Speltz Anti-cable needs break-in period?

Actually the Anti-Cable website basically seems to suggest what Sean says: that twisting the runs may ameliorate top end roll-off by lowering total inductance. I was apparently misremembering when I implied that Speltz's site suggests twisting will do the same for bass response.

I tried researching further on the web, to locate whatever reference I was remembering about twisting, inductance and bass response, but couldn't find it again. I did, however, find seemingly contradictory claims surrounding this topic -- and that was looking mostly at independent technical writings and those posted on manufacturer's websites, not those of non-technical audiophiles (such as myself) in forums such as this. (There seems to be similar disagreement over the importance of characteristic impedance.)

So it's hard to know what to make of this. I guess the best thing to do is listen and compare, twisted vs. untwisted. The one time I tried separate-lead speaker cables, I twisted them together as recommended by that manufacturer (the cables sounded rolled-off in the treble and bass-heavy, so I didn't buy them, but I also didn't try them untwisted to compare). A lot of the online papers I read were written by technophiles whose larger agenda was often that fancy audiophile cabling is snakeoil and a ripoff, and who also claim inaudibility for different variables which I personally believe I have heard. Whereas of course the manufacturer sites are mainly trying to sell a product.

As the for the effect of dielectric pigment, given the arguments presented above, why should gray 'sound better' than black? Or red 'sound worse' than clear or white? In any case, it seems to me that the whole point of the dielectric in Anti-Cables is that it's as minimal as possible, in which case so should be the 'audibility' of its pigment.

I've had the anti-cables for 2 years now, just luv 'em. In all the threads i've participated re: paul's wonder wire, i've never ran across a person who preferred to twist them. Even Mr. Speltz sais to lay them so they aren't touching one another.

One thing many don't talk about is directionality...speltz's wire sounds deep & warm one direction and bright the other. I find the warmer directions and leave them to break in. My cables: anti-cables and 2 sets of anti-IC's w/eichmanns all took a month to break in.

No worries if you have these cables but haven't listened for direction...i had the anti-cables in place 12 months, then tried the direction thing & it was instantly noticeable...2 of the 4 runs were the wrong way - i swapped them and a week later the cables make amazing music.

I'm constantly looking for a new sp cable design i like under $500...besides the cheLa design from CV, my $50 anti-cables are it for me.

matt

i've never ran across a person who preferred to twist them. Even Mr. Speltz sais to lay them so they aren't touching one another.

How far apart do you have yours?

All things being equal ( ha ha ha ), enamel has a higher dielectric absorption ratio than Teflon. As such, even though there seems to be less dielectric influence in one's mind due to "seeing" less dielectric with enamel, the Teflon actually distorts the signal less. Sean
>

I love the interconnects and like the speaker wire. Are you saying you found both to be directional? Do you remember which (speaker) runs were the wrong way? HF? LF? OR by four runs do you mean 2 pos and 2 neg. I ask all this to avoid having to rerun these as its no fun in my installation space. Also I tried Chela vs Anti and found it hard to percieve much difference. Chela now in the closet. How the interconnect grew the image and made the HF right was amazing for me. I actually found the first incarnation of the interconnects has slightly better bass than the new style with the smaller signal wire inside the larger gauge spiraled ground return like you have. Everything else is better on the new style. I also got my new styled ones before the Eichmann versions were available.

ET

ET