On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 08:30:06 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:38:14 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:
"neutron" wrote in message
...
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:12:10 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
news
It's all snake oil, smoke and mirrors, and Russ is well aware of
this.
I have personally offered £1,000 to anyone who can demonstrate the
audible supriority of 'audiophile' cables. That offer has been on
the
table for more than six years, and despite many loudmouthed claims
from the 'subjectivists', no one has even *tried* to claim the
prize.
**I'll take that offer, Stew. You know my conditions, I presume?
*The* conditions are that signals are level-matched at the speaker
terminals at 1kHz and 10kHz +/- 0.1dB, and you have to get better than
15 out of 20 double-blind trials correct.
I would do it. My conditions would be that I was given a few hours to
get
to
know the test system, and also have hear each of the cables in the test
system before the test starts. After that, your conditions sound good.
Is
that fair?
**Stewart has already covered his arse, by stating the frequency response
AT
THE SPEAKER TERMINALS must be within 0.1dB. Stewart knows full well that
it
is very easy to expose easily audible differences between speaker cables.
After level matching, that task becomes well nigh impossible.
That's not a matter of 'covering my arse', you twit.
**Of course you are. When you make an unqualified pronouncement:
"I have personally offered £1,000 to anyone who can demonstrate the audible
supriority of 'audiophile' cables."
I (and others) are entitled to take your claim at face value.
The rules have *always* been made perfectly clear, troll.
No one has ever
denied that it's possible to hear gross level mismatches, but when did
you ever see Kimber, Transparent et al making claims about cable
resistance?
**You mean here?
http://www.kimber.com/Products/LoudS.../4PR_Spec.aspx
Or here?
http://www.kimber.com/Products/LoudS.../8PR_Spec.aspx
Or here?
http://www.kimber.com/Products/LoudS...alXL_Spec.aspx
Anyway, you get the idea. Kimber cables DO tend to provide lower inductance
figures than *any* figure 8 (or Zip, to our US friends) cables. And make no
mistake, it is inductance which can cause big problems.
Not in any normal domestic system - as you're well aware.
No, this test is about debunking all the ******** about
special constructions and materials.
**Special construction provides low(er) inductance and may lead to
significant audible and measurable differences between cables. No ********
there. Just plain old engineering.
Bull****. I can replicate the most expensive Kimber or Alpha-Core MI
low inductance cable with a reel of cheap multiway ribbon cable, such
as you'll find inside your PC.
As you rightly say, get a level-match at the speaker terminals (which
you can do for a buck a foot against *any* 'audiophile' cable) and
there is no audible difference.
**Wanna bet? I'll choose the speakers and the cable length.
Fine - have at it.
Of course, you've been told all this
before, so you're simply trolling.
**Nope. I just feel that by glossing over the facts, you're just feeding the
ignorant. Tell them that there may well be audible differences in cables.
Then explain why. Without the explanations, many people just keep sucking up
the hype.
The facts are never 'glossed over', anyone can easily understand that
comparing 12AWG cable to 24 AWG over long runs is not a reasonable
test. OTOH, I have already compared fifteen feet of Naim NACA5,
probably the most inductive speaker cable you can buy, to an ultra-low
inductance design into my own 3-ohm speakers. There was a *measured*
difference of more than 1dB at 20kHz, but no *audible* difference
whatever.
You're just whining and crying for no apparent reason. What, do *you*
think that Kimber 'Black Pearl' has any value ina domestic hi-fi
system? If so, why?
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering