# $1million for High End Cables



## NaamanF (Jan 18, 2006)

Well not quite. 

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-...ove-7250-speaker-cables-are-better-305549.php

Can of worms opened.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

these have to sound better, cause it costs so much, right? i mean...right?


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

They come packaged in 20 kilos of coke.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

low said:


> these have to sound better, cause it costs so much, right? i mean...right?


I have actually been on Randi's website over cables and speakers that claim a 2 some-odd-gig response figure. :blush: 

A buddy sent that to me.

I'm going to start making cable out of killer RF cable, my costs will be low and I can back up RF rejection, etc with real figures. ****, with hollow core Heliax I can blow the skin-effect people out of the water!

Chad


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

tyroneshoes said:


> They come packaged in 20 kilos of coke.


Makes the High-end "sparkle" a bit more


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

I guess if you are rich...who cares if it sounds better or not...you have the money to buy what ever is supposed to be best and your American Express Platinum will tell your ears that it is the best.

On the other hand...
For the guy that makes sacrafices to buy $50K in stereo equipment....Just think how many live concerts he can attend for that amount?


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

When I had my rant about Science the other day...this is the stuff I speak of. Pseudoscience at it's best

The guy who put this challenge out deserves a million.


----------



## DonutHands (Jan 27, 2006)

i love the guys that comment that they can hear the difference between these cables, and with the million prize, they do nothing to try to win it. seriously, they are fooling themselves.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Check out the Pear website. What a bunch of **********.
http://www.pearcable.com/sub_cable_design.htm


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

Ill put my KNU Karma speaker wire and DIY gelpco RCAs vs this pear ****, in blind tests any day of the week.


AUDIO VOOOOOODOOOOOOOOO the floor dances.


----------



## mach999 (Jul 28, 2007)

The guys at head-fi.org would tell you those cables sound "warm".


----------



## selftc (Jan 22, 2007)

i like this comment:

_"speaker cables do sound different. After some break in time, different cables have different characteristics if you have good hearing to hear the difference."_


there you have it guys. cables have break in time. i read it on the internet so it must be true.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

I like this comment:

_Do not purchase handmade cables!_

and this one:

_Handmade cables simply cannot match the repeatability or precision of cables made by machine. Handmade is something to look for when buying a piece of art, not an electrical component._

Now I have to pull my cables out and break them in. Anyone know whats best should you just run pink noise for 100hrs through them.LOL

I am going to throw all my DIY cables in the trash because they suck.LOL


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

mach999 said:


> The guys at head-fi.org would tell you those cables sound "warm".



maybe if we put them in a fridge it will fix them


----------



## NaamanF (Jan 18, 2006)

I think that statement might be true if you were buying raw copper and hammering it out yourself.


----------



## Genxx (Mar 18, 2007)

Did anyone read the myth section.

http://www.pearcable.com/sub_car_audio_cable_myths.htm

Come on guys just buy them after you install them the hair on the back of your neck will stand up. That is what makes the difference between good cables and audiophile cables.


----------



## skylar112 (Dec 8, 2005)

We need to send this into mythbusters hehe


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

skylar112 said:


> We need to send this into mythbusters hehe


I really thought about it this weekend. That and the Richard Clark amp test. We really should.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2007)

audiophile lore is all about legend, belief and mystique ... the concept of "proof" plays no role ... if you _believe_ it to be true, then so it is.

... that's not a compliment.


----------



## Kenny Bania (Aug 1, 2007)

These are the best sounding cables you can buy. But beware, make sure you have the arrows pointed in the right direction.....HU=====> Amps and not the other way around or your amp WILL make your HU louder!!!!!!


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

Kenny Bania said:


> These are the best sounding cables you can buy. But beware, make sure you have the arrows pointed in the right direction.....HU=====> Amps and not the other way around or your amp WILL make your HU louder!!!!!!


if your amp makes your HU louder, then wouldn't that send a louder signal to the amp? have a Y cable so the amp just keeps making a louder signal for the HU to send to the amp for the amp to send to the speakers.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Well whatever you do you gotta put the headunit higher in elevation than the amps, them 'lektrons like to flow downhill!

There IS a reason for directional cable in some instances if you are one to only attach the shield at one end.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

K, so we got amps and cables on the list. Whats next? New DACs that go way and above the resolution of a cd audio file?


----------



## mfenske (Feb 7, 2006)

Genxx said:


> I like this comment:
> 
> _Do not purchase handmade cables!_
> 
> ...


I actually kind of agree with this logic. To me a properly setup machine should out perform human work. Maybe I'm wrong?


----------



## Kenny Bania (Aug 1, 2007)

Thumper26 said:


> if your amp makes your HU louder, then wouldn't that send a louder signal to the amp? have a Y cable so the amp just keeps making a louder signal for the HU to send to the amp for the amp to send to the speakers.


THis is why you want a HU that has speaker outputs...just in case you hook the cables up backwards the signal is safe and can be rerouted to the speakers. Not many know this but, it's an important protection circut developed by some pretty brilliant engineers from the Eastern Block during the heat of the cold war. Conspiracy, you ask? No, not quite...do your rearch.  Hint: search "project peach (peach is a code word for pear in bolshevik code  )


----------



## Kenny Bania (Aug 1, 2007)

chad said:


> Well whatever you do you gotta put the headunit higher in elevation than the amps, them 'lektrons like to flow downhill!
> 
> There IS a reason for directional cable in some instances if you are one to only attach the shield at one end.


****, sorry I forgot about that. :blush: I always add an inline fan on my signal wires to help the 'lectrons speed up to the max 'lectrond speed down the signal. Gotta watch the speed, otherwise you get really fast SQ.


----------



## matdotcom2000 (Aug 16, 2005)

This reminds me of the Amp challenge lol its all about application


----------



## kskywr (Oct 2, 2006)

On a more serious note, I've always wanted to try out MIT's Oracle cables... at least in the home. I wonder if I could notice a difference. Does anyone here have any experience with those?


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

kskywr said:


> On a more serious note, I've always wanted to try out MIT's Oracle cables... at least in the home. I wonder if I could notice a difference. Does anyone here have any experience with those?


lol, who's joking around.


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

I think you guys are using the wrong Cat5 or Cat6 cables to communicate over the internet.

You are "harsh" cold, sterile, and overly full of detail.

Now if you used a different cable, you could be "warm", "full of sparkle" and have a "melodious timbre".

You seriously need to consider an upgrade. 
(which only I can supply for a "nominal fee" considering the "deal" your getting)


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

i'll put lamp cord up against those voodoo cables for speakerwire and ratshack cables up against them for rca's.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Here is where I get a lot of flak. Yes, I am standing up for the audiophile community. Proudly. 

Point #1 - Cables absolutely make a difference. Period. I have A-B tested crappy cables with "ok" monster cables and there was an audible difference. So whoever says lamp wire can stack up.... no way. Try as you may, I was a skeptic, my ears don't lie. It makes a difference. I'm sure people would laugh at the great length many of you go to to deaden your car or position your tweeters to sound just right. 

Point #2 - To whoever made the joke about the arrows on the cable. Those arrows do have a point, and the grounding is different on one end vs. the other. It's why they are there. You can use them in any direction, won't make a ton of difference. As i understand it just disperses the noise into the chassis instead of into the signal itself. 

Point #3 - If you can afford a full system of Wilson Audio X2's or Dyn Evidence with Krell Master Series or Halcro Amps, odds are that even an 8' pair of Transparent Opus speaker wire @ a cool $30,000 isn't hurting your pocket book either. If you spend that much on a system, whats another $30k to make sure it sounds it's best. If they can afford it, more power to them...and leave them alone. Many people try to rationalize "well that's a nice car!" Guess what, this guy/girl probably has a Ferrari or 2 in the garage already anyways.


----------



## Pb2theMax (Aug 26, 2005)

IMO, there is a difference between $80 Monster Cable and $2.99 Dollar Store cable. But I doubt there's a difference between an $80 Monster Cable and a $7k Pear cable. I mean, it's just copper and insulation. How advanced can it be?


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Pb2theMax said:


> IMO, there is a difference between $80 Monster Cable and $2.99 Dollar Store cable. But I doubt there's a difference between an $80 Monster Cable and a $7k Pear cable. I mean, it's just copper and insulation. How advanced can it be?


And I doubt there is a difference between the $7k pear cable and the $30k transparent..... but like I said, if you've got the jack who cares.


----------



## Pb2theMax (Aug 26, 2005)

People that have that kind of money to blow need to give some of it to me.


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

I am sure I could sell you ubber internet cables, so you statements would sound great.

At the moment they are tired, lacking in any plausibility outside of psychoacoustics.

For a nominal fee, my internet cables would help you sound more lively, authoritative and intelligent.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Abmolech said:


> I am sure I could sell you ubber internet cables, so you statements would sound great.
> 
> At the moment they are tired, lacking in any plausibility outside of psychoacoustics.
> 
> For a nominal fee, my internet cables would help you sound more lively, authoritative and intelligent.


Actually, I'm 100% positive you couldn't. The only thing that was tired here was your poor attempt to insult my intelligence. If you're trying to inflate your epeen you're going to need to work a little harder than that.


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

Show your intellect by reading about RLC networks for a 20 Hz to 20 KHz system comprising not more than 10 metres of cable.
Then come back and make the above statements.

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7517&highlight=RLC

Or put it in a real world test by replacing a car antenna cable with them, or perhaps a digital video cable.
Both of these comprise a 75 ohm cable and 75 ohm terminators, lets see if any of these "great" cables can beat the cheap $1.50 a metre and terminators.

Until then my cables offer has as much validity as yours "hearing test".


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Abmolech said:


> Show your intellect by reading about RLC networks for a 20 Hz to 20 KHz system comprising not more than 10 metres of cable.
> Then come back and make the above statements.
> 
> http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7517&highlight=RLC
> ...


You can show me graphs, science, and data until you are blue in the face. It will NEVER tell you how something sounds to you. This is true with speakers, or cables, or amps, or transports. Data and Analysis can never tell you how something sounds, or how one thing sounds compared to another. The best test for that will always and forever be a listening test. I'm sure you can come up with more to argue on that point, but you will just be wrong. A graph or some numbers on a page can't tell me how something sounds to me.

Not to mention it's 4am, I'm at work, I'm cranky, and I'm stubborn.


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)




----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

It's not futile to argue with math and science when it comes to something as complicated as the human sensory system. All the math and science in the world, and years of research have still not been able to duplicate how our sensory system works. So please, elaborate why some numbers on a page effect how I interpret sound coming into my ears. I can compare a $1.50 cable and an $80 cable, much like listening to an MP3, and then an uncompressed raw track of the same high quality recording. The difference is noticeable. Maybe not to you, maybe you don't have a trained ear, or maybe you just don't care. Go look at the High End Headphones post. There are TONS of opinions on what does and doesn't sound good. I like Grado's, some people hate them. Everyone has a different opinion on audio and sound and very little of it comes down to science. It's quite simple, they put the headphones on their head, listened, and decided. If you make your audio decisions and purchases based upon specs, rather than listening and deciding what you like, you are just making an uneducated decision. I'm really at a loss how you can attempt to argue a lab test is better than sitting down, listening, and hearing for yourself. After all... that is what you do with audio equipment at the end of the day. At least one would hope.


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

havok20222 said:


> It's not futile to argue with math and science when it comes to something as complicated as the human sensory system. All the math and science in the world, and years of research have still not been able to duplicate how our sensory system works. So please, elaborate why some numbers on a page effect how I interpret sound coming into my ears. I can compare a $1.50 cable and an $80 cable, much like listening to an MP3, and then an uncompressed raw track of the same high quality recording. The difference is noticeable..



But do you hear that differeance because in your mind you know that one of the wires costs alot more and the thoughts going through your mind affect your sensory intake, is it causing you to hear things that arent there, or because you want to hear these things!! Like you said it's a sensory mental thing. I would say quite confidently that if I got two wires A and B and both were made of the same wire just made to look different with heat shrink etc... but told a bunch of snake oil believers that one cost $20 and the other $2000 and got them to do a listening test with the wires that probably 9 out of 10 if not all of them would tell me they could hear differences! 

Granted you can probably tell the difference between a $4 interconnect and a $100 interconnect but thats because one is a cheap piece of **** with dodgy joins and nasty ass wire purity and the other is a good quality piece of equipment made with good quality parts. But between a $100-$200 interconnect and a $3000 interconnect, no chance that the supposedly .2% more pure wire makes any difference and knowing the way things work these days with everything being made in the same factory and then badged as required I wouldn't be surprised if the base wire of both interconnects comes from the same cable company and same batch number.

The cost numbers on a page mean something because if one wire costs alot more you'll convince yourself your hearing something you most likely arent.


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

I like this comment from there myth section _Frequency response measurements show a very clear difference between identical systems wired with different cables. The reality is that car audio cables can easily have a greater impact on frequency response than an amplifier! 
_

Hmm, maybe if I was trying to run a 1000watts through a piece of 22gauge to my sub compared to 12gauge.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

zukiaudio said:


>


Take that! And that! And that! ....and that!


----------



## the other hated guy (May 25, 2007)

I'm one of those guys that believe in cable...now I'm not saying just because it's ubber expensive it's good....I've listend to the Opus's on a few occasions...as well as the MIT Oracles...and wasn't all that floored....

but my father and I spent a few years collecting cable like Acoustic Zen, Harmonic Tech, Wire World, Stealth, Alyssa Tweaks, Straightwire, Kimber etc...and have found pros and cons in all...


flame on.......


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

the other hated guy said:


> I'm one of those guys that believe in cable...now I'm not saying just because it's ubber expensive it's good....I've listend to the Opus's on a few occasions...as well as the MIT Oracles...and wasn't all that floored....
> 
> but my father and I spent a few years collecting cable like Acoustic Zen, Harmonic Tech, Wire World, Stealth, Alyssa Tweaks, Straightwire, Kimber etc...and have found pros and cons in all...
> 
> ...


I hope collecting didn't include paying for them too


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

http://www.pearcable.com/sub_products_comice_frequencyresponse.htm

I find this interesting... I'd like to see someone try to replicate it. These guys don't sound nutty like some other companies. At least they claim to know why it sounds better, and post a graph.

As for me... I could swear I heard the difference from my fancy speaker wire to regular 12-gauge speaker wire. I have Tara Labs stuff... which I bought since I walked into a test, not knowing which side was what, and picked it out. 

Nick @ SI, a good friend of mine, had it set up in his living room, called me up, and told me to come over and check it out. I didn't believe anything about fancy cables whatsoever at this point, FYI. So I got there, sat down... and he switched back and forth from one speaker to the other. Totally different sound... so I had him switch back and forth for about 5 minutes. I picked the one I thought sounded better... and it sure was the Tara Labs wire.

*shrugs* The stuff I have isn't even terribly expensive  I'm happy with it.


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

There no way well constructed cable sounds different then say the $4000 cable, unless they add distortion, which some will find enjoyable....doesn't make sense. Metal is metal, yes some have better rejection, yes silver conducts better then copper is it audible in the human ear hell no, as long as it rejects outside noise. All in your heads IMO.

Thats like saying if I take one of my PG MS275s and take off every component of the board and they go back and solder them with silver it will sound better then my other PG MS275 w/o silver solder.


----------



## mach_y (Sep 8, 2006)

Every conductor in a system (please note I said SYSTEM, not cable) has a resistance, inductance, and capacitance (RLC as mentioned earlier in this thread... please go read here: http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7517&highlight=RLC )

Think of it this way... instead of the RCA cables being just cables, imagine a cable with a resistor, inductor, and capacitor wired inside the cable. Get a second cable of the same length also with a resistor, capacitor, and inductor wired inside, but with different values for each than the first cable.

Depending on the SYSTEM (source, cable, amplifier), cables with different RLC values will affect the signal. However, which cable will sound better (if one will sound better at all) is entirely dependent on the specific system the cable is used in. A $30k cable in one system might be perfect, and in another horrible, same goes for lampcord. If you look at the analog audio chain from the internals of the source through the input stage of the amplifier, and put different RLC values between the two, depending on the circuit, it may or may not have an affect on the signal. 

Each persons' ears are the final judgement. Graph charts, math, who cares? What matters is if it actually makes a difference to the end user's perception of sound. The difference between two cables in regards to the RLC values of each cable might make a difference in the sound depending on the entire system. This is why the only place to test a cable is in your own system in the normal place the system is and by your own ears. A cable review in any other system (even in a different room) is completely meaningless.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

mach_y said:


> Depending on the SYSTEM (source, cable, amplifier), cables with different RLC values will affect the signal. However, which cable will sound better (if one will sound better at all) is entirely dependent on the specific system the cable is used in.


This is true BUT the issue is that what if any effect said values have on the AUDIO spectrum 

Chad


----------



## solacedagony (May 18, 2006)

All the points in this thread plus more have been made and explained in Werewolf's cable tutorial. Please, take a gander.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

So I took the liberty of contacted Adam over at Pear to see his response. For anyone who hasnt dealt with Pear, I must say the are a great company to deal with. Other than that I will leave my personal thoughts aside. His response is below..

*
Hello Don,

Nice to hear from you. Yes, by now we have heard about this challenge (although we were never contacted directly). Unfortunately, like most offers of $1 million this one is a hoax. While James Randi is claiming to offer a $1 million dollar prize to differentiate between these speaker cables, by reading the official rules of the challenge, it becomes immediately clear that the offer is not valid. One must be able to "demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability" in order to qualify. Since there is a wealth of scientific information explaining the differences between speaker cables, the offer is not a valid one (and James Randi knows it).

While we publish a frequency response plot demonstrating the differences between cables on our own website here: http://www.pearcable.com/sub_products_comice_frequencyresponse.htm, there are also independant measurements and data that can be found for example here: http://www.audiodesignline.com/howto/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201807390 In addition, the High School eductated James Randi who claims to have consulted unnamed experts on the matter makes unsubstantiated claims that our science is junk. Unfortunately true experts do not agree. For example, despite his claims that RFI is not a problem in speaker cables, according to publications by the Amateur Radio Relay League, RFI has been documented as a known problem that can exist in speaker cables.

In addition, according to the editor of Stereophile magazine John Atkinson, James Randi has completely fabricated the statements about Atkinson made in this "challenge". Furthermore, another audiophile who goes by the moniker "Wellfed" on the AudioAsylum forums, says he tried to take the challenge twice for what I consider a more dubious audio tweak (the GSIC chip), but was denied the opportunity and was lied to by the Randi Foundation. Finally, according to these forum posts: http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/messages/719041.html at least one person has tried to take the "challenge" previously to show that they could differentiate between loudspeaker cables and they were denied by Randi who said "Wire is not wire. I accept that".

So, at the end of the day we have claims made by a high school educated retired magician, which are refuted by independent studies and publications conducted by experts. Most importantly, James Randi's "challenge" is backed by nothing. Many audiophiles have already expressed interest in taking the challenge, but they are barred by the contest rules unless they are part of the media. And, in the past, Randi denied audiophiles the chance to take the "challenge" with regard to differentiating between speaker cables.

At Pear Cable we publish objective measurements to demonstrate the improved fidelity of our cables. In addition, we publish reviews and opinions that are based on both blind and non-blind testing. In fact, the comments made by Richard from the Bay Area Audiophile Society on the Comice Silver Interconnects were the result of a blind test he conducted.

We have not yet put together an official response to this joke of a "challenge", so we are not currently participating in the many conversations going on in audio forums as we speak. In any case, I hope you find the above to be informative.

Sincerely,

Adam Blake*


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

Looks like I need to get you guys some better internet cables.
Your ones are dark, moody and shrouded. Veiled might be a more simplistic term.

You need to upgrade to high clarity, open and "airy". 

For a nominal fee, you can compete with mathematics and graphs...


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Woah, Am I reading correctly in the fact that Pear thinks that a "standard" speaker cable is 3dB down at 20K !? What chunk of steel did the wrap the standard cable around?


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

I would love to have ANY of these manufactures to take the challenge and replace the car antenna cable and/or the digital coax cable with their own.

Guess what?

NONE want to take on $1.50 RG59 or RG60 75 ohm coaxial cable with 75 ohm terminators.

You SHOULD ask yourself why.


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

Im going to test it...in the area the audiophiles claim in matters their ears...


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Abmolech said:


> I would love to have ANY of these manufactures to take the challenge and replace the car antenna cable and/or the digital coax cable with their own.
> 
> Guess what?
> 
> ...



As said before we should DO IT NOW! and make a mint!

For "esoteric" folks we could use Andrews LMR400 or Davis RF Bury-Flex.

A much cheaper "downgrade" would be RG213 

I have 3 studios running all vintage unbalanced gear here. All are wired with RG59.

Chad


----------



## Abmolech (Nov 2, 2006)

> Since there is so much information present on the market about interconnects, and since its the celebration of my 4000th post, I thought I’d spend some time and let you know the ins and outs of interconnects of various forms, and how you can get the most out of them I hope you find this useful.
> 
> Stereo Interconnects (RCA's)
> 
> ...


From a fellow New Zealander and friend of mine.

Note how good the internet cables he was using are.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Abmolech said:


> From a fellow New Zealander and friend of mine.
> 
> Note how good the internet cables he was using are.


An instant classic! Well done.


----------



## mach_y (Sep 8, 2006)

chad said:


> This is true BUT the issue is that what if any effect said values have on the AUDIO spectrum
> 
> Chad


and I noted it might not affect the audio signal at all. Depending on the output of the source and the input stage of the amp, the cable might not make one iota of difference in any spectrum. It all just depends.

On a personal note, I would much rather see more time spent installing the speakers than on a single second of time spent deciding what cable to use


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

i know of an sq competitor who admitted to using primary wire twisted with a drill and hooker ends for his rca cables. he also won in semipro (i think that's the class he was in) at nopi and several other sq comps. he's always been a straight shooter so i didn't doubt him. they were just going from a 701 to his genesis amps. basically, that's what rca cables are...twisted wire soldered to ends and wrapped to look pretty. he was also using the standard hooker speakerwire and still is afaik.

i'm using the $8.99 rockford fosgate cables on my frontstage. i noticed a difference in sound from the old slightly melted in places knu karma cables but i'm pretty sure it was just the fact the knu cables had corrosion in several places from age. i'm using 16awg monster speakerwire that's like $60 for a 100' spool. reason i use it instead of the walmart wire i used to swear by is because in the high humidity i live in the monster corrodes a lot slower. side by side in my shop the exposed monster ends are still shiney gold while the exposed ends of the walmart wire from the car audio section is corroded like crazy. both were stripped at the same time. this test is going on 3 months now. also, when i pulled a sub out of a sealed box after only a few months use on 250rms the ends of the walmart "sound king?" wire looked burned where they were hooked to the sub. still havn't figured that one out. it was 14awg wire too so now i'm really confused on how it got burned.


----------



## backwoods (Feb 22, 2006)

no arguments about inductance and high efficiency gear? 


The double blind is the real ***** of it. Don't have a switch to let it happen quickly.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

backwoods said:


> The double blind is the real ***** of it. Don't have a switch to let it happen quickly.


there is but the wire would have to go through something that would "deteriorate" the sound:blush:


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

TEAM SHIMANO/FALCON said:


> reason i use it instead of the walmart wire i used to swear by is because in the high humidity i live in the monster corrodes a lot slower. side by side in my shop the exposed monster ends are still shiney gold while the exposed ends of the walmart wire from the car audio section is corroded like crazy. both were stripped at the same time. this test is going on 3 months now. also, when i pulled a sub out of a sealed box after only a few months use on 250rms the ends of the walmart "sound king?" wire looked burned where they were hooked to the sub. still havn't figured that one out. it was 14awg wire too so now i'm really confused on how it got burned.


i can x2 on the corrosion properties of the speaker king walmart wire. that shyt corrodes fast.

i'm going to say is it's b/c it's pure copper, while the monster cable is copper coated something else not as good. 

and was Andy the one using twisted wire for rca's?


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

Thumper26 said:


> i can x2 on the corrosion properties of the speaker king walmart wire. that shyt corrodes fast.
> 
> i'm going to say is it's b/c it's pure copper, while the monster cable is copper coated something else not as good.
> 
> and was Andy the one using twisted wire for rca's?


but at the end of the day corrosion is gonna kill your sound quicker than copper that's "tainted". the arkansas humidity is the freaking devil and i'm sure tennessee is just as bad.

yeah andy's the one that commented on the homemade rca's. kinda blew my mind. the man may be a little harsh at times but he knows his ****.


----------



## Fixtion (Aug 25, 2006)

Wire is wire. Period. It's all electrical. It all comes down to is the wire the correct gauge for given current draw, derating factors based on environment/insulating material, and is the copper not corrosive in any manner. Connections the same principles apply. 

These are the main factors what will affect ELECTRICALLY how the equipment will sound. It's all marketing. These are why you may percieve "sonic" differences between wires. 

Oh, and solid copper is better than stranded, if there's a kink in the wire, it causes resistance variation,arcing,heat,bad bad stuff.

Lampcord insulation tends to be of lower quality and may be corrosive to the copper inside, I wouldn't use it. 

In cars we see temperatures far greater than most cables can handle, the derating factor can be below 70% in the car environment.

I suggest everyone take an electrical course, so that you can see the number behind wire size ratings and what not. This all goes beyond "marketing ploys"

-Fixtion


----------



## Thumper26 (Sep 23, 2005)

TEAM SHIMANO/FALCON said:


> but at the end of the day corrosion is gonna kill your sound quicker than copper that's "tainted". the arkansas humidity is the freaking devil and i'm sure tennessee is just as bad.


on that, the copper in the wire is still golden. the copper underneath the mounting post is shiny as well. i've pulled it out of mine. so there may be a little on the ends that's not just right, but that's it, which is fine.

if i ever compete, i'll prolly solder terminals on the wire just for a more clean install.

on a side note, the stinger wire that goes to my battery terminal has never shown corrosion EVAR. the wire has been installed for a couple of years, and i just pulled it out and it's perfectly shiny. i think that's a pretty good testament as well.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

Thumper26 said:


> on that, the copper in the wire is still golden. the copper underneath the mounting post is shiny as well. i've pulled it out of mine. so there may be a little on the ends that's not just right, but that's it, which is fine.
> 
> if i ever compete, i'll prolly solder terminals on the wire just for a more clean install.
> 
> on a side note, the stinger wire that goes to my battery terminal has never shown corrosion EVAR. the wire has been installed for a couple of years, and i just pulled it out and it's perfectly shiny. i think that's a pretty good testament as well.


my jl audio wire seems to still be solid too. it's the 4awg. most of my speakerwire connections are soldered except for what's going to the drivers inside the doors. didn't have my soldering iron with me when i did those. i've never had issues with corrosion doing a twist n tape though as long as the tape was tight around the wire.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I'm glad you mentioned high efficiency speakers. If you are going to hear a difference in anything in he signal chain easy, it will be done easier on high efficiency speakers.

I've done single blind tests on my horns at home, and differences were there and heard by everyone who listened. 



backwoods said:


> no arguments about inductance and high efficiency gear?
> 
> 
> The double blind is the real ***** of it. Don't have a switch to let it happen quickly.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

6spdcoupe said:


> So I took the liberty of contacted Adam over at Pear to see his response. For anyone who hasnt dealt with Pear, I must say the are a great company to deal with. Other than that I will leave my personal thoughts aside. His response is below..
> 
> *
> Hello Don,
> ...


You're email from Adam Blake is now on Gizmodo.com  I thought it brought enough attention to stir things up, so I pointed it out to Giz. This should be good!

P.S. - I hope you don't mind. I just wanted to further stir the pot and incite a little battle between the old coot and the new blood.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Don't you think it would have been nce to post it up AFTER you asked if it was ok?

Nice to take that liberty with someone's stuff.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

thats messed up.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

havok20222 said:


> You're email from Adam Blake is now on Gizmodo.com  I thought it brought enough attention to stir things up, so I pointed it out to Giz. This should be good!
> 
> P.S. -* I hope you don't mind.* I just wanted to further stir the pot and incite a little battle between the old coot and the new blood.


Well if I did mind then it wouldnt matter being that ship sailed already. So apparently my thoughts are irrelevant at this point.

When I posted that I directed Adam to this thread and he had told me his is not going into any forums/debates/etc just yet. I then asked him permission to post his response on This forum Prior to posting it and he replied stating it was fine.

Whats done is done now, but a bit more consideration would have been nice.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Yeah, that was a pretty fugged up thing to do there Professor Einstein.


----------



## SQ_Bronco (Jul 31, 2005)

thehatedguy said:


> Yeah, that was a pretty fugged up thing to do there Professor Einstein.


I'm not sure what "gizmodo" is, I'm assuming some kind of discussion group somewhere (it's blocked by my firewall) but I think it's funny that y'all think it was OK for the email to be posted on this public forum, but not somewhere else. As long as he linked back here, there's no breach of ethics other than the one 6spdcoupe committed, by posting the original email here in the first place...


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2007)

nothing good ever comes out of threads about wire


----------



## DonutHands (Jan 27, 2006)

once its on a public forum, it dosent matter what the original poster thinks, its out there for the world and theres nothing they can do about it. no consideration needed if you ask me.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Well if its any credit I do apologize. I put in the PS edit after what was done, and I realized once it was too late that I probably should have asked. On the flip side though, this post started from the original throw down that was posted on gizmodo's website. (At least I can only assume if you go through their article history.) This forum is also viewed by a lot of people in the audio world/business. I simply linked it to gizmodo since I think they owe a response like that to their readers. Once it's out there on the web, it's there for everyone to see. I do wish your name would have been left out, and maybe only parts of your email included, but hindsight is 20/20 i guess. Anyhow, I should have asked and I'm sorry for jumping the gun. Feel free to shift any blame my way if needed.


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

SQ_Bronco said:


> I'm not sure what "gizmodo" is, I'm assuming some kind of discussion group somewhere (it's blocked by my firewall) but I think it's funny that y'all think it was OK for the email to be posted on this public forum, but not somewhere else. As long as he linked back here, there's no breach of ethics other than the one 6spdcoupe committed, by posting the original email here in the first place...


That I committed? Where did I breach any code of ethics? Please feel free to humor me.

As for posting it, I never denied or approved. Honestly I never had the option to. But as already stated and quote obvious to the eyes its already public. Just a bit of consideration since our forum here seems to have a bit of niche that not everyone visits. Soliciting it out to website after website may cause more harm than good as an end result for the companies at hand. Can I control it? No. Should I be able to? No. End result though is just a lil consideration should have been used prior to posting it, being that now someone on the other forum will forward it to another and so on, we all know how the internet works..


----------



## 6spdcoupe (Jan 12, 2006)

havok20222 said:


> Well if its any credit I do apologize. I put in the PS edit after what was done, and I realized once it was too late that I probably should have asked. On the flip side though, this post started from the original throw down that was posted on gizmodo's website. (At least I can only assume if you go through their article history.) This forum is also viewed by a lot of people in the audio world/business. I simply linked it to gizmodo since I think they owe a response like that to their readers. Once it's out there on the web, it's there for everyone to see. I do wish your name would have been left out, and maybe only parts of your email included, but hindsight is 20/20 i guess. Anyhow, I should have asked and I'm sorry for jumping the gun. Feel free to shift any blame my way if needed.



No harm no foul, just for future reference. Its not my place to control it since its already out publicly anyway. I was just hoping for some consideration before moving forward.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

I'm still confused why people here seem to think electric chairs, network cable, and antennas have anything to do with fidelity.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

I haven't read much of this thread, but I do find some viewpoints intriguing. A company who shall remain nameless was very dissatisfied with a few articles that went up on AudioJunkies about cables. My point isn't necessarily that there are no differences between cables, but rather, that there is little to no scientific backing to what sounds good and what doesn't. Here are my main questions for any and all wire manufacturers.

1. What are the measurable differences between one wire and another? Basically, what are we really looking at to determine which one is better?
2. What creates these differences?
3. Who is doing the leading industry research on the interpretation of these differences? Using loudspeakers as a correlary, who are the Geddes, Klippel, O'Toole, etc. of the wire world?
4. How is quality assurance performed? If the differences between this wire and that wire are immeasurable (as I have heard some claim), then how do you ensure that production run #1 is as good as production run #7409?

I am more than willing to entertain the concept that there may be differences...even audible differences...from one cable to another, but I ask that as a manufacturer, you quantify these differences, which is something I have never seen anyone objectively review.


----------



## zukiaudio (Jan 31, 2007)

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/news/2007/10/bose_qa


----------

