Top 10 Signs That A Cable Company is Selling Snake Oil

This response was published by
What's Your Thoughts?

The audio industry is full of hype with the most nonsense surrounding the simplest component of the A/V chain - interconnects and speaker cables. Because there are often very little measurable and audible differences between cables, many of the exotic cable vendors use psuedo junk science to differentiate their products from their competitors. These vendors often prey upon the suggestible audiophile giving them reasons why these products must be utilized in their precious systems in order to achieve the best performance possible to reach the true path of audio nirvana. Listed below are the top 10 cable snake oil claims to watch out for. If a vendor is selling you on any of these fallacies, run don't walk away from their products, unless of course you enjoy a good sci-fi story and desire to buy expensive audio jewelery.  

Watch out if a Cable Vendor or Manufacturer:
  1. Promotes that their product allegedly eliminates audio related Skin Effect and/or "Strand Jumping" problems.
  2. Claims revolutionary breakthrough in cable technology by polarizing or biasing the dielectric using a battery.
  3. Promotes that their products eliminate "Audiogenic", "Diode Rectification" or any type of non linear distortions. See Debunking the Myth of Cable Distortion and Dielectric Biasing
  4. Physically places (+) and (-) wire leads in separate dielectrics not closely spaced in a common jacket. See: Calculating Cable Inductance of Twin Feeder Cables
  5. Claims vast improvements in sound by inserting "Cable Elevators" to raise the cables off the floor and minimize electron misfiring or static energy fields.
  6. Claims that cryogenically freezing cables improves fidelity or measurably changes electrical properties after the cable is restored to room temperature.
  7. Claims that their cables require a "Break In" period.
  8. Claims that measurements cannot quantify why their designs are superior and often misapply engineering principles in their reasoning but abandon the associated governing laws and metrics that establish them.
  9. Claims audible differences exist between stranded and non-stranded wires of same gauge rating, geometry and conductor spacing.
  10. Claims audible differences between silver and copper cables of equal design geometry and gauge.

I think that this sort of thread belongs no where on this forum, as such a thread is devised right form the start to give everyone an ulcer, and it destroys the website, the forum, and the business in general.
+1. We've already seen that there are some that come here simply to engage in argument. There's no reason to encourage them when threads on this topic already exist.
+1 This thread does a disservice to Audiogon visitors who wish to learn ways for improving their audio system. We should be helping, not obstructing.  It’s always easier to tear something down than to build it.
While I don’t disagree with almost all those points (with exception) and could add some more, not to mention, if the claim is only associated with consumer audio (and not other more rigourous industries) it is probably bunk, I have to go with Teo on this, the only point of this post is to incite discord and it has no value to the forums.  I think it would be best to remove it.

I don’t agree with Teo that "questionable" products are essential to the health of the industry, and could argue the opposite is true, but if people want to believe what they believe, that is their right, as is spending money where they feel like. These people should also respect that if they are promoting their belief in a forum where others are exposed, that others have the right to question said beliefs (if they don’t resort to name calling). This us vs. them / cancel culture that is prevalent in today’s culture doesn’t help anyone but the ones who profit off discourse.

I don’t agree with Teo that "questionable" products are essential to the health of the industry"

Teo never claimed, stated, or asserted such a thing, and you're use of actual quotation marks to claim that teo did say that is very deceptive at the very least.