Peter Wieck wrote:
> On Mar 18, 6:48 pm, JamesGan...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
>>There is no physical reason for silver to be any better that copper
>>for interconnects. To suggest there is some sort of audible
>>difference is utter hogwash.
>
>
> Well... there is and under carefully designed conditions it could be
> audible - but it is a trivial point.
>
> a) Silver is the best room-temperature conductor available. Fine
> silver, that is.
>
> b) in terms of pure-metal conductivity, silver is followed by copper,
> gold and aluminum.
>
> http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/electrical.html
>
> So, if one is to choose only by conductivity, then Silver is the
> choice.
>
> In the real and practical world, about any decent conductor of
> sufficient gauge will be indistinguishable from any other conductor of
> sufficient gauge at audio frequencies and current levels.
>
> Of course, we *MUST* elevate the conductors so that eddy currents
> induced in flooring nails (amongst other reasons) do not interfere
> with the signal ;-)
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
Hi Peter
I'm not the biggest fan of this cable mojo however I recently did a
blind test with an audio engineer and had an interesting result.
I like CALRad cables. These are pro audio/video cables sold through pro
audio/video outlets. (http://www.calrad.com/download/55%20Series.pdf)
At 50% less than the boutique cables they are a steal.
We played with 2 . the 55-705 (6mm) and the 55-715(8mm) interconnects.
after switching back and forth through blind testing. We both
concluded that the 6mm conductor was the better cable. The difference
was audiable. the 8mm was somewhat veiled. whereas the 6mm was very
open. Highs seemed muffled. The midrange was just there. . The bass was
the same between the 2 wire gauges.
Just following up were you said. "about any decent conductor of
sufficient gauge will be indistinguishable from any other conductor of
sufficient gauge at audio frequencies and current levels."
Thanks
Mike Mueller
|
