The Science of Cables

One thing I still don't understand is which cable parameters that are responsible for what we call "transparency"

It depends on what's stuck on the cable ends.

For example, a loudspeaker with excessive group delay and a ringy tweeter may require a cable that makes a more coherent speaker sound 'polite'. A tube amp with a puffy bottom may require a cable that makes a solid state amp sound anemic.

HiFi's great shame is too close a focus on parts and not enough on the system, iow "Not seeing the woods for the trees."

@andy2 

In regards transparency there is a great quote from the late Charley Hansen of Ayre electronics which unfortunately I can't find but roughly paraphrased goes something like this. Most people try to gain greater transparency by upping the intensity of the light ( in cable speak upping high frequencies which has been the standard method used for decades now to try to achieve some modicum of transparency ) we just clean the window ( or in cable speak drop the noise floor ) That can be most effectively achieved in a cable assembly by simply extending the bandwidth, either by use of a cable doubling, or the way TEO Audio does it which is using a liquid metal conductor. In both cases the cable generated noise generated by wave reflections due to impedance mismatches is reduced producing a cleaner window ( the analogy would be reducing room generated reflections and producing a room that is a more acoustically transparent musical setting ). One could, of course, also apply vibration control to clean the window by reducing the effects of micro-phonics but successful solutions along this path are harder to execute because standard vibration control protocols, while producing lower noise floors numbers, also produce phase shift which is something that slurs a signal and thus diminishes any transparency gains ( and the ear brain doesn't respond well/take kindly to phase shifts ).

Most people try to gain greater transparency by upping the intensity of the light ( in cable speak upping high frequencies which has been the standard method used for decades now to try to achieve some modicum of transparency ) we just clean the window ( or in cable speak drop the noise floor )

I suppose "cleaning the window" is better than trying to "upping the intensity of the light".  Galen Gareis  (Iconoclast designer) says extensively about "TIME" coherent in his cable design.  Some of the reviews seem to say that his cables are very "transparent", so I guess "TIME" coherent is one of the main ingredients for being "transparent".

Anyway, as for measurement vs. listening, Galen Gareis says that he notices differences in sound between different type of copper although he readily admits that he doesn't know how to measure them.  He also said that two cables with the same "RLC" measurements could have completely different sound.  

 

He also said that two cables with the same "RLC" measurements could have completely different sound.  

Sounds like that right there is a severely serious Class One case of bigly blasphemy. Methinks he will soon be answering to a cracked, errrr, crack team of inquisitors from the dreaded Cable Inquisition.

It is with mixed emotions I interject into a nice scientific cable discussion the observation that -all things being equal - a white jacketed cable or power cord whatever will sound better than one with another color jacket. As the little mice in the movie say, that’s the way things are! OK, bickering may continue.