I would appreciate if you guys can enlight me by posting the "theoretical" Advantages AND Disadvantages of the network technology with respect to the traditional (non-network) approach. Besides resistance, inductance and capacitance, is there any other significant parameter involved here?

I guess that network technology must be based on some solid principle(s). Otherwise it would be difficult to understand why the technology is endorsed by some high-end manufacturers (Avalon and Spectral come to mind).

Thanks for your help (remember: Advantages AND Disadvantages).

of hiI

 Don't know anything about theory. - John K 21:27:52 7/08/99 (1)
 Re: a little about theory. - PEB 23:10:31 7/11/99 (0)
 Re: Network speaker cables: Advantages vs. Disadvantages - Thorsten 11:42:10 7/07/99 (1)

...

Show full thread outline!

 Don't know anything about theory. - John K 21:27:52 7/08/99 (1)
 Re: a little about theory. - PEB 23:10:31 7/11/99 (0)
 Re: Network speaker cables: Advantages vs. Disadvantages - Thorsten 11:42:10 7/07/99 (1)
 Re: Thanks a lot! - Harold 06:49:54 7/08/99 (0)
 Re: Network speaker cables: Advantages vs. Disadvantages - Jack G 11:28:28 7/07/99 (0)

Juding purely on the basis of the patents on networks in connection with speaker-cables, the issues are a few....

Certain highly capacitive, low inductance Speakercable can make Transistor Amp's oscillate on fast impulses unless the Speaker-Side carries a RC Network. (see patent by Mathew Polk)

Bruce Brisson (MIT/Transparent) has a patent on an Amplifier side network that is claimed to offset the Timeconstant made up out of the Cables Isolation Resistance and the Cables Capacitance.

As these effects are minimal with good quality dielectrics (foamed/airspaced polyethylen or teflon) the implication for the quality of the Wire actually employed in these cables seems dire....

I believe later versions additionally add a bit inductance. The result makes the Cable behave as a predictable Low-Pass filter which prevents noise getting into amplifers and which ensures stability under all condition....

The funny thing is that most Mid-Fi Amplifiers have all this stuff build into the Amplifier itself and only a few "High-End" Amplifier companies refuse to do so and hence generate a market for "network cables"...

In my own system (SE Valves) I have repeatedly found that less is more. But then my Speaker-Cables use mostly air as dielectric, my Amplifiers are unconditionally stable and inherently designed to eliminate any injected noise....

So, if your amp is a bit hiar-shirt style or incompetently designed, you might find Cables with boxes will sound better than those without.

Being a DIY enthusiast and penny-pincher I suggest you try the DIY Cable Recipy detailed here:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/ffrc_e.html

This Cable is designed to offer a good balance of RLC and to be compatible with the widest range of equipment. It's dirt-cheap too.

Then borrow the MIT and compare it to see if the Improvement (if there is any) is worth your money....

Later Thorsten

PS, something on Networks in Cables from your's truely can be found here:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/ubyte2e.html - look near the Bottom

If you hear and like the improvement with the MIT Terminator 2 Bi-Wire, then you should try MH-750 and above. The 750 is where I think MIT cables really start to sound good. Their lower products aren't as impressive, I think.

As for the "secret circuits" in the boxes, I think they are just trying to do a subtle phase trick in order to get the low frequencies to arrive at the same time as the highs. By purposely starting the amplitude up at frequencies above the audio band, then bringing the amplitude back down, the phase curve can show an ever decreasing negative characteristic. Hence the typical high group delay at low frequencies is decreased. So they are creating a resonance at very high frequencies. With extra-high bandwidth amps, there is the danger of sending the amp into oscillation.