Originally Posted by DanPackMan
Knitting is for hats and sweaters. Multi strand wire from monoprice is the smart choice for speakers. These cables provide the exact same amount of sound improvement as the most expensive cable out there. No manufacturer has ever demonstrated better performance when it comes to sound quality or sound improvement.
This "knitting" thing prompts a question in my head -- care for a thought experiment? I think you can help!
Let's take 100 tiny un-insulated
strands of wire, lay them out each 1" apart, then connect them together only at each end (*) -- we'll call that "wire A".
Now, let's "knit" all those strands tightly together -- we'll call that "wire B".
How should we expect the two "wires" to measure, electrically?
Now, again keeping in mind that each little strand is un-insulated, so it's not like we're creating a "twisted pair" wire here, if we get more exotic in the "knitting scheme" used by "wire B", can we effect electrical change in the wire?
Finally, let's take "wire A" and bunch it into 4 25-strand braids, thinly insulate each, braid those, then twist the ends of each of the 4 strands together -- now what? Now we're beginning to create (for lack of a better term) a "transformer-like-thing", right? I would certainly expect a change in the wire measurements now, no?
Now, of course, even if every theoretical wire I've proposed does measure 100% differently, if the amplifier you're using attempts to be a "pure-voltage-source" (and it has the current reserves to drive your "wire+xover+driver" load), then it really "shouldn't matter" to your ears. I mean, minus the potential HF losses, for which can be compensated, and easily, if
they become audible. Of course, a lot of old ears probably won't hear them anyway...so, there's that
That said, all bets are off when you have an amplifier that isn't trying to be a voltage-source. More, "pure voltage-source" is theoretical, yes? So, certainly there are practical limitations. However, there are also perceptual limits and, fortunately, much bigger distortions in the loudspeakers and rooms themselves that swamp anything "exposed" by the amplifier limitations (unless, of course, it is just a terribly bad amplifier!).
Which is to say, there is indeed much more than the "simplicity" put forth by some posters. One tiny set of equations does not the full system of equations make! Once one has the "full system" to consider (amp->speaker->room->ears->brain) many of the differences that "can be computed" dilute to "inaudible" due to factors in the full system. Which is to say, they become "lost in the noise". Primary among that "noise" is your bloody ears have known
limitations due to both their anatomy and the signal processor (brain) behind them! Indeed, some of these limitations (sighted bias by the brain) account for much of what one "hears" when they "listen to wires" in "sighted conditions"! One does not have to agree, but all current science does. More, there doesn't seem to be updated peer-reviewed research to suggest otherwise w.r.t. the audibility of wires -- at least, that is, wires that aren't designed
to be equalizers; some (that should be avoided, IMO) are!
One may ask why no one funds additional research; especially if there's so much money to be had by proving (simple) wires make an audible difference. Alas, there's no reason, there's enough money to be had from the gullible and no more money than marketing (often simply by attending shows to which their target audience flocks) need be spent. All the real consensus in the scientific community has been reached and that was...what...half-a-century
ago (and more, lol).... Yet, here we are, what feels like eons later still debating this rubbish when the real science has long surpassed it. Better, in the process, we have built amplifiers and speakers whose performance is better than ever (if transparency is the goal) because real scientists
have progressed the SotA by measuring and focusing on what does
Oh, and one more thing, just because I know it'll rub some better than others -- the real enemies of transparency, IMO? The room, movement, and heat (i.e., power). The room contributes most of the sound. Movement, e.g., of a cone, creates distortion (how much does a drum skin move when struck? (**)). Heat, while it just sucks in general for electrical devices, in speakers causes power compression. So, I suggest the "compression drivers suck" and "large bass drivers are slow" people re-read this paragraph until it sinks in! While you do that, I'll admit that there are many ways to skin a cat (e.g., compression drivers "may suck on some horns" and even then can compromise in other areas (e.g., head-in-vice), so...certainly one can skin it differently (and possibly, that skinning is just a different horn or throat size...or speaker topology that doesn't use them)).
(*) I suppose it imposes a practical issue getting all this disjoint wire bunched to a singular point connection just at "the end", but...let's "pretend".
(**) yes, I know a drum skin and speaker cone are different -- tension but one biggy. Accept it as the best analogy my feeble mind could muster -- can my point remain?