[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Arny Krueger wrote:

"Harry Lavo" wrote

Years ago, on RAHE, I described a situation where I bought (used) some
top-of-the-line Monster speaker cable to replace my basic Monster
speaker
cable, and how dissappointed I was that it actually sounded less good
than
what I was using...so I took it back.

In fact it probably sounded no different. But Harry always has to hear
some
difference.

That perhaps or the extra low resistance altered the frequency response
subtly
in a way he disapproved of.

The "top-of-the-line" Monster cables I've checked out have about the same
resistance as the basic Monster cable. It's something like 12 gauge either
way.

The physical differences I've seen related to how the wire was insulated -
single bundle of bare strands versus multiple separately-insulated strands,
etc.

For years Monster sold speaker cables with separately-insulated strands as
addressing skin effect. Lab tests that should have shown the tiny decreased
impedance at high frequencies due to addressing skin effect, didn't.

It turns out that separately-insulated strands don't address skin effect.
You need something like a hollow conductor with a far larger outside
diameter to do that. Later on Monster did come out with a cable that
addressed skin effect, by properly changing the conductor geometry from a
bundle of wires to what amounted to being a hollow tube with far larger
outside diameter.

Of course the larger diameter hollow decreased mutual inductance between the
conductors, which in turn increased series inductance. So they just
exchanged the tiny losses due to skin effect for tiny losses due to series
inductance.