Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

speaker wire vs. lamp cord

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 18, 2004 11:56:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
wire"??
Thanks
DoctorJ

More about : speaker wire lamp cord

Anonymous
September 19, 2004 12:00:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

<jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com
> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
> wire"??

Plan "B" 12 gauge low voltage stranded wire from your local builder's supply
or hardware store. Both Home Depot and Lowe's stock it, for example.
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 12:29:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>,
jdsmd@bellatlantic.net wrote:

> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
> wire"??
> Thanks
> DoctorJ

There are only two basic requirements:
- The wire's resistance should be very low compared to the speaker's
impedance.
- The two wires must be as close as possible to each other to reduce
inductance.

You can check the tables here or Google for other resistance charts.
http://documents.epanorama.net/documents/wiring/wire_re...


How good the wire needs to be depends on the quality of the speaker.
Wire resistance reduces dampening of the speaker's own resonations, it's
coloring. It's OK to skimp on speakers used for surround effects
because they're usually running off a Lo-Fi signal anyways. 1 Ohm loss
would be usable for 8 Ohm surrounds. The primary speakers would
probably sound best with less than .5 Ohms loss.

Solid-core twisted-pair in-wall wire works great too. It's just tough
to manage it without securing it every few feet.
Related resources
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 12:37:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Not the same as regular lamp cord???

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

><jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
>news:8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com
>> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
>> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
>> wire"??
>
>Plan "B" 12 gauge low voltage stranded wire from your local builder's supply
>or hardware store. Both Home Depot and Lowe's stock it, for example.
>



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 8:13:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Expensive" speaker wire - 12 ga. can be had on the web for as low as
$36/100ft. Definitely for less than $50/100ft. An alternative is to
parallel one or two pairs of 14 ga. lamp cord to get the same
resistance/ft. Easiest way to check is to take one 14 ga. lamp cord
and tie the pair at one end together. Do the same with the other end,
use it as a single wire. Do the same for the other speaker lead. See
if they sound better. You can even tie two lamp cord sections in
parallel ( 4 conductors) for each speaker lead and get it down to
equal about 10 ga. I did this once and there was an audible
improvement. I assume that your Hsu is not a powered unit.


On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:56:35 -0400, jdsmd@bellatlantic.net wrote:

>for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
>14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
>wire"??
>Thanks
>DoctorJ
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 11:21:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

<jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:86lpk0t2rmg1e0ag5u9rujq4rbft6ri6ei@4ax.com

> Not the same as regular lamp cord???

Heavier gauge.

> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> <jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
>> news:8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com
>>> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires.
>>> is 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive
>>> "speaker wire"??
>>
>> Plan "B" 12 gauge low voltage stranded wire from your local
>> builder's supply or hardware store. Both Home Depot and Lowe's stock
>> it, for example.
>>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the
> World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via
> Encryption =---
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 11:28:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:mcmurtri-8D7AB9.20290718092004@corp-radius.supernews.com

> In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>,
> jdsmd@bellatlantic.net wrote:

>> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
>> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
>> wire"??
>> Thanks
>> DoctorJ

> There are only two basic requirements:
> - The wire's resistance should be very low compared to the speaker's
> impedance.
> - The two wires must be as close as possible to each other to reduce
> inductance.

> You can check the tables here or Google for other resistance charts.
> http://documents.epanorama.net/documents/wiring/wire_re...

So far so good.


> How good the wire needs to be depends on the quality of the speaker.

Kevin, what is the criteria for speaker wire goodness? Did you say?

> Wire resistance reduces dampening of the speaker's own resonations,
> it's coloring.

This seems to be said in an inverted way.

A wire with low resistance does a better job of accurately delivering the
voltage at the output of the amplifier to the speaker terminals. Conversely
a wire with high resistance does a poorer job of accurately delivering the
voltage at the output of the amplifier to the speaker terminals. IOW, the
high resistance wire will add additional voltage variations, that depend on
the speaker's own resonance's, among other things.

> It's OK to skimp on speakers used for surround effects
> because they're usually running off a Lo-Fi signal anyways. 1 Ohm
> loss would be usable for 8 Ohm surrounds. The primary speakers would
> probably sound best with less than .5 Ohms loss.

For best results, the loss in the speaker cables should be less than 1-3% of
the minimum impedance of the speaker. There's a procedure for sizing speaker
wires posted at http://www.pcavtech.com/techtalk/wire_size/index.htm

> Solid-core twisted-pair in-wall wire works great too. It's just tough
> to manage it without securing it every few feet.

Agreed.
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 9:57:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

jdsmd@bellatlantic.net wrote in message news:<86lpk0t2rmg1e0ag5u9rujq4rbft6ri6ei@4ax.com>...
> Not the same as regular lamp cord???

The same, though perhaps with a lower voltage rating on the
insulation. The reason Arny's suggestion makes sense to me is that I
have never seen 12 gage lamp cord in regular hardware stores, but I
have seen 12 gage zip cord sold as low voltage outdoor lighting cord.
Zip cord is cheap and easy to handle.
Anonymous
September 19, 2004 11:40:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

<jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com...
> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
> wire"??

**You don't mention the length of the cable, nor the impedance
characteristics of your speaker, so it is impossible for anyone to answer
your question.

BTW: Good speaker cable (IE: Low resistance/low inductance type) need not be
expensive.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 3:00:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <b6ednRy_mrqm8NDcRVn-qw@comcast.com>,
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

> "Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
> news:mcmurtri-8D7AB9.20290718092004@corp-radius.supernews.com
>
> > In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>,
> > jdsmd@bellatlantic.net wrote:
>
> >> for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
> >> 14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
> >> wire"??
> >> Thanks
> >> DoctorJ
>
> > There are only two basic requirements:
> > - The wire's resistance should be very low compared to the speaker's
> > impedance.
> > - The two wires must be as close as possible to each other to reduce
> > inductance.
>
> > You can check the tables here or Google for other resistance charts.
> > http://documents.epanorama.net/documents/wiring/wire_re...
>
> So far so good.
>
>
> > How good the wire needs to be depends on the quality of the speaker.
>
> Kevin, what is the criteria for speaker wire goodness? Did you say?
>
> > Wire resistance reduces dampening of the speaker's own resonations,
> > it's coloring.
>
> This seems to be said in an inverted way.
>
> A wire with low resistance does a better job of accurately delivering the
> voltage at the output of the amplifier to the speaker terminals. Conversely
> a wire with high resistance does a poorer job of accurately delivering the
> voltage at the output of the amplifier to the speaker terminals. IOW, the
> high resistance wire will add additional voltage variations, that depend on
> the speaker's own resonance's, among other things.

No, I meant same thing. Wire resistance lets the speaker do more of
what it wants to do electrically and mechanically. You can put a beefy
10 Ohm resistor in series with your speakers to hear an exaggeration of
what happens. Generally you loose some bass and get an uneven midrange
response.


> > It's OK to skimp on speakers used for surround effects
> > because they're usually running off a Lo-Fi signal anyways. 1 Ohm
> > loss would be usable for 8 Ohm surrounds. The primary speakers would
> > probably sound best with less than .5 Ohms loss.
>
> For best results, the loss in the speaker cables should be less than 1-3% of
> the minimum impedance of the speaker. There's a procedure for sizing speaker
> wires posted at http://www.pcavtech.com/techtalk/wire_size/index.htm
>
> > Solid-core twisted-pair in-wall wire works great too. It's just tough
> > to manage it without securing it every few feet.
>
> Agreed.
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 8:28:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
designed to have less reactance over its length. For short distances,
you will not hear the difference, between speaker wire, and a heavy duty
lamp cord.

If you have a descent DVM, you an measure the DC resistance of a pair of
wires to start with. Take a 100 ft length, and short the pairs at the
far end. At the close end measure its resistance. Do the same for each
type.

To test for the return loss due to its capacitive reactance, and
inductive reactance, you will need a sophisticated setup, using a
laboratory reference amplifier, audio sweep generator, 8 ohm 100 W dummy
load, and a scope. Connect the 100 foot length of wire to be tested on
to the amplifier with the 8 ohm dummy load connected to the far end.
Connect the audio sweep generator to the amplifier, and set the sweep
output for 20 to 20K at line sync rate. Connect the scope to the other
end, and set its scale to be for 1 V-cm AC coupled. Set the scope sync
line rate for line sync. Set the scope time base for 50 ms/cm to start
with. Turn the system on, and calibrate at 400 Hz to have the scope to
full scale P-P. Turn on the sweep mode and observe the flatness of the
sweep. You can trim the veneer or timebase on the scope for the best
resolving. If you use the delayed sweep option on the scope you will be
able to see any segments of the response, and expand on them.

After performing the above, you can then compare the different wires to
see the effects. You would be surprised to see how the different types
of wires perform. If you do the math, you can calculate the Db drops. If
you want to get sophisticated using a dual sweep scope, you can get in
to working out the phase delay errors and etc. With a distortion
analyser, you can also start getting in to the harmonics that the
different wires will produce in relation to each other. All of this
becomes part of the sound quality.

Personally, I would use speaker cord. The cost difference is not
something that is going to break the bank, for the possible gain.

--

Jerry G.
======

<jdsmd@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message
news:8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com...
for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
wire"??
Thanks
DoctorJ
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 12:52:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
> designed to have less reactance over its length.

This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.

It does NOT change the resistance at all.
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 1:05:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message news:<mcmurtri-8D7AB9.20290718092004@corp-radius.supernews.com>...
> How good the wire needs to be depends on the quality of the speaker.
> Wire resistance reduces dampening of the speaker's own resonations, it's
> coloring.

Uh, that would be "resonances" and no, unless you are using VERY tiny
wire, the resistance of the speaker wire does NOT reduce damping of
the only relevant resonance in the speaker, the fundamental mechanical
resonance. A couple of important points behind this:

1. By far, the largest source of series resistance that affects
the damping of the speaker resonance is NOT the speaker wire,
but the very DC resistance of the voice coil in the driver
itself. Unless that resistance is reduced A LOT (it's typically
on the order of 80% or more of the nominal impedance of the
speaker) OR you're using something like 28 gauge wire, the
voice coil DC resistance will completely dominate the total
series loop resistance and render pretty irrelevant differences
in nomimally competently designed and selected speaker cable.
Consider, for instance, the difference between a 10 foot run of
16 gauge vs 12 gauge speaker wire. The former will have a total
series resistance of 0.08 ohms vs 0.03 ohms. Now, one might
that the 12 gauge has about 2.5 times better damping than the
16 gauge, and that would be wrong. If the speaker voice coil has
a DC resistance of 6.5 ohms, say, it's the difference then between
6.58 and 6.53 ohms, and now the difference in damping is more
on the order of under 1%, hardly relevant.

2. In any case, the effects on damping caused by the speaker wire
cannot affect resonances that have no manifestation in the
electrical impedance. That means that, for the most part, the
ONLY resonance affected is that of the fundamental mechanical
resonance of the driver/system. The vast majority of resonance
of the sort caused by diaphragm breakup and such are simply
untouched by changing the cable, even in the worst scenarios.
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 8:16:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On 20 Sep 2004 08:52:44 -0700, dpierce@cartchunk.org (Dick Pierce)
wrote:

>"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
>> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
>> designed to have less reactance over its length.
>
>This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
>NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
>Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
>stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
>to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.
>
>It does NOT change the resistance at all.

And in fact, if you wanted the lowest possible resistance, you'd use
solid-core 12AWG wire, since it doesn't contain any air space within
that 12AWG diameter.......

Might be a tad inflexible however, since that's about the gauge you'd
use for connecting a range cooker! However, if you're planning a
permanent multiroom install, heavy gauge 'Romex' does make excellent
speaker cable, with short flexible tails running from wall outlets to
the actual speakers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 8:52:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<7d0uk09djddb7rjmehtf3e86t3lkomj057@4ax.com>...
> On 20 Sep 2004 08:52:44 -0700, dpierce@cartchunk.org (Dick Pierce)
> wrote:
>
> >"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
> >> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
> >> designed to have less reactance over its length.
> >
> >This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
> >NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
> >Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
> >stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
> >to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.
> >
> >It does NOT change the resistance at all.
>
> And in fact, if you wanted the lowest possible resistance, you'd use
> solid-core 12AWG wire, since it doesn't contain any air space within
> that 12AWG diameter.......

Well, actually, no. If it's spec'ed at 12 gauge, the spec comes from the
effective conductor cross-sectional area, so that's taken into account.

Be that as it may, the difference in resistance if this weren't the
case is still MUCH smaller than the total series resistance, dominated
as it is, actually overwhe4lmed by the voice coil DC resistance.
Anonymous
September 20, 2004 11:04:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jerry G." wrote:

> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance.

No it doesn't.

For a given length os wire, the resitance is purely determined by the
cross-sectional area. Stranding makes no difference whatever.

> It is designed to have less reactance over its length.

Wrong again !

The inductance is determined by the 'loop area' which again has nothing
whatever to do with stranding. Nor will cable capacitance be affected by
stranding.

The only effect of significance regarding stranding is skin-effect but at
audio frequencies about 2mm dia strands can be used without skin effect
being an issue IIRC.


Graham
September 20, 2004 11:16:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> On 20 Sep 2004 08:52:44 -0700, dpierce@cartchunk.org (Dick Pierce)
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
>>
>>>Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
>>>designed to have less reactance over its length.
>>
>>This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
>>NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
>>Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
>>stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
>>to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.
>>
>>It does NOT change the resistance at all.
>
>
> And in fact, if you wanted the lowest possible resistance, you'd use
> solid-core 12AWG wire, since it doesn't contain any air space within
> that 12AWG diameter.......
>
> Might be a tad inflexible however, since that's about the gauge you'd
> use for connecting a range cooker! However, if you're planning a
> permanent multiroom install, heavy gauge 'Romex' does make excellent
> speaker cable, with short flexible tails running from wall outlets to
> the actual speakers.

If you do that, make sure you clearly mark it, so some electrician
doesn't helpfully energize it for you.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.
Anonymous
September 21, 2004 1:39:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message
news:2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de...
> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance.

**Nonsense.

It is
> designed to have less reactance over its length.

**Not necessarily. Naim cable, for instance, is specifically designed for
high inductance.

For short distances,
> you will not hear the difference, between speaker wire, and a heavy duty
> lamp cord.

**It depends on the load and the actual length of the cable.


>
> If you have a descent DVM, you an measure the DC resistance of a pair of
> wires to start with. Take a 100 ft length, and short the pairs at the
> far end. At the close end measure its resistance. Do the same for each
> type.
>
> To test for the return loss due to its capacitive reactance, and
> inductive reactance, you will need a sophisticated setup, using a
> laboratory reference amplifier, audio sweep generator, 8 ohm 100 W dummy
> load, and a scope. Connect the 100 foot length of wire to be tested on
> to the amplifier with the 8 ohm dummy load connected to the far end.
> Connect the audio sweep generator to the amplifier, and set the sweep
> output for 20 to 20K at line sync rate. Connect the scope to the other
> end, and set its scale to be for 1 V-cm AC coupled. Set the scope sync
> line rate for line sync. Set the scope time base for 50 ms/cm to start
> with. Turn the system on, and calibrate at 400 Hz to have the scope to
> full scale P-P. Turn on the sweep mode and observe the flatness of the
> sweep. You can trim the veneer or timebase on the scope for the best
> resolving. If you use the delayed sweep option on the scope you will be
> able to see any segments of the response, and expand on them.

**YIKES! You like to do things the hard way. It is MUCH easier to do that
that. A millivoltmeter (or a CRO) and an oscillator is all you need. Compare
the Voltage at 50Hz and 20kHz. Then it is a trivial exercise to determine
the reactance of the cable. BTW: Capacitive reactance is is no interest.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Anonymous
September 21, 2004 4:23:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 04:28:14 -0400, "Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net>
wrote:

>Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
>designed to have less reactance over its length. For short distances,
>you will not hear the difference, between speaker wire, and a heavy duty
>lamp cord.

er......bollocks :-)
Anonymous
September 21, 2004 10:10:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:23:59 +0100, Laurence Payne
<l@laurenceDELETEpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 04:28:14 -0400, "Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
>>designed to have less reactance over its length. For short distances,
>>you will not hear the difference, between speaker wire, and a heavy duty
>>lamp cord.
>
>er......bollocks :-)

What, you mean you *will* hear the difference? :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 21, 2004 11:45:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message
news:2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de...

> Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance.

Could you explain the physics of how this works ?

geoff
Anonymous
September 21, 2004 9:20:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Dick Pierce wrote:
> "Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
>>Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance.>
> This is pure, utter nonsense.

Maybe he meant resistance to bending :-)))
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 1:10:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface of the
iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.



"Dick Pierce" <dpierce@cartchunk.org> wrote in message
news:D c02c02f.0409200752.74f5b9fd@posting.google.com...
> "Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message
news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
> > Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
> > designed to have less reactance over its length.
>
> This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
> NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
> Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
> stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
> to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.
>
> It does NOT change the resistance at all.
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 1:15:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"John Krieger" <john.krieger@att.net> wrote in message
news:tNOdnY5lBe9LTc3cRVn-rw@comcast.com

> Not actually nonsense, since the current runs mostly in the surface
> of the wire. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.

Wrong on several grounds.

(1) The depth of the conductive layer @ 20 KHz and below is a very
significant portion of the thickness of even 12 gauge wire.

(2) Secondly, skin effect is based on magnetism. The magnetic lines of force
pass among the strands of wire in a cable quite freely. So, merely stranding
and bundling or twisting the strands has little effect. Even insulating the
individual strands has little effect.

If you want to make a cable that has reduced skin effect @20 KHz and below,
you have to make a conductor that is hollow and fairly large like a piece of
tubing. If stranded wire is used for this to maintain flexibility, it is
wound around a fairly large core composed of non-conductive and non-magnetic
material.
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 2:32:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Dick Pierce wrote:

> Well, actually, no. If it's spec'ed at 12 gauge, the spec comes from the
> effective conductor cross-sectional area, so that's taken into account.
>
> Be that as it may, the difference in resistance if this weren't the
> case is still MUCH smaller than the total series resistance, dominated
> as it is, actually overwhe4lmed by the voice coil DC resistance.

I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood what
happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would the
results be the same.
Thanks.
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 8:27:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"John Krieger" <john.krieger@att.net> wrote in message news:<tNOdnY5lBe9LTc3cRVn-rw@comcast.com>...
> "Dick Pierce" <dpierce@cartchunk.org> wrote in message
> news:D c02c02f.0409200752.74f5b9fd@posting.google.com...
> > "Jerry G." <jerryg@total.net> wrote in message
> news:<2r7il7F168d2tU2@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > Speaker wire is of a finer stran, thus having less resistance. It is
> > > designed to have less reactance over its length.
> >
> > This is pure, utter nonsense. The resistance of the wire is determined
> > NOT by the stranding, but by the net wire gauge and the bulk material.
> > Very fine stranded 12 gauge copper wire has the same resistance as coarse
> > stranded 12 gauge copper wire. The primary advnatge afforded by going
> > to the fine stranded version is in mechanical flexibility.
> >
> > It does NOT change the resistance at all.
>
> Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the
> surface of the iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less
> resistance.

You're speaking of the "skin effect" and you're wrong on at least
two counts. First, the current does NOT run "mostly on the surface"
at audio frequencies. Over the vast majority of the bandwidth, the
skin effect is negligable. Second, at those significantly higher
frequencies where it is appreciable, the stranding of the sort
found in speaker canles has no effect, as the current will confine
itself to the surface of the entire bundle, making a stranded cable
act essentially as a single solid conductor for all intents and
purposes.
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 9:15:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

John Krieger wrote:

> Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface of the
> iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.

This is an A.C. effect that's only relevant at high frequencies.

For example, I have just been designing a switch mode power supply operating at
130kHz. The maximum conductor diameter recommended to avoid skin effect at this
frequency is 0.4mm.

Scale this to audio frequencies and you'll see the nonsence of the finely
stranded argument.

Low cable impedance is most relevant at LF anyway (damping factor for LF driver
).

Furthermore, an internal passive crossover ( as is most usually the case )
presents a much higher impedance to the LF and HF drivers than the amplifier or
cable combined !


Graham
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 9:27:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <4150FC5D.7955EF0C@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
> John Krieger wrote:
>
> > Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface of the
> > iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.
>
> This is an A.C. effect that's only relevant at high frequencies.
>
> For example, I have just been designing a switch mode power supply operating at
> 130kHz. The maximum conductor diameter recommended to avoid skin effect at this
> frequency is 0.4mm.
>
> Scale this to audio frequencies and you'll see the nonsence of the finely
> stranded argument.
>
> Low cable impedance is most relevant at LF anyway (damping factor for LF driver
> ).
>
> Furthermore, an internal passive crossover ( as is most usually the case )
> presents a much higher impedance to the LF and HF drivers than the amplifier or
> cable combined !
>
>
> Graham
>
>
Skin effect with all the calculations.


http://tinyurl.com/646hb

I Care
Anonymous
September 22, 2004 10:09:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
wrote:

>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood what
>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would the
>results be the same.

Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
of cable.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 23, 2004 2:35:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"John Krieger" <john.krieger@att.net> wrote in message
news:tNOdnY5lBe9LTc3cRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface of
> the
> iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.

Yep, at 200KHz or so. But these strands are touching, so do not act as
individual conductors.


geoff
Anonymous
September 23, 2004 5:01:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> wrote:

>>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
>>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood what
>>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would the
>>results be the same.

> Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
> were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
> amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
> OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
> extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
> of cable.

Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?
Anonymous
September 23, 2004 9:54:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
wrote:

>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
>> wrote:
>
>>>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
>>>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood what
>>>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would the
>>>results be the same.
>
>> Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
>> were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
>> amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
>> OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
>> extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
>> of cable.
>
>Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?

In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.

Some of those low-inductance cables, such as Alpha Core 'Goertz' MI
claim to have a 'matched' impedance, as the characteristic impedance
of the cable is only 6-8 ohms, as opposed to the 50-100 ohms of most
speaker cable. In reality, this is an insupportable argument, since
the cable is not being driven from a 6-8 ohm source, speaker impedance
varies wildly, and a matched impedance would in any case only be of
importance when cable length exceeds about 1/10 of a wavelength. The
wavelength of a 20kHz signal in such a cable is about six *miles*....
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 23, 2004 7:36:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>, jdsmd@bellatlantic.net
says...
>
>
>for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
>14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
>wire"??

If really long runs, get 12 gauge. With the money you save you can buy
some more music to play through your system.
------------
Alex
Anonymous
September 24, 2004 2:46:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Alex Rodriguez wrote:

> In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>, jdsmd@bellatlantic.net
> says...
> >
> >
> >for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
> >14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
> >wire"??
>
> If really long runs, get 12 gauge. With the money you save you can buy
> some more music to play through your system.
> ------------
> Alex

Also note that lamp (zip) cord has a flat edge and a round edge that you can
use to maintain (or keep track of) polarity.

Ron Capik
NJ Pinelands Cultural Society
< www.AlbertHall.org >
--
Anonymous
September 24, 2004 3:18:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> wrote:

>>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

>>>On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
>>>wrote:

>>>Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
>>>were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
>>>amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
>>>OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
>>>extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
>>>of cable.
>>
>>Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?

> In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
> low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
> speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
> In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
> Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
> available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
>
> Some of those low-inductance cables, such as Alpha Core 'Goertz' MI
> claim to have a 'matched' impedance, as the characteristic impedance
> of the cable is only 6-8 ohms, as opposed to the 50-100 ohms of most
> speaker cable. In reality, this is an insupportable argument, since
> the cable is not being driven from a 6-8 ohm source, speaker impedance
> varies wildly, and a matched impedance would in any case only be of
> importance when cable length exceeds about 1/10 of a wavelength. The
> wavelength of a 20kHz signal in such a cable is about six *miles*....

Thanks again for the reply. I gather then, that, this type of speaker
wire offers no real advantage in normal applications, and would not be
really cost effective.
September 24, 2004 7:23:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Ron Capik wrote:
> Alex Rodriguez wrote:
>
>
>>In article <8pipk0do3np4t2l9u16tuhk4d36g1puokq@4ax.com>, jdsmd@bellatlantic.net
>>says...
>>
>>>
>>>for my new Hsu surround sound system, I have to run so long wires. is
>>>14 gauge lamp cord ok ($25/250 feet) or must it be expensive "speaker
>>>wire"??
>>
>>If really long runs, get 12 gauge. With the money you save you can buy
>>some more music to play through your system.
>>------------
>>Alex
>
>
> Also note that lamp (zip) cord has a flat edge and a round edge that you can
> use to maintain (or keep track of) polarity.
>
> Ron Capik
> NJ Pinelands Cultural Society
> < www.AlbertHall.org >
> --
>
I've never seen ANY kind of paired wire that didn't have SOME kind of
way to distinguish the wires -- color, printing, texture on the
insulation, a wrap or thread, etc.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.
Anonymous
September 24, 2004 9:52:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 23:18:27 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@h0optonline.net>
wrote:

>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
>> wrote:

>>>Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?
>
>> In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
>> low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
>> speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
>> In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
>> Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
>> available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
>>
>> Some of those low-inductance cables, such as Alpha Core 'Goertz' MI
>> claim to have a 'matched' impedance, as the characteristic impedance
>> of the cable is only 6-8 ohms, as opposed to the 50-100 ohms of most
>> speaker cable. In reality, this is an insupportable argument, since
>> the cable is not being driven from a 6-8 ohm source, speaker impedance
>> varies wildly, and a matched impedance would in any case only be of
>> importance when cable length exceeds about 1/10 of a wavelength. The
>> wavelength of a 20kHz signal in such a cable is about six *miles*....
>
>Thanks again for the reply. I gather then, that, this type of speaker
>wire offers no real advantage in normal applications, and would not be
>really cost effective.

In so far as it will sound identical to 12AWG zipcord, that would be
correct.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 4:16:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:epo4l0l77gej1so5qba84srkj3scikqmup@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >>>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
> >>>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood
what
> >>>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would
the
> >>>results be the same.
> >
> >> Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
> >> were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
> >> amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
> >> OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
> >> extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
> >> of cable.
> >
> >Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?
>
> In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
> low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
> speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
> In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
> Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
> available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.

**Except that, with some speakers (notably electrostatics), low inductance
cables may well be desirable. Here is the impedance curve of just such a
speaker:

www.rageaudio.com.au/accu.jpg

In this situation, NAIM cables (unless the speaker is to used with a NAIM
amplifier) would be the very worst choice imaginable. Standard Figure 8 (Zip
cable) would be a slightly less worse choice. High power coax, or Goertz
MI-1 would be the best choices.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 7:39:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <41575bc8@news.comindico.com.au>,
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:epo4l0l77gej1so5qba84srkj3scikqmup@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >
> > >>>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
> > >>>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood
> what
> > >>>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today, would
> the
> > >>>results be the same.
> > >
> > >> Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers which
> > >> were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid Naim
> > >> amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
> > >> OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
> > >> extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30 feet
> > >> of cable.
> > >
> > >Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?
> >
> > In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
> > low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
> > speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
> > In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
> > Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
> > available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
>
> **Except that, with some speakers (notably electrostatics), low inductance
> cables may well be desirable. Here is the impedance curve of just such a
> speaker:
>
> www.rageaudio.com.au/accu.jpg
>
> In this situation, NAIM cables (unless the speaker is to used with a NAIM
> amplifier) would be the very worst choice imaginable. Standard Figure 8 (Zip
> cable) would be a slightly less worse choice. High power coax, or Goertz
> MI-1 would be the best choices.

If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".

See the "Schaum's Outline Series" tutorial on Transmission Lines to
learn how to do the calculations correctly. Most "transmission line"
texts do not cover how "characteristic impedance" is calculated at low
frequencies; that one does .The calculation is nowhere near the same as
at higher frequencies.

Isaac
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 9:11:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Isaac Wingfield" <isw@witzend.com> wrote in message
news:isw-894F8F.20395826092004@netnews.comcast.net...
> In article <41575bc8@news.comindico.com.au>,
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
> > "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:epo4l0l77gej1so5qba84srkj3scikqmup@4ax.com...
> > > On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:32:42 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>>I remember reading about speaker cables that caused some amps major
> > > >>>grief. I believe it was the Polk speaker cables. I never understood
> > what
> > > >>>happened and why. And, if you used those speaker cables today,
would
> > the
> > > >>>results be the same.
> > > >
> > > >> Highly capacitive cables triggered HF oscillation in amplifiers
which
> > > >> were only marginally stable, most notably the Naim NAP250. Avoid
Naim
> > > >> amps, and no modern amplfier should have a problem in this regard.
> > > >> OTOH, you don't need such weird cables anyway, except in the most
> > > >> extreme case of say an electrostat speaker driven by more than 30
feet
> > > >> of cable.
> > > >
> > > >Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive
cables?
> > >
> > > In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
> > > low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
> > > speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
> > > In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
> > > Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
> > > available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
> >
> > **Except that, with some speakers (notably electrostatics), low
inductance
> > cables may well be desirable. Here is the impedance curve of just such a
> > speaker:
> >
> > www.rageaudio.com.au/accu.jpg
> >
> > In this situation, NAIM cables (unless the speaker is to used with a
NAIM
> > amplifier) would be the very worst choice imaginable. Standard Figure 8
(Zip
> > cable) would be a slightly less worse choice. High power coax, or Goertz
> > MI-1 would be the best choices.
>
> If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
> impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
> might be more than a little surprised.

**Nope. I won't be surprised in the slightest. The ONLY important
characteristics of speaker cables are (per unit length): Resistance,
Inductance. Capacitance is largely unimportant. Characteristic impedance is
not a point of issue, in any practical length speaker cable.

The line doesn't have one; it is
> frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".

**No argument from me.

>
> See the "Schaum's Outline Series" tutorial on Transmission Lines to
> learn how to do the calculations correctly. Most "transmission line"
> texts do not cover how "characteristic impedance" is calculated at low
> frequencies; that one does .The calculation is nowhere near the same as
> at higher frequencies.

**OK. I studied this stuff 30 years ago. It is exactly as relevant to audio
today, as it was then. IOW: Not at all. Your strawman is duly noted,
however.

When you have time, do some calculations, using some regular 'zip' cable, in
(say) 10 Metre lengths, with the speakers whose impedance I posted. Get back
to me then.

BTW: Here are some figures pertaining to various speaker cables (thanks to
Fred Davis):

---

12 AWG (Manhattan 39059) 0.25 uH/ft 24 pF/ft 0.0036 ohm/ft

12 AWG (Belden 8477) 0.28 uH/ft 23 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft

12 AWG (Belden 9718) 0.23 uH/ft 22 pF/ft 0.0033 ohm/ft
(lamp cord construction - similar to RS MegaCable)

MIT CVT 0.22 uH/ft 151 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft
(approx. 13 AWG)

Dunlavy Z6 0.025 uH/ft 645 pF/ft 0.0028 ohm/ft
(11 AWG)

Goertz MI-1 (13 AWG) 0.004 uH/ft 480 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft
(Alpha-Core) (about 0.1uH for 25 feet)

Kimber 16LPC 0.07 uH/ft 61 pF/ft 0.0025 ohm/ft
(11 AWG)

Twisted pair flat cable 0.04 uH/ft 685 pF/ft 0.0026 ohm/ft
(Amphenol Spectra-Twist 843-138-2601-064)
(11 AWG)
---

12 AWG (Manhattan 39059) 0.25 uH/ft 24 pF/ft 0.0036 ohm/ft

12 AWG (Belden 8477) 0.28 uH/ft 23 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft

12 AWG (Belden 9718) 0.23 uH/ft 22 pF/ft 0.0033 ohm/ft
(lamp cord construction - similar to RS MegaCable)

MIT CVT 0.22 uH/ft 151 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft
(approx. 13 AWG)

Dunlavy Z6 0.025 uH/ft 645 pF/ft 0.0028 ohm/ft
(11 AWG)

Goertz MI-1 (13 AWG) 0.004 uH/ft 480 pF/ft 0.004 ohm/ft
(Alpha-Core) (about 0.1uH for 25 feet)

Kimber 16LPC 0.07 uH/ft 61 pF/ft 0.0025 ohm/ft
(11 AWG)

Twisted pair flat cable 0.04 uH/ft 685 pF/ft 0.0026 ohm/ft
(Amphenol Spectra-Twist 843-138-2601-064)
(11 AWG)
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 9:45:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Isaac Wingfield wrote:

> If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
> impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
> might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
> frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".

That's because audio frequencies have very long wavelengths.

Only when the cable length approaches the signal wavelength does a characteristic
impedance become a relevant issue.


Graham
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 10:08:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:16:10 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

>
>"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:epo4l0l77gej1so5qba84srkj3scikqmup@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
>> wrote:

>> >Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive cables?
>>
>> In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
>> low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
>> speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
>> In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
>> Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
>> available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
>
>**Except that, with some speakers (notably electrostatics), low inductance
>cables may well be desirable. Here is the impedance curve of just such a
>speaker:
>
>www.rageaudio.com.au/accu.jpg
>
>In this situation, NAIM cables (unless the speaker is to used with a NAIM
>amplifier) would be the very worst choice imaginable. Standard Figure 8 (Zip
>cable) would be a slightly less worse choice. High power coax, or Goertz
>MI-1 would be the best choices.

However, while that is *theoretically* true, even in this particularly
extreme case (and assuming the amplifier itself has no problem), I
would be surprised if there was any *audible* difference with the
usual 10-15 feet of cable.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
September 27, 2004 11:09:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lsafl011k6ng15urej7q5qv199r9umi9uu@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:16:10 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
> <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:epo4l0l77gej1so5qba84srkj3scikqmup@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:01:44 GMT, TonyP <arpierre@optonline.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >Thanks for the reply. What was the "advantage" of high capacitive
cables?
> >>
> >> In general, a cable which exhibits high capacitance will also exhibit
> >> low inductance. Low inductance is *theoretically* desirable in a
> >> speaker cable, as it reduces the cable reactance at high frequencies.
> >> In practice, even driving a 3-ohm load over thirty feet of cable with
> >> Naim NACA5 (probably the *highest* inductance cable commonly
> >> available) will result in a treble droop of less than 1dB at 20kHz.
> >
> >**Except that, with some speakers (notably electrostatics), low
inductance
> >cables may well be desirable. Here is the impedance curve of just such a
> >speaker:
> >
> >www.rageaudio.com.au/accu.jpg
> >
> >In this situation, NAIM cables (unless the speaker is to used with a NAIM
> >amplifier) would be the very worst choice imaginable. Standard Figure 8
(Zip
> >cable) would be a slightly less worse choice. High power coax, or Goertz
> >MI-1 would be the best choices.
>
> However, while that is *theoretically* true, even in this particularly
> extreme case (and assuming the amplifier itself has no problem), I
> would be surprised if there was any *audible* difference with the
> usual 10-15 feet of cable.

**You DID mention 30 feet (let's get with the programme, Stewart: It's
almost 10 Metres, not 30 feet). My comments were couched, with that length
under consideration.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Anonymous
September 28, 2004 2:54:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41579AF5.95EBF025@hotmail.com...
> Isaac Wingfield wrote:
>
> > If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
> > impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
> > might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
> > frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".
>
> That's because audio frequencies have very long wavelengths.
>
> Only when the cable length approaches the signal wavelength does a
characteristic
> impedance become a relevant issue.


Has anybody done an appropriate ABX double-blind test on the effect of
hi-zoop speaker cables on lamps ?

Do the words spring out of one's book with more depth, is the room bright,
less glary ? Is the spectral balance more even (none of those stressful
ultra-violet undertones ) ????

geoff
Anonymous
September 28, 2004 10:04:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <41579AF5.95EBF025@hotmail.com>,
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Isaac Wingfield wrote:
>
> > If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
> > impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
> > might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
> > frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".
>
> That's because audio frequencies have very long wavelengths.

There's actually a bit more to it than that. The propagation velocity is
a function of frequency, too. As frequency drops without limit,
propagation velocity drops without limit too. Bass notes *really do*
take longer to get to the speaker.

But nowhere near enough to matter, unless your speakers are in the next
state.

Isaac
Anonymous
September 28, 2004 7:54:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:%zc4d.4729$mZ2.432244@news02.tsnz.net
> "John Krieger" <john.krieger@att.net> wrote in message
> news:tNOdnY5lBe9LTc3cRVn-rw@comcast.com...
>> Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface
>> of the
>> iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.
>
> Yep, at 200KHz or so. But these strands are touching, so do not act
> as individual conductors.

Even if the strands were individually insulated, it wouldn't matter.
Anonymous
September 28, 2004 10:16:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 06:04:22 GMT, Isaac Wingfield <isw@witzend.com>
wrote:

>In article <41579AF5.95EBF025@hotmail.com>,
> Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Isaac Wingfield wrote:
>>
>> > If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
>> > impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
>> > might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
>> > frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".
>>
>> That's because audio frequencies have very long wavelengths.
>
>There's actually a bit more to it than that.

No, I don't think so. The transmission line theory calculations is
*based on* the fact that the length of the line is of the same order
of magnitude (or greater) than the wavelength. If you go on and
calculate anyway, your calculations has no value at all. Check your
textbooks, please.

>
>But nowhere near enough to matter, unless your speakers are in the next
>state.

True, but that's what Pooh Bear said.

>
>Isaac

Per.
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 9:53:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <ja3jl05ggvm41qu1sh368shei3ccelof8b@4ax.com>,
Per Stromgren <per.stromgren@telia.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 06:04:22 GMT, Isaac Wingfield <isw@witzend.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <41579AF5.95EBF025@hotmail.com>,
> > Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Isaac Wingfield wrote:
> >>
> >> > If you actually do the calculations to determine the "characteristic
> >> > impedance" of a transmission line in the audio frequency range, you
> >> > might be more than a little surprised. The line doesn't have one; it is
> >> > frequency dependent, unlike the situation at "RF".
> >>
> >> That's because audio frequencies have very long wavelengths.
> >
> >There's actually a bit more to it than that.
>
> No, I don't think so. The transmission line theory calculations is
> *based on* the fact that the length of the line is of the same order
> of magnitude (or greater) than the wavelength. If you go on and
> calculate anyway, your calculations has no value at all. Check your
> textbooks, please.

The calculations use *different equations* in the low frequency domain.
Things that don't matter at higher frequencies predominate here. For any
given construction of a transmission line, there is a "crossover
frequency" below which it doesn't have a "characteristic impedance".
Study the treatment in the Schaum's Outline book "Transmission Lines",
and then we'll talk.

> >But nowhere near enough to matter, unless your speakers are in the next
> >state.

That difference in velocity between low and high audio frequencies is
exactly why the telephone company added all those "loading coils" to
their long lines before they developed carrier telephony.

The loading coils increased the value of inductance per unit length of
the lines; that tended to equalize the velocity over frequency. Without
them, voices were unintelligible because the different frequencies
arrived at different times.

Then they developed the carrier system, which used single sideband
modulation in the hundreds of kilohertz range. That eliminated the
velocity difference, but the system wouldn't work with all those loading
coils stuck up all those poles. So they had to take them all out.
Millions of them.

Isaac
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 9:54:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <NpmdnSgYJOXPXMTcRVn-ig@comcast.com>,
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

> "Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
> news:%zc4d.4729$mZ2.432244@news02.tsnz.net
> > "John Krieger" <john.krieger@att.net> wrote in message
> > news:tNOdnY5lBe9LTc3cRVn-rw@comcast.com...
> >> Not actually nonesense, since the current runs mostly in the surface
> >> of the
> >> iwr. Finer strands = more surface are = less resistance.
> >
> > Yep, at 200KHz or so. But these strands are touching, so do not act
> > as individual conductors.
>
> Even if the strands were individually insulated, it wouldn't matter.

If each individual strand was larger than a #18 wire, it would 8^}

But not much.

Isaac
!