what gauge wire ?

[redriverangler]

If i were to wire a Yamaha 6190 HTR with energy 5.1 take speakers on a run of no more than 30 feet would 14 gauge do the job .The yamma puts out 135 watts per channel. I had bought a 6160 with 95 watts per channel and did all the wiring
Thanks in advance

[sallysue]

If i were to wire a Yamaha 6190 HTR with energy 5.1 take speakers on a run of no more than 30 feet would 14 gauge do the job .The yamma puts out 135 watts per channel. I had bought a 6160 with 95 watts per channel and did all the wiring
Thanks in advance

14g is an industry standard for the most part, so for surrounds and so forth - yes 14g is fine for the lengths you're talking about. If you have full range towers up front use 12g for them and keep the lengths of wire the same for the R and L.

Hope this helps

[E-Stat]

14g is an industry standard for the most part, so for surrounds and so forth - yes 14g is fine for the lengths you're talking about. If you have full range towers up front use 12g for them and keep the lengths of wire the same for the R and L.
For simplicity, one can get the same effect (actually 11 gauge) by biwiring the mains with the same 14 gauge (if speakers support such a connection).

rw

[sallysue]

One thing I forgot to add redriverangler - try not to cut the long runs and splice them, you'll loose power. Also, avoid coiling the speaker wire. Many times, in order to do a neat job, guys will coil and zip tie the extra speaker wire - avoid this it can affect the signal.

[E-Stat]

Also, avoid coiling the speaker wire. Many times, in order to do a neat job, guys will coil and zip tie the extra speaker wire - avoid this it can affect the signal.
Indeed, coiling will increase inductance - which for zip is already about triple that or more found in better cables.

rw

[mlsstl]

Regarding coiling wire, I don't know I'd be overly concerned about this. I did some back of the envelope calculations and if you do five tight 8 inch diameter loops of speaker wire you'll get an inductance value of about 15 microHenries. In a typical 8 ohm speaker, this starts affecting the bandwidth of the speaker somewhere around 100,000 Hz, which is way beyond the frequency response of all speakers on the market and virtually all source material.

Fewer turns would push that frequency figure even higher.

Any audible effect would more likely come from the fact that five 8 inch loops of wire adds ten feet of speaker wire to each connection. That adds extra resistance and degrades the dampening factor slightly, but neither of those qualities have anything to do with the coiling of wire.

[blackraven]

Buy some 10 or 12g wire from www.bluejeancables.com They will cut them in the length you need. Buy the unterminated cable and buy the banana plugs from them and terminate them yourself, its easy to do with their plugs. You will save a ton of money that way. Its 0.61 cents per for for the 12g.

[E-Stat]

In a typical 8 ohm speaker, this starts affecting the bandwidth of the speaker somewhere around 100,000 Hz, which is way beyond the frequency response of all speakers on the market and virtually all source material.
The challenge with cocktail napkin calculations is they greatly simplify actual effects of the real world speaker-amplifier interface. Typical speakers are not 8 ohm resistors and amplifiers react diffferently to added inductance.

Interactions (http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/cableInteractions.pdf)

rw

[kexodusc]

The challenge with cocktail napkin calculations is they greatly simplify actual effects of the real world speaker-amplifier interface. Typical speakers are not 8 ohm resistors and amplifiers react diffferently to added inductance.

Interactions (http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/cableInteractions.pdf)

rw
Excellent read. Thanks E-Stat.

[audio amateur]

The challenge with cocktail napkin calculations is they greatly simplify actual effects of the real world speaker-amplifier interface. Typical speakers are not 8 ohm resistors and amplifiers react diffferently to added inductance.

Interactions (http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/cableInteractions.pdf)

rw
That is pure geek-ness:crazy:

[mlsstl]

Typical speakers are not 8 ohm resistors and amplifiers react diffferently to added inductance.
I see this quite a bit in the audio forums. People love science when it confirms their beliefs but instantly become priggish when it doesn't.

First, the coil of speaker wire mentioned created a inductance that could only be measured in microhenries. This is a thousand-fold lower than the inductance values commonly used in crossovers. The inductors used in speakers are measured in millihenries.

Next, consider that a 2% tolerance is a very tight figure for a speaker inductor (tolerance specs can run 10% or 20% in many inductors) and we can quickly see that the loop of speaker wire has an inductance value that is lower than the variability of the inductors already present in the speaker.

On the other hand, look at the impact the extra 10 feet of wire (coiled or not) has on the dampening factor. About a year ago I had a Bel Canto S300 with a dampening factor of 1000. That extra 10 feet of 14 guage wire would drop that dampening factor to about 120 all by itself.

Sure, speakers are not 8 ohm resistors, but you can certainly plot the impedance by frequency for any speaker and calculate the impact. The majority of speakers actually have gentle a rise in impedance above 5KHz or 10Khz, so that would push any high frequency roll-off the speaker coil is introducing even higher than the 100KHz figure mentioned earlier.

Does the inductance of a five loop coil of speaker wire change anything? Probably at some microscopic level of things in the universe. However, in comparison to other effects that are much larger it probably doesn't accomplish much. Rather like waxing my headlight lenses on my car to reduce air friction when what I really need to do is get a tune up.

[Kevio]

I see this quite a bit in the audio forums. People love science when it confirms their beliefs but instantly become priggish when it doesn't.Dude, I am totally hip to the sentiment here and your math looks good but you really should give the paper a read or at least try and dig up some dirt on the author before trying to take this on.

[E-Stat]

I see this quite a bit in the audio forums. People love science when it confirms their beliefs but instantly become priggish when it doesn't.
Indeed. Nowhere have you acknowledged the content of the article having to do with the interaction of inductance with amplifiers. Who is talking about crossovers?


That extra 10 feet of 14 guage wire would drop that dampening factor to about 120 all by itself.
First of all, that's damping factor and who cares (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=prophead&n=2973&highlight=damping+Dan+Banquer) about astronomical values?


Rather like waxing my headlight lenses on my car to reduce air friction when what I really need to do is get a tune up.
You continue to completely miss the point by performing your theoretical gyrations of inductance in a vacuum. That only works when the speaker is not driven by an amplifier. :)

rw

[mlsstl]

...but you really should give the paper a read or at least try and dig up some dirt on the author before trying to take this on.

I made no argument against the paper and have no dispute with the author nor have any urge to look for "dirt" on anyone. I'm not "wired" that way.

The paper doesn't discuss coiling wire. The offending noted cables have a combination of characteristics, not one. Coiling wouldn't affect either the capacitance or resistance.

While I remain of the opinion that coiling a bit of excess wire is not an issue that wll audibly affect an otherwise fine system, it is still a good idea (as I already noted) not to use excess speaker wire.

And I'm happy that you approve of my math. ;-)

[E-Stat]

That is pure geek-ness:crazy:
Here's the Cliff Notes summary:

"If loudspeakers were only simple resistance, then large, low-resistance cables would not be a bad idea. However, loudspeaker systems exhibit a frequency dependent complex impedance that can interact with the reactive components of amplifier and cable. The best response was obtained with low-inductance cables and an amplifier with low-inductance output and a high, frequency-independent damping factor.

Looking at the effect of a single metric independent of its use in a complex system is virtually useless in the real world. That's also why THD is meaningless.

rw

[mlsstl]

... who cares about astronomical values?
Apparently you did when you stated that coiling will increase inductance without reference to the amount of inductance created or the influence on audibility.

You continue to completely miss the point by performing your theoretical gyrations of inductance in a vacuum.
Et tu.

The paper you referred to above makes not one reference to whether any of the measured interactions were audible under either normal or test conditions.

The ability to measure a difference does not equate to something being audibly better. Not too many years ago amp makers were chasing incredibly low distortion numbers yet amplifiers that did not measure as well sounded better.

Likewise, nothing you've said above indicates that coiling a speaker wire would be audible. Your position on the situation is just as much a "theoretical gyration" as mine unless there is a portion of this thread that is not available for my viewing.

[E-Stat]

(re:who cares about astronomical values? )Apparently you did when you stated that coiling will increase inductance without reference to the amount of inductance created or the influence on audibility.
Actually, astronomical means "exceptionally large" as the value you cited with DF, not small. My point is that your calculations ignore any effect caused the amplifier-speaker system.


Not too many years ago amp makers were chasing incredibly low distortion numbers yet amplifiers that did not measure as well sounded better.
Exactly! They (like you) were missing the forest for the trees by focusing on the value of a metric independent of anything else. That's why I commented. The loss values you quoted do not translate to the real world of amplifiers driving speakers.


Your position on the situation is just as much a "theoretical gyration" as mine...
I merely point out there are indeed measurable effects outside the cocktail napkin theory.

rw

[mlsstl]

My point is that your calculations ignore any effect caused the amplifier-speaker system.
I did not "ignore" anything. My position has clearly been that I consider the effect too insignificant to merit much concern. Many years ago I worked professionally as a sound engineer and have seen more coiled mike and speaker cables that I care to shake a stick at. If there is an audible effect - which I doubt - it was the least of my worries then and now.

The loss values you quoted do not translate to the real world of amplifiers driving speakers.
Et tu again. Just like the chase for artifically low amp distortion numbers, likewise, I've seen nothing from you in this thread (or in the paper) that translates into the "real world" of "can you hear it?" There has been zero mention of audibility much less evidence.

It is mildly annoying to be chastised for being theoretical and not in the real world when the critic is no differently positioned. Perhaps you don't see that.

Out of curiosity, I put on a longer set of speaker cables this evening and coiled them. If there was a difference, I couldn't hear it. (Though that opens up a whole new set of questions about the "resolution" of my system and my whether my listening skills have been properly honed if you feel it necessary to go that direction.) It is certainly a test that is within the scope of most people if they simply want to see what works for them.

Anyway, our original poster certain has lots of fodder to chew. Thanks for an engaging discussion.

[E-Stat]

I did not "ignore" anything...(Though that opens up a whole new set of questions about the "resolution" of my system...
Actually such a comment continues to ignore the role of the significant factor: the amplifier used. Independent of their ability to resolve, amplifiers react differently to the effects of small amounts of inductance. Yours is necessarily different from that of others. The reliance of a conclusion based on but one of many puzzle pieces doesn't provide much use to me. YMMV.


Thanks for an engaging discussion.
Hopefully, a thought provoking one.

rw

[sallysue]

beliefs but instantly become priggish when it doesn't

My girl gets after me for using too many 5 cent words. I can't remember the last time I had to look up the meaning of a word. Priggish - had to look it up - I learned something, thanks :o

[audio amateur]

Gosh, I love these civilised 'arguments'. Thanks for the fine read gentlemen;)

[Ajani]

Gosh, I love these civilised 'arguments'. Thanks for the fine read gentlemen;)

Way too civilized... we need to get Pix, Rich and Sir T in here to shake things up a bit... Otherwise E-Stat and mIstI will have us all taking a break to have afternoon tea and crackers in the middle of the argument...

I must admit that this has been an interesting discussion... The more I read and experience in this hobby, the less impressed I become with just measurements...

[Kevio]

Here's the Cliff Notes summary:

"If loudspeakers were only simple resistance, then large, low-resistance cables would not be a bad idea. However, loudspeaker systems exhibit a frequency dependent complex impedance that can interact with the reactive components of amplifier and cable. The best response was obtained with low-inductance cables and an amplifier with low-inductance output and a high, frequency-independent damping factor.
That is the fluffy bit in the introduction and conclusion. The actual work tells a different story. The meaty bit for me was "The effects of 3.1 m cables are subtle" though I probably would choose a different word than "subtle". Both measurements and mathematical simulation of the complete "interacting" system (amplifier, cable, speaker) showed the differences between $3000 and $10 cables to be a less than 1 dB roll off at 20 KHz. From my reading of the experimental data, there was little correlation between price and measured performance.

[Kevio]

Actually such a comment continues to ignore the role of the significant factor: the amplifier used. Independent of their ability to resolve, amplifiers react differently to the effects of small amounts of inductance. Yours is necessarily different from that of others. The reliance of a conclusion based on but one of many puzzle pieces doesn't provide much use to me. YMMV.Combinations of two amplifiers, two speakers and 12 cables were tested. The overall performance of the system was not significantly different than the computed sum of the performance of the individual pieces. There is no magic "synergy" effect. This is not highlighted in the author's conclusion but is evident in figures 12 and 17 where measurements and predictions agree across the entire audio spectrum exactly for the robust amplifier and to within 0.05 dB for the fussy one.

[E-Stat]

Both measurements and mathematical simulation of the complete "interacting" system (amplifier, cable, speaker) showed the differences between $3000 and $10 cables to be a less than 1 dB roll off at 20 KHz. From my reading of the experimental data, there was little correlation between price and measured performance.
In the FR domain only.

rw

[E-Stat]

Combinations of two amplifiers, two speakers and 12 cables were tested. The overall performance of the system was not significantly different than the computed sum of the performance of the individual pieces.
I'm thinking there are more than two different performing amplifiers and speakers in the universe. Variations exist. I brought this article to light to point out that one must consider the speaker-amplifier system. It certainly doesn't purport to cover all possibilities.

My final commentary is that if one is concerned about the best sonic performance in terms of both frequency and phase response, then any excess cable should be eliminated. Coiling only makes things worse. Such probably makes little difference in *pro* sound reinforcement situations since all of them are dreadful anyway.

rw

[Kevio]

In the FR domain only.
I assume FR is Frequency Response. In the land of conventional physics there are (fourier) transformations between time domain and frequency domain - you derive one from the other - it is two ways of looking at the same thing - they are not independent realms.

[E-Stat]

In the land of conventional physics there are (fourier) transformations between time domain and frequency domain - you derive one from the other - it is two ways of looking at the same thing - they are not independent realms.
Not every *equivalent* combination results in the same ability to localize.

rw

[Kevio]

Not every *equivalent* combination results in the same ability to localize.The paper doesn't include any listening tests and it doesn't even include any distortion measurements so I agree, it is not going to give a complete picture as to what the different cables sound like.

But I have to say, neither does it do a good job of supporting its thesis: "If loudspeakers were only simple resistance, then large, low-resistance cables would not be a bad idea. However, loudspeaker systems exhibit a frequency dependent complex impedance that can interact with the reactive components of amplifier and cable."

Without this piece, theory indicates that 3.1 meters of reasonable cable (coiled or not) doesn't have significant effect on system performance. So, for now, I'm sticking with 12 gauge zip cord.

[E-Stat]

Without this piece, theory indicates that 3.1 meters of reasonable cable (coiled or not) doesn't have significant effect on system performance. So, for now, I'm sticking with 12 gauge zip cord.
Theory is always a great place to start. While too rich for my blood, the highest resolution system I've heard is that of a reviewer friend using the latest Nordost cabling.

rw

[audio amateur]

Nordosts certainly have the looks...

[mlsstl]

Such probably makes little difference in *pro* sound reinforcement situations since all of them are dreadful anyway.
Just a point of order. Where do you think recordings come from? Do studios not qualify as "pro" environments?

[audio amateur]

Just a point of order. Where do you think recordings come from? Do studios not qualify as "pro" environments?
He said pro 'reinforcements', i.e. speakers used for gigs, clubs etc.

[E-Stat]

He said pro 'reinforcements', i.e. speakers used for gigs, clubs etc.
Exactly. Sound reinforcement systems are the sonic equivalent of a city bus. They are cost effective means to handle the needs of lots of folks. At the decided expense of performance. Has anyone here actually heard one that didn't sound hard and completely lacking in any semblance of creating a three dimensional image?

rw

[mlsstl]

He said pro 'reinforcements', i.e. speakers used for gigs, clubs etc.[
That doesn't explain why the subject was even brought up. The only possible explanation I see is that it was an unnecessary personal dig at my comment that I used to do professional work. However my statement did not limit my work to the reinforcement area.

Perhaps some can't think beyond the Beatles at Shea Stadium but there are well designed venues with excellent systems for live performances. And that doesn't explain the many incredibly fine recordings from the 1950s and 60s made before the fancy uncoiled modern cables were available. ;-)

[E-Stat]

That doesn't explain why the subject was even brought up.
Why did you bring it up?

"Many years ago I worked professionally as a sound engineer and have seen more coiled mike and speaker cables that I care to shake a stick at."

You seemed to think it was important to provide that information. I would agree that it doesn't support any notion of a qualitative endorsement.


...but there are well designed venues with excellent systems for live performances.
We may fairly disagree on what constitutes an "excellent system". My reference for live performances is no system at all. My reference for monitoring systems likewise does not include "sound reinforcement" gear. To each his own.

rw

[mlsstl]

E-Stat, you seem to have difficulty with the idea that two people can be knowledgeable about a subject and have different opinions. You also have an inclination to quote quite selectively.

1. You arbitrarily consigned my experience to only the "sound reinforcement" venue. Your presumption is limited and incorrect. You continued your incorrect assumptions even after it was pointed out. Most people would have at least given a nod to the error of their presumption. Your choice seem to be to continue the bluster. It also seem you have never been in a recording studio.


My reference for live performances is no system at all.
2. Then that leaves you with a lot of wonderful performers you would have never seen live. Very few jazz singers perform live without amplification, even in small clubs: Sarah Vaughan, Ella Fitzgerald, Ray Charles, Joni Mitchell and all of their more recent counterparts such as Karrin Allyson, Marlena Shaw, Janice Hagan, Christine Rosholt, Cassandra Wilson and so on, In fact, it was the invention of the microphone and PA system that allowed a whole new style of singing that departed from the operatic and vaudeville style. Had the world followed your puritan lead, the development of a whole range of music would have never occurred.

Yes, for certain types of music, on certain types of instruments in the proper sized hall, no amplification is preferred. However, that leaves a lot of live music on the cutting room floor that perhaps you are willing to abandon, but I'm not.

I guess your statement concerning "references" was an effort to demonstrate your audiophile pedigree for all to see. Well, congratulations. The podium is all yours. I've got some backup maintenance on my music collection to do this evening. See you around.

[E-Stat]

you seem to have difficulty with the idea that two people can be knowledgeable about a subject and have different opinions
Perhaps you might read the last paragraph of my post beginning with "We may fairly disagree..."


1. You arbitrarily consigned my experience to only the "sound reinforcement" venue.
I did make the assumption that no credible audio engineer would leave runs of "coiled speaker cables" to fixed studio monitors. Mea culpa if your example is representative of that. That is typical of mobile sound rigs.


It also seem you have never been in a recording studio.
I confess that I've only worked with Telarc Recordings for one of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra albums. There were most certainly not runs of "coiled speaker cables" used with the ADS monitors.


2. Then that leaves you with a lot of wonderful performers you would have never seen live...
"Seen" live. That's a good summary of the experience. Yes, I've "seen" quite a few performers under those circumstances. The multichannel source mixed down to mono offers zero in the way of localization found in unamplified venues. Forget hearing any fine instrumental or vocal detail. In those cases, the musical event transcends the sonic event - although the recorded version usually sounds more *live* than live.

I see no reason to lower the bar as a point of reference. Perhaps there would be fewer mediocre recordings if more professional sound engineers were aware of the limitations. YMMV.

rw