Speaker wire is it science or psychology


I have had the pleasure of working with several audio design engineers. Audio has been both a hobby and occupation for them. I know the engineer that taught Bob Carver how a transistor works. He keeps a file on silly HiFi fads. He like my other friends considers exotic speaker wire to be non-sense. What do you think? Does anyone have any nummeric or even theoretical information that defends the position that speaker wires sound different? I'm talking real science not just saying buzz words like dialectric, skin effect capacitance or inductance.
stevemj
Redkiwi,

I've just read your post and have found your argument persuasive. Since you've stated you are a scientist, it's tacitly understood you are a proponent of measurements and repeatability. That notwithstanding, you've also expressed a willingness to trust the sensory apparatus you've been endowed with ( your ears ) even when the graphs and meters are sending conflicting messages. That is what any advocate of the scientific method should practice - an open mind and a willingness (nay, eagerness) to look at things even when you haven't yet found the way to quantify them. That may come someday. To dismiss things out of hand when the meters or the instruments can't measure them is not good science.
There is still a staggering amount of research to be conducted before anyone can say with definitive proof that how people perceive sound and especially music has been mapped, tested and catalogued.

Isn't there an old tale, perhaps apocryphal, of the aerodynamic engineer who proved on paper that a bumblebee can't fly? His proof was replete with equations and techno stuff, all seemingly compelling. However, the bee, being the illiterate creature it is, still kept on flying.

I don't share your aversion to SS amps but do understand how you can prefer "valves". (I find tube amps a bit, shall we say, generous in what they do to certain parts of the audible spectrum.) Some folks just perceive things differently. Witness the Krell vs Levinson thread elsewhere here to get an idea of the intensity with which people hold convictions. BTW, how are things in New Zealand? (Guessing that you're such, based on your nom de plume.)
Redkiwi, Jadem6, nicely done.

When I compare wires, I notice sometimes that although I cant articulate a reason, I prefer one over another. That is to say, I dont decide, this one is best, I just enjoy whatever Im listening to more so that I forget to stop after the short selection that Im using for the comparison and let the piece play all the way through. Now, if you have 2 wires, and with one you have no trouble cutting songs short to analyze the effect of the wire, but with the other you cant stand to interrupt a song you like, isnt that a very good reason to prefer one over the other?

And who cares how they measure?
Detlof: "I began to wonder, if any member of the 'honorable opposition' ever went to live concerts" is what is known as an ad hominem attack. It's also quite false. The last time I went to Carnegie Hall, I didn't hear any of the effects of out-of-phase rumble, nor did I notice an excessive amount of inner groove distortion. Those two effects, among others, are endemic to vinyl reproduction. By the way, they are not endemic to analog, since they aren't evident on analog master tapes. That's why it's known as distortion. Some audiophiles may like the sound of that distortion, just as they may like the way a SET amp clips or the way a cable rolls off the high end. But that's not because it's "closer to real music." It's just closer to what you like. And it's perfectly okay to like it (hell, I like some of it myself), but let's not make of it more than it is.
Jostler, apaologies, I did not mean to be offensive, I wondered that was all and I was proved to be wrong. Besides often enough you seem not to mince words either, remember those clicking of heels to consequently hear better. Mind you, that was witty, but not without its own mischief. I can live very well with the rest of your above post, in fact I liked it, as you can see.