Start low and move up slowly till desired result achieved.Cost has ZERO correlation to sonic quality as RESULTS ARE DEPENDENT ON THE REST OF THE SYSTEM!
- ...
- 150 posts total
Hilarious how all of you ignored the only gold nugget in this thread posted by
elliottbnewcombjr I chose to believe in the concept of small diameter, individually insulated multi-strand, to minimize the 'Skin' effect of single or twisted strands of non-insulated small diameter strands. (Cat 5 like, what I use)That's right! Cat 5 or 6 is as good as money can buy! But, it's easier to be fooled than believe you've been fooled (and robbed blind). |
First the disclosure. I am an engineer and I have been working in the research and development of technical products since the early 70's. One of the issues that always comes up is "why is your product better" and a few people will ask "can you put a number on it". Audio products present a unique challenge, everyone has an opinion on what is best. So, how do you even go about developing a scale of "goodness" when there is no agreement on what is good. When you consider basics like impedance it is not difficult to produce a cable that meets the requirements to perform the basic function of transmitting a signal well, so why bother publishing this information. On the other hand, why would an engineer tell anyone, outside of the decision group, about any measurements which may be useful in developing a competing product? If you have ever been involved in doing blind testing to determine the performance level of a system, you are probably aware of the difficulties in analyzing such data. There are ways to do this type of analysis, using such an analysis in developing a scale which will predict the performance of a system is more than a little elusive. Maybe, just maybe, a study of the history of the development of cables will yield some insight into this issue. The major issue in developing a scale is, what is better in terms of the performance. |
- 150 posts total