John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
Phaedeaux wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

The impedance graphs and text on the cited web page are made-up lies.
But I suppose the wilder the lies, the more audiophools will pay.

Audio doesn't really matter anyhow.

Didn't one of the electronics magazines once publish a series of A/B
comparisons of various ultra-expensive speaker cables against zero-guage
welding cable? As I recall, the 0 AWG pair performed better in both the
instrumental and listening tests than any of the audiosnob brands. Of
course, the expensive-is-always-better crowd countered that the cables
must be matched to the combination of amp, speaker and listening room.
One day, I'd like to see how a panel of audiosnobs would rate a _live_
performance heard through an opaque (but acoustically transparent)
curtain.

About the only thing a speaker cable can do is add resistance (lowers
volume and can change speaker damping) or add inductance (attenuates
highs slightly, not generally audibly). Widely spaced pairs have more
inductance; an aggressively bad design can hit something like 20
uH/meter.

Which is why I rejected sucha pattern recently for an install. I assume it
had been made that way just to suit audiophool tastes.

The NMR gradient cable that I replaced was made of two pieces of RG8
coax, using the centers for the current out and return, with both
shields grounded for EMI reasons. That design maximized both
resistance and inductance, so the load that I was driving was more
cable than gradient coil.

"Aggressively bad"

Some laser drivers make a cable out of two pieces of copper foil with
a thin double-adhesive insulator between. They get below 2 ohms as I
recall.

I have to say I liked you 'home made coax' idea. How might the numbers turn out
when using typical 2.5 mm2 or 4mm2 AWM ? Sorry we don't understand AWG here
without tables or charts. I guess you'll want a fairly thin sheath over the
centre conductor. Not sure if plain AWM would be ideal for that.

Graham