John Dunlavy On "Cable Nonsense"

Sqjudge, knowing you from our off air conversations I'll bet your loving Liguy's post. Hey Li... you have no idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!! P.S. Sqjudge, I've been working on a return message, I'll get it off soon. J.D.

Steve, My "Placebo Effect" is in reverse. When I try Radio Shack cables vs multi kilobuck ICs I am praying and rooting real hard that Radio Shack wins the contest. I dont like paying the same price for an IC as an amplifier.It goes against my sense of what is fair and honest. On the other hand, who am I to say to a design engineer that the last five years of testing, scrapping, midnight oil burning,and cost etc.,does'nt warrent the price?
BTW, I have also heard many exotic speaker wires screw up the sound far worse than stranded zip cord. Getting zip cord to sound correct though, is not the way Monster or Sound Connections or the old Levinson company did it. They used too many strands to achieve a given guage and wound up with mud sonically. (here come the morter shells)
Paul, I also concur with your last paragraph......Frank

Liguy, I commented on the idea of "transmission line" theory applying to audio frequencys. I do not dispute the charterisic impedance of a cable even if it is only a centimeter in length. Do you happen to recall how long an IC would have to be to get even ONE standing wave in it at any audio frequency? (it is way more than a few feet)

Here's my 2 cents worth...
First off let me say that I am a believer in that cables do make a difference (not always for the good) and that bi-wiring also makes a difference (also not always to the plus side of things).
This past weekend I spent some time with a pair of cable designers who I have come to know over the last 5 months. These guys make cables that have separate cables for transmit and returns as opposed to all cables being in the same jacket - typical stereo cables are 2 cables per channel and bi-wires are 4 cables per channel. We tested a prototype cable (bi-wire version) that was constructed in a different configuration in that the return wires were made slightly different in terms of the internal wrapping of the materials. The transmit wires were configured exactly the same. Using the same system (older but high end Sony cdp, Copeland preamp and amp) but using three different pairs of speakers (Duntech, B&W 803 S2 and a pair of DIY (vifa & seas drivers) I was able to tell each and every time when the return wires had been changed. I found what can best be described as an "aggressive" verus a "laid-back" sound when the cables were swapped. There were about 6 listeners there and we all were able to distinguish the differences although personal tastes lent to a discussion on which way sounded best. Some times I preferred the "laid-back" version while others preferred the other.

In a nutshell it can be said that I am a believer in cable differences but respect the right of those who believe that they don't make difference from a purely scientific standpoint or have tried but have noticed no difference. I am no electrical engineer but do have a background in ultrasonics (so I have some knowledge on how sound and electrical signals move through time and space) but it was my experience that there was a significant difference each time, audible to a number of people - I can't explain it scientifically but I know what I heard and the only thing our group of testers could not definatively agree on was which version sounded the best.

I am glad for the differences expressed in these forums as it allows for one's own experiences to be be heard (read) and it would truly be a boring world (audio and otherwise) if we all were of the same opinion...

Rgd - Could you explain the "return" and "transmit" part of your post? I don't understand.