Can we objectively rate speaker cables?

Hi Jenny,

I like your idea, but I think someone will have to put a lot of discriptive text in place to make everything clear.

For example what does "warm" mean? Does everyone view that the same way?

Another example of how confusing subjective observations can get; doesn't "slow" also relate to "warm" and doesn't "fast" also get somewhat into the same space as "detailed"?

If someone can give some very detailed and precise definitions to the end points of the scales then perhaps this will work. I certainly agree that it would be nice to have some sort of scale to allow one person to review a cable and have everyone else know where that fits in with other cables.

ROVA

Applauding your idea to bring some coherency to the confusing subject of choosing cables, we will be stomped by the variability of our systems. OTOH, your attributes, presented as opposites (warm-analytical) may help simplify things.

I would suggest we stick to characterising "objective" attributes: construction, materials used, shielded/non-shielded etc. For example, single core flat IC cable, copper, has a reasonably neutral-warmish sound (06) and good tonal balance, etc.

BTW, closed sound-stage & slow, both, are often due to restricted upper frequencies.

Jenny,

Since the way a cable behaves has an awful lot to do with the equipment at both ends it seems to be a pointless endeavor to try to attribute individual sonic properties to the cables themselves. Arthur Salvatore has a lot to say about cables and reviewers that proclaim wonderful sonic qualities about higher priced cables.