 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.85.131.36
Thoughts of solid vs stranded wire in the signal path. I assume power wiring makes no difference.
Follow Ups:
here is an interesting link that helped me grasp some of what drlowmu is talking about here, litz wire, ground planes etc:http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/parts/102180-groundside-electrons.html#post1213239
Edits: 04/11/11
Now if the link provided had something to do with what Jeff posted, then fine. But IMHO, it doesn't.
I didn't read it all as for now I don't have the time. I would be fine with the results if it wasn't for the mumbo jumbo explanations.
When it comes to ground plane solutions, I have done some of this and it is audible but then good grounding techniques are audible and verifiable technically so there's no mystery explanations needed.
cheers,
Stephen
maybe it doesn't however it does give an explanation as to how adding litz wire to the ground system essentially helped resolve more detail.
it could be bullshit for all I know, and in honesty I haven't done a lot of experimenting with different wire just yet.
the gentlemen posting it seems pretty well versed in output transformer design, I certainly wouldn't dismiss it entirely.
Very few pass these courses in undergraduate studies with flying colors, and fewer go on and use it in future work. BS can be made to sound good, and unrecognizable as such.
I can understand that he hears what he says. He tries then to imagine the actual cause and effect. While he means well, he really doesn't know what happened and has no reality-based idea about what he's talking about.
I have dealt with these kinds of problems in RF and microwave theory and I can't really make a true understanding of what is going on. That is just because I know it takes major computer modeling for just simple things, and this isn't even simple. Probably no one, therefore, really knows the cause and effect. And that's why it is sometimes called "black magic". It means something seems to work, but there's no hope now for a real quick understanding. Dimensionally and electrically there, there's way too much that can be going on.
I repeat this message again and again, and that is we know a lot, but we still don't know much at all in science no matter how it seems. We branch out again and again with more questions for every simple answer found. Only the highest leading edge researchers really appreciate that humbling fact, I think.
-Kurt
...and take everything that gentleman says with a very large grain of salt.
You have been warned...
-Henry
.
Ampere's law shows forces can be strong with multistranded and insulated runs of closely spaced wire. And Litz is one of them since it isn't perfectly orthogonal.
I have stranded copper within stranded coated silver stranded wire from Van Den Hul. I made the choice by ear alone, and I didn't know it was made like that. My prejudice tells me no way will I go there.
BUT, it was built about air tight as can be in the very physically strong and thick insulator. It will bend but not expand easily. This seems to force the stranding into something mechanically like a single strand in terms of susceptibility to Ampere's law of forces in wire.
Other cheaper insulation will make the strands expand, move a bit, and waver mechanically.
Teflon V-Caps and Duelund (Jensen) crossover components are built to make internal dimensions solid as a rock mechanically. IOW, they also don't waver mechanically much by current or voltage change that cause electrodynamic forces to alter their values with the music.
This might more explain why some things might sound better: mechanically inert as well as electrically inert toward distortion (forces causing deviations).
And this might be found temporally far more than from steady state signals. Where does that blur come from in those things?
Just something to think about as a hypothesis.
-Kurt
It is too technical for Cable Asylum and too hypothetical for Prop Head.
-Kurt
OK, so we got this electron current - either AC going back and forth or DC in one direction as separate entities or as an AC signal imposed on DC, which, either way, means there's a chaotic mixture of electrons hurtling through the wire like a riotous marathon through a tunnel. And there's a limited number of available valence positions meaning the runners in the tunnel have to play musical chairs on their way through and some of the runners have to run backwards periodically. Imagine what it's like, if you're an electron, to be faced with this turmoil. Seems to me we're just being sadistic to submit electrons to such confusing, painful conditions. I think we should take a moment for a silent prayer for forgiveness.
Or, we could mitigate things a tad by using stranded 10 awg - surplus trans atlantic cable or maybe just jumper cable if that seems to extreme, but skinless, of course.
Doug
Doug
Neff,On several days over the past week and a half I have been up till 3 A.M., listening to the sounds of wire changes in a receiver I am working on. This was the B+, B- and Ground supply runs mostly, and there was a WHALE of a positive difference when I was done optimizing the piece late last night.
So you stated this :
" I assume power wiring makes no difference. "
From my experiments, I would say you are GROSSLY underestimating things with power wiring.
I think wire implementations is one of the single biggest hinderences to present builders getting optimal results in audio.
There are TWO questions to answer with wire:
1) First, how MUCH wire should be used ?
(so as to couple energy internally, have a linear and optimal transfer function.)
2) Second, what TYPE of wire, solid or stranded ?
These are "two camps", and after working with both, I personally tend to prefer stranded, actually, litz type, specifically multiple TCSS runs, which allows me to get (1) enough wire to couple well between critical points while avoiding the "too big a wire gauge sound" and (2) the sonic advantages of nuancing and wider bandwitdth stranded wire can provide, that I do NOT hear with thin solid wires. Thin solid wires play coherently to my ears, but only in the middle frequencies.
This is a great subject for this Forum. Tell Henry he (and everyone else) can't begin to measure this, its foolish, as Dan Lau pointed out below..... use your ears and it becomes an art.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 04/08/11 04/08/11
'On several days over the past week and a half I have been up till 3 A.M., listening to the sounds of wire changes in a receiver I am working on'
It sounds like you are hitting the nose candy in a major way :)
Al
Until you perform valid testing, nothing you say on this subject can be taken seriously.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
"Until you perform valid testing, nothing you say on this subject can be taken seriously."
I would like someone who demands that from another do it themselves just ONCE on any close call and report back. We can then all laugh at this stupidity. Until then, nothing you say against him on this subject can be taken seriously! Hahahaha!
-Kurt
Kurt,
Thanks, you tell him !! :-)
Jeff Medwin
When it comes to close calls on hard to hear effects, the results HAS TO abide by the probability of the success shown and HAS very high uncertainty also.
What this means is that the measurement almost has no validity when it's a close call. But, also, the claim almost has no validity as you cannot show it.
It's a big flaw in the case for the 1935 statistical analysis book "Design of Experiments" used by science for 76 years, and the past 21 years under how to "fix it". Prior to the 1935 book by Ronald A. Fisher, and revised over and over, there were few people using statistical arguments. Instead, it was just a run of one experiment and hopes others can repeat it.
Since 1990 after flawed drug tests were discovered, especially in the area of safety, the method was seen to still be in need of a huge overhaul to eliminate bias still accidentally getting in. Drug companies were seeing the damage to the true nature of their products from contaminating bias in their studies. As they went global in research, the target group of people were found out that placebo there can be stronger than here by cultural differences set up in the mind.
So, for your unsupported claims, you are also not set free.
It now becomes a matter of what system you just want to believe in. Science misses more often than it hits, by just examining the natural bias toward no result (false negatives). That is due to the fact most problems will err on randomizing the situation.
But the laugh is all about each side being so damn sure of themselves. And all each has is a belief. Scientists are even making arguments to "fudge it" more or less for certain highly placebo affected studies, like in antidepressants.
-Kurt
"I personally tend to prefer stranded, actually, litz type, specifically multiple TCSS runs"
TCSS isn't a litz type cable.
cheers,
Stephen
.
To infinity and beyond!!!
Litz wire is where each individual strand is insulated in the same piece of wire. TCSS is multistrand wire and they are not separately insulated. Running multiple multistrand wires is just that and is not Litz. Litz is also woven in a special way. There is nothing in what Jeff says that his solution is Litz. To call it Litz is technically incorrect.
cheers,
Stephen
Yes, its NOT individually insulated and thus not Litz, so what? It is unplated pure copper with VARIOUS gauges inside, and has a teflon outer coating. Nice sounding, which is why (I think you and) I use it.
One KEY point is the "wire" is only half the battle, the next important audio question, is HOW MUCH is needed, to couple the signal for full and optimum transfer function ??
I can say this, it is seldom one run !! Done BY EAR of course, try it starting with grounds first, then the B+ runs!! I do this all the time now.
My audible results are encouraging ......to say the least.
I wanna have all 'de music, fullband and dynamics, in my room. Cheers.
Jeff Medwin
"Yes, its NOT individually insulated and thus not Litz, so what?"
The "so what deal" is you called it Litz and it clearly isn't. Using the wrong technical terminology leads people astray as is evident in this thread.
And on a personal note, I don't like paralleling of any device passive or active and that includes wire. I have tried it and I don't like the result.
So my experience, of trying this by ear, is the opposite of yours. I don't see this as an area worthy of putting any great effort into.
cheers,
Stephen
NT
To infinity and beyond!!!
I have re-wired every amp I have bought with either Audio Note (UK) Lexus (cooper) or AN-Vx (silver) cable. Both are Litz and there is an audible and costly difference.
"What did the Romans ever do for us?"
Until you can reliably tell the difference in a properly conducted blind listening test, any results you get are meaningless. It is as likely, or more likely, that the main change taking place is in your brain.
That's a fact.
Sorry.
-Henry
Because you are talking theory, and I have walked the walk, not just talked the talk, or "thought " about it.
I don't think the original poster agrees with you either.
Double Blind tests are for sissies... amateurs who THINK they know what they are doing, people like....well..."you know who".
BTW, on your DIY solid state project, I wanted to highly complement you in twisting the wires from each huge supply cap, exactly 14 times and perfectly symmetrically , very very nice work Henry !!
Jeff Medwin
"Because you are talking theory, and I have walked the walk, not just talked the talk, or "thought " about it." You have also squawked the squawk (and no doubt porked the pork).
"Double Blind tests are for sissies... " At which elementary school did yo pick uo that pearl of wisdom? Can't you get it into your head that, without unbiased evidence, opinions remain simply that -- opinions? Someone might well say "I'll try that and see if I can get improved results, like Jeff did," and fair enough. But to convince skeptics you need to have done some indisputable testing with conclusive and repeatable resullts.
How much practical work does it take before you're entitled to claim you "walk the walk?"
BTW, staying up until 3AM doing listening tests on wire is not DIY audio. It's tweaking.
-Henry, listening to Sinatra right now on my DIY turntable, with DIY amplifier
That was one of the first things I experimented with after I learned how to solder. At that time, the Brits I think were leading the charge in favor of solid core wires. Then Pierre Sprey of Mapleshade told me to use as thin a gauge of solid core wire as possible (not so thin as to jeopardize current carrying capacity). My listening experiments led me to agree with Pierre. I favor very thin gauge solid core wire and/or very thin ribbons. I think all the theories to justify this are faulty or can be faulted in one way or another. I have absolutely no idea why these types of wire sound slightly better to me than stranded wires, but I go with my listening experiences. Moreover I would add that I am sure I would not discern differences among signal carrying wires in a system with which I was not intimately familiar, i.e., any system but my own.
Silver or copper, by the way, are both OK with me, but I slightly favor silver. However, silver-plated copper sounds harsh (for want of a better word) to me. I don't understand this either.
Mitch
Normally you might say it belong in cables but being Neff is a regular and the wire topic can cover the internals of amplifier/preamp building,it can go in either section.
Diversity of opinions on any one technical subject,almost always causes confusion for the listener.
.
99% of the technical explanations you read from audiophile sources about distortion caused by strand-to-strand jumping, skin effect, etc., are not authoritative and should be viewed with skepticism.
If a distortion mechanism exists, it should be possible to measure it. To the best of my knowledge, no one has published authoritative measurements to show that there is such a mechanism.
The human ear is a miraculous thing, but is not even close, by orders of magnitude, to the "precision measurement instrument" that many people claim it is. If strand-to-strand jumping causes distortion, there are incredibly sensitive instruments that should be able to detect it.
Absent empirical proof, the best we can say is that people claim to hear a difference. This takes us straight to the murky and unverifiable land of tweaks. There's a forum for that, too, if you can find space among all the crystal threads.
That said, contact integrity is definitely an issue that can lead to measurable and presumably audible degradation.
IMHO, ideally, discussions in this forum would focus more on the verifiable, leaving the more extreme subjectivist debates for the tweak forums.
-Henry
I read the human ear is more sensitive with processing by the brain than electronic equipment. The article stated if eyes were as sensitive as hearing, in outer space the eye located above NY could detect a 60 watt bulb in Los Angeles.
I am not an expert- I just read it.
> The article stated if eyes were as sensitive as hearing, in outer space
> the eye located above NY could detect a 60 watt bulb in Los Angeles.
Hmmm. When I was at Stanford, my undergraduate advisor was researching the composition of the rings of Saturn by performing signal processing on radio waves emitted by by the Voyager spacecraft as they passed through the rings while the probe flew by the planet.
That means detecting an 18W transmitter at a distance of 1.2 billion kilometers.
Think the human ear could match that? :-)
-Henry
A bullet can go through a room, and, if it doesn't hit you, the human ear can detect the general path where the bullet entered and exited.
'Think the eye can do that Professor??
Are you a Professor? College Teacher? Employed now??
Cheers,
Jeff Medwin
Somehow, in your mixed-up brain, this has become an argument where I am trying to prove eyes are better at hearing than brains.
FWIW, deaf people can understand speech by reading lips with their eyes. Can you read a newspaper with your ears?
-Henry
P.S. I'll be happy to tell you what I do for a living if you tell me first why you asked the question.
... when using a similar effective sized horn pickup array as a hearing aid and all correctly funneled into the ear. Still, I'm going to doubt it.
POWER OF VOYAGER II'S X-BAND TRANSMISSION FROM SATURN
PG / k1 x (r2)2 = 1,384,500 / (12.5664) x (1.3 x 1012 meters)2
1,384,500 / (1.6 x 1013)2 = 1,384,500 / 2.1 x 1025
= ======== 6.6 x 10^-20 watts/meter2 ==========
POWER FLUX DENSITY (PFD) = P x G / 4 x pi x r2
PFD = watts per meter2
P = 21.3 watts (X-Band transmitter output)
========= G = 6.5 x 10^4 (antenna gain) =========
PG = ERP (effective radiated power)
r = radius or distance from earth
Power received = 4.29 x 10^-15 watts = 4.29 femtowatts (fW).
Threshold of hearing = 0 dBA = 1.00 x 10^-12 watts = 1 picowatt (pW). A very tiny amount of energy.
Add power gain from a massive horn array into the ear, the same as the assisted antenna gain (just for a fun comparison, as if this could be done). The power gain was 6.5 x 10^4.
Ear sensitivity with this system then goes down to 1 pW / antenna gain = 1.54 x 10^-17 watts = 0.015 femtowatts. Now the ear clearly wins, and we are in a way somewhat wrong (might have to remove the outer ear's own gain for this idea).
It would be some kind of amazing radio receiver that could do 1 pW sensitivity with the kind of small size and weight portability and low energy needs as a human head with ears can do. I think microphones can, but the electronics ruins its very large dynamic range.
We can see by this comparison that the ear is a remarkable instrument, just by itself without the brain processing.
-Kurt
Kurt, thanks for doing those cacluations. The point of my posting wasn't to dismiss the remarkable capabilities of the ear/brain, but to give some perspective on the lightbulb example.
An incandescent bulb has an efficiency of about 2%. So we're talking about detecting an unmodulated 1.2W source from an isotropic radiator at a distance of 5000km. Not bad, but consider that ham radio operators routinely transmit and receive actual information over even longer distances using simple, portable, battery-powered equipment of 1W output or less (QRP). And the comparison isn't really fair to the ham operators, because they have to contend with atmospheric noise and absorption, whereas the bulb example assumes transmission through empty space.
Granted, the Voyager example involves high-gain antennas, but we were comparing the naked ear to electronic instrumentation. I would say that it's fair game to allow any sort of gadgetry on the instrumentation side. On the other hand, I would argue that your hypothetical acoustical horn array is just another kind of instrument that extends the capabilities of the senses, just as an oscilloscope or distortion analyzer allows us to perceive things we cannot with unaided eyes and ears.
What's really interesting, IMHO, is the question of numeracy, the ability to reason with numbers. Now, the distance from Earth to Saturn is about 240,000 times greater than the distance from NY to LA. That's about how much farther the moon is from Earth than the convenience store is from your house. I think this illustrates that, in the grand scheme of things, LA really isn't that far from NY.
So, to the extent that we're comparing the sensitivity of the ear to that of instrumentation, I would say instrumentation stacks up pretty well, wouldn't you agree?
-Henry
1. Electronic equipment is commonly mechanically aided by parabolic antenna input and horn waveguide output.
2. Human ears can also have such a hearing aid instead of limiting it to the small outer ear. It won't be given the kind of device used for space telemetry.
3. The satellite receiver took max advantage out of its mechanical aid.
{{That's about how much farther the moon is from Earth than the convenience store is from your house. I think this illustrates that, in the grand scheme of things, LA really isn't that far from NY.}}
4. I never examined the case for the light emission of the light bulb 5,000 km away. I simply looked up the power input into a normal ear for threshold of hearing. So I am not comparing those two situations. I am comparing the radio station with antenna to the naked ear, and then with the added antenna gain. It's more apples to apples I think this way.
5. I used a zero BW tone for the ear. It's more than zero for the case of the radio, but nears that number with a very low bitrate. So it's not yet really apples-to-apples.
6. Background noise/processing noise in both systems were neglected. I assumed best conditions for each.
Both systems degrade rapidly with the onset of some real world problems such as background noise, loss of the mechanical gain, and calculating resultant channel capacity.
The brain against the computer makes it unfair in comparison because the brain can be more powerful in many areas like pattern recognition.
{{So, to the extent that we're comparing the sensitivity of the ear to that of instrumentation, I would say instrumentation stacks up pretty well, wouldn't you agree?}}
Most people will say what you say by looking over the general specs of instrumentation versus ears. But to measure for weird anomalies like transient IMD in a narrow band intermittently is a easy to do when you know where it is. It's very difficult if you don't know anything about its properties to begin with. The human brain might be a faster processor for hearing and recognizing it, but will not also measure it.
So ears and instruments are not really analogous as people keep wishing it to be. The computer is not a human mind and vice versa.
So I answer your question finally by saying there are many great things instruments can do better than ears, but many great things that ears can do better than instruments. Therefore there is a problem trying to correlate these two methods.
-Kurt
Now, double the ears (two ears) with guess 1 Gig neuron brain processing for spacial perception.
No wonder we like music thru audiophile equipment and get that wow factor. Right up there with sex! Err.........I have to think about it.
(No disrespect to Henry's audio knowledge base though).
Digital RF vs analog AF? What beamwidth? .1 degree? I wonder if the data was sent in-between 20Hz to 20kHz at a beamwidth of 180 degrees both transmit & receive antennas if the signal could be received?
Henry
The one assumption you make is
that we know what to measure.
There is quite posibly a distortion
parameter that exists that we
don't know that it exists so
we have no way of measuring it.
Let alone a devise that CAN measure it.
I think you give mankind's knowledge
too much credit and not respect
the limitations inherent in us.
We don't know everything or even close.
That's individually and collectively.
One person hears a difference that you cannot.
One person doesn't hear a difference that you can.
One person knows something that you do not.
One person doesn't know something that you do.
"We all know in part"
both Personally and Collectively.
DanL
It is equally plausible that there is some mechanism acting on the listener that causes these differences in perception.
This is the irrational domain of tweaks. The thinking goes like this:
1) I hear a difference.
2) I am unaware of a technical explanation for what I hear.
3) Therefore, there must be an unknown-to-science-and-engineering phenomenon at work here.
What is more complex, a piece of wire or the human ear/brain? What serious steps have you taken to evaluate all the possibilities, not just some hypothetical new science?
This discussion belongs in the tweakers forum. It's a waste of time otherwise, because the answer is unknowable, given the rejection of controlled listening tests as an investigative tool.
-Henry
Practically speaking, I use stranded when twisting pairs of wire to reduce hum, like heater lines (less likely to crack over time & with heat). I use solid strand for all signal lines if possible. And grounding straps. Stranded lines for speaker jack connections.
More for reliability issues, than total sonic value.
Just my 2¢ worth...
I'm with you on this one. Stranded wire for flexibility, and solid where I want it to stay put. I tried some DIY litz speaker cable made from 26Ga magnet wire once. My kids kept knocking it out of the connectors and breaking off bits of the wire. Now, all speaker wire is 16Ga zip cord. In this house, if sonic differences aren't obvious, practicality wins.
Neff
I use solid core everywhere.
Preferably OCC.
The more wire I replaced with solid core
the more whole the music sounded.
Stranded sounds like it was seperated
and then put together again IMO.
DanL
DanL,
You surprise me! I didn't think you were in to the wire thing!Ha! Ha!
Paul
AC on wire has a skin effect in that the current flows on the outside of the wire and more pronounced as frequency goes up. Stranded wire may cause multiple skin effects and may actually jump around perhaps causing some small but noticible distortion. But, I have no way of measuring that.
"Stranded wire may cause multiple skin effects and may actually jump around perhaps causing some small but noticible distortion."
This is no more a real phenomenon than Morse code from Mars.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
there are quite a few cable sellers that speak of the so called diode effect between strands. Unless there is science behind it. It is just anecdotal.That said. I also avoid multistranded wire like the plague. Unless it is litz. But I don't do that because I have actually a/b it. I once changed a run of stranded speaker cable with solid core and since then I've just gone solid core. So I do a lot of things without scientific basis or semi-scientific. Such as choke input. Non magnetic parts as much as possible. That's about it.
(Edit) Fixed the plague spelling.
To infinity and beyond!!!
Edits: 04/09/11
Oxidation is the problem with stranded wire. The oxide layer that form on the surface of the wire is not as conductive as the base metal. Cuprous Oxide is a semi-conductor and was actually used in primitive solid-state rectifiers. Most metal oxides are dielectrics, and therefore insulate. Hence the problem with aluminum wire in house wiring, where due to wire oxidation, the conductive area at a connector shrinks to the point where there is a high resistive drop with current, which heats up the connection to the point of igniting a fire. Therefore, if you use stranded wire, a non-airtight crimp connection can result in a reduced conductivity as the strands oxidize over time.
Dental plaque is a biofilm, usually colorless, that develops naturally on the teeth.Plague is caused by the organism Yersinia pestis
Both should be avoided like the... you know.
Edits: 04/08/11
.
To infinity and beyond!!!
is also the result of the focal death of cells in a tissue culture monolayer resulting from the spread of an infectious virus from cell to cell, originating from virus infecting a single cell at the center of the focus, under a layer of agarose. I just had to say that.
Bas
"I also avoid multistranded wire like the plaque."
Because you and most everybody else know it sounds bad.
The only ones that don't know it are the ones that
scream loudly with their fingers in their ears -
"There Is No Scientific Evidence To Prove That!!!"
So they contentedly go out and buy zip cord
for their speaker wire and proclaim it's great.
DanL
Dan, I think you are reaching conclusions not supported by the evidence. I bet if you took that zip cord and had solid wire installed inside it, it still wouldn't sound as good as other options.
Russ
I had Z-3 Monster speaker cables.
I tried Radio Shack 18ga solid core wire.
I much preferred the Radio Shack wire.
I then tried the NeoTech OCC wire and
heard further improvement.
I tried both the teflon and PVC jacket.
Each had an appeal but I found that if I
used one on the (+) and one for the (-)
they complimented each other quite well.
Is that enough evidence for you?
DanL
So Dan - you are saying then that the people who own Citation II amps that I rebuilt with some stranded wire and who LOVE the tone are all in denial - that those amps really sound bad??
That's what your pronouncement seems to say - at least to me.
BTW - the wire leads from the Citation II output trafos - stranded. And we ALL know how bad they sound.
Mr. McShane, your rebuilds are, by all accounts superb. I trust your tube information implicitly. (I read you even like puppies). But your argument doesn't hold water.
Just because the Citation II transformers sound great doesn't mean they wouldn't be better with solid core or Litz wiring. Same with your rebuilds.
From a transformer manufacturing standpoint, either would be impractical, solid core for flexibility issues and Litz for time of manufacturing (termination) issues.
But I certainly do agree on the basic quality of lots of things we buy that don't follow the "rules".
Stuart
WHOA! Don't touch that!
Hi Stuart,Dan said "sounds bad" in his earlier post - that's what I was addressing. So yes indeed my statement does hold water when applied to that particular statement - at least in my humble opinion.
I refuse to generalize regarding wire - or ALMOST anything else in judging sonics. There are exceptions to nearly every rule, and in many cases compelling cases can be made on both sides of an argument. Just FYI - I use both solid and stranded, and even some Litz wire on occasion.
BTW, thank you for the kind words!! They are very much appreciated.
Edits: 04/08/11
Stuart
I use old crossover inductor wire
for my secondary system in the kitchen.
Works great.
DanL
So what do you use for speaker interconnect wire? Solid wire seems pretty impractical.
Or, the Home Depot Special cables which use a compression lug on the end, preventing the oxidation that David McGown mentioned.
Litz wiring is great, but a bit expensive.
Stuart
WHOA! Don't touch that!
Mikey
For the main speakers -
I use 18ga OCC copper teflon on the positive
and 18ga OCC copper PVC on the negative.
For the Plate Amp to the subwoofer -
(Mounted together so no flexing involved)
I use 10ga generic copper house wire.
I strip off the PVC coating and
spiral wrap it with teflon tape and
finally some shrink wrap over it.
All of it solid core 8^D
DanL
TK
You have some posts that are well thought out.
Then you go and spoil it with ones like this.
You should really learn to censure yourself.
You would get along better with everyone.
DanL
What is it exactly that you object to? Every double-blind wire test I've ever performed or read about indicates no such effect. Even speaker cables can be made much smaller than most people would otherwise believe before listeners can detect a difference. When it comes to sonic improvements, there are much bigger fish to fry.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Neff
Also OCC wire has an added bonus -
"In 1986 the Ohno Continuous Casting (OCC) Process was developed by professor Ohno of the Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. The wire made by this process ... has one crystal boundary per 6.5 km on avearge. Normal wire has a crystal boundary perhaps every 10 mm."
So OCC wire has no crystal boundry to jump across.
DanL
And what happens to that 3 mile crystal when you bend the wire?
Jim
What happens when you bend it?
Not much it just bends.
Just because they use the term crystal
doesn't mean it shatters.
Think of soldering vs welding.
Both can still bend without breaking.
"Normal" wire are pieces soldered together.
OCC wire is more like welded together.
It's forged as one piece of wire miles long.
The conductor can still bend without
breaking the crystal.
DanL
"has one crystal boundary per 6.5 km on avearge"
One every 6.5 KILOMETERS??? One every (roughly) 3 and 1/2 MILES??
Even 10 mm is HUGE - are you sure that quote is correct? Because if it is correctly quoted then let me be the first to raise the red flag on it!
Jim
Here are some others that have heard the difference.
I am sure at least one of them you'll respect.
http://www.sowter.co.uk/occ.php
http://www.onhifi.com/product/audience_au24_powerchord.htm
http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/furutech/furutech-PCOCC.htm
http://www.monarchyaudio.com/specs_PCOCC_Spkr%20Cbl.htm
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/archive/index.php/t-138007-p-2.html
http://www.agoraquest.com/viewtopic.php?forum=51&topic=34310
DanL
That's not what I questioned Dan - a single crystal over 3 miles long is what I question!! :~)
Jim
It is forged as one piece miles long.
Then cooled so that it stays integrated.
DanL
from my meager readings, I would guess that such skin effect would be noticeable only at high frequencies.
that said, I still use solid silver in the internals. inside the speaker box, I individually insulate each silver wire. the physics and the math are beyond me ... I just do it that way.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
