Again, prompted by the 'quotations' thread....
Let me start by saying that that of course cables make a difference. Try using bell wire to jump start your car, or mains cable to run your ethernet link.
The specification of cable can be a key part of the design process, depending on the importance of the cable to the system. If you were an engineer at Morphy Richards (do they still exist?) specifying the cable for a kettle, then the extreme temperature or extreme cold cabilities of the cable are unlikely to matter, current carrying capability would be key however. On the other hand, if you are at Boeing (the example on the quotations thread), then is it likely thay your cable will have physical requirements not found in any other application, except perhaps at Airbus. Is it any wonder Boeing has specific cable produced for it.
HiFi cables are no different. Speaker cables need to be of a low resistance, low level links need adequate shielding, digital links need the correct characteristic impedance.
Where the nonsense starts is when two perfectly adequate cables are compared with 'veil lifting' results. The writers of 'whiter whites, and blacker blacks' reports on HDMI cables have rightly been ridiculed into silence, but I am afraid that this sort of thing continues with interconnects, most notably speaker cables.
Absent dodgy copper, or wierdo basket weave construction, two speaker cable of the same cross sectional area of conductors will sound the same, regardless of the name of the cable, or the marketing budget of the distributor. Different length cables may sound different, as may different thickness cables, but keep the length and the cross sectional area the same, then they will sound the same - how could they be any different?
One final point, coating the outside of a cable with a microscopic layer of silver makes the cable look bright and shiny, it does not make the sound bright. Why would it?
Let me start by saying that that of course cables make a difference. Try using bell wire to jump start your car, or mains cable to run your ethernet link.
The specification of cable can be a key part of the design process, depending on the importance of the cable to the system. If you were an engineer at Morphy Richards (do they still exist?) specifying the cable for a kettle, then the extreme temperature or extreme cold cabilities of the cable are unlikely to matter, current carrying capability would be key however. On the other hand, if you are at Boeing (the example on the quotations thread), then is it likely thay your cable will have physical requirements not found in any other application, except perhaps at Airbus. Is it any wonder Boeing has specific cable produced for it.
HiFi cables are no different. Speaker cables need to be of a low resistance, low level links need adequate shielding, digital links need the correct characteristic impedance.
Where the nonsense starts is when two perfectly adequate cables are compared with 'veil lifting' results. The writers of 'whiter whites, and blacker blacks' reports on HDMI cables have rightly been ridiculed into silence, but I am afraid that this sort of thing continues with interconnects, most notably speaker cables.
Absent dodgy copper, or wierdo basket weave construction, two speaker cable of the same cross sectional area of conductors will sound the same, regardless of the name of the cable, or the marketing budget of the distributor. Different length cables may sound different, as may different thickness cables, but keep the length and the cross sectional area the same, then they will sound the same - how could they be any different?
One final point, coating the outside of a cable with a microscopic layer of silver makes the cable look bright and shiny, it does not make the sound bright. Why would it?