Speaker Wire Developments in last 10 years? Need advice.

[jneutron]

Equipment? A VOM? Capacitance meter?

No. The audio equipment.

None are designed for EMC issues.

Apparently, you've never seen Nordost cabling.

Why would you say that? All I said was, I got a red x in a box where you linked a picture.

I've duplicated the valhalla.

That assertion is not supported by my experience (or that of a trusted reviewer in your neck of the woods) using almost identical cabling from a single company. In fact, the effective DC was slightly worse on the more revealing cable.

You disagree...then say "in fact"... then present information which agrees with me. You are confused.

Allow me to help you resolve your confusion...

I did not say that lower effective dielectric coefficient, or faster prop velocity was better. Nor, worse. But different.


What were the numbers for both cables?

jn

[E-Stat]

None are designed for EMC issues.

I'm a pragmatist. The world is what it is. Cost controlled at every turn, too.

Why would you say that? All I said was, I got a red x in a box where you linked a picture.

Sorry, I thought it would be helpful to explain why you weren't getting the image.

I've duplicated the valhalla.

Matching three metrics, perhaps. I continue to disagree with the notion that is all that matters when used in real world systems.

I did not say that lower effective dielectric coefficient, or faster prop velocity was better. Nor, worse. But different.

Ok. Generally speaking lower EDC creates fewer interactions and phase changes than those with higher values.

What were the numbers for both cables?

1.33 vs 1.10.

[jneutron]

Matching three metrics, perhaps. I continue to disagree with the notion that is all that matters when used in real world systems.

You'll eventually agree with me...I'm patient..

Ok. Generally speaking lower EDC creates fewer interactions and phase changes than those with higher values.

It does? Why is that?

Seriously, The interaction between cable length, it's EDC, it's characteristic Z and R, all conspire with the load to modify the soundstage imaging placement accuracy. Saying such a monotonic statement as you have isn't accurate. It's unfortunately, a tad more complicated than that.

1.33 vs 1.10.

Neat. What about the other numbers?

jn

[E-Stat]

You'll eventually agree with me...I'm patient..

Theory sure does look good on paper!

Seriously, The interaction between cable length, it's EDC, it's characteristic Z and R, all conspire with the load to modify the soundstage imaging placement accuracy.

How do you know those are the only factors. Which one(s) have you considered and ruled out?

Saying such a monotonic statement as you have isn't accurate.

I think "generally speaking" is a sufficient qualifier.

It's unfortunately, a tad more complicated than that.

On that we most certainly agree!

Neat. What about the other numbers?

Length was the same at ten feet or so. Z value not published for both cables. Good question. Very similar. We're not comparing 24 gauge zip to 12 gauge zip.

[jneutron]

Theory sure does look good on paper!

It's even better when it describes a model which is an accurate predictor of an outcome.

How do you know those are the only factors. Which one(s) have you considered and ruled out?

The list is extensive. Color, height from floor, grain boundaries, 4 9's vs 7 9's, lots of really silly stuff.

Length was the same at ten feet or so. Z value not published for both cables. Good question. Very similar. We're not comparing 24 gauge zip to 12 gauge zip.

How does one know effective dielectric constant without knowing the distributed L and C?? They conspire to create Z.

jn

[E-Stat]

Color, height from floor, grain boundaries, 4 9's vs 7 9's, lots of really silly stuff.

That is a list of silly stuff.

How does one know effective dielectric constant without knowing the distributed L and C?? They conspire to create Z.

It would appear that you are looking for the "characteristic impedance" as I have already provided the EDC. At least according to your definitions from five years ago.

Click here for them

I was referring to the use of "Z" to represent impedance in ohms. Aren't you with the plan? After all, resistance is the ONLY important factor to Roger Russell. In that case, the answers are 1.09 /.09 vs. 1.33 / .04

FWIW, the values for my JPS cable are 1.16 / .05.

[jneutron]

It would appear that you are looking for the "characteristic impedance" as I have already provided the EDC. At least according to your definitions from five years ago.

Click here for them

I was referring to the use of "Z" to represent impedance in ohms.

I know. What is L, C, and R for the cable?

Aren't you with the plan? After all, resistance is the ONLY important factor to Roger Russell.

Luckily, I am not Roger Russel..

Which is why I asked for the numbers.

and yes, vprop =1/sqr(EDC)

Z =sqr(L/C)

cheers, jn