wrote in message
news:3cwWb.279361$xy6.1423933@attbi_s02...
Adding music as the signal source doesn't improve matters, use any source
for any reason. The basic question is what properties of a wire requires
it's replacement so as to increase speaker performance. If as you claim
there is an unknown variable but it can't be measured, how does one
determine which wire has or doesn't have it; and is it better to have it
or not? Many people are of the mind that the unknowns are well known,
they are in the perception process of the person and not in the physical
reality of the wire. If we eliminate these perception factors and there
is no difference in electrical measurement, what remains; and still that
nagging question of how do we know of an unknown? Under what situation
does your experience, under which this unknown can be realized, make this
possible? If 24 inches of a wire with this factor makes a difference,
does 48 inches double it? Or is it subtraction, of the many feet of plain
wire in the crossover and speaker coil, does replacing 24 inches of the
total internal box length make the difference? Can we set up a situation
where increasing or decreasing the total amount of the wire with the
unknown factor makes it obvious, as compared to same amount of wire
without the factor of the same electrical properties? Spectulation about
electron flow and confirmation of some unknown is not the same thing.
What does it afford us to speculate and measure and experiment to our
heart's delite if it is all about something which doesn't exist? When all
factors have been excluded, including the perceptual, and still no
difference exists; on what basis can we continue to believe some unknown
might still be found when the straight line answer is to exclude some
unknown?


Wow, this is getting good.

OK, you've now all heard the micro science I believe is there. But, one
manipulative factor that measureably stands out are all forms of signal loss
in loudspeaker design, be it electrical, mechanical or
acoustic. If one makes a general attempt to reduce all signal losses in the
complete signal pathway, with, very important, compensating for any effect
on frequency response, there is always repeatedly an improved situation as a
result. Depending on how much loss you recover, this is measureable in very
slight to modest increase in efficiency, but the sonic impact is often
everything but subtle.

Have any of you ever truly studied the inside any hi-fi speaker at all? I
should be preaching to the choir here. Have any of you ever studied what
happens when you take BAF stuffing out of a vented cabinet and line the
walls instead? If you had, than you would know that the increase in bass
definition is huge with only a modest increase in output efficiency. Only
sometimes can you see this improvement in the impulse or step response. Have
any of you ever studied what happens when you reduce the DC resistance in
the series pathway to a woofer, with lower loss wire and better inductors?
(adjusting for frequency response of course). Well, it's also huge. Have any
of you ever hard wired PCB terminals on a speaker with a PCB, or got rid of
the PCB altogether? Well, it is usually not huge but very discernable.
Getting to my point, replacing the wire in this example can be of benefit if
replacing it would improve the overall DC resistance going to the woofer.
Some British designs have up to 1 ohm of series resistance going to the
principle low frequency driver(s). You get this down to 0.1 or 0.2 ohm and
the difference is phenomenal but your test equipment, in its current form,
will never specifically "show" this improvement to you. In the tuning of an
existing speaker which you don't want to re-design, you really only need
test equipment to restore the tonal balance. (i.e. flat, smooth SPL
response)

Once more thing about measuring. Do you really think that measuring
frequency response, impulse response, ETC, or distortion of any kind
actually gives you any comprehensive picture as to what's going on? It's
only scratching the surface.

So to spice it up some, why don't you prove to me why Riku's B&W's could
never be improved.

Wessel

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to
agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the "unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the
intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very
obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines,
chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more
complex.
(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of
electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you
that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel

wrote in message
...
"You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very
best 24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis,
you
are measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will
never simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the
factory the speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is
never the case). After even a thorough tweeking they will still look
just
as flat but may sound much, much better. The improvement in this
theoretical scenario is not in the flatness of the curve but in the
preservation of the integrity of the signal getting to your ears. Many
speakers can also be hugely improved by optimizing the diffractive
properties of transmission, inside and outside of the cabinet."

There are a few expressed and implied strawman type arguments here, all
of
which have been covered well on this ng before and need not be
addressed.
If a few inches, 24?, of wire in the box makes such a difference, why
can't the several feet in the crossover and speaker coil simply
continue
to overwhelm any very small subtraction to whatever "problem" replacing
the wire affords? If one can't measure any difference in the
properties
of the wire, how does one know there is a difference to make it "sound
better"? How does one measure the integrity in a before and after wire
swap? If there is a wave, complex or not, shape change related to
integrity, how does one know it suffers in the absence of gear to
measure
same? If in fact such cann't be measured, how does one know that the
existing wire in fact is not far superior to wave integrity then any
possible substitute? On what experience of measurement, at what ever
bit
level and depth, can we even know in the first place or confirm anew
that
wire does something to wave integrity; such that you can start with
that
presumption on which to make deductions? The box shape effect on
difraction are well known, all such for the exact theoretical basis
confirmed by measurement.