"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 11:17:20 +0000, Eeyore
wrote:



Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 10:15:31 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Indeed; but then so is pretty well any design of cable. That's the
problem
with this discussion - throw in *very* long runs and you might hear or
measure a difference. But then no one with any sense has very long low
impedance speaker cable runs.

Certainly preferable to long runs of high impedance cable. If we
ignore coax and stick to standard twin, a low impedance speaker cable
will tend to have a lot of copper in it to achieve the high
capacitance and low inductance necessary for a low impedance. That
makes it better suited to long runs.

The inductance is almost totally unaffected by the quantity of copper
involved (
assuming an intelligent design ).

Graham

Not a first order effect, admittedly, but thin wire is more inductive
length-for-length than thick wire. The main factor, though as I said
is to bring the characteristic impedance down closer to that of the
speaker hanging on the far end in order to flatten the response.
Mostly that involves increasing the capacitance - for which you need
thicker wires closer together. This geometry change in itself lowers
the inductance.

**Much like the old Tocord, which allegedly possessed a characteristic
impedance of around 8 Ohms. It played merry Hell with Naim amps. Hugely
capacitive stuff.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com