direction you'd like to tune your system.

But for me, I find that approach limiting, since ultimate resolution is not my goal. I am impressed by detail, but I'd rather be seduced by the music. Besides, how can we determine at what point a cable crosses over from being veiled to artificially detailed?

We all have different tastes and priorities in music and audio presentation. We're all searching for the sonic balance that pleases us most. Some place detail and transparency over an organic nature, or vice versa. Just as in audio, I'd choose the dark eyed belly dancer over the blonde fitness trainer. They're both beautiful, but I prefer my music with hips.

I reserve most of my skepticism for religion and politics.

Rsbeck:

I provided a link to a well referenced and more thorough test than anything that you've provided. These tests were conducted by Nelson Pass, an industry legend who doesn't nor has he ever marketed cables. They were independently confirmed by Matt Polk, another industry legend as they both came to similar conclusions. While Matt Polk did offer cabling to the public for sale, his research was conducted because the product that he was offering was causing a negative reaction with specific amplifier designs, which other cabling did not. This in itself should tell you that there is a difference in how an amplifier responds to different electrical stimuli in the form of a speaker cable and / or a loudspeaker / cable combination. After all, if you change the electrical characteristics of a loudspeaker, you would expect and ( even you ) probably accept that it could change the sonics of what you hear. Why is it so hard to believe that changing that same circuit elsewhere in that same signal path ( speaker cabling ) could achieve similar results?

The referenced article that was published 27 years ago demonstrates that as different speaker cables are connected between an amplifier and a speaker, the transient capacity and power delivery characteristics of the amplifier change too. Since transient response is directly related to both amplitude linearity and bandwidth, a cable chance can and should be both measurable and audible. In many cases, this is easily measurable ( as evidenced by that article ) and in some cases, the outcome is quite audible. There are many variables here that could effect the audibility of the specific situation i.e. the stability of the amp under load, the specific cables being used, the quantifiable differences in electrical characteristics of the cables themselves that are being compared, the combination of the cable / speaker and their individual electrical summing, the listening skills of the participants, etc...

In some cases, the difference between the amp being able to sustain high power into a reactive speaker load boils down to what speaker cable is used i.e. the speaker cable is used as an impedance transformer or "buffer". Not only is this effect measurable and audible, it is physically provable in the fact that the amplifier will turn itself off. This is mentioned in the same article as posted by Nelson Pass some 27 years ago. Using anything but a cable that was both high in series resistance, high in nominal impedance and limited in bandwidth would cause the amplifier to shut down into a specific loudspeaker load. While this was not the best sonic combination according to Nelson Pass, it was the only electrical solution with that given amplifier / speaker interface.

The problem here is that you've refused to listen to any form of logic, denied the existence of such repeatable testing in the referenced article as conducted by a well respected industry professional and keep referring to some inadequate test results as a point of reference. Bare in mind that these test results were done using a simulated loudspeaker load that maintains consistent electrical characteristics regardless of the amplitude, duration or bandwidth of the signal i.e. not a real loudspeaker that changes electrical characteristics as frequency, duration and amplitude are varied.

Since i've already provided links to demonstrate that cables can change the dynamics ( electrical operating parameters ) of an amplifier and you've refused to acknowledge this, what makes you think that i should go out of my way to perform any other testing. This is especially true when you won't even take the time to enjoy some music in the confines of your home using your familiar system and some different speaker cabling that i provide for your temporary use free of charge?

Even if i were to perform such tests, what would it take to lend my test results more credibility than the test results as made publicly available by Nelson Pass some 27 years ago? It is my belief and theory that not only would you refuse to acknowledge any test results that i would submit, regardless of how thorough and exhaustive the results were, but you would also continue to refuse to compare speaker cabling within your system.

As such, the bottom line comes down to this. I can't win this "debate" no matter what i do. The only thing that i could hope to do would be to have you experience enough of a difference in the sonics of a system with a speaker cable change that it would pique your curiosity. In doing so, it may cause a desire within you to make YOU want to do your own research and open your mind to other alternative theories to that of what you already cling to. You are the only one that is limiting both your own knowledge and level of experience in this matter.

Given that i'm willing to provide you with the resources to further your experience, which hopefully will further your knowledge base at the same time, i can only arrive at one logical point of conclusion. That is, i have to ask you this one question. If you can answer this question with a reasonable response, i'll be glad to drop any further interaction with you on this given subject.

What are you afraid of and / or the barriers that exist in terms of you listening to some different speaker cabling within the confines of your system at no expense to you? Sean
>

Gregm: You're playing Rsbeck's game and will never win. You will only allow him to keep repeating the same techno-muck that he has been convinced is correct. In doing so, it only strengthens his beliefs and will make it harder to get through to him in the long run. Please refrain from doing so, as feeding a troll only makes them bigger and stronger : ) Sean
>

Sean, your detail filled post is probably the finest of the year. I doubt it will be equalled by any of us in 2005.

As you pointed out, Rsbeck has no interest in having his perspective altered. What I have continued to see in his cable postings, here included, is a simply a see saw "Does Not!", "Does Too!", "Does Not!", "Does Too!", "Does Not!, "Does Too!" war of attrition ad infinitum develop. He makes gives no ground, and makes a lot of points along the way, but in the end, he is simply not willing to do what this hobby is all about. It's NOT about measurements. It's not about theories. It's not about being right or wrong. It's about listening. Listening to music, through our systems. Not much else matters, to me, at least.

I have my own beliefs regarding cable. I was once as big a cable skeptic as there was, the same is true of two close friends of mine. Over time, we heard different things coming from our systems when cables were switched out, and came to accept that cable makes a difference. I am still of the opinion that the hysteria, hype, and markups of cable are beyond obscene for the most part. But, also that a dedicated, open minded audiophile can benefit by the judicious choice of cabling in their system.

I believe that one who has not experimented with cabling has simply not maximized the performance of their system. Period. No matter what they say.

I also believe that for those who choose not to believe or don't want to experiment, that's also fine. We all get off of this hobby somewhere, be it with amplification, speakers, front ends, cabling, isolation and room treatments, source material, listening chairs, getting their ear hair trimmed, you name it.

But, in the end, I always go back to the sage Kondo San of Audio Note's mantra, "Nothing is unimportant."

This will be my one and only statement in this thread. It has already been nasty enough without having this idiot get himself involved in the fracus further.