Speaker cable update time.
TrevorM has been experimenting with speaker cables and he was kind enough to send me some and get my opinion. I am not sure there's a right or wrong answer but I'll let you all know what I heard. This is all very scientific-like.
------ Components -------------
The components I used look like this: Late 1980s vintage tape deck --> ADA-1000 --> M50v4. That's it. No receiver, no pre-amp, no subs...nothing. Before you start laughing about the tape deck, it does have Dolby C NR and I only used the highest quality metal tapes.
I was sitting 12 feet away from the M50v4 in my 4200 cu ft room.
------ Cables -------------
Trevor in the posts above described the cables and their published specs. I refer to them as licorice twist, white, and gray. I don't think any of these are classified as speaker cables but I could be wrong. To these I added 16AWG speaker cable available from anywhere, green jacketed 12 AWG speaker cable from Revy from 14 years ago intended to go in-wall, and KnuConceptz 12AWG speaker cable from Amazon. All cables were cut to 10 feet.
------- Music ---------------
I listened to Bob Marley's Legend. I recorded this from CD to tape back in 1991.
------- Measurements ---------
I measured after I listened. I don't have any fancy equipment. I have a digital multi-meter (DMM) and an SPL meter. I used the DMM to measure cable capacitance. I then divided the measured capacitance by the cable length to get the capacitance per foot. The resistance was negligible for all cables but I've recorded it below anyway. My meter cannot read resistance below 0.1 Ohm. I have no way to measure inductance. I used the first track to measure the peak SPL in dBC. There was negligible difference in peak SPL but I recorded it below anyway. The cables below are in no particular order. The number is just an ID for reference.
1. Licorice twist ------------ 0.1 Ohm, 125 pF/foot, 102 dBC peak
2. White --------------------- 0.1 Ohm, 95 pF/foot, 101.5 dBC peak
3. Gray ---------------------- 0.1 Ohm, 29 pF/foot, 101.5 dBC peak
4. 16 AWG generic --------- 0.1 Ohm, 25 pF/foot, 101.5 dBC peak
5. Green Revy 12 AWG ---- 0 Ohm, 26 pF/foot, 101 dBC peak
6. KnuConceptz 12 AWG -- 0 Ohm, 17 pF/foot, 101 dBC peak
There was no significant difference in cable capacitance as I varied the paths of the cables, moved them closer or further to boundaries or twisted them into various shapes.
-------- Listening Impressions ---------
I do not have a switcher. I listened, swapped cables and listened some more.
You'd have to be a real bad listener to not be able to pick out the difference in bass between the first two cables and all the others. With these first two, the bass was flabby and uncontrolled. Mid-bass was depressed. Mids were smeared and highs were not airy. I could tell this right away without listening to all the others but listening to all the others confirmed it. It was still enjoyable though.
As soon as I changed to #3, these problems largely disappeared but bass wasn't totally tight. With the last three cables, I could not hear any differences between them. The lows were tight, mid-bass popped nicely and highs were airy without being bright. The last three cables sounded the best.
---------- Conclusions --------------
A. I could not hear differences between speaker cables.
B. I could hear differences between "Trevor's cables" and speaker cables. Trevor's cables may not be speaker cables.
C. All cables provided similar SPLs.
D. All cables were of similar, vanishingly low resistance.
E. Not all cables were the same capacitance.
F. Speaker cables were of lower capacitance.
G. Without developing a complete circuit model, trying to describe why I heard what I heard would be nothing more than speculation.
H. You do not need a "high resolution system" to hear differences in cables.
I. The M50v4 are fun!
I'll just add another thing in here. The M50v4 sound better uncorrected in my 4200 cu ft room than the M100v4. I can listen to the M50 in that room without correction and I can't say that about the M100. Ditto with the living room. Once corrected though, the M100 offers detail the M50 can't match. Some though may say that less detail is not a bad thing.
