alt.certification.a-plus - speaker wires...does size matter?

Author

speaker wires...does size matter?

LMNOP

2002-09-14, 12:28 pm

Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
this now...

Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
equal in length as possible, for efficiency?

--
Live for something rather than die for nothing.
- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.
"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:in46oucugtp7lqiv27t4vlcu1
389ukeksf@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 08:19:59 GMT, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo) wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 03:53:44 GMT, user@user.com (Ghost) wrote:
> >
> >>In article <3d8147df.3266885@news.sprint.ca>, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo)
wrote:
> >>
> >>> Which is the positive terminal on an RCA jack
> >>>
> >>> 1) the outer shield
> >>>
> >>> OR
> >>>
> >>> 2) the inner pin??
> >>>
> >>> This is in an audio situation
> >>>
> >>> Thanks....
> >>
> >>Generally, but not always, the inner pin on any similar type of
connector
> >>is positive, the outer shield being negative.
> >>
> >>This does change periodically, especially with power connectors.
> >
> >Which wire goes to the center of the speaker?
> >
> >The + ??
>
> With speakers, the most important factor is that they are phased
> together, and that simply means that the same terminal on the output
> feeds the same terminal on each speaker. If this doesn't happen, they
> are out of phase, and the cancellations of sound in the air will
> result in a thin and empty sound.
>
> One way to verify phase is to use a 1.5 volt cell (AA, AAA) and apply
> it briefly to the speaker, while watching the cone movement, in and
> out. You need the speaker cones to be moving in the same direction for
> proper phasing.
>
> It isn't about red, white, black, whatever wire colour being the right
> one...it's about the sound being presented properly. I can give a more
> step-by-step approach if necessary.
>
> Tom

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 6:28 am

In article <3d836b0b@news.toolband.com>,
"LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> writes:

>Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they
>should be as equal in length as possible, for efficiency?

Speaker lines are low impedance, (relatively) high amperage
circuits, and the power dissipated in speaker wires equals
I*I*R, where I is the (relatively) high amperage and R is the
speaker wire resistance. Thus speaker wire resistance
should be minimized by using (relatively) high gauge wire
and by minimizing speaker wire length.

Audio is *very* low frequency, and speaker wires do *not*
suffer from radio frequency transmission line effects. Speaker
wires need not be the same length.

I use "lamp cord" for speaker wire. Lamp cord is heavy
gauge copper, and it is polarized (the insulation surrounding
one of the two conductors is ridged, or a cloth thread is
carried with one of the copper conductors) allowing speakers
to be connected in consistent phase. Most amplifiers and
speakers include terminals allowing direct connection --
RCA jacks are not necessary or desirable.

Do *not* use AC power plugs or sockets as speaker wire
connectors. I have witnessed such an installation. When
a tired roadie mistakenly plugs a speaker cable into an AC
wall socket the result is unpleasant and brief.

I can not warrant your results using my methods.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 7:28 am

LMNOP

2002-09-15, 3:28 pm

"...Do *not* use AC power plugs or sockets as speaker wire
connectors. I have witnessed such an installation. When
a tired roadie mistakenly plugs a speaker cable into an AC
wall socket the result is unpleasant and brief..."

............Holy crap, I can see it now! LOL

Great advice! thanks!
LMNOP

--
Live for something rather than die for nothing.
- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.
"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020915080852.10323.00000367@mb-fx.aol.com...
> In article <3d836b0b@news.toolband.com>,
> "LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> >Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
> >I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they
> >should be as equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
> Speaker lines are low impedance, (relatively) high amperage
> circuits, and the power dissipated in speaker wires equals
> I*I*R, where I is the (relatively) high amperage and R is the
> speaker wire resistance. Thus speaker wire resistance
> should be minimized by using (relatively) high gauge wire
> and by minimizing speaker wire length.
>
> Audio is *very* low frequency, and speaker wires do *not*
> suffer from radio frequency transmission line effects. Speaker
> wires need not be the same length.
>
> I use "lamp cord" for speaker wire. Lamp cord is heavy
> gauge copper, and it is polarized (the insulation surrounding
> one of the two conductors is ridged, or a cloth thread is
> carried with one of the copper conductors) allowing speakers
> to be connected in consistent phase. Most amplifiers and
> speakers include terminals allowing direct connection --
> RCA jacks are not necessary or desirable.
>
> Do *not* use AC power plugs or sockets as speaker wire
> connectors. I have witnessed such an installation. When
> a tired roadie mistakenly plugs a speaker cable into an AC
> wall socket the result is unpleasant and brief.
>
> I can not warrant your results using my methods.
>
> My opinions.
>
> Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
> --
> Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
> Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
> Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C.
Davis
>

LMNOP

2002-09-15, 4:29 pm

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 6:29 pm

A further consideration:

"Lamp cord" uses stranded copper wire conductors. I always
"tin" the wire ends using a soldering pencil or a small soldering
gun. Tinning the stranded wire ends prevents them from
becoming a snarled mess. Tinning the stranded wire ends
also prevents a "loose strand" from shorting between the
speaker/amplifier terminals.

Use minimal solder. The goal is to bind each conductor's
individual strands together without making the result too stiff
or too thick. If you use too much solder the result might be too
stiff or too thick to use with some speaker/amplifier built-in
connectors (e.g., spring 'clothespin' type connectors).

I can not warrant your success using my methods.

In article <20020915080852.10323.00000367@mb-fx.aol.com>,
rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) writes:

>In article <3d836b0b@news.toolband.com>,
>"LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>>I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they
>>should be as equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
>Speaker lines are low impedance, (relatively) high amperage
>circuits, and the power dissipated in speaker wires equals
>I*I*R, where I is the (relatively) high amperage and R is the
>speaker wire resistance. Thus speaker wire resistance
>should be minimized by using (relatively) high gauge wire
>and by minimizing speaker wire length.
>
>Audio is *very* low frequency, and speaker wires do *not*
>suffer from radio frequency transmission line effects. Speaker
>wires need not be the same length.
>
>I use "lamp cord" for speaker wire. Lamp cord is heavy
>gauge copper, and it is polarized (the insulation surrounding
>one of the two conductors is ridged, or a cloth thread is
>carried with one of the copper conductors) allowing speakers
>to be connected in consistent phase. Most amplifiers and
>speakers include terminals allowing direct connection --
>RCA jacks are not necessary or desirable.
>
>Do *not* use AC power plugs or sockets as speaker wire
>connectors. I have witnessed such an installation. When
>a tired roadie mistakenly plugs a speaker cable into an AC
>wall socket the result is unpleasant and brief.
>
>I can not warrant your success using my methods.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 6:29 pm

In article <20020915080852.10323.00000367@mb-fx.aol.com>,
rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard) writes:

>In article <3d836b0b@news.toolband.com>,
>"LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>>I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they
>>should be as equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
>Speaker lines are low impedance, (relatively) high amperage
>circuits, and the power dissipated in speaker wires equals
>I*I*R, where I is the (relatively) high amperage and R is the
>speaker wire resistance. Thus speaker wire resistance
>should be minimized by using (relatively) high gauge wire
>and by minimizing speaker wire length.

One further consideration:

Thick (lower resistance) wire has a lower wire gauge than
thinner (higher resistance) wire.

My last sentence should have read "Thus speaker wire
resistance should be minimized by using (relatively) LOW
gauge wire and by minimizing speaker wire length."

Coffee, more coffee.

I can not warrant your success using my methods.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 7:29 pm

Richard Ballard

2002-09-15, 7:29 pm

Barry Watzman

2002-09-15, 11:29 pm

Xref: 127.0.0.1 alt.certification.a-plus:14733

Size does matter, but not greatly in most cases (Isn't that what Carrie
said on "Sex and the City" ?).

Speakers may have to carry lots of current (200 watts into 4 ohms is 50
amps). It takes big wires to carry big current. But it's hard to get
specific here, and in "normal" cases, with moderate power amplifiers,
while it might technically matter, any differences might be inaudible
and irrelevant.

Some generalizations:

1. For longer runs, use bigger wires
2. For higher power levels use bigger wire
3. If you play your system at really high volumes, or have inefficient
speakers, use larger wire.
4. If you have low impedance speakers, use bigger wires.

I usually just use lamp cord wire, preferably 16 guage (18 is more
common and is fine for lamps, but 16 is a bit heavier and a better for
speakders). I have a 200 watt Pioneer receiver and Bose speakers,
everything is fine, but the runs are fairly short. Remember also, that
200 watts is divided up among 5 speakers (two each front and rear plus
center).

It's possible to get carried away with this, and some people do, but
honestly I don't think that 1% of the population (if ANYONE, I'm really
a skeptic on this) can hear the difference between moderate (20 foot)
runs of #16 lamp cord and #4 guage "Monster Cable" costing dollars per
foot in a typical home stereo system (200 watts or less, remember that
is a total for a number of speakers in most cases).

If one speaker has a 6' cable and another one a 50' cable you've just
"unbalanced" the system because the long speaker cable is effectively a
resistor in series with ONE of the speakers. It's not necessary, within
reason, to match the lengths exactly. On the other hand, a gross
imbalance in the lengths CAN make a significant difference.

Use some judgement and be reasonable. Bigger is better, but the lengths
of the runs, the amount of power in your amp (and, very much related,
how high you run the volume control), the efficiency of your speakers,
and the impeadance of the speakers (the lower the impedance of the
speakers, the more important this is, it matters more for 4-ohm speakers
than for 8-ohm speakders), these things all matter and change the
importance of having "large" speaker wires of approximately equal length.

LMNOP wrote:
> Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
> this now...
>
> Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
> I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
> equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
> --
> Live for something rather than die for nothing.
> - Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.
> "Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:in46oucugtp7lqiv27t4vlcu1
389ukeksf@4ax.com...
>
>>On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 08:19:59 GMT, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 03:53:44 GMT, user@user.com (Ghost) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <3d8147df.3266885@news.sprint.ca>, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo)
>>>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>Which is the positive terminal on an RCA jack
>>>>>
>>>>>1) the outer shield
>>>>>
>>>>>OR
>>>>>
>>>>>2) the inner pin??
>>>>>
>>>>>This is in an audio situation
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks....
>>>>
>>>>Generally, but not always, the inner pin on any similar type of
>>>
> connector
>
>>>>is positive, the outer shield being negative.
>>>>
>>>>This does change periodically, especially with power connectors.
>>>
>>>Which wire goes to the center of the speaker?
>>>
>>>The + ??
>>
>>With speakers, the most important factor is that they are phased
>>together, and that simply means that the same terminal on the output
>>feeds the same terminal on each speaker. If this doesn't happen, they
>>are out of phase, and the cancellations of sound in the air will
>>result in a thin and empty sound.
>>
>>One way to verify phase is to use a 1.5 volt cell (AA, AAA) and apply
>>it briefly to the speaker, while watching the cone movement, in and
>>out. You need the speaker cones to be moving in the same direction for
>>proper phasing.
>>
>>It isn't about red, white, black, whatever wire colour being the right
>>one...it's about the sound being presented properly. I can give a more
>>step-by-step approach if necessary.
>>
>>Tom
>
>
>

Barry Watzman

2002-09-16, 12:29 am

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-16, 4:28 am

On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 17:10:30 GMT, "LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
>this now...
>
>Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
>equal in length as possible, for efficiency?

The longer the wires, the more will be the power loss in the wire.
This is only significant in extremem cases, such as very this wire,
very long wires, very low (4 ohms or less) speaker impedances). Thin
wires have higher resistances, and can also add to the power loss in
the wire, again, only in extreme situations.

Equal in length doesn't matter much either, except for...you guessed
it, extreme cases. :-)

Tom

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-16, 5:28 am

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-16, 3:28 pm

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 09:52:26 GMT, Tom MacIntyre
<tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 17:10:30 GMT, "LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
>>this now...
>>
>>Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>>I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
>>equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
>The longer the wires, the more will be the power loss in the wire.
>This is only significant in extremem

I have to stop posting in such a rush...

>cases, such as very this wire,

....really!

Tom

>very long wires, very low (4 ohms or less) speaker impedances). Thin
>wires have higher resistances, and can also add to the power loss in
>the wire, again, only in extreme situations.
>
>Equal in length doesn't matter much either, except for...you guessed
>it, extreme cases. :-)
>
>Tom

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-16, 4:28 pm

V.O.J

2002-09-16, 8:28 pm

1. Low frequencies travel faster then the highs.
2. Anything over about 12-15 ft should be awg 12 or larger
3. As has been stated wires to more than on pair of speakers should be the
same length no matter the placement of the speakers.
4. Typical Computer speakers (under $150.000 without an amplifier are so bad
that it wouldn't matter much what you did.

"LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3d836b0b@news.toolband.com...
> Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
> this now...
>
> Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
> I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
> equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>
> --
> Live for something rather than die for nothing.
> - Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.
> "Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:in46oucugtp7lqiv27t4vlcu1
389ukeksf@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 08:19:59 GMT, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo) wrote:
> >
> > >On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 03:53:44 GMT, user@user.com (Ghost) wrote:
> > >
> > >>In article <3d8147df.3266885@news.sprint.ca>, nowhere@nowhere.now
(Geo)
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Which is the positive terminal on an RCA jack
> > >>>
> > >>> 1) the outer shield
> > >>>
> > >>> OR
> > >>>
> > >>> 2) the inner pin??
> > >>>
> > >>> This is in an audio situation
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks....
> > >>
> > >>Generally, but not always, the inner pin on any similar type of
> connector
> > >>is positive, the outer shield being negative.
> > >>
> > >>This does change periodically, especially with power connectors.
> > >
> > >Which wire goes to the center of the speaker?
> > >
> > >The + ??
> >
> > With speakers, the most important factor is that they are phased
> > together, and that simply means that the same terminal on the output
> > feeds the same terminal on each speaker. If this doesn't happen, they
> > are out of phase, and the cancellations of sound in the air will
> > result in a thin and empty sound.
> >
> > One way to verify phase is to use a 1.5 volt cell (AA, AAA) and apply
> > it briefly to the speaker, while watching the cone movement, in and
> > out. You need the speaker cones to be moving in the same direction for
> > proper phasing.
> >
> > It isn't about red, white, black, whatever wire colour being the right
> > one...it's about the sound being presented properly. I can give a more
> > step-by-step approach if necessary.
> >
> > Tom
>
>

V.O.J

2002-09-16, 9:28 pm

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-17, 12:29 am

On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 02:12:14 GMT, "V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> wrote:

>1. Low frequencies travel faster then the highs.
>2. Anything over about 12-15 ft should be awg 12 or larger
>3. As has been stated wires to more than on pair of speakers should be the
>same length no matter the placement of the speakers.
>4. Typical Computer speakers (under $150.000 without an amplifier are so bad
>that it wouldn't matter much what you did.

It has to be remembered that the sound is being perceived by humans,
not measured by sensitive measuring equipment. Low and high are
relative terms, and 20-20k are all low frequencies. I tend to think
that AWG12 for 12-15 feet+ is overkill, especially when a speaker
impedance has not been specified. If you do a resistance per foot for
AWG12, you'd likely have to have a speaker impedance of less than an
ohm for the wire resistance to be 5%, and 10% is considered by many to
be a reasonable cutoff point for practical purposes. I also don't
think that equal wire length is terribly important, within reason, as
any reasonable length is not going to result in a noticeable phase or
level problem. I agree with 4...

I don't tend to fall in with the so-called "golden ears" crowd, who
want huge wires and gold-plated everything. I've never seen it
demonstrated that much of a difference results. For 4, or 2 ohm
speaker runs of 100 feet+, it's a different story.

Just for fun...

http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~sjreeves...10/wireawg.html

About 5 ohms per km for AWG12, or less than 0.015 ohms for 12-15 feet.
I see that as serious overkill.

Tom

>
>"LMNOP" <johnnynbonnie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:3d836b0b@news.toolband.com...
>> Why didn't I know about this phase thing? This is cool, I have to go try
>> this now...
>>
>> Q: Does it matter how long the speaker wires are? Or thickness?
>> I've heard that the longer they are, not as good. Also, they should be as
>> equal in length as possible, for efficiency?
>>
>> --
>> Live for something rather than die for nothing.
>> - Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.
>> "Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:in46oucugtp7lqiv27t4vlcu1
389ukeksf@4ax.com...
>> > On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 08:19:59 GMT, nowhere@nowhere.now (Geo) wrote:
>> >
>> > >On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 03:53:44 GMT, user@user.com (Ghost) wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>In article <3d8147df.3266885@news.sprint.ca>, nowhere@nowhere.now
>(Geo)
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Which is the positive terminal on an RCA jack
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 1) the outer shield
>> > >>>
>> > >>> OR
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 2) the inner pin??
>> > >>>
>> > >>> This is in an audio situation
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks....
>> > >>
>> > >>Generally, but not always, the inner pin on any similar type of
>> connector
>> > >>is positive, the outer shield being negative.
>> > >>
>> > >>This does change periodically, especially with power connectors.
>> > >
>> > >Which wire goes to the center of the speaker?
>> > >
>> > >The + ??
>> >
>> > With speakers, the most important factor is that they are phased
>> > together, and that simply means that the same terminal on the output
>> > feeds the same terminal on each speaker. If this doesn't happen, they
>> > are out of phase, and the cancellations of sound in the air will
>> > result in a thin and empty sound.
>> >
>> > One way to verify phase is to use a 1.5 volt cell (AA, AAA) and apply
>> > it briefly to the speaker, while watching the cone movement, in and
>> > out. You need the speaker cones to be moving in the same direction for
>> > proper phasing.
>> >
>> > It isn't about red, white, black, whatever wire colour being the right
>> > one...it's about the sound being presented properly. I can give a more
>> > step-by-step approach if necessary.
>> >
>> > Tom
>>
>>
>

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-17, 1:29 am

Richard Ballard

2002-09-17, 8:28 am

In article <2cwh9.28028$S32.1831461@news2.west.cox.net>,
"V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:

>1. Low frequencies travel faster then the highs.

At audio frequencies any transmission line delays are negligible
in copper wire. Reflections *can* accumulate in long cable
lengths.

<snip>

>3. As has been stated wires to more than on pair of speakers
>should be the same length no matter the placement of the speakers.

In normal listening environments (as opposed to concert arenas) I
believe that differences (frequency-dependent delay or ohmic losses)
due to speaker wire length would be negligible.

In concert arena installations, I would expect constant impedance
transmission line (e.g., 600 ohm) signal distribution to distributed
high power integrated amplifier/speaker units. The constant
impedance transmission lines would minimize signal reflections
and ohmic loss at longer wire lengths by utilizing higher impedance
(i.e., lower amperage) circuitry. These techniques were pioneered
in the telephone industry.

Of course current technology makes this obsolete -- today
everybody uses wireless microphones and instrument pickups.
(Hope that no gypsy cabs are cruising nearby.)

<snip>

Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted on
using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the 'sound' of
early transistorized amplifiers. They had good ears -- the
early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably greater third-order
intermodulation distortion than vacuum tube amplifiers.

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-17, 9:28 am

V.O.J

2002-09-17, 9:28 am

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d2fdougef2hch0o2893vgjr0t
3h3aro7c2@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 02:12:14 GMT, "V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> wrote:
>
> >1. Low frequencies travel faster then the highs.
> >2. Anything over about 12-15 ft should be awg 12 or larger
> >3. As has been stated wires to more than on pair of speakers should be
the
> >same length no matter the placement of the speakers.
> >4. Typical Computer speakers (under $150.000 without an amplifier are so
bad
> >that it wouldn't matter much what you did.
>
> It has to be remembered that the sound is being perceived by humans,
> not measured by sensitive measuring equipment. Low and high are
> relative terms, and 20-20k are all low frequencies. I tend to think
> that AWG12 for 12-15 feet+ is overkill, especially when a speaker
> impedance has not been specified. If you do a resistance per foot for
> AWG12, you'd likely have to have a speaker impedance of less than an
> ohm for the wire resistance to be 5%, and 10% is considered by many to
> be a reasonable cutoff point for practical purposes. I also don't
> think that equal wire length is terribly important, within reason, as
> any reasonable length is not going to result in a noticeable phase or
> level problem. I agree with 4...
>
> I don't tend to fall in with the so-called "golden ears" crowd, who
> want huge wires and gold-plated everything. I've never seen it
> demonstrated that much of a difference results. For 4, or 2 ohm
> speaker runs of 100 feet+, it's a different story.
>
> Just for fun...
>
> http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~sjreeves...10/wireawg.html
>
> About 5 ohms per km for AWG12, or less than 0.015 ohms for 12-15 feet.
> I see that as serious overkill.
>
> Tom
>

As I stated. Typical speakers and computer cards don't need any attention
except good (solid) connections)

BUT

If one has (the golden ear and serious speakers) then size and distance do
matter.

DC resistance is almost irrelevant in sound.

V.O.J

2002-09-17, 9:28 am

"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020917095424.05139.00000764@mb-mk.aol.com...
> In article <2cwh9.28028$S32.1831461@news2.west.cox.net>,
> "V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:
>
>
> Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
> amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted on
> using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the 'sound' of
> early transistorized amplifiers. They had good ears -- the
> early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably greater third-order
> intermodulation distortion than vacuum tube amplifiers.
>

Yep, it was "much" easier to have distortion built in and create distortion
(via clipping) with tubes than with solid state.

Tubes had a more "mellow" sound also because 20-20K was normal and it wasn't
found out until later that the high and the low multiplied together still
had to equal 400,000. Early designers of xisters would push the top to 100k
and not drop the bottom to 4.
Speakers didn't match.
Roll offs weren't steep enough.
Intermodulation is where two frequencies mix to create a third. It exists
equally in tubes and xisters. Not paying attention to the 400,000 rule
created unbalance.

V.O.J

2002-09-17, 10:28 am

V.O.J

2002-09-17, 10:28 am

Richard Ballard

2002-09-17, 10:28 pm

In article <YfHh9.29521$S32.2010876@news2.west.cox.net>,
"V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:

>"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20020917095424.05139.00000764@mb-mk.aol.com...

<snip>

>>Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
>>amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted on
>>using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the 'sound' of
>>early transistorized amplifiers. They had good ears -- the
>>early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably greater
>>third-order intermodulation distortion than vacuum tube amplifiers.
>
>Yep, it was "much" easier to have distortion built in and create
>distortion (via clipping) with tubes than with solid state.

I think you have that backwards. At the beginning of the
"transistor amplifier era" vacuum tube amplifiers (mature
technology) were more conservatively designed and less
prone to clipping than transistorized amplifiers (which were
pushing the then state-of-the-art). Also, transistors have
sharper cutoff characteristics than vacuum tubes. The result
was a tendancy for early transistorized musical amplifiers
to clip more and harder, giving increased third-order
intermodulation distortion (think the Fourier Series
representation of a square wave) in early transistor
amplifiers (when compared to vacuum tube musical amplifiers
of the same era).

This problem in early transistorized musical amplifiers was
reduced when available transistors got more powerful and
cheaper, allowing more margin before clipping plus the use
of multiple-transistor (odd harmonic cancelling) amplifier
symmetric output circuits.

Integrated circuit analog operational amplifiers (with the
ability to use feedback to modify gain/bandwidth) were
further down the road.

<snip>

My opinions.

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-17, 11:28 pm

V.O.J

2002-09-18, 12:29 am

"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020917234859.10323.00000441@mb-fx.aol.com...
> In article <YfHh9.29521$S32.2010876@news2.west.cox.net>,
> "V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:
>
> >"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20020917095424.05139.00000764@mb-mk.aol.com...
>
> <snip>
>
> >>Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
> >>amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted on
> >>using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the 'sound' of
> >>early transistorized amplifiers. They had good ears -- the
> >>early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably greater
> >>third-order intermodulation distortion than vacuum tube amplifiers.
> >
> >Yep, it was "much" easier to have distortion built in and create
> >distortion (via clipping) with tubes than with solid state.
>
> I think you have that backwards. At the beginning of the
> "transistor amplifier era" vacuum tube amplifiers (mature
> technology) were more conservatively designed and less
> prone to clipping than transistorized amplifiers (which were
> pushing the then state-of-the-art). Also, transistors have
> sharper cutoff characteristics than vacuum tubes. The result
> was a tendancy for early transistorized musical amplifiers
> to clip more and harder, giving increased third-order
> intermodulation distortion (think the Fourier Series
> representation of a square wave) in early transistor
> amplifiers (when compared to vacuum tube musical amplifiers
> of the same era).

I was there and transitors don't clip like tubes do. Transistors limit.
Part of my response was a joke about Jagger and his "musical" talent.
The critical remarks about transistorized units were as I stated.
Nothing to do with power or symetric outputs, just a misunderstanding of
audio which was exacerbated by the elimination of inherently frequency
limiting output transformers.

>
> This problem in early transistorized musical amplifiers was
> reduced when available transistors got more powerful and
> cheaper, allowing more margin before clipping plus the use
> of multiple-transistor (odd harmonic cancelling) amplifier
> symmetric output circuits.
>
> Integrated circuit analog operational amplifiers (with the
> ability to use feedback to modify gain/bandwidth) were
> further down the road.

Question
Define what you mean by clipping.
Clipping is the flattening of the top of a sign wave.

>
> <snip>
>
> My opinions.
>
> Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
> --
> Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
> Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
> Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C.
Davis
>

V.O.J

2002-09-18, 1:29 am

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 5:28 am

On 18 Sep 2002 03:48:59 GMT, rball84213@aol.com (Richard Ballard)
wrote:

>In article <YfHh9.29521$S32.2010876@news2.west.cox.net>,
>"V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:
>
>>"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:20020917095424.05139.00000764@mb-mk.aol.com...
>
> <snip>
>
>>>Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
>>>amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted on
>>>using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the 'sound' of
>>>early transistorized amplifiers. They had good ears -- the
>>>early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably greater
>>>third-order intermodulation distortion than vacuum tube amplifiers.
>>
>>Yep, it was "much" easier to have distortion built in and create
>>distortion (via clipping) with tubes than with solid state.

It's that, for useful, likeable distortion, tubes were good, and solid
state was not, and possibly still isn't. It wasn't only the tubes. The
output tansformer saturation played a part, as did the cabinet design.
I had an old Fender 50 watt guitar amp that would literally soar and
sing with the sound, once I learned to use it cranked up high enough,
and that depended on the pickup outputs. Hotter pickups pushed any
design farther, and the tube designs sounded good when they distorted.

Bands still genearally used tubes rather than solid state for electric
guitar in many cases.

Tom

>
>I think you have that backwards. At the beginning of the
>"transistor amplifier era" vacuum tube amplifiers (mature
>technology) were more conservatively designed and less
>prone to clipping than transistorized amplifiers (which were
>pushing the then state-of-the-art). Also, transistors have
>sharper cutoff characteristics than vacuum tubes. The result
>was a tendancy for early transistorized musical amplifiers
>to clip more and harder, giving increased third-order
>intermodulation distortion (think the Fourier Series
>representation of a square wave) in early transistor
>amplifiers (when compared to vacuum tube musical amplifiers
>of the same era).
>
>This problem in early transistorized musical amplifiers was
>reduced when available transistors got more powerful and
>cheaper, allowing more margin before clipping plus the use
>of multiple-transistor (odd harmonic cancelling) amplifier
>symmetric output circuits.
>
>Integrated circuit analog operational amplifiers (with the
>ability to use feedback to modify gain/bandwidth) were
>further down the road.
>
> <snip>
>
>My opinions.
>
>Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 5:28 am

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 05:32:15 GMT, "V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> wrote:

>
>"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20020917234859.10323.00000441@mb-fx.aol.com...
>> In article <YfHh9.29521$S32.2010876@news2.west.cox.net>,
The result
>> was a tendancy for early transistorized musical amplifiers
>> to clip more and harder, giving increased third-order
>> intermodulation distortion (think the Fourier Series
>> representation of a square wave) in early transistor
>> amplifiers (when compared to vacuum tube musical amplifiers
>> of the same era).

Intermodulation distortion, or harmonic distortion? Two entirely
different things.

>
>I was there and transitors don't clip like tubes do. Transistors limit.
>Part of my response was a joke about Jagger and his "musical" talent.
>The critical remarks about transistorized units were as I stated.
>Nothing to do with power or symetric outputs, just a misunderstanding of
>audio which was exacerbated by the elimination of inherently frequency
>limiting output transformers.

I was there also, and had several other tube amplifiers, along with
some solid state ones, that I used regularly. The Peavey Stereo chorus
came close to a tube sound, and close enough for what I was playing at
the time.

Tom

>
>>
>> This problem in early transistorized musical amplifiers was
>> reduced when available transistors got more powerful and
>> cheaper, allowing more margin before clipping plus the use
>> of multiple-transistor (odd harmonic cancelling) amplifier
>> symmetric output circuits.
>>
>> Integrated circuit analog operational amplifiers (with the
>> ability to use feedback to modify gain/bandwidth) were
>> further down the road.
>
>Question
>Define what you mean by clipping.
>Clipping is the flattening of the top of a sign wave.
>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> My opinions.
>>
>> Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
>> --
>> Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
>> Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
>> Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C.
>Davis
>>
>

Russ S

2002-09-18, 5:28 am

I don't know about many cases Tom - I would say in most cases. Even with
the latest technology I can not get the warmth that I can with tubes.

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 6:28 am

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 6:28 am

Russ S

2002-09-18, 6:28 am

I don't know about many cases Tom - I would say in most cases. Even with
the latest technology I can not get the warmth that I can with tubes.

Richard Ballard

2002-09-18, 11:28 am

In article <zdUh9.33669$S32.2279006@news2.west.cox.net>,
"V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:

>"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20020917234859.10323.00000441@mb-fx.aol.com...
>
>>In article <YfHh9.29521$S32.2010876@news2.west.cox.net>,
>>"V.O.J" <icon@righthere.com> writes:
>>
>>>"Richard Ballard" <rball84213@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>news:20020917095424.05139.00000764@mb-mk.aol.com...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>Interesting trivia: At the beginning of the "transistorized
>>>>amplifier era", Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones insisted
>>>>on using vacuum tube amplifiers -- they did not like the
>>>>'sound' of early transistorized amplifiers. They had good
>>>>ears -- the early transistorized amplifiers had appreciably
>>>>greater third-order intermodulation distortion than vacuum
>>>>tube amplifiers.
>>>
>>>Yep, it was "much" easier to have distortion built in and
>>>create distortion (via clipping) with tubes than with solid
>>>state.
>>
>>I think you have that backwards. At the beginning of the
>>"transistor amplifier era" vacuum tube amplifiers (mature
>>technology) were more conservatively designed and less
>>prone to clipping than transistorized amplifiers (which were
>>pushing the then state-of-the-art). Also, transistors have
>>sharper cutoff characteristics than vacuum tubes. The result
>>was a tendancy for early transistorized musical amplifiers
>>to clip more and harder, giving increased third-order
>>intermodulation distortion (think the Fourier Series
>>representation of a square wave) in early transistor
>>amplifiers (when compared to vacuum tube musical amplifiers
>>of the same era).
>
>I was there and transitors don't clip like tubes do.
>Transistors limit.

Both vacuum tubes and transistors can clip. What actually
happens is the inability of the power supply to supply
ever-increasing currrent to the circuitry -- voltage plateaus
(clipping) are the result.

The difference is in the *abruptness* of the clipping. Vacuum
tubes work by electron migration from cathode to anode over an
appreciable (in atomic terms) distance. The distance across
a transistor semiconductor junction is *much smaller*. Vacuum
tubes have greater numbers of "stray" electrons in transit than
transistors have "stray" electrons/holes in transit. The result
is that transistor clipping is more abrupt (sharper edges), and
the more abrupt transistor clipping generates greater odd-order
harmonic distortion.

>Part of my response was a joke about Jagger and his "musical" talent.
>The critical remarks about transistorized units were as I stated.
>Nothing to do with power or symetric outputs, just a misunderstanding of
>audio which was exacerbated by the elimination of inherently frequency
>limiting output transformers.

That was not the issue. Design of vacuum tube amplifiers in the
ultrasonic range utilizing output transformers is possible, but
is no longer economically practical.

>>This problem in early transistorized musical amplifiers was
>>reduced when available transistors got more powerful and
>>cheaper, allowing more margin before clipping plus the use
>>of multiple-transistor (odd harmonic cancelling) amplifier
>>symmetric output circuits.
>>
>>Integrated circuit analog operational amplifiers (with the
>>ability to use feedback to modify gain/bandwidth) were
>>further down the road.
>
>Question
>Define what you mean by clipping.
>Clipping is the flattening of the top of a sign wave.

SINE wave.

As I discussed previously, Both vacuum tubes and transistors
can clip. What actually happens is the inability of the power
supply to supply ever-increasing currrent to the circuitry --
voltage plateaus (clipping) are the result.

<snip>

Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "Don't Know Much About The Bible: ..." by Kenneth C. Davis

Richard Ballard

2002-09-18, 12:28 pm

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 2:28 pm

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:42:16 +1200, "Russ S" <noway@nohow.com> wrote:

>I don't know about many cases Tom - I would say in most cases. Even with
>the latest technology I can not get the warmth that I can with tubes.
>

I've been out of the music loop for many years now, so I am not aware
of recent developments. One would think that DSP could climb that
mountain also.

The Peavey Stereo Chorus I used was good all-around for what I played,
a mixture of country, country-rock, some straight pop/rock, a little
jazz. It used solid-state circuits for clipping, and I examined the
waveform one day on an oscilloscope, and my eye was as satisfied as my
ear had been...no square-wave, hard-edge stuff; as well as some soft
rounding of the sine wave, the waveform tilted off to the side a bit,
almost like an hysteresis curve for a transformer's response. It
sounded good enough for me, and I think subliminally it contributed
eventually to what would be my quest for the A+.

Man, that was hard to get back on-topic! :-)

Tom

Tom MacIntyre

2002-09-18, 3:28 pm

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:42:16 +1200, "Russ S" <noway@nohow.com> wrote:

>I don't know about many cases Tom - I would say in most case