Newbie Q: speaker cable length? Different OK?
jmcgrogan24,977 posts01-12-2016 12:17pm If you're purchasing terminated cables than they will be harder to sell if you need to change. Change? Who changes their speaker cables? ;^) Hah I don't coz I use wires with bare ends. I believe they're Kimber 4TC |
And on that count, let me ask, from the link, sufficient enough cables?I looked at the link, and they strike me as a reasonable choice, at least to use initially and perhaps over the long term. I’m somewhat puzzled, though, by the references in the description to a conductor diameter of 7 mm, and an outer diameter of 17 mm. The description also states that the conductors are 12 gauge. A 12 gauge copper conductor has a diameter of approximately 2 mm, as can be seen in this wire gauge table. Also, looking at the illustration the outer diameter looks to be a lot smaller than 17 mm, as the diameter of the tips of the banana plugs shown on the cable is probably about 4 mm, and as best as I can tell the outer diameter does not appear to be more than perhaps 2 or 3 times that amount. In any event, while the impedance of your speakers, as shown here, is very low (less than 3 ohms throughout most of the audible frequency range), the resistance of 30 feet of 12 gauge wire (the combined length of the + and - conductors in a 15 foot cable) is about 0.05 ohms, which seems reasonably small even in relation to the low speaker impedance. (The corresponding figure for the shorter cable would be about 0.03 ohms if you go with the unequal length alternative). However it seems conceivable that the unspecified inductance of the cable, in cables of those lengths, may be enough to present an impedance in the upper treble region that is audibly significant relative to the low impedance of the speaker at those frequencies. (The impedance presented by an inductance rises in proportion to frequency, and the inductance of a cable rises in proportion to length). The result of that might be a very slight softening of the upper treble, which in the case of the Thiels that I’ve heard and also read comments about could very well be a good thing. And then there are the myriad other possible cable effects audiophiles like to discuss and argue about, and that are much talked about in marketing literature, but whose quantitative significance is debatable, and which in some cases may not even be quantifiable, such as "strand jumping," metal purity, "skin effect," "dielectric absorption," "time alignment," "characteristic impedance," antenna effects, etc. In any event, it seems safe to say that the bottom line on those things in any given application is unpredictability, so IMO you have made a reasonable choice. Other opinions will certainly differ in some cases. BTW, if it does turn out that your speakers have been damaged, and if it appears that a particular driver or drivers has/have been blown, you may want to give Bill LeGall at millersound.net a call. He is the best in the business when it comes to repairing speakers, and he is also a pleasure to deal with. Typically just the failed driver(s) is/are sent to him; shipping the entire speaker is usually not necessary. Good luck. Regards, -- Al |
Thanks Al, Among all things, that was most comforting to read of the Bill LeGall lead. That gives me a great option, and relieves my growing concern that I may have damaged what could be a vintage, difficult-to-fix set of speakers. We shall see if they are, once I get this finally plugged together. But at least I have options. The guy does indeed seem to be a treasure. (And in my old stomping grounds, no less.) Yes, who knows where they were getting their numbers. I just measured them, and each of the cables, red and black, are about 6mm -- including insulation. It was the outer cable that was about 16mm. --Actually, they'd written it accurately; I misread it. Perhaps I will take them up on the option to return both and go with two 15's, in that there just might be a future upgrade day. |
OK; thanks for the clarification. So when they referred to the diameter of "individual conductors" in their description they were referring to the diameter of each conductor (+ and -) **including** its insulation. And when they referred to the outer diameter they were referring to the diameter of the outer jacket which surrounds both conductors over most of the length of the cable. Makes sense now. Regards, -- Al |
