More fuel for the fire..

Of course, this article doesn't mention the quality of the speakers, what amp, etc - IMO, probably more important than which high end cable you are choosing, since if the equipment at either end isn't up to par, what you have in between doesn't matter....oh, and coat hanger wire is usually pretty thick....


http://www.engadget.com/200...n-monster-cable-and/

quote Audiophiles can't tell the difference between Monster Cable and coat hangers By Nilay Patel posted March 3rd 2008 8:03PM We've always believed that the perceived quality boost that comes from using high-end cables is really just a trick of the mind (read: justifying the ridiculous cost of premium cables to yourself) -- if you've dropped enough cash, you can probably hear anything you want. Still, our belief is one thing -- cold hard proof is another, and it looks like a group of 12 self-professed "audiophiles" recently couldn't tell the difference between Monster 1000 speaker cables and plain old coat hangers. Yeah, coat hangers. The group was A-Bing different cables, and unbeknownst to them, the engineer running the test swapped out a set of cables for coat hangers with soldered-on speaker connections. Not a single one was then able to tell the difference between the Monster Cable and the hangers, and all agreed that the hangers sounded excellent. No wonder Monster has to rig HD displays. Still, we bet people still fall for the hype -- oh hey, if you're looking for the ultimate in sound, we've got half a meter of oxygen-free, triple-wrapped double-insulated Sonically Shielded AmpliSized Egyptian Llama cable here that we'll part ways with for just a couple grand.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: My history doesn't read quite as accomplished ...

I didn't intend that as a "Mine is bigger than yours" boast ... merely to establish that I have some competence in the subject. The bottom line in any audio system is your personal experience of what you hear; nothing else really matters.

For your amusement I'll post a couple of pictures below of a high-quality two-channel audio power amplifier I designed and built in the middle 1970s. Power output was 100 watts per channel (continuous) into 4 ohms. The power supply rejection of the circuit was so good (about 80 dB) that only a very simple unregulated power supply (+/- 40 volts at 7 amps) was required. Convection cooling was usually adequate, but the heat sink could be fitted with a 120 mm whisper fan for high-power commercial applications. Unfortunately, the hybrid module at the heart of the design was an experimental part from RCA that never made it into volume production. I sold all rights to this design in the early 1980s, but I still have this prototype unit in my possession and it still works.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 01-08-2012).]

Something else to look for....dont rely on how thick the wire appears on the outside. Some very heavy looking wire barely has any conductor strands in it. I had to replace an end on an extension cord I have. Its like 3/8" wire. The actual wire it it looks to be like 24 gauge.

quote Originally posted by Marvin McInnis: I didn't intend that as a "Mine is bigger than yours" boast ... merely to establish that I have some competence in the subject. The bottom line in any audio system is your personal experience of what you hear; nothing else really matters. Cool pics ....

I didn't exactly take it that way. I respect the industry experience. I have some, but not nearly as much.

The amp is very cool. I love the big honkin' heat sinks. At 4 ohms rating, was that meant for pro applications? Is the design being made use of?

I'd also like to know what the test parameters were for the coat hangar test. And Roger is correct. A lot of big cables are heavy on the insulator.

[This message has been edited by Patrick's Dad (edited 01-06-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: I love the big honkin' heat sinks. At 4 ohms rating, was that meant for pro applications? Is the design being made use of?

The heat sink was something that I had left over from a previous design project. It's overkill, but I still like the look.

4 ohms was just the optimum load for this particular design. FWIW, most high-quality acoustic-suspension speakers of the time (e.g. AR-3s from Acoustic Research) were 4 ohms. The amp also worked fine with 16-ohm JBL studio speakers, which were considerably more efficient than the ARs, so the sound level was about the same with either. I also tested my design for stability with everything from a 100% capacitive load (~10,000 microfarads) to a 100% inductive load (~5 henries).

As a said earlier, the amp in the picture used an experimental part (the HC-2500) from RCA that never made it into production, and my amp could never have gone into large-volume manufacture without it. In addition, the design itself is 36 years old now and would certainly be obsolete; truth be known, it was probably obsolete by the middle 1980s. As one technical detail, the output stages used bipolar transistors similar to the complementary 2N3055/MJ2955 pair; virtually any new design today would use power FETs. Second, it used a Class AB output design to reduce crossover distortion, so the idle power requirement was relatively high; that would be unacceptable today. Such is progress.

[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 01-10-2012).]