RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I spotted
this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of speaker
cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

--Ethan

"Badger" wrote in message
. com
Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ReadThis" wrote in message
news:uPoxb.15794$Ac3.11758@lakeread01
Found this very interesting article and discussion on audio cables
at ecoustics.com. http://www.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/5/6528.html

What I found interesting is the fact that this article references
this article:



http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...cts/Audio-Cabl
e-Vendor.html

Which says this:

Top Ten Signs an Audio Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil
By: Gene DellaSala Date: 10/08/03 Updated with Audioquest Response:
10/19/03 Watch out if a.

(1) Cable vendor promotes that their product allegedly eliminates
audio related Skin Effect and "Strand Jumping" problems.

Which references this article:



http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...cts/CableInduc
tance.html

Which says this:

As frequency increases, skin effect causes the internal inductance to
become negligible, since the current is forced to the surface of the
conductors."

I'm not sure I see your point. The skin effect is what it is.

Agreed.

No one's cable can make it do other wise, and no one can hear it anyway.

Agreed. I see irony in an article that says that skin can be ignored
referencing an article that talks about the effects of skin effect.

I think that's the point.

I see that as your point...

Maybe I'm missing something?

It's not all that important, anyway.

"Badger" wrote in message
. com
Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"ReadThis" wrote in message
news:uPoxb.15794$Ac3.11758@lakeread01
Found this very interesting article and discussion on audio cables
at ecoustics.com. http://www.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/5/6528.html

What I found interesting is the fact that this article references
this article:



http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...cts/Audio-Cabl
e-Vendor.html

Which says this:

Top Ten Signs an Audio Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil
By: Gene DellaSala Date: 10/08/03 Updated with Audioquest Response:
10/19/03 Watch out if a.

(1) Cable vendor promotes that their product allegedly eliminates
audio related Skin Effect and "Strand Jumping" problems.

Which references this article:



http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...cts/CableInduc
tance.html

Which says this:

As frequency increases, skin effect causes the internal inductance to
become negligible, since the current is forced to the surface of the
conductors."

I'm not sure I see your point. The skin effect is what it is.

Agreed.

No one's cable can make it do other wise, and no one can hear it anyway.

Agreed. I see irony in an article that says that skin can be ignored
referencing an article that talks about the effects of skin effect.

I think that's the point.

I see that as your point...

Maybe I'm missing something?

It's not all that important, anyway.

"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I
spotted this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

Agreed, this doesn't belong in any factual discussion of audio gear. It
fails on two counts - one being that percentage breakdowns of system costs
are often bogus, secondly because paying $70 for cables in a $1000 system is
like paying about $50 too much.

In fact the interconnects that come with the components generally suffice,
and $20 worth of 12 gauge should suffice for most if not all systems, even
5.1 systems.

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of
speaker cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Agreed for a 2 channel system.

"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I
spotted this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

Agreed, this doesn't belong in any factual discussion of audio gear. It
fails on two counts - one being that percentage breakdowns of system costs
are often bogus, secondly because paying $70 for cables in a $1000 system is
like paying about $50 too much.

In fact the interconnects that come with the components generally suffice,
and $20 worth of 12 gauge should suffice for most if not all systems, even
5.1 systems.

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of
speaker cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Agreed for a 2 channel system.

Ethan Winer wrote:

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I spotted
this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of speaker
cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Interesting eh? Same goes for the rest of the cables. The only reason
I can see for spending more on cables is if I need more of them, not
because I bought a more expensive receiver.

Ethan Winer wrote:

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I spotted
this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of speaker
cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Interesting eh? Same goes for the rest of the cables. The only reason
I can see for spending more on cables is if I need more of them, not
because I bought a more expensive receiver.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I
spotted this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

Agreed, this doesn't belong in any factual discussion of audio gear. It
fails on two counts - one being that percentage breakdowns of system costs
are often bogus, secondly because paying $70 for cables in a $1000 system is
like paying about $50 too much.

In fact the interconnects that come with the components generally suffice,
and $20 worth of 12 gauge should suffice for most if not all systems, even
5.1 systems.

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of
speaker cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Agreed for a 2 channel system.

Actually genrleman
I think you are being a little unkind and selectively quoting.
If you read the entire article the says that 5-& % is the absolute
maximum and uses a phrase like "spend as little as is reuired to get
the job done"

He also goes on to say that there is nothing wrong with spending if
you want the aesthestics of a particular cable brand.

The overall feel of the article is the same as your own views. Maybe
the problem is the poor grammar and writing style.?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message

RT,

Found this very interesting article

I'm all for debunking nonsense, but in the guise of doing that I
spotted this howler:

"We generally recommend about 5-7% of total system cost."

Agreed, this doesn't belong in any factual discussion of audio gear. It
fails on two counts - one being that percentage breakdowns of system costs
are often bogus, secondly because paying $70 for cables in a $1000 system is
like paying about $50 too much.

In fact the interconnects that come with the components generally suffice,
and $20 worth of 12 gauge should suffice for most if not all systems, even
5.1 systems.

In my opinion $10 is the most one should spend on a normal length of
speaker cable, regardless of how much the rest of the system cost.

Agreed for a 2 channel system.

Actually genrleman
I think you are being a little unkind and selectively quoting.
If you read the entire article the says that 5-& % is the absolute
maximum and uses a phrase like "spend as little as is reuired to get
the job done"

He also goes on to say that there is nothing wrong with spending if
you want the aesthestics of a particular cable brand.

The overall feel of the article is the same as your own views. Maybe
the problem is the poor grammar and writing style.?

In article ,
Stuart Stebbings wrote:
He also goes on to say that there is nothing wrong with spending if
you want the aesthestics of a particular cable brand.

Quite. If I spent a fortune on designer gear and you could see the back,
I'd expect to spend a fortune on designer cables.

If only they sold them on looks rather than performance the argument could
end right here...

--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn