Rsbeck: I'm not claiming anything regarding facts and figures. I'm asking you to put your own listening skills and system to the test and tell me the results. If the cables sound different and YOU can identify these differences, yet those that you trust can't explain those differences scientifically, who are you going to believe? Will it be your ears and brain or their flawed testing procedures?
Unfortunately, you refuse to do something simple to test your own beliefs within the confines of your own system and listening methodology in order to either confirm or deny those beliefs. I'm not the one with something to hide, hence my offer to you to provide the necessary materials to conduct the testing as you see fit in an environment that you think is suitable for such things. The fact that you continue to babble on about my so called listening abilities when you won't even put yours to the test using your own system that you are familiar with only demonstrates why discussing this subject in public is near useless. That is, those that run their mouth the most don't even use what they tell others to, nor will they put their beliefs to the test. I said i was done here, yet you feel the need to keep egging things on. In case anyone was wondering, i'm not the one running away from a simple listening test as conducted under a no-stress scenario. That privilege belongs to Rsbeck.
JNeutron: What's the matter, got an "audiophile jones" for a forum to expound all the "facts & figures"? AA down again??? : )
Other than that, Nordost claims a velocity of propogation higher than i've ever seen for ANY coaxial type cable. They claim 94%, which is a phenomenally high figure. Most coaxial designs range from appr 66% ( poly & teflon ) up to 78% ( foam ) on average. Those utilizing a higher percentage of "air dielectric" can range up to appr 84% from what i've seen as used in a coaxial form. Given that a coaxial design requires more dielectric involvement and a contained field, i can see how things would slow down compared to an openly spaced design conducting within free space and / or minimal dielectric involvement.
As to your comment "As it turns out, the point of minimal line storage occurs when the characteristic impedance of the cable matches the load..so, in theory, an 8 ohm speaker would work best with an 8 ohm cable impedance", I agree. Not only does it work best in theory, but also in reality. That's why i've been "preaching" the use of impedance matched cabling for years now. It is also why i've stressed that one should select their loudspeaker cabling prior to any other cabling in the system as we already know what the specific impedance ratios are that we'll be working with. Given the varying input / output impedances of some components, selecting the proper impedance for an interconnect becomes a crap-shoot. Sean
>
Unfortunately, you refuse to do something simple to test your own beliefs within the confines of your own system and listening methodology in order to either confirm or deny those beliefs. I'm not the one with something to hide, hence my offer to you to provide the necessary materials to conduct the testing as you see fit in an environment that you think is suitable for such things. The fact that you continue to babble on about my so called listening abilities when you won't even put yours to the test using your own system that you are familiar with only demonstrates why discussing this subject in public is near useless. That is, those that run their mouth the most don't even use what they tell others to, nor will they put their beliefs to the test. I said i was done here, yet you feel the need to keep egging things on. In case anyone was wondering, i'm not the one running away from a simple listening test as conducted under a no-stress scenario. That privilege belongs to Rsbeck.
JNeutron: What's the matter, got an "audiophile jones" for a forum to expound all the "facts & figures"? AA down again??? : )
Other than that, Nordost claims a velocity of propogation higher than i've ever seen for ANY coaxial type cable. They claim 94%, which is a phenomenally high figure. Most coaxial designs range from appr 66% ( poly & teflon ) up to 78% ( foam ) on average. Those utilizing a higher percentage of "air dielectric" can range up to appr 84% from what i've seen as used in a coaxial form. Given that a coaxial design requires more dielectric involvement and a contained field, i can see how things would slow down compared to an openly spaced design conducting within free space and / or minimal dielectric involvement.
As to your comment "As it turns out, the point of minimal line storage occurs when the characteristic impedance of the cable matches the load..so, in theory, an 8 ohm speaker would work best with an 8 ohm cable impedance", I agree. Not only does it work best in theory, but also in reality. That's why i've been "preaching" the use of impedance matched cabling for years now. It is also why i've stressed that one should select their loudspeaker cabling prior to any other cabling in the system as we already know what the specific impedance ratios are that we'll be working with. Given the varying input / output impedances of some components, selecting the proper impedance for an interconnect becomes a crap-shoot. Sean
>