From: kester@mte.ncsu.edu (Dan Kester)
Subject: Re: Very expensive cables
Organization: Mat. Sci. & Eng., NCSU
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:28:58 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.163356.4480@EE.Surrey.Ac.UK> M.Willis@ee.surrey.ac.uk
(Mike Willis) writes:

>
>Speaker cable has less relevent parameters and we can measure all of them more
>accurately than we can hear. There is the resistance, the capacitance, the
>inductance, the linearity, the impedance etc etc. What we measure is the
signal at
>one end of the cable compared to what we put in. If moden technology can not
>measure any difference then we certainly can not hear one. However moden
technology
>does indeed measure a difference. The question is does it sound better or
worse?


You make some good points here, but I'm not sure the conclusions are right. 
Can we really measure more accurately than we can hear?  Especially if what we
want to measure is something as subjective as "good" or "accurate" sound.  You
list 5 variables for measuring wire properties; when you take into account that
each of these 5 may vary as a function of frequency, you suddenly have a huge
amount of interacting variables that may affect the sound.  But even if you
have all the data about the wire, it tells you very little about how they will
sound.  To "measure" how they sound, the only reasonable thing to do is to
listen to them.

>This is hard to tell. A solid core thin speaker cable will sound different
from a
>good thick multicore as it will have a higher impedance to high frequencies.
No
>doubt the manic reviewers will say it sounds smoother or sweeter! Perhaps it
will
>enable the speaker to present an easier load to the amplifier. If you like it,
then
>use it but do not be conned into paying $300 per metre for it.

You make the points that: 1. There are measurable differences.  2. There are
sonic differences.  But then you go on to say that no one should pay more than
a few dollars or pounds for cables.  Why not?  Sure it is hard to decide which
wires have the "best" sound.  But if there are sonic differences, and after
comparing different cables you find that some do have a significantly better
sound ("better"= a sound (in your system) that you prefer), why not pay for it?
 If a cable company has actually done the research to find a cable that
combines all the electrical variables mentioned above in a way that gives a
pleasing sound, they should get a reasonable price for it.  And is $300 any
more unreasonable than $2000 for an amp with $100 worth of parts in it?  No,
you are not paying for the parts, or the copper in the wire, you are paying for
having someone figure out how to assemble the components to give a good sound.

> Current UK mags seem to think you can buy a
>$600 CD player, a $400 Amplifer and $100 speakers and expect it to sound good.
>Connect the speakers with heavy duty multicore and simple tinned (or silver
plated)
>bannana plugs. If the speaker cable totals more than $2/m you are being
conned.
>
Sure, it can sound good, but what if you want it to sound great?  No one who
has heard a good $10,000 system will say the $1100 system sounds as good.  It
is simply a question of how to balance cost versus sound quality (and no, I am
not saying the relationship between cost and sound is linear, absolute, or
always there. Some things are underpriced, many are overpriced.)

Dan Kester
kester@mte.ncsu.edu 
Xref: sparky rec.audio:12169 misc.consumers:16225