Well RPS you pulled it off! I mean like Burger King's impossible burger your space does not warrant what was heard in the 12 hour session spent with you on Tuesday. Like the sweet beef undertones missing in that burger, even with my eyes closed, my senses could not escape the confines of the room. Small room small stage - mere physics that can not be eliminated. However, you recently added a piece of equipment that makes your room complete and defies physics.

I totally enjoyed my visit with you. Another time warp that was very hard and pressed to end. We will continue in time. I feel like your a brother from another mother now. The food was good, conversation rich, and atmosphere becoming. Thank you all.

The speakers you designed are with no doubt the best 2 way implemented set that crossed my ears. Bass is well defined and tactical. Mids play well with the lows and highs - vocals are crisp with emotional attachment. Highs are sublime with delicacy.

Feeding the 2way gems is nothing special like the 12 gauge OFC, Torii 3 with stock tubes, microphone cable ICs with one way shields, basic Brown Burr DAC, and a Tascam transport. The music heard did not show, by any means, any degradation with this setup.

Your admission of how terrible and unsustainable those 2 ways was in the room before any treatment has been cured. The 12 hour session we completed on Tuesday is proof of that. Your listen db level is a bit higher than mine and I thank you for doing a slight adjustment for my pleasure. But I think it was your need to impress that got you to turn up the volume at the onset. The sound was the same but eliminated the chance of fatigue when lowered a bit.

We listened a couple enjoyable hours with your new blast from the past piece bypassed. The only negative was Ozy's CD seemed a bit edgy at times but had great special effects. I think it had to be the mastering causing it because it was only noticeable on that disk. Then you initiated the C-9! Woweee! The hugh sound stage was not meant to be in your space. It grew by leaps and bounds. Vocals became very intimate in presence. There was zero artifacts. The performance became live. The new experience was like headphones without the cans and gave tactical body resonance! Something that tires me quickly when using headphones, that is my ears get some good vibes but the rest of my organs do not.

RPS, the only negative to me when it came to tactical experience was the dual 12" push and pull setup behind the listening chair. The timing was off a bit that distracted from the main speakers at times. This is surely caused by the direct connection with the Torii speaker outputs. A time delay would help this. It kind of reminded me of when I had transducers installed in the home theater couch which gave a sense of vibration without aligned impact.

I could go on and on about the music but will pin it down to one CD that everyone is familiar with, Pink Floyd's "Dark side of the Moon" Played to death but a well done work using "Q". The C-9 is a phasing tool that eliminates crosstalk between our ears. Yup that space between our ears is wide enough that causes our sense of hearing confusion when we hear music in stereo. RPG's C-9 is 45 years old and works like a new item. There is no signs of bypass interference to the signal and what I am about to describe works as intended.

The second act(track) "On the Run" starts with Q(time delay sceme used in many recordings that places sound in space at various locations using the space between your ears and two speakers as leverage) within 3 seconds of track start. I've always heard the mechanical sound created after 3 seconds in that track as an oblong sound circulation. With the C-9 it made its rounds perfectly around the circumference of my head. It was a hat of moving sound. Outstanding!

Then I asked you to bypass the C-9 after 6 or so hours and this was rather revealing of the unit's capabilities. Vocals became somewhat subdued. Loss of vibrancy was evident. Just to recall that I spent a couple onset satisfying hours listening with this unit bypassed is telling in itself. One does not know until it is placed at earshot side by side(A-B).

mrchipster,
It is a wonderful when meeting another individual that goes thru similar struggles and tackles those challenges in a similar fashion. RPS did very well in tackling his small room. Turning it into a true sanctuary - a place to regenerate ones drive. I can see where some refinement will be done. Not in the sound but in workability of daily use like a simple thing of making the light switch easier to access, etc.

What puzzled me was the fact that I listened 2 or so hours before the C-9 was activated. It sat there idle in bypass mode. The sound already very impressive. When it was switched in, the sound stage widened a bit. The result was too wide creating a hole in the middle. I mentioned that to Paul and then he switched it to narrow from wide mode and wala it tighten up and the walls disappeared! Other then the two modes mention of the C-9 there is a theatrical mode that adds some echo. The echo seemed gimmicky and was not desired.

Tony, in this case I believe the Carver C-9 Sonic Holograph Generator is what was referenced.

https://www.highfidelityreview.com/carver-c9.html

I can't believe I accidentally closed the page I was on after writing an extensive amount of information here that I was about to post!

I will just have to rewrite what I can recall and make do with that.





Okay, let me start again.

Back a few years ago when I had SET mono blocks and a very high end vinyl system along with my ARCAM Alpha 9 ring DAC CD player, I decided to build some high quality cables using the best materials available and fashioned the way the top cable producers were using geometry in the most expensive esoteric cables offered in the market.  These all were way too expensive for my consideration at retail prices.

I assembled many different types of configurations using both high purity heavy gauge copper and also medical grade high purity silver conductors which cost me hundreds of dollars for a small spool back then. That same spool would cost upwards of thousands $$$ in today's market. Silver is prohibited for use at today's cost unless you are wealthy.

I built a set with only twin conductors running in a parallel twist configuration around a cotton core. These were then wrapped in a wax coated cloth sheath and terminated with the finest WBT connectors. No shields, and minimal insulators which was as close to air as possible. Then I constructed a set of speaker cables that were a hybrid version consisting of high purity oxygen free copper and pure silver conductors running in tandem. I built one set without shielding, the other with metal shielding and a aluminum faced wrap like they use for underground cables. The ground shield was terminated before signal contact to prevent any noise or interference to pass through. So in short, I had variations to compare and see what differences these changes made to the sound signature.

In conclusion of these tests, I found the pure silver cables to be far too bright and revealing. Ultra detail, but at the cost of fatigue. As I recall, I found the minimalist cables without the shielding to sound the best, and I did not have issues with ground noise or EMI/RFI interaction.

What I liked the most was the hybrid version using a combination of copper and silver to balance things out. Wrapping the conductors with bees wax saturated cloth seemed to be the most honest and pleasing version that I tested. Very smooth and appropriately revealing without glare or fatigue. These had ultra clear detail and nothing missing within the presentation. So I know from past experience what can be expected from various cable geometries, and what difference the quality and type of material can make to the overall signature. Like everything else that I owned, all gone and in the past.

So with that said, moving on to the present.

After JB left here from his visit, I got to thinking about the quality of my speaker cables and realized that there could be some major improvement here for very little cost. My experimental mindset came back online and I got busy with an idea. I wanted a set of high end flat ribbon cables that have an almost air like type of insulator in a minimalist form. These have to be at least 16 feet long and they must be heavy gauge with high purity copper as a minimum. I have a stockpile of high quality foil inductors in the shop that are collecting dust. Logically, I knew that these inductors would provide the perfect material for the conductors. I selected a set of Jensen WAX coated high purity copper foil inductors which are 16 GA @ .22 mH. The flat ribbon is .75 inch wide. When unraveled, the total length of each inductor equals just over 17.5 feet when folded in half to make two conductors for one cable. I wrapped these bare ribbons in wax paper and then applied a strip of wide vinyl electrical tape between them for insulation. These were  then slipped through a cloth like heat-shrinkable sheath which is over an inch wide but flat. The ends are terminated with heavy duty pure copper spade lugs. The total length of the cables are crafted to 16 feet in length. The heavy gauge of the ribbon should be fine at that length.


So out with the old stranded copper 12 GA speaker cables and in with the new design.


At first impression, I was not sure if these were going to work out or not. The difference in sound signature was major and way too bright for my taste. I am used to the dark relaxed signature of copper cables.  I immediately thought of back when I had a SACD player and how I always found that format to be bright and edgy in my opinion. That was a prime example of why I preferred high end vinyl over digital in the first place. It took a long time for the digital format in general to become satisfactory within my perception compared to pure analog. Much better these days.

This also reminded me of my cable experimentation using pure silver conductors. Again, very bright and with an extreme degree of upper extension. To me, this is like having a spotlight shine in your face.  Realizing that the brain needs time to focus upon something new, giving it time to adjust, I knew that this needed some time before any hasty decisions were made. This was like a night and day difference in sound signature.

So I reduced the treble levels on the ToriiMK3 amplifier down to about 70 percent to bring things into perspective. Everything sounded much more relaxed and acceptable now. I also noted that I don't have to turn the amp volume control up as high to get the same decibel level and sonic impact compared to the other cables. So you know that something major is going on in improvement. That level of gain confirms that.  What I need to confirm is whether or not I will like the overall sound signature of these new cables. I am still doing listening tests. So far, these are growing on me with some very interesting results. These indeed have a much higher degree of "air" within the top end. There is extra micro-detail coming into clear focus that I never heard before. This being in the higher frequencies. Many subtle and delicate nuances are now being revealed without constraint. Yes, these are brighter due to the higher extension which is now being revealed without reservation. It is like getting your high frequency hearing back after years of being without it. There is a great deal of positive gain within these cables compared to what I was using. I doubt that I would return to the old set. The new ribbon cables are ultra revealing and unforgiving of bad source material...just like any great part of the audio chain. The speaker cables were definitely the weak link here. Not anymore.

The main reason why I chose a flat ribbon design was to test the theory of "skin effect" upon cable conductors. Supposedly the flat area of ribbon cables are to reduce that effect, providing further extension into the higher frequencies with better clarity.

Hmmm, you know what, I may just be on to something here.

You just had a lesson in science class and didn't even realize it.

I don't believe in most of the cable hype that goes on in marketing to justify the high cost of esoteric cables. It is simple logic with respect to material quality, and geometry which makes the difference. No magic fairy dust here. Just great results at a very low cost. That scores high in my book.

I am sure that there will be much more about my impressions with these cables in the future as time progresses and I get more listening time in.
I see some very promising expectations arising from this set of ribbon cables constructed from old foil inductors. Time will tell.


So here are some images of the cables I constructed. Keep in mind that I assembled these quickly for testing and evaluation. Appearance was not my concern at the time. Now that they seem to tow the line, I think some beauty treatment may be in order. First things first.

Hey RPS. Your speaker cable exploration caught my attention, and just wanted to say that in my cable experiments, no matter IC, PC, speaker, within the usual ranges, gauge has a notable impact on everything, but generally the so important spectral balance a big one for me. I have talked about this a lot of times here, so won't go much into it now, especially since you like to play around with these things and find out for your self.

From my experiences in this system/room, 16 from 12 gauge speaker cables, especially of the exact same wire, would make substantial differences. Not that 16 gauge is definitely small in all cases, especially where other issues make the system/room too dense, thick, and bassy. But here, with wires I have tried, 16 gauge notably reduces the lower information in the balance, which in turn reveals more mids and highs in the balance.

The speaker cables I have used for a really long time are made of 999 soft-annealed copper, 999 soft-annealed silver (I find 999 soft-annealed resolving, but softer/smoother sounding, closer to UPOCC), and one 16 gauge NOS WE tinned copper. I find multiple wires making the conglomerate gauge is really nice to tune how good metals work together. But even all the same metal, I think multiple wires tend to clean and speed things up compared to one larger wire, especially with crossing the wires exploration (in my speaker cables maybe ending up with a cross a little less than every foot?). Also with blends, I think we hear more of each wire, perhaps in part due to less skin effect and all else the electrons respond to with bigger wires. So not all gauge... Still, with my Toriis, room, and all, if my memory is correct, I ended up with 13 gauge before the balances started off-neutral toward bass weighted.

Though interested, I have not explored ribbons since these sound so good it is not a priority, and I have become pretty addicted to mixing good metals. So I can't say just how gauge would effect them, but if the bass/fullness stays a little shy, and the mids-up, a little clean, could be worth some experiments with 14 or 12. I think doubling up what you have would tell some story, but I am guessing that would change the many things beyond the spectral balance more notably than a single larger ribbon would...improving the sound or not, can't say. When I tried doubling the WE 16 wires, it brought up bass some, but not enough for me, and it hardened the mids. Three got the bass close here, and these wires do have heightened mid "flare," but three sounded way too hard mids up here.

Would I purchase something like this concept? If I won the lottery and/or perhaps somehow became single again (neither of those situations are likely to ever happen). Otherwise: No. I have my system the way I want it, love the sound, and am through buying components for the near (probably far) future. I am unable to treat my room, have found other work arounds that seem effective to me.

Hello Will, thanks for your response.



16 gauge notably reduces the lower information in the balance, which in turn reveals more mids and highs in the balance.


Yes, that makes perfect sense and can't be denied concerning the electrical properties of the conductor. There always seems to be a trade off. Of course, this is where a balancing act comes into play. It boils down to a matter of taste.

I will say that so far (and I have many more hours of evaluation before the results are confirmed), that I have not noticed any major degree of reduction within the lower registers, however, there is definitely a much higher focus in the higher frequencies without a doubt.

I find 999 soft-annealed resolving, but softer/smoother sounding, closer to UPOCC), and one 16 gauge NOS WE tinned copper.


Absolutely! Like I stated, I have always preferred the darker presentation of copper for that very reason. I am very accustomed to that sound signature and therefore use it as a reference during evaluations.  I have come to the conclusion that a mixed degree of the most favorable metal formulations are what indeed create a balancing act which I favor the most. Also, there is evidence to suggest that "air" is the best insulator for a high end cable or interconnect.

Obviously, we can't have bare conductors exposed to the elements with the top reason being safety or shorting the wires.  But we can use coatings which are "air-like" that bring us much closer to that ideal form without the negative factors coming into play. Just think about the choice of materials used in expensive audiophile grade capacitors, or that of inductors, and of course, precision resistors. The thing that sets them apart is not only the choice of materials used in the construction, but in how they are designed to interact within the whole. There is a reason why foil/oil capacitors are desired so much, or the use of wax instead of oil. There is definitely a huge difference between using flat ribbons, and that of twisted cable. The characteristics of solid conductor wire and stranded conductor wire of the same gauge and purity standards have significant differences in their properties. So yes, these things matter, and they are proven to make a difference. That is a tangible set of working parameters which can't be denied. It is easy to understand why one cable is superior to another just by the logical choice of it's composition.

My problem with marketing is that they focus on Pseudoscience nonsense that can't be proven. From a logical standpoint, just "hocus pocus" set within a stage of smoke and mirrors. They prey upon the ignorance of the consumer and dazzle them with false representation that anyone with proper knowledge understands what these products really are. Just because a "magic" cable cost $1200 doesn't mean it is actually worth that, and I fail to believe that any such thing exists. Of course, if one wants to believe that, then more power to them. They just fed the deception machine with empty pockets and false promise. The problem with the audio world has always been marketing deception. "money talks and BS walks"(although the ironic thing is that BS is actually the driving force behind these products). In business, the bottom line is always what matters. They are going to gain max profits any way that they can.

The thing that matters in order for these magazine rags to be successful, is to cater to the manufacturers who spend the most money on advertising in order to fuel the revenue necessary for those "rags" to be profitable. They always base quality upon the degree of cost. If a products costs more than what a competitor has, then it MUST be better, RIGHT?  Pure rubbish and absolutely shameful!  Somehow, their product has to be clearly superior to the competitor. People are not amazed and lured in by the boring factors of metallurgy. The attention is based upon magical characteristics that are somehow going to transform their audio system by exponential degrees of improvement.

Now look, to be reasonable, would I expect cables from Monster Cable to be superior than Radio Shack? Absolutely. And should I expect cables made by Audio Quest to be superior to what Monster Cable sells? Again, absolutely! But there is good reason for that concerning the way these cables are manufactured, and the types of materials used in the construction. When we start focusing upon the higher degrees of cable production, the limitation of "return on investment" becomes absolute, and hard to prove when we talk about one cable being superior to another.

In the end, what needs to be focused upon goes back to one simple thing. You need to ask yourself, does this cable really make a sensible difference in my system for which I can truly justify it's overinflated price? If so, then congratulations, you just bought the cables perfect for your enjoyment and satisfaction. If you can honestly say that the difference is minimal and somewhat questionable, then why the hell did you waste your money on that, when it could have done much more good investing in acoustical upgrades which are guaranteed to make an improvement.

This is something that people who really want to improve their audio systems need to actually consider and understand before throwing money away on false promises.

That is another problem I have dealing with the ignorance of people who have more money than common sense. Some people are so gullible that they will believe anything that they hear, simply because they choose to. I prefer to use common sense and go with a proven winner, not some marketing hype. Look, these people have far greater issues to focus on before they even begin to worry about the quality of cables. If the room they are in flat out SUCKS acoustically, any cable, at any price, no matter how "golden" these are toted to be, are not even a factor with significance  without first correcting the very thing that is effecting the quality of their systems in the first place.

So many people would be amazed to discover just how much better their existing equipment actually sounds just by taking care of that top priority factor in the first place. This is when one can actually evaluate and know the difference between cable quality, and actually stand on the grounds of reasonable perception. Thousands of dollars invested in "supreme" cables are never going to rectify bad acoustics. Nor will the addition of the best electronics in existence.

However, once a room is satisfactory, and the orientation of equipment within the room is set up in an optimal fashion, then, and only then, can the focus upon high end cables really prove the worthiness of their design. I am not talking about the usual  response I have seen so many times that goes along the lines of "well, I think after many hours of listening, I think I heard a small change with a certain note in the music". Or they just give senseless blanket statements which really do not amount to anything tangible.  The fact is, it all comes down to Psychology. This becomes the very factor which drives the power of pseudoscience so successfully within the spectrum of marketing these products.  This goes way back to the tactics of snake oil salesmen preying upon the ignorance of people, fulfilling their hopes of finding that magical cure. We all know what they actually got, far from being any cure!


Just use common sense and practical measures. This will go a long way towards achieving that optimal goal. We all have our own personal tastes. You just have to find what satisfies you the most without being scammed by marketing deception.

And of course, it doesn't hurt to perform a little diy experimentation of your own. Remember, knowledge is power. It is that power which formulates real results. Some of the best products out there are home made. And when you look at the money saved, it just makes perfect sense.



When I tried doubling the WE 16 wires, it brought up bass some, but not enough for me, and it hardened the mids. Three got the bass close here, and these wires do have heightened mid "flare," but three sounded way too hard mids up here.


That is a great idea. I am going to consider trying that later on. It does make sense.


That was great input on your behalf. Thanks again for posting it.

Hey mrchipster,


Yes, I think that you hit that nail square on the head concerning this concept being upgraded the "Decware" way for sure!

We all know that if anyone could make this happen (IN AMERICA), and with quality standards that last a lifetime, then the clear obvious choice is a well thought out design by Steve right here in Decware land. If any other company tried to offer this unit with the same quality and warranty, then the price would be far out of most peoples reach. Only a few audiophiles would benefit from owning one.

I will tell you what is on my wish list.  There is one guarantee that will influence me instantly to place an order for a new amplifier. And right now, this is what it will take for me to even consider a new amp at this time. This is the ideal opportunity to create and promote a whole new amplifier concept based upon a proven winner. Since this circuit has to be inserted directly between the source and the amplifier, this makes for an ideal concept to actually integrate this refined circuit directly within the amplifier base. The controls are minimal, and could be placed near the rear to keep things clean cosmetically. The circuit would be switched to engage or bypass from the rest of the amplifier circuit if desired. This could be a cost saving feature for someone like myself looking for something more to have a reason for another amplifier. I would buy this new amp in a heartbeat!

Look, if you just took the same Torii design that you have now, and simply integrated this circuit, then you can consider my order being taken immediately.   If you could offer this new amp version for under $7000.00, then I am in.  

I remember a time when Decware used to send an amplifier around the country for people to evaluate in-home for a limited time. Then they had to send it to the next person to evaluate. That motivated a great deal of new buyers simply because they knew from experience what they were buying. That very concept would work well for those that are curious, but need actual proof of it's worthiness in their system. There are those of us that can easily predict that outcome based upon experience. It is not for everyone, but I believe far more will want one of these. That of course is dependent upon features and price.  People, it is my belief that if a ZROCK3 sells for over $1600 such as the one I have on order, then a unit of this profound capability should easily be worth as much, or more in my opinion. And we all know how popular the ZROCK unit is.

Yes, you are right, Decware already has it's plate full, and as the waiting list confirms, a very busy schedule to say the least. But you know what, that has never stopped Steve before when a new innovation comes about which holds great merit. And to my knowledge, there has never been a product released designed by Steve that didn't live up to its promise.

If anyone seriously wants Steve to consider this, then you better step up to the plate and let him know you are interested. This might take some convincing, but I have to convince the majority to at least consider a concept like this before that next stage can unfold.

Of course, everyone is not looking for a new amplifier. For those, a simple stand alone unit needs to be offered for a reasonable price point. Either way, I strongly believe with the right promotion, this circuit regardless of how it is implemented, will gain widespread demand and therefore sales. Once word of mouth takes off, this thing will sell itself and become the basis for a new innovative device which I think most people will favor if the design is done properly. Well, we know that if it comes from Decware, you don't have to worry about that.  If nothing else, at the very minimum, I would like to see a circuit board made available with a kit including the necessary components sold as a DIY kit for those inclined to build one themselves.  I know that the CB isn't as good as being wired point to point, but if that is all we can get, fine, I will take it.

It should be obvious by now that there is strong merit behind the technology of this circuit, and still today after all these years since it's conception.  After all, when people that are hardcore Decware buyers who demand this level of quality and performance, begin to take notice of this unit, then actually try it out and stand behind it, then that should raise some interest in the feasibility in which to bring this concept to life. We need it in our stereo systems, most people just don't realize that yet, or even why.  

There are several longtime Decware forum members here who have past experience with the Carver C9 Sonic Hologram Generator. I think that they can back me up on this assertion.  Hey, as an example, I just proved this to JB, and now he has ordered a used unit, soon to have it in his system. This would have never happened had he not experienced mine, and found out for himself how critical this circuit is with the important role it plays in two channel audio. Please take the time to talk with him, and give him a chance to explain how he feels about this. Since he ordered a unit, the answer must be positive.

I myself will never listen to audio again without this unit. If I have to build one myself, then that is the way it will have to be.  One way or another, this new design will come into existence. The unit I have is old and subject to having components fail, although no signs of that yet. I would like a newer version of this unit using a much better transformer, audiophile grade components, and a major upgrade using stepped attenuators instead of basic and limited push buttons to control the circuit. This idea has so much potential. I would hate to see it overlooked.

Not that a budget friendly base model wouldn't do the job effectively and very well with the five op-amps, but we all know how a PROPERLY implemented tube structure can take things into the next dimension of sound quality. I am sure that a tube based version would double the price, but to many, this would be justified. My take on that, have several versions of upgrades with different levels of cost to allow more people to actually experience the so important function of this device. The goal here above everything else is to perform ONE  function, and perform that function WELL.   If all I could afford was a base model, but knew it was doing the job of removing interaural-crosstalk from the speakers, then of course I would be more than happy to own one. No matter which model chosen, any form of this correction is going to be better than no correction at all.




I would consider buying a Decware version of the C-9. Not sure what the price point would be but if it was a stand-alone unit for my purposes that would be the ideal. As long as it would fit appropriately in my chain somewhere I'd be willing to give it a shot. Using tubes in parts of the circuitry would be the Decware way and probably the option I'd prefer.




My sentiments exactly!  Everything that you stated is critical to the outcome of it's potential success.  I would love to have you experience the Carver C9 for yourself.   Just like with JB, I think it would be a game changer with very serious influence. I know that you value the same things that I do in audio. For that reason, I am sure you yourself would be convinced as well.


In closing, I want to provide an example of what interaural-crosstalk does to your stereo image.

Let's use a visual perspective to make it clear as to what this anomaly actually does to distort the stereo image.

First, cut a monitor image in half, and let that represent what you see coming from the monitor source on the left and right sides having each half represented in proper perspective, representing the actual speakers.  *In other words, the left half of the visual image is displayed only on the left monitor. The right half is only seen on the right monitor.

(**If these were to be joined together, you would have a normal "complete" monitor image )


Now, to represent the extra unwanted signals that define what interaural-crosstalk creates, just imagine the following.

Imagine that there are now FOUR monitors placed directly inline. Two "extra" monitors placed within the center of the two already in place.

However, this time, the second "extra" monitor will display the image seen on the far right which is the right half of the image.

Now reverse that with the third monitor. An image of the first far left monitor will be displayed on that third monitor.

You should be able to visualize the confusing, uncoordinated visual image that would take place here. Could you imagine how difficult it would be for your brain to comprehend what your eyes see? This would be total confusion, and something which would be very unnatural for you to perceive what the actual image really is.


Now remove those two "extra" center monitors, and place the outer two monitors closer together.  Everything starts to make sense now. The total picture comes into play without the confusion. You are now submerged within the "natural" perspective. You only see the left half, and the right half in proper perspective and the total picture is clear.

That "clear" picture is what you unravel once the two extra "masking" signals are terminated.

Within the audio realm, you now have a complete three dimensional canvas with total separation of instruments placed where they should be heard in a real live performance. The left ear receives only what it is supposed to hear. The right doing the same.  This mimics exactly what real time in real space does when you hear natural sounds outdoors. The outdoor experience clarifies this outcome without question. The result is drastic, and immediate, with the majority of music played as long as the speakers and room are set up correctly. Failure to do so will limit the results. A room without acoustic control will also be limited as to the outcome. However, the correction will still be notable and worthwhile. This is critical as to how the speakers are placed as well. The listening apex is absolutely critical and of utmost importance in order for this to be completely effective.


There is no "smoke and mirrors of deception" here.  Finally, you will understand what your stereo speakers have been denying you all along.

This cure doesn't have to remain in the lost abyss any longer. It just takes the right individual to breath new life back into it. Resurrection with a real purpose.


Are we still dreaming?

Now, back to the discussion on speaker cables.

From what Will was saying in the earlier post, he brought up a very good point that got me to thinking.

I am considering that idea of "doubling" the effective surface area for each conductor. What I have in mind is to run two ribbon strips in a twisted formation around a cotton rope core. The leads would be run perhaps in a criss-cross fashion with a controlled degree of space between each turn.

Possibly, it might be a good idea to encapsulate that with wax impregnated cotton material before protecting the cable with a flex shield. Just one of many variables to consider.

This would double the actual gauge factor for which should balance the perspective of the outcome to a more agreeable state of coherence. I would still retain the gain within the top end, but without losing anything in the lower midrange or bass frequencies. This makes enough sense to warrant experimentation. I would love to add a couple of pure silver conductors into the mix, but my budget is going to exclude that idea for now.

I am willing to try something new if it makes enough sense to invest in. The DIY way of course.


Also, nice experiment with the speaker cables. Seems like they may be working out nicely and with some tweaks might give you the frequency range you're looking for. There sure are a lot of variations on a theme when it comes to cables of all kinds. I agree that air is a great insulator. I have some speaker and IC cables that implement to some degree what you're discussing here. The speaker cables use stranded OFC copper to make up each individual conductor and each one is then either coated with silver, tin, or left pure copper to deliver the proper frequencies to the speaker.

Thanks mrchipster.

And more affirmation continues with what is going on within these cables. It seems that many of us are finding out the same degree of difference between these cable geometries. As long as the physics of it make sense, then I feel there is a reason to experiment. Too expensive to experiment with retail models, but in the DIY world, it is easy and forgiving in cost. The materials can also be repurposed into another cable design. Nothing really lost. Eventually, the right combination is found.


This could drive us all crazy!