On Feb 20, 5:38*pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:

Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers (8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.

Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. *Make sure the resistor can
take the power.

Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.

Top tip!

Bill

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

On Feb 20, 3:23*pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:
"David WE Roberts" wrote in ...









Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers (8-16
ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.

So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?

Otherwise I'll probably have to chuck them.
Apart from anything else I think that 6 ohm speakers are fairly rare, and
that most speakers come in at 8 ohm.

Sucked it and saw.
All seems to work O.K.
AFAICT the 'surround' speakers are at a slightly lower volume than the main
speakers but there isn't a gread deal in it.
Whatever, it sounds nice.

They usually do well in filling a large room but don't always stand up
to extended listening.


Shame about the other stack, but it dodn't really owe us anything.

In message
,
thirty-six writes
On Feb 20, 5:38*pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:

Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers
(8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit
likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.

Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. *Make sure the resistor can
take the power.

Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.

Top tip!

Bill

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

Care to explain (briefly)?
--
Ian

On 20/02/2012 11:14, Martin Brown wrote:

It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly.

Highly unlikely - the capacitance won't be that much higher than with
any other type of 2-wire line. Most amplifiers are stable with load
capacitances at least a couple of orders of magnitude more than
presented by a typical speaker cable run .

You really want the equivalent of about 1mm^2 cross section of copper
(or more) in each wire of a decent speaker cable intended to preserve
bass response.

Possibly OTT. The only thing that matters is the total (loop)
resistance in the speaker lead, but it doesn't have to be absurdly low,
only low compared to the resistance of the speaker's voice coil - since
that is what dominates in the 'damping circuit'. In practice there will
be no audible or measurable improvement from reducing the cable's
resistance below about 5% of the nominal impedance (and 10% is quite
good enough if you're not super-critical). Hence the heftiness of cable
required is entirely dependent on the length of run.

Basic figure of 8 speaker cable using annealed copper is fine.
You don't need stuff hand spun by mermaids in an oxygen free atmosphere.

We'd all agree on that, I hope:
http://www.douglas-self.com/ampins/f...ailproj.htm#p8

--
Andy

In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.

I used to use the old thin stuff meant for 405 line TV but have ran
out.

Just as well - it would be a poor match for the speaker in a 625 line TV.

--
*Real men don't waste their hormones growing hair

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 10:38 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
thirty-six wrote:

Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.

I used to use the old thin stuff meant for 405 line TV but have ran
out.
The inner core would be 0.6mm so the return resistance would be quite
high per unit length.

Bill

thirty-six wrote:

Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.

Top tip!

Bill

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

Hey! We've invented the telephone!

Bill

Ian Jackson wrote:

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

Care to explain (briefly)?

Please keep formulae to a minimum.

Bill

On 21/02/2012 10:23, Bill Wright wrote:
Ian Jackson wrote:
[thirty-six wrote]
The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

Care to explain (briefly)?

That will be difficult...

Please keep formulae to a minimum.

Don't worry Bill, the proposition is piffle.

--
Andy

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article
,
wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want

From which storybook did you find that gem?


Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot


NORMALLY You put an RF choke in series with the speaker in the amp
design itself. Some cheapskates leave it out...

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 5:38 pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:
Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers (8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.
Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. Make sure the resistor can
take the power.
Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.

Top tip!

Bill

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

I love the way you tell em.

Not much experience of electronics then?

On Feb 21, 8:20*am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
In message
,
thirty-six writes









On Feb 20, 5:38*pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:

Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers
(8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit
likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.

Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. *Make sure the resistor can
take the power.

Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.

Top tip!

Bill

The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.

Care to explain (briefly)?
--
Ian

There is reactance and the amplifier responds to that compounding the
lack of linearity in what isn't a transmission line.

On Feb 21, 10:19*am, Bill Wright wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 10:38 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *thirty-six wrote:

Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.

I used to use the old thin stuff meant for 405 line TV but have ran
out.

The inner core would be 0.6mm so the return resistance would be quite
high per unit length.


It's acceptable. The greater linearity (lack of reactance) makes it a
much better choice.

On Feb 21, 12:53*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article
,
* * *wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want

From which storybook did you find that gem?

Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot

There's normally a loudspeaker unit at the end of the wire. Your
claims are fallacious.

NORMALLY You put an RF choke in series with the speaker in the amp
design itself. Some cheapskates leave it out...

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 12:53 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want
From which storybook did you find that gem?
Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot

There's normally a loudspeaker unit at the end of the wire. Your
claims are fallacious.

doesn't matter if there is.

The endpoint impedance of the wire at HF/RF is of little impact on its
impedance overall - that's ALL about capacitance and coax is simply
more capacitative than T & E. something like 50-150 pF/meter.

Twin lead - 300 ohm ribbon cable - is in the 10-20pF/meter range.

I would expect that T & E would fall somewhere between the two.

I see you know the square root of **** all about the design -
inadvertent or otherwise - of RF oscillators. Or power amplifiers.

I must have designed 10-20 in my time and probably the thing that took
longest was making sure they were RF stable with anything stuck on the
output.

By number, about 6-10 components are there to actually ensure this, and
to ensure its safe whatever the bozo user does to the output short of
stuffing live mains into it,

Capacitors across teh output are just another ting you check for..

Bear in mind that some cheapskate manufacturers will substitute cheaper
or lower spec devices and/or simply 'remove components' until the design
doesn't work. Then put the last one back in..

I saw a lot of that in early far east kit..parts simply missing off the PCB.

Some was legitimate - they would use old boards with newer transistors
that didn't need the extra stabilising. Some was not tho. Pure penny
pinching.



NORMALLY You put an RF choke in series with the speaker in the amp
design itself. Some cheapskates leave it out...

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 8:20 am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
In message
,
thirty-six writes









On Feb 20, 5:38 pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:
Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers
(8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit
likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.
Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. Make sure the resistor can
take the power.
Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.
Top tip!
Bill
The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.
Care to explain (briefly)?
--
Ian

There is reactance and the amplifier responds to that compounding the
lack of linearity in what isn't a transmission line.

More gobbledygook!

cables are linear.

Diodes are non linear.

The reactance of the cable has no effect whatsoever at audio
frequencies. It is only significant at HF/RF frequencies.

The resistance, however, has both.

More proof you are a complete plonker.

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 10:19 am, Bill Wright wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 10:38 am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
I used to use the old thin stuff meant for 405 line TV but have ran
out.
The inner core would be 0.6mm so the return resistance would be quite
high per unit length.


It's acceptable. The greater linearity (lack of reactance) makes it a
much better choice.


"The greater linearity (lack of reactance) "

linearity has absolutely NOTHING to do with reactance.

Let me guess, you write for a HiFi magazine?

On Feb 22, 4:03*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 12:53 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
* * *wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want
From which storybook did you find that gem?
Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot

There's normally a loudspeaker unit at the end of the wire. *Your
claims are fallacious.

doesn't matter if there is.

The endpoint impedance of the wire at HF/RF is of little impact on its
impedance overall - that's ALL about capacitance and *coax is simply
more capacitative than T & E. something like 50-150 pF/meter.

Twin lead - 300 ohm ribbon cable - is in the 10-20pF/meter range.

I would expect that T & E would fall somewhere between the two.

I see you know the square root of **** all about the design -
inadvertent or otherwise - of RF oscillators. Or power amplifiers.

Bull****ter!


I must have designed 10-20 in my time and probably the thing that took
longest was making sure they were RF stable with anything stuck on the
output.

Irellevant.

By number, about 6-10 components are there to actually ensure this, and
to ensure its safe whatever the bozo user does to the output short of
stuffing live mains into it,

Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.


Capacitors across teh output are just another ting you check for..

Bear in mind that some cheapskate manufacturers will substitute cheaper
or lower spec devices and/or simply 'remove components' until the design
doesn't work. Then put the last one back in..

I saw a lot of that in early far east kit..parts simply missing off the PCB.

Yes, and ...

Some was legitimate - they would use old boards with newer transistors
that didn't need the extra stabilising. Some was not tho. Pure penny
pinching.

Still has nothing to do with choosing speaker wires.







NORMALLY You put an RF choke in series with the speaker in the amp
design itself. Some cheapskates leave it out...

On Feb 22, 4:06*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 8:20 am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
In message
,
thirty-six writes

On Feb 20, 5:38 pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:
Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers
(8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit
likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.
Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one..
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. *Make sure the resistor can
take the power.
Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.
Top tip!
Bill
The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.
Care to explain (briefly)?
--
Ian

There is reactance and the amplifier responds to that compounding the
lack of linearity in what isn't a transmission line.

More gobbledygook!

cables are linear.

Diodes are non linear.

The reactance of the cable has no effect whatsoever at audio
frequencies. It is only significant at HF/RF frequencies.

Get beyond the "beginners guide to..." and perform simple listening
tests with cables of equivalent x-sect on typical amplifiers, not
hypothetical amps with pure power supplies.


The resistance, however, has both.

More proof you are a complete plonker.

Odd that I managed to get 98% for level III electronics (circuit
design) in 1985. They must have been lying to me. ;-)

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:06 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 8:20 am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
In message
,
thirty-six writes
On Feb 20, 5:38 pm, Bill Wright wrote:
RobertL wrote:
On Feb 17, 5:33 pm, NT wrote:
On Feb 17, 4:09 pm, "David WE Roberts" wrote:
Still fettling my Akai stero system.
Base unit with tape is now working after new fuse inserted.
CD transport naffed - checked by trying on other system.
So I have decided to chuck the second partly broken stereo stack and keep
the speakers.
However, just realised that the speakers are 6 ohm, and the connectors on
the back of the amp say Speakers (6-16ohm) and Surround Speakers
(8-16 ohm).
Grr....gnarghh....there goes my plan to use the spare set of speakers for
surround speakers.
So is running 6 ohm speakers on an 8-16 ohm speaker circuit
likely to blow
the speakers or the amplifier?
Is there an easy way to uprate the speakers to 8 ohm?
No.
Well, you could simply put a 2 ohm resistor in series with each one.
Then you'd be sure not to damage the amp. Make sure the resistor can
take the power.
Why not put the speakers a hundred yards up the road? The cable
resistance would then provide the extra 2 ohms.
Top tip!
Bill
The reactance of twin wire will knock off both high and low
frequencies, due to the way negative feedback loops work, leaving the
sound more like telephone reproduction.
Care to explain (briefly)?
--
Ian
There is reactance and the amplifier responds to that compounding the
lack of linearity in what isn't a transmission line.
More gobbledygook!

cables are linear.

Diodes are non linear.

The reactance of the cable has no effect whatsoever at audio
frequencies. It is only significant at HF/RF frequencies.

Get beyond the "beginners guide to..." and perform simple listening
tests with cables of equivalent x-sect on typical amplifiers, not
hypothetical amps with pure power supplies.


Dear boy I used to DESIGN HiFi amplifiers for a living.

And test them with instruments and ears.


The resistance, however, has both.

More proof you are a complete plonker.

Odd that I managed to get 98% for level III electronics (circuit
design) in 1985. They must have been lying to me. ;-)

They were. Or you are (more likely) By that time I had desinged or
developed over 20 different power amplifiers for everything from audio,
to stadium and guitar usage. Hardly hypothetical.


And spent more time peering into oscilloscopes, distortion meters
spectrum analysers and the like than you had had hot dinners, and at the
far end of coils of speaker cables too.

Id also worked on video frequency power amplifiers to drive fast CRTs
for military applications. Getting 5W at 20Mhz is not easy, even today,
when you want linearity.

Not that you appear to understand what that means.

Which suggests you are just an engineering trainspotter. You really know
noting, and its all big words from magazines.

In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
There is reactance and the amplifier responds to that compounding the
lack of linearity in what isn't a transmission line.

Care to speculate on the reactance of the average speaker system?

--
*When I'm not in my right mind, my left mind gets pretty crowded *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

--
*It is wrong to ever split an infinitive *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Feb 22, 4:56*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:

Get beyond the "beginners guide to..." and perform simple listening
tests with cables of equivalent x-sect on typical amplifiers, not
hypothetical amps with pure power supplies.

Dear boy I used to DESIGN HiFi amplifiers for a living.

Well old fellow, things have moved on a little from then, although my
grandfather was using co-ax speaker wiring at least from 1960's with
tube amplifiers.

And test them with instruments and ears.

Phase shifts are not readily detected unless one specifically looks
for them and will tire a listener over a long period.

The resistance, however, has both.

More proof you are a complete plonker.

Odd that I managed to get 98% for level III electronics (circuit
design) in 1985. *They must have been lying to me. *;-)

They were. *Or you are (more likely) By that time I had desinged or

There's no likely about it, I attended all lessons while most of the
class were playing football and so was receiving one to one tuition at
times. These lessons were advanced into level IV and much practical
knowledge was also received from an extremely knowledgable tutor who
actually enjoyed his job when he had students who listened.

developed over 20 different power amplifiers for everything from audio,
to stadium and guitar usage. Hardly hypothetical.

So nothing to do with co-ax.

And spent more time peering into oscilloscopes, distortion meters
spectrum analysers and the like than you had had hot dinners, and at the
far end of coils of speaker cables too.

Only by miking up a loudspeaker can one get an indication of audio
performance in reproduction.

Id also worked on video frequency power amplifiers to drive fast CRTs
for military applications. Getting 5W at 20Mhz is not easy, even today,
when you want linearity.

Not that you appear to understand what that means.

Which suggests you are just an engineering trainspotter. You really know
noting, and its all big words from magazines.

So you havn't tried it. Extended listening tests from good sources
demonstrate the effectiveness of using co-ax over zip-wire with 20'
lengths. Try it.

On 22/02/2012 16:32, thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:03 pm, The Natural
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 12:53 pm, The Natural
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want
From which storybook did you find that gem?
Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot

There's normally a loudspeaker unit at the end of the wire. Your
claims are fallacious.

doesn't matter if there is.

The endpoint impedance of the wire at HF/RF is of little impact on its
impedance overall - that's ALL about capacitance and coax is simply
more capacitative than T& E. something like 50-150 pF/meter.

Twin lead - 300 ohm ribbon cable - is in the 10-20pF/meter range.

I would expect that T& E would fall somewhere between the two.

I see you know the square root of **** all about the design -
inadvertent or otherwise - of RF oscillators. Or power amplifiers.

Bull****ter!

ROFL. You spout random buzzword salad and then call him a bull****ter.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.


Me neither..

36 .. your in a hole, stop digging....
--
Tony Sayer

On Feb 22, 5:58*pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 22/02/2012 16:32, thirty-six wrote:









On Feb 22, 4:03 pm, The Natural
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 21, 12:53 pm, The Natural
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:14 am, Martin
wrote:
On 20/02/2012 10:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
* * * *wrote:
Cheap co-axial wire is
most suitable for remote speaker connects and simple ellipticals or
dual cone ellipticals work well for this.
Co-ax for speakers? You live and learn.
It wouldn't surprise me if some power amplifiers reacted to having coax
wire used to connect to speakers by oscillating wildly. You really want
*From which storybook did you find that gem?
Oh its no story. Not a few rather poorly QC'ed or poorly designed amps
will go mad with a capacitor on the output, and coax is a few tens of pF
a foot

There's normally a loudspeaker unit at the end of the wire. *Your
claims are fallacious.

doesn't matter if there is.

The endpoint impedance of the wire at HF/RF is of little impact on its
impedance overall - that's ALL about capacitance and *coax is simply
more capacitative than T& *E. something like 50-150 pF/meter.

Twin lead - 300 ohm ribbon cable - is in the 10-20pF/meter range.

I would expect that T& *E would fall somewhere between the two.

I see you know the square root of **** all about the design -
inadvertent or otherwise - of RF oscillators. Or power amplifiers.

Bull****ter!

ROFL. You spout random buzzword salad and then call him a bull****ter.

Where's this widely oscillating amplifier due to co-axial cable you
speak of?
It seems to me you were doing nothing but ****-stirring. I've not
used any buzzwords intentionally, that's in your imagination and what
I have said is only in response. It seems more likely you can't bear
the thought of being wrong and wasting £100 on speaker wire when some
salvaged co-ax would have done the job better. Almond oil is useful
in getting the sand out of your ears, maybe after treatment you will
hear the difference.

On Feb 22, 6:09*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
* thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. The comparison is ill-founded.


36 .. your in a hole, stop digging....
--
Tony Sayer

In article
..com, thirty-six scribeth thus
On Feb 22, 6:09*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
* thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. The comparison is ill-founded.


Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....



--
Tony Sayer

On Feb 22, 7:17*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
.com, thirty-six scribeth thus









On Feb 22, 6:09*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
* thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. *The comparison is ill-founded.

Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....

--
Tony Sayer

You've obviously a bigger spade.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

yeah, but what would they know about hifi eh? Compared with 'thirty-six'

thirty-six wrote:


A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. The comparison is ill-founded.


You owe me a new keyboard..


Do you just pick random phrases out of a catalogue and string them together?

Or have you recently stopped taking medication?

On 22/02/2012 19:17, tony sayer wrote:
In
.com, scribeth thus
On Feb 22, 6:09 pm, tony wrote:
In , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. The comparison is ill-founded.


Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....

His credibility was almost zero before these latest posts but is now so
far below that TNPs previous expression "square root of **** all" will
have to deal with negative numbers.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

thirty-six wrote:

Where's this widely oscillating amplifier due to co-axial cable you
speak of?

Well in my design years, they tended to go up in a heap of smoke in less
than a second, after knocking out teh hiome service on long wave.. fr a
couple of seconds :-)

so that's where they *went*.

Till I learnt how to isolate the expensive bits from the effect of
capacitors across the output.


It seems to me you were doing nothing but ****-stirring. I've not
used any buzzwords intentionally, that's in your imagination and what
I have said is only in response. It seems more likely you can't bear
the thought of being wrong and wasting £100 on speaker wire when some
salvaged co-ax would have done the job better. Almond oil is useful
in getting the sand out of your ears, maybe after treatment you will
hear the difference.

Dear boy, my speaker wire such as it is, is T & E buried in the floor.
And then a bit of twin flex.

thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:56 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:

Get beyond the "beginners guide to..." and perform simple listening
tests with cables of equivalent x-sect on typical amplifiers, not
hypothetical amps with pure power supplies.
Dear boy I used to DESIGN HiFi amplifiers for a living.

Well old fellow, things have moved on a little from then, although my
grandfather was using co-ax speaker wiring at least from 1960's with
tube amplifiers.

And test them with instruments and ears.

Phase shifts are not readily detected unless one specifically looks
for them and will tire a listener over a long period.
The resistance, however, has both.
More proof you are a complete plonker.
Odd that I managed to get 98% for level III electronics (circuit
design) in 1985. They must have been lying to me. ;-)
They were. Or you are (more likely) By that time I had desinged or

There's no likely about it, I attended all lessons while most of the
class were playing football and so was receiving one to one tuition at
times. These lessons were advanced into level IV and much practical
knowledge was also received from an extremely knowledgable tutor who
actually enjoyed his job when he had students who listened.


Oh you have a technicians city and guilds designed for equipment
maintenance.

Not a degree at all. Not eeven an HND


developed over 20 different power amplifiers for everything from audio,
to stadium and guitar usage. Hardly hypothetical.

So nothing to do with co-ax.
And spent more time peering into oscilloscopes, distortion meters
spectrum analysers and the like than you had had hot dinners, and at the
far end of coils of speaker cables too.

Only by miking up a loudspeaker can one get an indication of audio
performance in reproduction.

What in earth is wrong with your ears?


And of course you are completely WRONG. If what is coming out of the
amplifier is exactly the same what is going into the loudspeaker then
its a sure sign that the cable is doing the job of not getting in the way.



Id also worked on video frequency power amplifiers to drive fast CRTs
for military applications. Getting 5W at 20Mhz is not easy, even today,
when you want linearity.

Not that you appear to understand what that means.

Which suggests you are just an engineering trainspotter. You really know
noting, and its all big words from magazines.

So you havn't tried it. Extended listening tests from good sources
demonstrate the effectiveness of using co-ax over zip-wire with 20'
lengths. Try it.


hahahahah.

Extended listening test have clearly demonstrated that you are a total
plonker.

Added to list of other plonkers.

Bye.

On Feb 22, 7:55*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
Where's this widely oscillating amplifier due to co-axial cable you
speak of?

Well in my design years, they tended to go up in a heap of smoke in less
than a second, *after knocking out teh hiome service on long wave.. fr a
couple of seconds :-)

so that's where they *went*.

Till I learnt how to isolate the expensive bits from the effect of
capacitors across the output.

It seems to me you were doing nothing but ****-stirring. *I've not
used any buzzwords intentionally, that's in your imagination and what
I have said is only in response. *It seems more likely you can't bear
the thought of being wrong and wasting £100 on speaker wire when some
salvaged co-ax would have done the job better. *Almond oil is useful
in getting the sand out of your ears, maybe after treatment you will
hear the difference.

Dear boy, my speaker wire such as it is, is T & E buried in the floor.
And then a bit of twin flex.

How precisely are you using the T&E?

In article
s.com, thirty-six scribeth thus
On Feb 22, 7:17*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
.com, thirty-six scribeth thus









On Feb 22, 6:09*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
* thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. *The comparison is ill-founded.

Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....

--
Tony Sayer

You've obviously a bigger spade.

Nope...

Time spent working at Rupert Neve, Audix broadcast, Pye TV transmitters
the BBC, Cambridge systems Tech (Audiolab)

and yourself, you in pro audio?..


--
Tony Sayer

On Feb 22, 8:00*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:56 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
thirty-six wrote:

Get beyond the "beginners guide to..." and perform simple listening
tests with cables of equivalent x-sect on typical amplifiers, not
hypothetical amps with pure power supplies.
Dear boy I used to DESIGN HiFi amplifiers for a living.

Well old fellow, things have moved on a little from then, although my
grandfather was using co-ax speaker wiring at least from 1960's with
tube amplifiers.

And test them with instruments and ears.

Phase shifts are not readily detected unless one specifically looks
for them and will tire a listener over a long period.
The resistance, however, has both.
More proof you are a complete plonker.
Odd that I managed to get 98% for level III electronics (circuit
design) in 1985. *They must have been lying to me. *;-)
They were. *Or you are (more likely) By that time I had desinged or

There's no likely about it, I attended all lessons while most of the
class were playing football and so was receiving one to one tuition at
times. *These lessons were advanced into level IV and much practical
knowledge was also received from an extremely knowledgable tutor who
actually enjoyed his job when he had students who listened.

Oh you have a technicians city and guilds designed for equipment
maintenance.

Not a degree at all. Not eeven an HND

The award was for a BTEC OND but there were extra modules included and
tested beyond the requirements for the award.

developed over 20 different power amplifiers for everything from audio,
to stadium and guitar usage. Hardly hypothetical.

So nothing to do with co-ax.
And spent more time peering into oscilloscopes, distortion meters
spectrum analysers and the like than you had had hot dinners, and at the
far end of coils of speaker cables too.

Only by miking up a loudspeaker can one get an indication of audio
performance in reproduction.

What in earth is wrong with your ears?

And of course you are completely WRONG. If what is coming out of the
amplifier is exactly the same what is going into the loudspeaker then
its a sure sign that the cable is doing the job of not getting in the way..

Oh don't tell me you tested amplifier response on a resistive load.

Id also worked on video frequency power amplifiers to drive fast CRTs
for military applications. Getting 5W at 20Mhz is not easy, even today,
when you want linearity.

Not that you appear to understand what that means.

Which suggests you are just an engineering trainspotter. You really know
noting, and its all big words from magazines.

So you havn't tried it. *Extended listening tests from good sources
demonstrate the effectiveness of using co-ax over zip-wire with 20'
lengths. *Try it.

hahahahah.

Obviously too much for you to bear.

Extended listening test have clearly demonstrated that you are a total
plonker.

Added to list of other plonkers.

Bye.

On Feb 22, 8:22*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
s.com, thirty-six scribeth thus









On Feb 22, 7:17*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
.com, thirty-six scribeth thus

On Feb 22, 6:09*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus

In article
,
* thirty-six wrote:
Normal conditions matter to choice of speaker wire not hypothetical no-
functioning conditions.

I've seen loudspeaker installations in some of the finest recording
studios in the country. Custom built regardless of cost. And never once
have I seen co-ax cable used for them.

Me neither..

A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. *The comparison is ill-founded.

Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....

--
Tony Sayer

You've obviously a bigger spade.

Nope...

Time spent working at Rupert Neve, Audix broadcast, Pye TV transmitters
the BBC, Cambridge systems Tech (Audiolab)

and yourself, you in pro audio?..

--
Tony Sayer

Nope, I had some temporary contracts early on with ILR, theater and
band support alongside repair work but generally found that the
rewards were unrelated to effort and the lack of appreciation caused
me to abandon my quest for the ideal job.

tony sayer wrote:
In article
s.com, thirty-six scribeth thus

You've obviously a bigger spade.

Nope...

Time spent working at Rupert Neve, Audix broadcast, Pye TV transmitters
the BBC, Cambridge systems Tech (Audiolab)

and yourself, you in pro audio?..


No I think he's in Rehab..

Martin Brown :
On 22/02/2012 19:17, tony sayer wrote:
In
.com, scribeth thus
A recording environment is a specific application, different from a
domestic installation. Radiated signals are minimised in the studio,
usually with screened twisted pair, an unecessary expense for
reproduction only. The comparison is ill-founded.


Fer fecks sake stop digging a bigger hole!....

His credibility was almost zero before these latest posts but is now so
far below that TNPs previous expression "square root of **** all" will
have to deal with negative numbers.

In other words, he needs to get real.

--
Mike Barnes