The Case For Thick Speaker Wire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaker "wire leads"... me to believe..

The case for "thick" speaker wire, seems sound considering the lower resistance of a larger diameter wire.

However....

Is it practical in all applications? I have used standard guages of speaker wire to reach all kinds of odd set ups, in home and clubs. In some cases it was rather difficult since you might run into crowding and such.. and there were those shielding headaches.

I was happy .... :banana: .... when "Cat" cabling came along as it made some of the most difficult installations rather easy.

I am sure there are probably resistance issues where "specialized" speakers are distant or power hungry.. but isn't this offset by a good amp or signal junction?

Just saying... :scratch2:
 
Elfasto,

Do you have any opinions on "dielectric absorption" effect on the sound we hear? Thicker cables usually have thicker insulation, ergo...

I have my findings, just curious about yours.
 
What about joining shorter stretches of cable together to make a longer run?

Recently, I repositioned my speakers and needed to extend the length of the cable a bit. All I had on hand was some different gauge/quality of wire. I twisted and taped the connection and it works.

I plan to re-do the speaker wire connections so they are one piece, and of a decent gauge/quality.

How much impact would the above hack job have on my sound quality, noticeable?
 
Elfasto,

Do you have any opinions on "dielectric absorption" effect on the sound we hear? Thicker cables usually have thicker insulation, ergo...

I have my findings, just curious about yours.

Again, this is just my 2¢ and based on mathematics, measurement, and observation with my system.

Most cables do have capacitance, which is natural because we have 2 conductors separated by a insulating material. When I measured my cables I did have a great variance in each cables capacitance.

So, I tried a variety of cables I had at hand (80% were premade 6 foot, and a couple of premade 3 foot cables), ranging from the thin el-cheapo ones that came with the stereo components, Monster Cable Video grade, RCA video grade, Acoustic Research Video grade, and a Acoustic Research Subwoofer Coax cable (aka really frickin thick cable).

Now, in all the 6 foot cables I tested, the one with the lowest capacitance was the 6 foot Acoustic Research Subwoofer cable (105 pF).

All the rest of the 6 foot video grade cables (Monster, RCA, Acoustic Research) were with a range of 128 pF (RCA) to 280pF (Acoustic Research, Monster).

The 3 foot cables were fairly low, and the majority of the "better" 3 foot cables were around the 50pF, and the el-cheapo ones were around 70pF.

So, the variance in cable capacitance is HUGE. Length does play a role in the capacitance, but the material also does as well.

Now, For audio, I DID NOT find a appreciable difference between the cables, save for noise due to one's cable having better shielding than the other, and that was readily noticeable between the el-cheapo cables and the video grade cables. All the video grade cables had better shielding and lower noise. The sound quality with various cables was almost the same across the board with every cable, doing A-B testing, Left and right channel cable differences with a mono source, and long term listening.

So, IMHO, capacitance in a cable will not play a serious role or any role in a audio system as long as the lengths are short (6 feet and under) and purposely routed away from any high tension lines (i.e. 120V, 220V, 240V power supply cords) that usually have absolutely no shielding on them whatsoever. The capacitance is just too small and the frequencies that the cable's capacitance would affect is just too high and beyond the audible frequencies. If a cable gets exceedingly long, cable capacitance may come to play, but there are other losses in a very long cable that will come to influence the sound and signal propagation far sooner than cable capacitance in Audio frequencies.

For analog video, cable capacitance plays a larger role. Because the bandwidths of video being so wide and the frequency range going up into the MHz, a cable's capacitance can be seen readily as a poorer or better picture. For my setup, the Acoustic Research Subwoofer Cable won out because:

1) I needed a 6 foot cable to go between the Laserdisc player and my Vizio 47" LCD TV.
2) It had the lowest capacitance of all the 6 foot cables, and the TV picture was the best with this cable. Colours were sharpest and picture was generally better due to less video noise.

So for high to very high frequencies, a cable's capacitance will be an issue because the frequencies needed for analog video extend high enough that the cable will act like a filter, a attenuator, and drop your signal strength or portions of your video signal.
 
Elfasto,

Thanks for the response, I'm sure it took awhile to write...but I was asking about "dielectric absorption" from the type of covering the wire has i.e. some kind of poly? or teflon? I think engineers call it "soakage".
 
Let me study up on this and get back to you. There seems to be alot of conjecture on the subject and I have to study more on this.


EDIT: Okay, I had to dig up some old books out of my closet for this one. The 'web sucks because all the vendors are claiming that angels will fly out of your speakers if you use their cables. No hard answers to this one using the internet.

Hard answer as I read it and interpreted it: "Soakage" will have the greatest influence on RF frequencies, inside High Frequency devices (computers, radio transmitters, etc) or propagation of high frequency signals due to the dielectric "recharging" itself after discharging it's charge. It can have an affect on digital signals because it can introduce a DC offset in the signal. However, this effect is mitigated since the computer or digital device can null out any DC offset introduced by the cable (which is going to be damn minimal in a short cable) and do it's usual error correction. Even in HF analog signals "Soakage" will be a very minor issue nowadays. I'm not sure even if this would have an effect on the touchiest of tube amplifiers.

Dielectric absorption can play a part with Microphone Cables, but the last time I heard of an issue with mic cables was about 20 years ago in my old analog recording studio days and it was a old cable that had issues with it's insulation. After changing it out for a new cable the issue disappeared for good. Even then the issues came up looked like a bad phantom power transformer in the mic amplifier. To this day I can't be sure if it was or it was the cable.

From what I gather, "Soakage" would be so low in a speaker cable that eventho' it could be measured, it would not be an influence. Even if the cables were 50 feet long, the dielectric absorption would play no part, as other factors would come to play, irregardless of the insulating material.
 
Last edited:
Elfasto,

You're good at research and assimilating.

I work backwards when it comes to upgrading i.e. I try to buy something only if I hear something I like and then I work backwards to try and figure out why for further purchases. It's saved me a lot of money over the years when you consider the alternative...buying something that is supposed to sound better (for whatever reason) and finding out it doesn't work for you.

For cables, over the years I've gravitated to thinner ones. I use teflon insulated silver cables (16 ga I think) in my main systems. For my Vintage gear, I found the 16 and 18 ga Radio Shack wire sounded very good, better than their 12 ga.

Have no idea why but I vote with my pocketbook. Working "backward", I wonder if it's the thinner insulation. The 12 ga has some pretty thick insulation which if DA was a factor, there would be more of it leading to more smear. But it's what I like the most and that's all that should count, really, to anyone.

btw and fwiw, silver is not bright and glaring. It's an honest cable and it's just letting you know what your components sound like. I've heard systems that a nice thick cable would a good choice but only because it would mask some of it's problems.
 
Elfasto,

You're good at research and assimilating.

I work backwards when it comes to upgrading i.e. I try to buy something only if I hear something I like and then I work backwards to try and figure out why for further purchases. It's saved me a lot of money over the years when you consider the alternative...buying something that is supposed to sound better (for whatever reason) and finding out it doesn't work for you.

For cables, over the years I've gravitated to thinner ones. I use teflon insulated silver cables (16 ga I think) in my main systems. For my Vintage gear, I found the 16 and 18 ga Radio Shack wire sounded very good, better than their 12 ga.

Have no idea why but I vote with my pocketbook. Working "backward", I wonder if it's the thinner insulation. The 12 ga has some pretty thick insulation which if DA was a factor, there would be more of it leading to more smear. But it's what I like the most and that's all that should count, really, to anyone.

btw and fwiw, silver is not bright and glaring. It's an honest cable and it's just letting you know what your components sound like. I've heard systems that a nice thick cable would a good choice but only because it would mask some of it's problems.

Thanks for the compliment. I appreciate that.

I think we think more alike than what's presented here at AK, but I do find I look at the numbers first, then dig and dig and find out what the manufacturer isn't telling me (the fine print). If I like what I find, then I buy. If I don't, I don't buy it. Right now money is a bit too precious for me to spend frivolously.
 
OKAY, I'm going to fan the flames here and present my point of view.

OK, go for it! And, I'll be the gasoline. Interestingly, I interpret the data you've found a bit differently.

Now, Skin Effect by definition (dictionary)
the tendency of a high-frequency alternating current to flow through only the outer layer of a conductor.

So, by definition, the higher the frequency, the more pronounced the skin effect.

Now, the Belden website I linked in my references show that at the frequencies that we use (up to 20 kHz) going past a certain gauge of wire isn't going to reduce your AC resistance because the skin effect comes into play.

(cut and paste from the belden website)

Basis:
Depth at 20 kHz = 18.4 mils (.0184 in.) Radius x 2 = 36.8 mils (.0368 in.) Diameter
Amount of conductor used at 20 kHz, based on conductor size
Conductors Diameter % of conductor used
24 AWG---------0.024 -------100% at 20 kHz
22 AWG---------0.031-------100% at 20 kHz
12 AWG---------0.093 --------75% at 20 kHz
10 AWG---------0.115 --------68% at 20 kHz

Interestingly enough, while I come up with very similar skin depths, I had learned that three skin depths handles about 98% of the total energy in the signal. But, who am I to argue with Belden? So, let's use Belden's assumption that only one skin depth defines the majority of area used for a signal. To make heads or tails out of the Belden data, let's calculate the effects on the cables they used.

(all for 20kHz)
Conductor-----Diameter----% cond used----DC res/ft------AC res/ft
24AWG--------0.024--------100------------35.67mOhm---35.67mOhm
22AWG--------0.031--------100------------16.4mOhm----16.4mOhm
12AWG--------0.093---------75------------1.59mOhm----2.11mOhm
10AWG--------0.115---------68------------0.9989mOhm--1.47mOhm


So, in regards to high frequency content of our music, thin wire is all we need.

My modified real life chart above clearly indicates that 10AWG is superior to 22AWG even at 20kHz. Therefore, I don't agree with your interpretation that thin wire is all you need. Comparing two tubes with 0.0184" thick walls, the tube with the greatest diameter will have the greatest amount of cross sectional area of material.

Now, low frequencies will have the same skin effect, but the skin depth is going to be much thicker

Reference: http://ncalculators.com/electronics/skin-effect-calculator.htm

Using this calculator, at 20 Hz the skin depth will be just under 17mm (5/8").

So, in order for the AC resistance to equal DC resistance at 20Hz, one would need 2/0 gauge cable. That's Welding Cable. Nobody would run that. Unless you have a massive support system for wires, you'd rip the terminals out of your amp and speakers.

So, in my point of view, going to a thicker wire in relation to high frequencies is not a bad idea up to a point. A thin wire will work just fine because of the skin effect at high frequencies where AC resistance will equal DC resistance.

At low frequencies, we're screwed simply because we won't have enough conductor, so our AC resistance will alway be greater than the DC resistance unless you run a solid hunk of 5/8" copper rod.

Not sure where the desire or goal to have the AC resistance equal th DC resistance. In my opinion, we are NOT screwed at low frequencies. It is merely that skin effect is of no concern until you get to really huge cables. When the diameter of the conductor is thin enough to carry 100% of the current per the Belden example, the AC resistance IS the same as the DC resistance.
 
If your ears and brain hear a difference between two wires, then they do. But, anybody who spends money based on someone else's ears and brain is dumb.
 
One thing has always bothered me about getting thick wires. And let's be clear, in my system when I went from shitty lamp wire to 12g Home Depot "monster" style cable, I heard a difference. A positive one.

But regardless, what about the connector bottleneck? The wire that goes from the connector to the driver is NOT thick. Does the short run eliminate any capacitance issue? I'm a little foggy on these concepts so please forgive me if any part of that question is off the mark.


Sent from my TARDIS at the restaurant at the end of the universe while eating Phil.
 
"The Case For Thick Speaker Wire."
----------------------

In a word...Reducing resistance. 50' of 16 gauge wire adds about 5% resistance to an 8 ohm circuit. 25' is good for 4 ohms @ 5% loss. To put things in perspective a barely perceivable 1 db drop in SPL would require a 25% loss, or 125' of 16 gauge wire for a 4 ohm speaker.

The benefit of thicker wire (16 gauge vs 22) has more to do with maintaining a flat freq response and damping factor. Most of the charts you see on speaker cable length are based on the 5% loss.
 
Last edited:
Holy cow! This thread is still going!

Shortly after it was moved from general audio discussion, I think, I lost track of it. Today, I saw something that made me feel like coming to the cutting edge and there was the thread, still active! Makes me feel like I actually contribute something rather than just being a general nuisance. :scratch2::D:music::banana: ....not sure how feel, other than good.
 
]I moved to 10awg which is available finely stranded and made my own cables, terminated with Nakamichi banana plugs. It made a dramatic difference in sound quality. Electricity tends to concentrate around the outside of a wire... so the larger the wire the less impedence to the signal. Obviously there are limitations. If you want an actual speaker cable, buy SO cable. It is available in many sizes and uses fjnely stranded pure copper wire. If you buy 12/3 with ground that will give you 4 - 12 awg wires in one casing. You can use it to biamp or tie the 12s together.
 
Last edited:
the human eye can see blue, when you can't measure the light at that point. Does this mean that 'scientifically' there is no difference? NOPE - BTW - I am a scientist :D

can you explain this statement a bit more? I was trained as a scientist and am familiar both with single photon detectors and with the psychophysical studies that indicate that a single photon striking a single rod can, if other photons are striking other rods within the same time window, be consciously perceived. The classic study suggests that it can be as few as 5 photons in 100 msec actually reaching the retina, and with each photon striking a different rod.

I'm still having a hard time understanding what's meant by a blue that is visible but not measurable given that commercial single photon detectors are availale with efficiencies at 450 nm at about 20%, so the same 5 photons would be very likely to be detected by those instruments as well.
 
Last edited:
]I moved to 10awg which is available finely stranded and made my own cables, terminated with Nakamichi banana plugs. It made a dramatic difference in sound quality. Electricity tends to concentrate around the outside of a wire... so the larger the wire the less impedence to the signal. Obviously there are limitations. If you want an actual speaker cable, buy SO cable. It is available in many sizes and uses fjnely stranded pure copper wire. If you buy 12/3 with ground that will give you 4 - 12 awg wires in one casing. You can use it to biamp or tie the 12s together.


Does Home Depot have that cable? I remember seeing black super flexible cable that I thought would have made a great speaker cable but it only had 3 conductors black green and white. The one that had 4 conductors was very stiff. I bi-amp and would welcome a "one cable" solution that sounds good and cleans up the spaghetti.



Sent from my TARDIS at the restaurant at the end of the universe while eating Phil.
 
After chasing the speaker wire merry-go-round for years, I settled into using individual 12ga solid core from The Home Depot. Inexpensive and, after an hour or two, it really settles into a nice, balanced presentation. Full lows, smooth mids, open highs.

Downside: Stiff and not the easiest cable to work with. Luckily, most of my amps are monoblocks and are positioned within a few feet of the speaker.

I should also point out that it is nowhere as difficult to work with as XLO Type 5. ;)
 
I've got a 10 meter run with my setup. I bought the thickest speaker cable the local electronics shop had - two conductor flat, clear vinyl. Now with better speakers and a more powerful amp (80wpc.)

I checked the hefty Kimber and it would have pushed $1000 for the 12TC. Sorry.

So my DIY plan is 10 AWG, multi-strand, silver-plated, teflon, twisted pair. I would like to try Kapton insulation but I'm not finding that in my internet search. The silver-plating would aid the skin effect; the wire I'm looking at has 36 strands of 0.45mm each.

So for each 10 meter run, I'm thinking a 2:1 twist so each speaker needs 20 meters or 40 meters (~250 ft). Still about $250 but they will have considerable scrap value for the metal is they sound bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom