"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:


OK, that's power leads all nicely sorted and we all know where we stand
on them, don't we?

Nope, "we" don't - if your "we" includes me . That was the point of my
posting. Sorry if you don't understand that.


Relax, it was only a 'device' to enable me to jump from mains leads to
speaker cables to better make the point that, with or without the 'science'
(ie measurements et al) to support or deny it, there exists an overriding,
*conventional wisdom* that will usually allow people to act independently of
any evidence provided by such science.

In the case of speaker wires, that is manifested in all sorts of tricky
stuff like various magic numbers of wire strands (79 is a popular one),
increasing wire cross-sections, extremely exotic and expensive materials
employed &c. My point with the single strand of wire (which has been going
strong all day and is still) is that whatever the measurements might show,
when the single strand is compared with a normal 'fullsize' speaker wire,
*nobody* is going to choose it as the preferable route to take even if, like
me, they couldn't detect any change in the sound whatsoever - deleterious or
otherwise!

IOW, 'conventional wisdom' will rule the outcome...

(Different, of course, if they do perceive a difference in the sound &c.
&c.)


The problem is that the pdf
makes assertions but gives what it presents to be 'evidence' without also
providing the details "we" would need to decide if the asserted
conclusions
are really demonstrated by the pretty graphs, or not.



Yep - no problem with any of that! Par for the course with this sort of
thing, really....