Why Do Cables Matter?


To me, all you need is low L, C, and R. I run Mogami W3104 bi-wire from my McIntosh MAC7200 to my Martin Logan Theos. We all know that a chain is only as strong as its' weakest link - so I am honestly confused by all this cable discussion. 

What kind of wiring goes from the transistor or tube to the amplifier speaker binding post inside the amplifier? It is usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper. Then we are supposed to install 5 - 10' or so of wallet-emptying, pipe-sized pure CU or AG with "special configurations" to the speaker terminals?

What kind of wiring is inside the speaker from the terminals to the crossover, and from the crossover to the drivers? Usually plain old 16 ga or 14 ga copper.

So you have "weak links" inside the amplifier, and inside the speaker, so why bother with mega expensive cabling between the two? It doesn't make logical sense to me. It makes more sense to match the quality of your speaker wires with the existing wires in the signal path [inside the amplifier and inside the speaker].

 

 

kinarow1

So I don’t understand how someone would be rolling on the floor with laughter reading patent claims.

 

@tonywinga 

Because the claims defy physics, particularly in HiFi.

I read plenty of claims for products on which something we made could possibly infringe - at least in a lawyer's mind - and had to write arguments invalidating the claims from prior art.

United States Issues Patent Number 10,000,000 in 2018. The twenty-five years from 1993 to 2018 double the number of patents of the previous TWO HUNDRED years. 

Many, many times I dissuaded our teams from applying because although the product might be clever and unique, it was based on fundamentals that would not survive a knowledgeable examiner. Perhaps I should have relented and 'collected' some more... 😏

@knownothing My argument was just called a name it wasn't dealt with as you say. My argument is that you can't get more information out of the recording than the original. I recorded original recording for 35 years I've been to the Oscars and Emmys and technical Emmys all more than once. The principle is easy if you put a Ferrari body around a Volkswagen it doesn't make it go faster or turn better. If you original recording has an information value of 7 you can't change any component and get 7.5 out of the recording this is a physics idea not an audiophile idea no matter how resolving your system is. 

Bottlenecks are parts of the recording that limit the amount of information you can put in the recording, you can have a movie with 192hz sample rate music and then mix the movie in 48k sample rate ant the 192hz music will not stick out as higher quality in the mix, the signal is limited to 48k. Audiophiles use examples explaining how cables tune their system, it is only possible to tune their system down not up because you can't create more information via the cable no matter how expensive it is. When AI is incorporated into audio that's another story but for now just understand it is a law called entropy not an idea that is limiting as well as audiophiles not understanding simple physics. 

If you would like to interact with the argument that would be great the first thing you have to do is disprove the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy). 

Also curious why the worlds most complicated and refined machines mankind has ever made that literally have to be accurate to within nano meters in making electronic chips use regular power cables. These are $500M machines, look up the power supplies that ASML uses. 

@donavabdear : and you have been repeatedly told from multiple people in various of your “audiophiles don’t understand “ threads that it’s not about adding “more information “ to the original recordings. It’s about removing as little as possible from it. But it does not appear you WANT to listen. And being so smart (Oscars and Emmys and all those distinguished accomplishments), it sounds to me you don’t want to listen (or read) on purpose. No idea why. Maybe because (going back to your multiple “audiophiles are basically stupid “ threads)?