Interconnect Directionality

investigation begins with what you know. It is reflected off the unknown thing. We ping it and get a radar ping back, of the shape of the unknown.

We speculate and investigate along those lines. Be clear enough with the self, honest enough with the self, so that if the hearing (science begins with observation) disagrees with the dogma of the backdrop, then the backdrop, the written theory..is wrong or the some part of the backdrop equation is incorrect.

The problem in this case, it is also tied to hearing comprehension.

Comparatively...Think of it as encompassing the concept of reading comprehension.

If you can’t comprehend what you are reading, and the subject is reading, re the observation of anomaly... then the idea of investigation goes out the window. A cornerstone of the investigation moves to being as gobbledygook to the investigator, thus rendering all applied motions to find clarity..useless.

Similarly or in the same moment, comes the properer and logical retreat: if your hearing is not up to snuff, then these investigations move to known dogma, and not into actual investigation.

People without the necessary hearing skills or without exposure to such clarified environments where such a thing can be heard...those people tend to get lost.

And the human mind falls back on what it knows. Nothing wrong with that, it’s worked for life on this planet, for millions of years.

But it does not work here.

For the science to go forward, the given person involved has to have the skills. They must have the hearing skills in order to move forward in the investigation. They must have the capacity to observe what the other investigators are observing, otherwise, no clarity..... and then comes the fallback to dogma, the fallback to the texts of yore.

And that’s not science. It the frailty of human limits.

It’s a personal physical limitation coming to life as conflict.

Conflict with others. Others who have the requisite hearing skills to get to the actual investigation and arrive at the correct answer. That is is anomalous, it is real, and it's not addressed by the known text and known works.

Therefore, logically, re science and investigation....if one does not have the hearing skills to hear it or has not tried to develop the correct methodologies to teach themselves to hear it, then that person is ignorant of the equation set required to be involved in the investigation..... and should.... by all logic and reason - remove themselves from the discussion.

To test directionality of a given strand:

try to use a small full range single speaker.

your test set up should be simple and so that you can change the direction of the strand quickly, in seconds.

Ie, that you can swap the strand direction, without moving. speaker on a low stand, the terminals of the amplifier and speaker right in front of you. Listening at point blank range, for certain effects.

Full range, no crossover, is best as there is less gear involved, less terminations involved, less phase skewing of the acoustic signal, to get in the way of your attempt at discernment.

Hook up the ground strand from the amp and to the speaker. Don't worry about it's directionality, for the moment.

Take a single strand to be tested, and run it from the amplifier positive terminal, to the speaker positive terminal.
 
Listen for speed and extension of highs, 'plosives, attack, transient speed, etc.

Flip it, quickly. possibly just holding the wire to the terminals/posts, so it does not need to be unfastened to make the next quick flip.

The faster cleaner more open direction is the correct direction.  Mark the amplifier end with a marker, or what not, try not to use tape as that adds mass and damping.

Now, take that discerned strand that was found to be correct in orientation, and move it to being from the speaker to the amp on the negative pathway. Put the amplifier end that was marked, at the speaker negative terminal end. that is the orientation of the 'return' leg, for speaker wiring, IMO and IME. Interconnects can be different.

Then, take the prior untested ground run piece and perform that same test again, on the positive leg between the full range speaker and the amp.

This is harder to hear on stranded wire, especially the cheap stuff, as it is totally muddy and muddled from the get go. The effect is easiest to hear in solid core wire, single strand.

THE ACTUAL PROFESSIONALS .... you know, the ones that make 100GHz cables, that ones that put gigabits through twisted pairs, the ones that developed the HDMI standard, the people who make measurements systems, all the ones where real bits, real SNR, real waveform shape = money, the ones whose customers have sophisticated test and measurement equipment, etc. etc. would never ever claim, except where a directional shield is concerned, or there is an intentional passive element built a cable, that, within the framework of audio, that directionality of an interconnect has any detectable difference in the sound.

as to that, I know a person who took their physics degree in transmission lines and the like. Basically their masters in the physics of conduction.

they ended up, in part of their resume, running a coast to coast telecommunications system as the head engineer.

And when it comes to audio and the signals involved and what is done in audio, this person quickly came to understand that people connected to and invested in things like the above quote...really don’t know the difference between their backside and a hole in the ground.

the audio signal is the moment to moment differential. The intelligence or information in or of the system, over time, so to speak.

It’s the given changes in the state of the system, in relation to one another, in a specific direction in time, as a sequenced record.

Just one way of potentially many to think of it.

as for mr robertcan:
Our patent folks, quite educated in the sciences and in patent knowledge, thought our patent made for the biggest change in electrical conduction in the area of small signal and/or transmission lines, in at least the past 150 years.

Explain why it is that, or why it isn’t.

Good luck.