I do understand and have professionally practiced electrical engineering for years. Series resistance has an impact on damping factor in dynamic speakers but does not in itself cause frequency changes if it is purely resistive. It’s a cable’s combined RLC profile and resulting impedance that alters frequency and is discussed extensively in the Iconoclast thread.
For example, Impedances of 10’s of ohms in portions of the 20-80Hz band are quite common in enclosed speakers without adding cable resistance. On the other hand, planar speakers can result in a purely resistive load which will create a voltage divider network with the cable but will have simply a level impact if the cable’s profile was simply resistive. It’s the cable’s additional inductance and capacitance which cause frequency changes in this case.
As to the actual cable specs, why not share this email? My point is that indicting a product on a single parameter measured outside its band of intended use is neither good science nor constructive critique.
There is indeed enough disrespectful behavior to go around; the group of you deserve each other as far as snark goes. But you are winning the contest of condescension.
Instead of each of you worrying about the other guy and fussing “He started it!” like spoiled four-year olds, how about everyone start posting as adults? There is nothing about this topic which requires constant snide cheap shots.
Most, if not all, of the subject posts you wrote (in my opinion/as I read them) assert, imply or suggest that the design of these cables are either a.) poor; b.) counterproductive; or c.) inappropriately marketed.
As such, the posts come off as disparaging.
Furthermore, the posts are (again, in my opinion) an unproductive and, dare I say “unscientific”, combination of select, alleged (but not substantiated) facts (i.e., specifications) coupled with speculation based on key assumptions that are arguably not supported (either in your posts or in reality w/r/t to the subject speaker cables).
All of this, along with your unsubstantiated assertions that folks don’t understand the subject matter you write about, leads at least one reader (me) to question not only your motives, but your credibility.
FWIW.
By all means, do carry on. For my part, if you were to write more about the applied science in the context of the actual product being addressed and speculate less, your contributions to the subject matter would be more productive and less bombastic.
Unfortunately, it appears you and I will just have to agree to disagree.
At this point, I see no prospect of bridging the gab between what I believe is legitimate critical analysis and your approach.
With all due respect, there was absolutely nothing inappropriate about my post and it did not warrant your intervention. If we cannot engage in a civil dialogue - event when we strongly disagree - there is no dialogue and the marketplace of ideas is closed for business.
Please restore my post and @CinDyment’s. Your intervention was inappropriate.
Thanks for all of your diligence.
[Edit: Upon further review, I looked at the unedited post, I see your point and can live with the snipping of my last remark. Cheers.]
Unfortunately, the curve you provided does not prove your point without the electrical equation from which it shows how simply adding a value R in series performs this non-linear function. I’ve designed many crossovers and equalization circuits and have never observed this nor been able to model it using circuit theory. So please share the equation that does.
Generally, if one does not measure AND listen to the actual subject cable, or discuss the documented experiences of those that have, then “this” sub-thread discussion is futile.
I think this nicely sums up much of difference in perspective I sense b/t you and me.
@CinDyment What speaker did you use to generate the frequency response graph of the 6-foot Kimber Cable with the added resistor? Also, what was the impedance profile of that speaker? This information would be helpful in understanding how the added resistance in the cable interacted with the varying impedance of the speaker at different frequencies.
Please correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t this thread start with the OP and others expressing happiness with the sound produced by these cables in their system?
And please tell me if you care to, when or how or why the thread devolved to proving why the OP should not like them.
I have no intention to go back thru and read the entire string. Just curious.
If I’m understanding correctly, the effects on a speaker’s frequency response of a high-ohm speaker cable will vary significantly depending on the pattern of the speaker’s impedance in relation to frequency. This means that the effects will be less for speakers with more consistent impedance, which suggests that the effects will vary with different speakers and different rooms. Below, I’ve pasted in the impedance and phase curves from Stereophile for my 30-year-old Thiel CS2.2 speakers, which appear to have some impedance variation in the bass but a flatter impedance curve overall than the other examples presented above.
I have never heard the Fideliums in my system or in any other, but it would seem to be necessary to actually listen to them with the specific speakers and room under question before making any decisions about the appropriateness of their use. This is especially true since the resistance question deals with only one of the characteristics that might differentiate the sound of these cables from other options.
]