2. cables
  3. 1395106353

Wire differences explained common sense

I need to share what many other audiophiles may have missed. About me Im a 52 year old critical listener to the point I have to make myself just listen to the music and enjoy. What prompted me to write is a very long article in Audioholics and one thing stuck out was there is no difference between copper and silver.

Ok well there is. Im not a PhD or scientist but a very observant listener. One day I replaced my Silver Kimber KGAC with Tara labs copper interconnects. I listened noticing the sound become a little richer and full. I then put BTO "Hey You" on vinyl and something happened. I did not startle as the song starts. I always play it loud and I always jump just a little. I restarted and turned up volume as much as I dare and still no body reaction. I switched cables and bam, the dynamics returned and I was startled when song starts even though its about to begin.

It is scientifically known silver is a faster conducter. Hence maybe why it can be harsh on some setups. I have only 2 full sets of interconnects like above for the last 10 years. I have changed them out many many times and have noticed small differences each time. I have a cable burner also. My advantage is by not having many different sets of interconnects to confuse I can zero in on the 2 I know.

Just my observations here.
blueranger
viridian's avatar
viridian
4,184 posts
 
John, I take no issue with the conclusion, nor with your, or the OPs listening skills, and did not opine myself on the copper vs. silver issues as it applies to sonics. But when "common sense" appears in the header, I expect the logic to hold a bit of water. And I don't see how a comparison of cables with differing geometries, sheilding, connectors and dielectrics can lead us to the conclusion that the type of metal in the wire is the determiant of the resulting differences in sound quality.

I am a bit suspect of this statement as well, "It is scientifically known silver is a faster conducter. Hence maybe why it can be harsh on some setups." I would be interested in this science. Silver is more conductive than copper, acting less like a resistor. So that might be what this means. It could also be a reference to, the related propogation speed, the speed at which a signal passes through the medium. But I don't understand how greater propogation speed equates with brightness, fastness or hash within the audible range.
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,132 posts
 
I don't see how a comparison of cables with differing geometries, sheilding, connectors and dielectrics can lead us to the conclusion that the type of metal in the wire is the determiant of the resulting differences in sound quality.
Nor do I.
arnettpartners
312 posts
 
Too logical.
chayro
1,801 posts
 
I don't think comparing two sets of cables, one copper and one silver, can be used as the basis for any conclusions. Regardless of the metal used, all cables have different resistance, capacitance and inductance, which may or may not have a profound effect on the frequency response, depending on the amplifier and speakers.

Silver is a better conductor of electricity than copper. That's a scientific fact. Any other comparisons between cables must be done either by measuring the electrical characteristics or by listening. IMO
arnettpartners
312 posts
 
Does any audiophile think that two cables identical in every way--plugs, dialectric, shielding, quality of the wire, guage--except that one wire is copper and the other silver--does anyone think they would sound identical? I don't. I suppose this prediction could fall into the category of common sense, which we audiophiles are known to have from time to time.
More to discover