I love any thread where Al quotes himself. At any rate the OP may be a great engineer but fails to make a coherent point. He makes three basic observations in his original post. That sonic differences in cables are not supported by scientific evidence. That the claims made by cable makers are excessive and over the top. And that the prices are too high.
Let's look at each one. With over 40 years in the hobby, my sense is that the ear is a finer and more discerning instrument than the oscilloscope and that if you hear a difference but the measurements do not support that difference you are either measuring the wrong thing or your measurement device is too crude to measure those differences. The OP never mentions the sound of any audio gear at all in his original post. I thought that the purpose of an audio system was to reproduce sound.
The view regarding the claims of cable makers is completely subjective, as with most advertising, some seems earnest but misguided, some over the top, and some quite reasonable and measured.
As to the prices of wire and accessories, again that is personal, and to some extent how one views the hobby. To some the improvement in perceived sound justifies the price of the gear. So if a $1000 screw subjectively improved the sound for the purchaser significantly then it would be a good value. Some judge the value based on the material value. The copper costs $60 per pound, another $10 for extruding and $20.00 worth of metal in the RCA jacks, etc. If it correlates to improved subjective sound quality all the better. Some are relativists and judge the improvement per dollar spent in relation to competing products. All of these approaches seem valid and tend to tell more about how the purchaser views the world than about the products themselves, IMHO.
And so sorry that you have to sigh Kenny. Don't worry, it gets better.
