No one actually knows how to lculate what speaker cable they need

Thanks for your input, I think I am going to give silver a try, I only need a 5ft. pair as I have limited space too...

I'm very happy with them.

I got 2x1m and 1x2m cables, each with 8 silver solid core wire, cryo'd, with built in jumpers at the speaker ends, solid sliver spades, and made with silver solder. Each cable is in a teflon sleeve, then litz braided, then covered in an outer sleeve. Additionally I had mine covered in nylon braid, just for aesthetics.
I also got 5x1m XLR cables. Total cost was £540.

I'm was going to get some clearday and cabledyne cables as well, to compare, but clearday aren't making any more and cabledyne aren't in stock.

As for sound, they're very nice. Not too much added brightness, a little more clarity and transparency, and better instrument placement. I think I'm limited by my physical space now, rather than any component or cable.

So far I've tried: van damme blue (not highly rated), 0 gauge battery cable (a step up from van damme, but that might just be a cable maintenance issue), kimber 12TC (nice, but a nightmare to work with).

I've got to a point where I'm probably going to stop looking at cables for this system until I move. Once I have a larger room with better dimensions I'll come back to them. At the moment I feel I've got about the right level of price vs performance that I can get in my current space.

Conrad, I would be interested in your opinion of the silver speaker cables. I am using silver interconnects, like them and have been thinking of trying some.

For tnose who have endured his long inane ramblings on the various turntable forums, I propose we crown Mr b4icu the "Raul" of speaker wire theory

And, maybe an adjustment to the "formula" ?

I’m getting a bad feeling. 😥 Damage Control! Damage Control!

I ended up not playing... I wanted to though as I was curious but as the thread went on I lost interest. Interesting thread and been fun to read but I agree with most and question the OP for being so secretive on his formula. Instead of blowing the money on the battery cable I bought a couple power receptacles and am very happy with that purchase.

Not quite. I didn't stick to the rules about gauge for these.
And I was on 0 gauge before. :)

Wow! 4 gauge solid silver. That must have set you back a bunch.

I swapped mine out for solid silver cables. Partly to tidy up on the cables in what is a fairly tight space.

It would be interesting if the first 3 AudioGon members are still using the DIY cables. Please chime in. The latter 3 are not AG members.

https://imgur.com/a/tgGNIvB

Hmmmm.... The boss of the cable industry doesn't seem to have arrived. I don't understand. I was hoping he'd show up and tell us how Nelson Pass doesn't know what he's talking about or measuring. Guess I'll stop holding my breath. 

Who's the "boss of the cable industry"? Why would anyone want to talk to you when you can't defend your theory from observed measurements that prove it wrong? You had all kinds of fight when you thought anecdotal evidence was your ace in the hole. C'mon, man! Tell us how the math is wrong and how Nelson Pass doesn't know what he's talking about or measuring. Stop trying to appeal to the imaginary "boss of the cable industry" for credibility. You don't get to be the "boss of the cable industry" by recruiting guys who can't make their ideas agree with math or measurements. 

Ok guys. This is going to end now and here. If your boss, of the cable industry you may represent wish to have a conversation, I'm here. For you: I'm no more available.

I never said I did the measurements at any point. I said the measurements have been done and they don't agree with your claims and then I cited and linked to them. You didn't do the measurements either! How can you ask someone to verify measurements you haven't even done yourself? Making measurements of these kinds is a somewhat technical challenge requiring some somewhat expensive gear and calibrated apparatus. I don't have that gear yet.

As for the theory which your secret formula supports...
It must be wrong. It has to be wrong because your understanding of the phenomenon doesn't match measurements. The values you claim are in error by orders of magnitude as proven by mathematical calculation and the verification of that math by measurements. Nobody needs to know your formula to prove its wrong because the results you claim from it are wrong. And that's why I know you've never done the measurements yourself. 

By the way... We're still waiting for you to explain to us just how Nelson Pass went down the wrong path. The least you could do would be to explain why his measurements are wrong. 

How is it that someone like the OP can dangle so much nothing and get so much attention?

There is no relevance to what the OP has to offer other than the illusion of some secret sauce. It doesn't exist. The DF of an amp does not define anything, nor does the minimum impedance of a speaker. These factors are not predictive of anything.

And why haven't speaker and amp designers, who are ALL far more talented than the OP, come up with such "calculations" or "standard guidelines?" Because there would be no value.

I assume that you and Mr. kosst_amojan are giving a lot all the time for free and now you are wondering why not all do so?

All you were doing on this thread is giving me hard time with your negative and hostile attitude. Now you think that you deserve to receive the formula as a gift?

Happy dreams.

" I reserve my right, not to give away my formula, at least not for free."

So, if not to make money, just like the cable manufacturers, why not reveal the formula? Or are you just a noble person and the accolades of a half dozen questionable participants good enough for you? 

Why do we have to repeat everything again (and again)?

1.       I've told you not to hold your breath for the cables formula. I did offer to calculate for all, for free, what cable they need. For some, who had a problem to get the DF, I walked the extra mile to contact the manufacturer and get the information.

I reserve my right, not to give away my formula, at least not for free.

If you think it worth for you, pass me an offer on the privet massaging (-:

2.       Nelson Pass is not arguing with me. You do. I've told you to bring your own say, not others. You claimed you did measurements to prove me wrong! Where are they? Please show us what and how you measured what, and the results.

3.       On my side, there are six guys (five on this thread) that tried it out and came back with results and impressions. I may say that they were all happy with the results.

Please refer to the excel table I posted earlier.

What would support my claim, if not an evidence of six people who had a recommended cable by some dealer, replaced by a calculated cable, and their report of the improvement in sound?

Not to say, that they invested in that cable, less than US $ 100.- for a result that mostly is unheard of, in this hobby.

There are two things that do connect my claim: I show (by calculation) the right cable to use and once it is used, the owner's report of what it improved.

It is a bit unfair, after some claimed that all it matters is sound and how we hear it, that you come to claim, it is not good for you and that you want scientific prove.

I'm afraid that it would get into par. 1 of this post, why it was not added. Let's keep it that way for now.

As far as this dialog is getting, everything on your summery post has been said already, done and dusted. Why anyone would want to read it all over again, nor re write it?

 

Let me sum up you're arguments and my responses...

You claim a new way to calculate appropriate speaker cable. 

I ask you how; what's the formula?

You state a theory and refer to the evidence of the results of an impedance calculation. 

I looked at your evidence and found an error in your interpretation. 

You demanded evidence to support my claim that you're wrong. 

I cited and linked to an article by Nelson Pass, which you read, that agreed with the claim I was making. 

Repeatedly you've presented anecdotal evidence and demanded it be held to the same level of respect as actual measurements. 

Now you demand I engage you on the level of anecdotal evidence as if that's equal to quantitative evidence of your quantitative claim. 

Then you demand I replicate the quantitative evidence because you refuse to explain the difference between your measurements and those of Nelson Pass, which you've already looked at. 

The anecdotal evidence that people say it sounds good doesn't support your scientific claim that your formula is the cause. Anecdotal evidence isn't evidence of quantitative scientific statements such as you've made. When you state you've developed a calculation, you've left the realm of the subjective and entered the objective. Therefore, subjective evidence is irrelevant. 

Watch your language. That's way it was flagged.
I'm tiered reading pages on pages of links others wrote. I've told you that you may post your own. I don't read nor refer any more to other (like Nelson pass) articles.

What happened to you, to sit num for so long?

It must be a triumph for you to complete an entire research in quantum mechanics and come up with a tangible result of some measurements.

What was my recommendation for a speaker cable for your setup?

Did you try that out and listened, just as some other guys here did, and came back with some very flattering and enlighten experiences?

What measurements?
May we see some of those results, how they were measured (test setup)?

What was the reference cable to show a fundamental difference, to prove your case?

To say, everybody can. To prove some real data behind this would be more challenging. For you, a bright scientist in quantum mechanics, it must be easy.

You have no concept. I proved you completely wrong. You can't read a calculator. You don't know what you're talking about. And the people who do think you have any clue might want to compare your nonsense claims to the actual measurements somebody took. 

I don't need to go head to head with you on concept or theory because the measurements have been done that prove you're concepts and theories are completely wrong. Trust me... The vast majority of folks here think you're a snake oiler. No proof. Just a lot of word salad and bad understanding. 

Nelson Pass is not the subject of this thread. If I will go deeper into that concept, you think you can keep up representing Nelson Pass's theory? I don't think so.

Don't get me other's says. Bring yours. This thread is pretty much got the attention and cooperation I hoped for. You and your dear friends are now here just to do damage and keep me busy with your crap that you dig and fish over the web.

So, unless you come up with some real stuff of your own, you better save your time.

C'mon, b4icu... Don't bail on us now. We're waiting with baited breath to learn how Nelson Pass went down the wrong path. 

b4icu,

Since you flagged my last post, I'll say it again...

Please, by all means, do school us on how Nelson Pass went down the wrong path. 

I have no interest in answering to you. I've proven through measurements that you've got no idea what you're talking about. Nelson's measurements agree with the numbers I've been telling you. You're aren't even in the ballpark. You're wrong. You have no secret formula. The proof is out there. I put it there. Everyone sees it. Just stop with this. You're not more credible than Nelson Pass. 

This has been an entertaining read.

The thread title was enough to know what's coming...

What kind of "relavent data" is necessary? What is a manufacturer expected to answer?

5 pages of comment, and  no real direction from the OP.
Just subjective opinion and know it all responses to everything.

With the OP's vast knowledge, he should know he isn't going to get the answers he's looking for.

Audio madness on display.





 

"With all the respect to Mr. Nelson Pass he went the wrong path."
- Now that's rich, have you any idea what he has accomplished?

"No one here approved his cable sounds better than other, but mine did."
- Nelson Pass doesn't make cables. You have stated 6 people have tried your "secret formula", only the ones that have shared their results on this thread have standing. The others are hearsay. Why don't you reveal your formula?
Educate yourself: https://www.passlabs.com/#

A short reminder: This thread is about speakers cables. 

No LAN cat 6, No balanced interconnects (XLR) or any other.

Until you answer my Q. don't expect to be answered.

With all the respect to Mr. Nelson Pass he went the wrong path. No one here approved his cable sounds better than other, but mine did.  

Are you using 0g XLR cables? NO. Are CAT6 ethernet cables built from 8g? NO. Are USB cables as big as my arm? NO. You’re proving my point, not refuting it! You can jam crazy high alternating voltages down a thin conductor with negligible impedance, and it’s generally preferable to do so. That’s why utility companies do it. 

As for your calculator... Learn how to read it. You’re looking at the wrong value. You’re quoting the skin depth impedance, not the full diameter impedance. It’s pretty freaking obvious. That’s why the number you quote is such a small figure and hardly changes with length.

Read this: https://www.passdiy.com/project/articles/speaker-cables

Nelson Pass did the measurements and they’re not even close to the stuff you’re saying. I’m going to trust his actual measurements a little bit more than your misinterpreted internet calculator speculation.

Sorry for the "0" on length. The new value is 0.00369 ohms and not 0.25 ohms as you say. Anyway, what about my Q:
"From where do you take this information about cable thickness and massive amount of impedance?"

Regarding Interconnects, it's another thread...

I use XLR, no Litz. The entire Pro industry use XLR, at length of 100 meters and longer, no loss! On 2m, it is perfect.

Sorry, pal, but your numbers are off by about 3 orders of magnitude. Nobody is using 200mm long speaker cables. More like 2000mm. That puts the final equation out around .25 ohm. 

Why do you think some people use Litz wire for interconnects? It's because the inductance of solid wire presents audiblo significant impedance to high frequencies. That's why I can't use Litz wire with my amp. It doesn't present the impedance required to damp the oscillation that can result from a bad ground, and with 1MHz full power bandwidth, it WILL amplify all kinds of things. If your misinterpretation were correct, it wouldn't make any difference. 

Mr. kosst_amojan

From where do you take this information about cable thickness and massive amount of impedance?

This site would suggests otherwise: https://chemandy.com/calculators/round-wire-impedance-calculator.htm

At material = Cooper, Fr. = 0.02MHz (20KHz), Length = 2m, Diameter = 20mm, Z = 0.00012 Ohms!

At 2mm, Z = 0.00143 (>10x worse or higher impedance).

The skin effect is about full power of a 0 AWG @ a Fr. of 250Hz @ 150Amp's. It doesn't need that kind of current at any Fr. Or power. A 1,000W power into 8 ohms would require 16 Amps.

Not to say, that in Audio most energy above 10KHz are harmonies, with substantial less power than the basic Fr. (-20dB less = x100 times less).

For some reason, those who tried it out were very happy with the results.

B4icu,

Why do you keep clinging to science? There is no science to your claims. You’ve presented no scientific proof. Where’s your formal theory or formula? You can’t cling to science while exempting yourself from it’s rigors.

A 10KHz signal is only using about 1/16th of an inch of a wire’s cross section. Anything thicker than that just produces more and more inductive impedance as the wire gets thicker and as the frequency increases. A 15KHz signal through a 6 foot 0g cable is seeing a massive amount of impedance. That’s stuff you can look up the numbers and actually model. That’s science. That’s not good for speaker cables. This is very elementary stuff.

“In science, there are ways to deal with claims. Some are proven right others to be wrong. History will tell if any other came earlier to claim the same. On both, I never had a guy on this thread to prove me wrong. All claims were of "different" nature. The so called jumper cables is not exactly what I claim, as some need less thick and other more thick cables, as per their equipment.”

@b4icu That’s true, nobody here proved you wrong. But, and here’s the kicker, you didn’t prove anybody wrong here, either. You know, like wire directionality and conductor purity, for example. And there’s a reason for that. In science, you cannot prove a negative. Hel-loo! Be that as it may, you haven’t even proved yourself right. How about them apples? 🍎 

Mr. kosst_amojan

In science, there are ways to deal with claims. Some are proven right others to be wrong. History will tell if any other came earlier to claim the same. On both, I never had a guy on this thread to prove me wrong. All claims were of "different" nature. The so called jumper cables is not exactly what I claim, as some need less thick and other more thick cables, as per their equipment.

My say doesn’t claim anything new or unknown so far to the electronics or electricity science. I just say that there is a relation between amp’s property’s (DF) and the speaker cable required resistance. On the fly, many tried to get me down from this idea, with variety of says, most common urban myths of the cables industry, till we got to Quantum mechanics. I’ll give that the benefit of the doubt, it was funny. For those who gave it a try, with a moderate budget of under US $100.- ended up embracing this idea and very happy with the results.

The audio industry had many claims since it was introduced. Some were well done and stayed. Others came and gone. At the time they were in fashion, some made a lot of money. Money we paid for listening and purchasing that idea. The same was with media and standards. Like the Mini Disc and the ATRAC coding method (SONY). Some made an impressing comeback: LP and tube amplification.

b4icu, 
Maybe some people don't care for some guy showing up on the scene and making ridiculous claims to some esoteric knowledge they clearly don't have. Guys like you, and the people you impress, out there using jumper cables for their speakers, look pretty silly to those of us who have a clue. You're ideas are silly in their own right, but you yourself are silly for claiming you've discovered the knowledge nobody else has in over 100 years of electrical engineering. I don't know why, but every few months one of your type comes out of the woodwork with some gimmick. Yours is jumper cables. There was a guy here banging on about "infra-bass", or something like that, whatever that is. Another guy went nuts about his "holographic amplifier" that "cloned" the recording venue. I think he was the same guy who claimed to have invented a 4th mode to operate transistors in. I'm sure there will be another fuse thread before too long. 

This should be interesting, the saga continues ...
https://www.stereophile.com/content/speaker-cables-5

Ok, you caught me, geoff and I are in the cable business. Our company has developed a formula based on common sense and practical application. Wire that can actually bend and not possibly rip the connectors out of the gear. Wire that would complement the looks of our listening environment. Wire that 99.9% of the world's audio enthusiasts use today and will in the future. Wire that sounds great and won't break the budget. Wire that one doesn't have to buy tools to build. Wire made by people that don't demand that we know all and if you disagree, you are a liar. Wire that will actually stay in the system for more than a month or so. Wire that doesn't claim "a scientific fact that some guys went the extra mile to try it and returned to share their impression". Wire that helps one dial in a system that is emotionally satisfying, not so called " scientifically" correct. Isn't that, after all, why we build these systems?