what gauge wire ?

[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