A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
interesting. It is at

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html

Note that I decided to put this on the Scots Guide not AudioMisc. This is
because the page shows a fair bit of 'hard sums' - i.e. the algebra for the
two approaches. However even if hard sums make your head ache, the results
may be of interest.  :-)

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Jim Lesurf wrote:
> A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
> relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
> element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
> interesting. It is at
> 
> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
> 
> Note that I decided to put this on the Scots Guide not AudioMisc. This is
> because the page shows a fair bit of 'hard sums' - i.e. the algebra for the
> two approaches. However even if hard sums make your head ache, the results
> may be of interest.  :-)
> 
> Slainte,
> 
> Jim
> 

Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many 
counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the 
flattest response - the expected result of having a better 
characteristic impedance match. Doing the usual maths on your table of 
cables

A = 8.5
B = 176
C = 153
D = 59
E = 211
G = 48.76

So as far as top end flatness goes, characteristic impedance is the best 
predictor of performance. Despite high capacitance, which might be 
thought of as predicting a sagging top end, the high cap cable (A) at 
8.5 ohms impedance is the only cable which is actually flat. And of 
course a  further implication of this is that this cable does not 
present a capacitive load to the amp - it connects the speaker almost 
invisibly, presenting the speaker impedance to the amp essentially 
unchanged.

Cable A is also interesting in comparing the transmission line and 
lumped models. The lumped model, at the top end, actually climbs away in 
the wrong direction - this is part of the initial rise in the lowpass 
filter model it uses, before the final plunge at the turnover frequency.

And of course this is for cables of 5 metres. There are many audio apps 
that use cable considerably longer than this, which makes it important 
to think about the applicability of models. For much longer lines it is 
clearly necessary to use either the proper transmission line model, or 
subdivide the lumped model into many smaller sections. Making that 
breakpoint decision needs careful thought, and probably several 
calculations to make sure you have it right. As you know, for myself I 
say to hell with it and use the transmission line model which I know 
will be right every time - no decisions necessary.

Finally, also as predicted, the rise in impedance at low frequencies 
brought about by the resistive terms in the lumped cable impedance makes 
absolutely no difference to the low frequency flatness of the cable. It 
merely changes the overall loss.

Thanks for taking the time and trouble to do all the sums.

d

Don Pearce wrote:

> Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many 
> counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the 
> flattest response - the expected result of having a better 
> characteristic impedance match.

You could also say that it is the low inductance cable that has the 
flattest response.
That's not at all counter-intuitive.

-- 
Eiron.

Eiron wrote:
> Don Pearce wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many 
>> counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the 
>> flattest response - the expected result of having a better 
>> characteristic impedance match.
> 
> You could also say that it is the low inductance cable that has the 
> flattest response.
> That's not at all counter-intuitive.
>


So which are you going to pick, and under what circumstances? Go with 
the characteristic impedance and you will be right every time, because 
it contains both L and C in the correct proportions.

d

Jim Lesurf wrote:

> A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
> relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
> element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
> interesting. It is at
>
> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
>
> Note that I decided to put this on the Scots Guide not AudioMisc. This is
> because the page shows a fair bit of 'hard sums' - i.e. the algebra for the
> two approaches. However even if hard sums make your head ache, the results
> may be of interest.  :-)

Yes, always been interested in this. I will peruse. Thanks for doing the hard
work.

Graham

Eiron wrote:

> Don Pearce wrote:
>
> > Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many
> > counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the
> > flattest response - the expected result of having a better
> > characteristic impedance match.
>
> You could also say that it is the low inductance cable that has the
> flattest response.
> That's not at all counter-intuitive.

Interesting. I just selected a low inductance cable for a certain job over
one where some attempt had been made to make it 'an impedance' by having
the cores kept further apart.

Graham

"Don Pearce"
> Jim Lesurf wrote:

>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html

> Doing the usual maths on your table of  cables
>
> A = 8.5

** Cable  "A" would be a woven multi-strand cable like "Tocord"  - it was 
sold under other names too.

> So as far as top end flatness goes, characteristic impedance is the best 
> predictor of performance. Despite high capacitance, which might be thought 
> of as predicting a sagging top end, the high cap cable (A) at 8.5 ohms 
> impedance is the only cable which is actually flat. And of course a 
> further implication of this is that this cable does not present a 
> capacitive load to the amp - it connects the speaker almost invisibly, 
> presenting the speaker impedance to the amp essentially unchanged.


** Jim got the results he did because of the *artificial* way he set up the 
model.

1. The amplifier has no output impedance at any frequency.

2. The speaker load is an 8 ohm resistor.

In the real world,  NEITHER  of these is EVER  the case.

Cable "A"  ( which is an 8.5 ohm transmission line)  WILL in fact present a 
severely capacitive load to the drive amplifier when used with real 
speakers, virtually all of which have a steadily rising impedance above 
20kHz.

Also, if the cables are ever attached at the amplifier end but not at the 
speaker end the load is a pure capacitance.

Some hi-fi amplifiers are highly allergic to capacitive loads in the ranger 
of 5nF to 30nF and immediately break into supersonic oscillation -  thence 
overheat and self destruct.

Most NAIM models were famous for this and the power amps made by Phase 
Linear.

Due to its penchant for amplifier destruction, dealers became reluctant to 
stock it and Tocord was soon pulled off the market.  Other 8 ohm 
transmission line cables have exactly he same problem.



.....   Phil

"Jim Lesurf"  wrote in message 
news:4fd70aea15noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
>A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
> relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
> element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
> interesting. It is at
>
> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
>
> Note that I decided to put this on the Scots Guide not AudioMisc. This is
> because the page shows a fair bit of 'hard sums' - i.e. the algebra for 
> the
> two approaches. However even if hard sums make your head ache, the results
> may be of interest.  :-)
>

**Nice work Jim. It backs up what I've been telling people for a couple of 
decades. As Phil has stated, what would be interesting would be to do the 
same analysis with real-world speakers. Particularly ESLs. I've measured one 
pair which has a response that falls to less than 1 Ohm at about 17kHz. Low 
inductance cables tend to be essential with such speakers.


-- 
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Phil Allison"

>> Jim Lesurf wrote:
>
>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
>
>> Doing the usual maths on your table of  cables
>>
>> A = 8.5
>
> ** Cable  "A" would be a woven multi-strand cable like "Tocord"  - it was 
> sold under other names too.


** I have placed a pic of a " Tocord " speaker lead on ABSE  -  since I 
could not find one on the net.

There are 72 green and 72 copper coloured strands  -  each enamel coated so 
are all insulated. There is a central clear plastic core ( not visible in 
the pic) of about 4mm diameter which the 144 strands are woven around. The 
outer sheath is only 7mm diameter and so the cable is quite flexible.

In order to fit a termination like the banana plugs shown, one must first 
burn off the enamel coating with a hot soldering iron and lots of solder. 
Quite easy really.



.....   Phil

Phil Allison wrote:
> "Phil Allison"
> 
>>> Jim Lesurf wrote:
>>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
>>> Doing the usual maths on your table of  cables
>>>
>>> A = 8.5
>> ** Cable  "A" would be a woven multi-strand cable like "Tocord"  - it was 
>> sold under other names too.
> 
> 
> ** I have placed a pic of a " Tocord " speaker lead on ABSE  -  since I 
> could not find one on the net.
> 
> There are 72 green and 72 copper coloured strands  -  each enamel coated so 
> are all insulated. There is a central clear plastic core ( not visible in 
> the pic) of about 4mm diameter which the 144 strands are woven around. The 
> outer sheath is only 7mm diameter and so the cable is quite flexible.
> 
> In order to fit a termination like the banana plugs shown, one must first 
> burn off the enamel coating with a hot soldering iron and lots of solder. 
> Quite easy really.
> 
>

Goertz also make similar cables.

The real danger with these cables comes when they are mistreated - a 
heavy table leg stood on them, for instance. When that happens it is 
possible for the enamel to rub through between two strands; you then 
have an instant short circuit which can't be fixed. A new cable is the 
only option.

d

In article <NIqdnXW8npeyFCTVnZ2dnUVZ8qDinZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Don
Pearce
 wrote:
> Jim Lesurf wrote:
> > A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
> > relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
> > element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
> > interesting. It is at
> > 
> > http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html


> Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many
> counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the
> flattest response - the expected result of having a better
> characteristic impedance match. Doing the usual maths on your table of
> cables

> A = 8.5 B = 176 C = 153 D = 59 E = 211 G = 48.76

> So as far as top end flatness goes, characteristic impedance is the best
> predictor of performance. 

That is OK if your concern is well above 20kHz for "top end". However the
actual cable impedances are well away from the approximate values you quote
at or below 20 kHz and the behaviour is better predicted there by series
inductance and resistance than by the above nominal values for
characteristic impedance. As the HFN articles will detail...  :-)

> Despite high capacitance, which might be
> thought of as predicting a sagging top end, the high cap cable (A) at
> 8.5 ohms impedance is the only cable which is actually flat. And of
> course a  further implication of this is that this cable does not
> present a capacitive load to the amp - it connects the speaker almost
> invisibly, presenting the speaker impedance to the amp essentially
> unchanged.

I'm afraid you make the classic oversight of assuming behaviour is close to
matched. It simply isn't. The reality is simpler. That low series impedance
gives you the flat response in these sorts of situations when the
frequencies are around 20 kHz or less.


> And of course this is for cables of 5 metres. There are many audio apps
> that use cable considerably longer than this, which makes it important
> to think about the applicability of models.

The interest I have is for domestic audio. I doubt that more than a small
fraction of those use cables an order of magnitude longer than 5 metres.

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <xMSdnVo1E-_oDyTVnZ2dnUVZ8tjinZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Don
Pearce
 wrote:
> Eiron wrote:
> > Don Pearce wrote:
> > 
> >> Thanks for that, Jim. Pretty much what I expected, with the (for many
> >> counter-intuitive) result that the high capacitance cable had the
> >> flattest response - the expected result of having a better
> >> characteristic impedance match.
> > 
> > You could also say that it is the low inductance cable that has the
> > flattest response. That's not at all counter-intuitive.
> >


> So which are you going to pick, and under what circumstances? Go with
> the characteristic impedance and you will be right every time, because
> it contains both L and C in the correct proportions.

The results to be published show this is simply incorrect. You would not be
"right every time" to do that. 

The problem is that values like the ones you did for characteristic
impedance aren't the right values at audible frequencies, and the actual
value changes with frequency across the audio band. With most LS cables,
most (or all) the audio band is below the R'/L' turnover point.

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article , Trevor Wilson
 wrote:


> **Nice work Jim. It backs up what I've been telling people for a couple
> of decades. As Phil has stated, what would be interesting would be to
> do the same analysis with real-world speakers. 

I am creeping up on that.  :-) The webpage does show results for 4 - 32
Ohms resistive to indicate that any resistive load value which is broadly
similar to a speaker doesn't change the conclusions much. The page was just
to make the basic point and show the analysis methods.[1]  However...

The HFN articles use a series of loads - resistive, capacitive, inductive,
as well as open and short. They compare measurement with theory and get
suprisingly good agreement. I also ended up including things like 'internal
impedance' (aka skin effect) and how it alters the behaviour of cables

I am also in the process of examining the use of squarewaves, and the use
of a load more like a speaker. i.e. one with a complex impedance that has
some peaks and dips.

However for obvious reasons I have broken this up over a series of
articles. All too much for just 3-4 A4 pages! The measurements also took
weeks to do and analyse. The webpage just uses old results by other people,
but I have done my own measurements on various cables, and details should
appear in due course. In fact, there is so much that as with some previous
articles I will probably end up doing 'extended' versions on the web six+
months after the magazine version appears.

FWIW The first HFN article should appear in the next issue. Now seen and
checked a PDF of the page layout. The other articles will appear in
following months, but there will be some breaks and diversions for articles
on other topics.

BTW Although I chose the cables 'at random' from a long list I compiled it
seems clear that 'A' was the old 'Monitor Audio' branded cable claimed to
be '8 Ohm'. For that, the values I have were measured by Jim Moir and
published in HFN. Detailed references in the articles.

Slainte,

Jim

[1] One reason for the webpage is that is will allow me to give it as a
reference if I wish in a magazine article. I wanted readers who are
interested to be able to see the models I used, but to avoid putting 'hard
sums' into the magazine and making the actual article difficult for those
who don't like maths. Given the models anyone else can - if they wish - do
similar work with other loads, cable lengths, etc, etc.

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Phil Allison wrote:
> 
> "Phil Allison"
> 
> >> Jim Lesurf wrote:
> >
> >>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
> >
> >> Doing the usual maths on your table of  cables
> >>
> >> A = 8.5
> >
> > ** Cable  "A" would be a woven multi-strand cable like "Tocord"  - it was
> > sold under other names too.
> 
> ** I have placed a pic of a " Tocord " speaker lead on ABSE  -  since I
> could not find one on the net.
> 
> There are 72 green and 72 copper coloured strands  -  each enamel coated so
> are all insulated. There is a central clear plastic core ( not visible in
> the pic) of about 4mm diameter which the 144 strands are woven around. The
> outer sheath is only 7mm diameter and so the cable is quite flexible.
> 
> In order to fit a termination like the banana plugs shown, one must first
> burn off the enamel coating with a hot soldering iron and lots of solder.
> Quite easy really.
> 
> .....   Phil

I doubt I'd ever wanna use that Tocord cable.

If someone crushes the cable under a foot or something, then it'd 
be easy to get a short between the different colour enamel wires woven
together.
So the amp sees a short circuit. Might be intermittent.
And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then its
fragile enamel,
and softer than grade 2 magnetic winding wire which cannot be cleaned
with a soldering iron and you have to use a 
flame or scrape off the enamel with a blade.

But without a short, I can see why the capacitance would be high because
enamel isn't thick insulation,
so wires are close, and closer wires are, the higher C becomes.

Most SS amps are made to tolerate pure C loads from say 0.002uF to 0.22
uf because they have an R+C 
series Zobel between output emitters and 0V, and also have an L+R
parallel Zobel between emitters and 
output terminal. So at HF above say 20kHz, some pure C isn't ever "seen"
by the output transistors,
so there is no way the C can cause the phase shift and oscillation at
low RF.
But some amps may not be so well designed, eg, like the Flame Linear you
mentioned.

Meanwhile many tube amps are allergic to some pure C load without
speakers connected.
That's why one should always ensure all amps are unconditionally stable
no matter 
what the load, or if there is no load.

It used to be fashionable to try to omit the Zobels, to get more
impressive bandwidth,
and to make claims that sound became "unveiled" due to a more direct
connection.
Fashionable ideas are often the purest BS.

A simpler cable can be made by anyone use to blue covered 4 pair Cat 5
cables.
Just twist them together, and make the 8 wires in each become the out
and back wire for the speakers.
Its easy to strip the wires and solder to banana plugs and put some red
and black shrink wrap on.
I know a guy with ESL speakers who likes such cables, and very cheap as
well.
Kinda difficult to get a short if you tread on them.

Patrick Turner.

"Patrick Turner"
> "Phil Allison"
>
>> >> Jim Lesurf wrote:
>> >
>> >>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html
>> >
>> >> Doing the usual maths on your table of  cables
>> >>
>> >> A = 8.5
>> >
>> > ** Cable  "A" would be a woven multi-strand cable like "Tocord"  - it 
>> > was
>> > sold under other names too.
>>
>> ** I have placed a pic of a " Tocord " speaker lead on ABSE  -  since I
>> could not find one on the net.
>>
>> There are 72 green and 72 copper coloured strands  -  each enamel coated 
>> so
>> are all insulated. There is a central clear plastic core ( not visible in
>> the pic) of about 4mm diameter which the 144 strands are woven around. 
>> The
>> outer sheath is only 7mm diameter and so the cable is quite flexible.
>>
>> In order to fit a termination like the banana plugs shown, one must first
>> burn off the enamel coating with a hot soldering iron and lots of solder.

>
>
> I doubt I'd ever wanna use that Tocord cable.


**  Look out   -

here comes a whole pile of  "Turneroid" hypothetical,  fabricated drivel !!!


> If someone crushes the cable under a foot or something, then it'd
> be easy to get a short between the different colour enamel wires woven
> together.


** Simply not true.

The strands of enamelled wire are very tough and well protected by the outer 
sheath and inner, soft plastic core.


> And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then its
> fragile enamel,


** That is complete bollocks.


> Most SS amps are made to tolerate pure C loads from say 0.002uF to 0.22
> uf because


** And some are not  -  particularly some UK made hi-fi exotica.

But the problem is easy fixed by adding a small coil in series with the 
amplifier's output.

20 turns of 1mm enamel wire wound on a pencil will do.



.....  Phil

In article ,
   Phil Allison  wrote:
> > And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then
> > its fragile enamel,


> ** That is complete bollocks.

Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
enamel by other means is a complete pratt. Probably the same type who
would use - or even try such cable for LS use.

-- 
*Why isn't there a special name for the back of your knee?

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman ( FUCKWIT MORON )"
>
>   Phil Allison
>>
>> > And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then
>> > its fragile enamel,
>
>
>> ** That is complete bollocks.
>
> Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
> enamel by other means is a complete pratt.


**  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!

 Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.

 Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot soldering 
iron.

 You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!





......   Phil

In article ,
   Phil Allison  wrote:
> > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
> > enamel by other means is a complete pratt.


> **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!

>  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.

Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet

>  Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
> soldering iron.

Everyone keeps a solder pot on the boil, I suppose, my little forensically
challenged colonial. 

>  You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!

If only you'd learn the Queen's English.

-- 
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> 
> In article ,
>    Phil Allison  wrote:
> > > And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then
> > > its fragile enamel,
> 
> > ** That is complete bollocks.
> 
> Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
> enamel by other means is a complete pratt. Probably the same type who
> would use - or even try such cable for LS use.

But I use enameled wire for winding chokes, and transformers.
The cheap shit from China can be tinned by just persisting with a
soldering iron and flux core,
and its only thin polyurethane enamel. Its softer than the the brown and
green stuff made
with enamel of polyester-imide which you can't tin with a soldering
iron.

Phil loves to say I am complete bollocks, as we all know, but 
using enamel wire for LS cables needs careful thought.

McIntosh used triple insulated enamel wire in bifilar windings for OPT
in tube amps where the two windings wound side by side had a 470Vdc
potential difference.
They lasted OK, so an LS cable should because of low voltages, but then
unlike the varnished wires in an OPT,
the LS wire strands are subject to movement and possible shorts.

Pppl used to plat their own litz wire to make a cable. This avoided skin
effect, and 
would keep RF wire resistance low.
Then they'd say it sounded better. 

Somehow I think such betterment claims are bollockesque in nature.

Patrick Turner.




> 
> --
> *Why isn't there a special name for the back of your knee?
> 
>     Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
>                   To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (MORON )"
>>
>  Phil Allison
>
>> > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
>> > enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
>
>
>> **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>>  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
>
>>  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
>
>
> Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet


**  Go look it up  -   you despicable arsehole.

 Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
 soldering iron.

 You   MORONIC,   LYING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!





......   Phil

Phil Allison wrote:
> 
> "Dave Plowman ( FUCKWIT MORON )"
> >
> >   Phil Allison
> >>
> >> > And if the enamel wire can be tinned with a hot soldering iron, then
> >> > its fragile enamel,
> >
> >
> >> ** That is complete bollocks.
> >
> > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
> > enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
> 
> **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
>  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
> 
>  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
> 
>  Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot soldering
> iron.
> 
>  You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!
> 
> ......   Phil

But the poluruethane enamel wire isn't the best type of enamelled wire
to use 
where you want something rugged, and prone to being trodden on, and 
yanked and wracked around at terminals.

Most of the amplifier failures I get to repair are from shorted speaker
cables.

Feel free to use the polyurethane if YOU want, but I won't, OK.

As you said, the small coil of wire which is a choke of say 10uH
in series with the amp and speaker cables should solve capacitance
bothers.
But most ppl would add a resistance of say 10 ohms in parallel with the
choke to damp the 
LC resonant circuit you'd get if a speaker cable with high C is shorted
at the speakers.

Many (but not all) SS amps have the L&R as a standard feature, and have
done for 40 years
after makers woke up about how easy it was to stuff a transistor amp
right up.

Patrick Turner

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> 
> In article ,
>    Phil Allison  wrote:
> > > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
> > > enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
> 
> > **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> >  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
> 
> >  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
> 
> Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet

Its quite sufficient for applications where heat is negligible and there 
is no mechanical stresses; Ie, in speaker crossover coils
and other coils used in many apps.  
> 
> >  Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
> > soldering iron.
> 
> Everyone keeps a solder pot on the boil, I suppose, my little forensically
> challenged colonial.

Somebody making a batch of speaker cabling to the Tocord 
model may well have a hot solder pot for the workers.

DIYers wouldn't.

 
> 
> >  You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!
> 
> If only you'd learn the Queen's English.

Which Queen? 

Plennea queens about....

Patrick Turner.
> 
> --
> *Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *
> 
>     Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
>                   To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Patrick Turneroid "
>
> But the poluruethane enamel wire isn't the best type of enamelled wire
> to use where you want something rugged, and prone to being trodden on,
> and yanked and wracked around at terminals.


**  One pig ignorant person's utterly mad opinion

  -   not fact.



> Most of the amplifier failures I get to repair are from shorted speaker
> cables.


** Totally irrelevant,  as that involves bare copper wires.


( rest of the Turneroid's mind numbing excreta flushed where it belongs)





......   Phil

In article ,
   Patrick Turner  wrote:


> "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> > 
> > In article ,
> >    Phil Allison  wrote:
> > > > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing
> > > > the enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
> > 
> > > **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > 
> > >  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
> > 
> > >  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
> > 
> > Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet

> Its quite sufficient for applications where heat is negligible and there 
> is no mechanical stresses; Ie, in speaker crossover coils
> and other coils used in many apps. 

ITYM 'polyurethane *coated* wire?  
> 
> > 
> > >  Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
> > > soldering iron.
> > 
> > Everyone keeps a solder pot on the boil, I suppose, my little
> > forensically challenged colonial.

> Somebody making a batch of speaker cabling to the Tocord 
> model may well have a hot solder pot for the workers.

They might well.

> DIYers wouldn't.

Indeed.
 
> > >  You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!
> > 
> > If only you'd learn the Queen's English.

> Which Queen? 

> Plennea queens about....

That is very true. You'd think Phil would be well up on that given his
propensities.

-- 
*Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film*

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article ,
>    Phil Allison  wrote:
> 
>>>Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing the
>>>enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
> 
> 
> 
>>**  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
>> YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
> 
> 
>> Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
> 
> 
> Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet
> 
> 
>> Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
>>soldering iron.
> 
> 
> Everyone keeps a solder pot on the boil, I suppose, my little forensically
> challenged colonial. 
> 
> 

Tins perfectly well with a normal iron.

-- 
Nick

"Nick Gorham"
>
> Tins perfectly well with a normal iron.


** Now try doing 72 strands at once and making a solid mass of them to fit 
into a banana plug.





......  Phil

Nick Gorham wrote:

> Tins perfectly well with a normal iron.

What temp does a 'normal' iron run at ?

Graham

"Eeyore"  wrote in 
message news:48BC973E.782F4D98@hotmail.com...
>
>
> Nick Gorham wrote:
>
>> Tins perfectly well with a normal iron.
>
> What temp does a 'normal' iron run at ?
>
> Graham
>

Hi Graham, I see you pal Philthy is still running off at the 
mouth.  I would have expected by now you would have taken 
the action you alluded to earlier.

Cheers TT

Phil Allison wrote:

> "Nick Gorham"
> 
>>Tins perfectly well with a normal iron.
> 
> 
> 
> ** Now try doing 72 strands at once and making a solid mass of them to fit 
> into a banana plug.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......  Phil
> 
> 

Yep, I take your point. I agree that in that case it would be much 
better, but I was just trying to indicate that the insulation was 
perfectly usable with just "normal" irons.

-- 
Nick

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> 
> In article ,
>    Patrick Turner  wrote:
> 
> > "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> > >
> > > In article ,
> > >    Phil Allison  wrote:
> > > > > Anyone who tries soldering enamelled wire without first removing
> > > > > the enamel by other means is a complete pratt.
> > >
> > > > **  ROTFLMAO  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > > >  YOU are a  100%,  total, know nothing fucking MORON  !!
> > >
> > > >  Go look up:  " self fluxing  polyurethane wire "'   sometime.
> > >
> > > Don't think polyurathene wire would be much use as a conductor, pet
> 
> > Its quite sufficient for applications where heat is negligible and there
> > is no mechanical stresses; Ie, in speaker crossover coils
> > and other coils used in many apps.
> 
> ITYM 'polyurethane *coated* wire?
> >
> > >
> > > >  Designed to be tinned by solder pot dipping or the use of a hot
> > > > soldering iron.
> > >
> > > Everyone keeps a solder pot on the boil, I suppose, my little
> > > forensically challenged colonial.
> 
> > Somebody making a batch of speaker cabling to the Tocord
> > model may well have a hot solder pot for the workers.
> 
> They might well.
> 
> > DIYers wouldn't.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> > > >  You dumb as a dead dog   POSTURING   POMMY  ASS  !!!!!!
> > >
> > > If only you'd learn the Queen's English.
> 
> > Which Queen?
> 
> > Plennea queens about....
> 
> That is very true. You'd think Phil would be well up on that given his
> propensities.

Maybe he'd try to become well up into a queen but perhaps lack enough 
propensity.

Dame Edna Everage, who is Australia's closest thing to an actual Queen
of Australia,
feared what might happen if she had Phil on her show.

But the latest report is that The Dame is about to become Austrlia's
first female Govenor General.
Madge will get a job in the kitchen at the Lodge, and Sir Les Paterson
will become Her Butler.


There's a lot to ignore about Phil, but he does say some very sensible
things at times.

Patrick Turner.
> 
> --
> *Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film*
> 
>     Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
>                   To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Jim Lesurf"
>
>A while ago there was some discussion about loudspeaker cables and the
> relative merits of analysis using the transmission line and AC lumped
> element approachs. I've now done a page on this which people may find
> interesting. It is at
>
> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/shortstring/howlong.html


** Figure 4 shows the " lumped component " model of a speaker cable that Jim 
used.

But why the heck is C shown at the speaker end and so coming AFTER  the 
cable's inductance  ???

Any cable ( whether co-axial, twin wire, twisted pair or woven pair ) 
exhibits pure capacitance when the far end is not loaded.  So C ought to be 
at the input end -  then at least the cable model would  pass open and short 
circuit load testing.

In fact, the model as shown in fig 4, resolves to simply cable L plus R in 
series with a pure 8 ohm load  -  over the frequency range graphed  -  cos 
the 8 ohm load completely swamps the effect of  the C values involved.




.....   Phil