Hi Doug,
Thanks for the complements. I might add one thing to your points. I think that in addition to gauge size, cable materials are important. I know what you mean however, because like you I remember about 30 years ago using lamp wiring for my speakers, and then buying some 12 gauge copper and . . . wow, no doubt about the improvement.
I think more copper might help the bass weight, but not bass definition since only the silver in my experiments brought out the definition. And there "more" silver seemed to actually hurt definition. Of course, I don't know what the quality of the silver used in the 12g cable was (I don't want to say the brand because they sell here), so quality could've been part of it. I guessed that the skin effect hampered, but I know plenty of people have calculated that and claim it is insignificant for audio (of course, these are usually engineers who claim if it can't be measured it can't be experienced).
So I can't say how much the design of the Silver Resolutions enhanced definition (from Signal's website: "Each cable contains 4 stranded silver conductors and 8 solid-core bare copper conductors"), and how much silver alone does it; I am mostly convinced silver helped because the results fit my hypothesis (i.e., I reasoned that since silver was generally speedier, then it should help better define bass). Obviously that's not thorough science, but I can't afford to test extensively (besides, it works no matter what the reason!).
When you asked "what do you think will happen if you double up on the mid/highs," my mind lit up. To tell you the truth, it never occurred to me to try it since the MITs do such a great job, and I am afraid of messing up their seemingly delicate balance of qualities. If you have any suggestions I'd would love to hear them, but it occurs to me that using two identical MIT cables might be the way to go.
Thanks for the complements. I might add one thing to your points. I think that in addition to gauge size, cable materials are important. I know what you mean however, because like you I remember about 30 years ago using lamp wiring for my speakers, and then buying some 12 gauge copper and . . . wow, no doubt about the improvement.
I think more copper might help the bass weight, but not bass definition since only the silver in my experiments brought out the definition. And there "more" silver seemed to actually hurt definition. Of course, I don't know what the quality of the silver used in the 12g cable was (I don't want to say the brand because they sell here), so quality could've been part of it. I guessed that the skin effect hampered, but I know plenty of people have calculated that and claim it is insignificant for audio (of course, these are usually engineers who claim if it can't be measured it can't be experienced).
So I can't say how much the design of the Silver Resolutions enhanced definition (from Signal's website: "Each cable contains 4 stranded silver conductors and 8 solid-core bare copper conductors"), and how much silver alone does it; I am mostly convinced silver helped because the results fit my hypothesis (i.e., I reasoned that since silver was generally speedier, then it should help better define bass). Obviously that's not thorough science, but I can't afford to test extensively (besides, it works no matter what the reason!).
When you asked "what do you think will happen if you double up on the mid/highs," my mind lit up. To tell you the truth, it never occurred to me to try it since the MITs do such a great job, and I am afraid of messing up their seemingly delicate balance of qualities. If you have any suggestions I'd would love to hear them, but it occurs to me that using two identical MIT cables might be the way to go.