The most detailed speaker cable??

I have to agree with Rsbeck -- completely. Putting aside the placebo factor, in all truth you'd be hard pressed to find something better that -- drum roll, please -- 14 gauge low voltage lighting cable from Home Depot. Approximately 15 cents a foot. Well-shield, super-well constructed, very pure copper, does the trick. Don't believe me? Roy Allison and the fine folks at McIntosh all have the same thought. Power cables? Give Dusty at CI Audio a call -- he's an extremely thoughtful, honest designer and recommends, drum roll, please, normal computer power cords from Radio Shack.

Yes, a dedicated line is a great idea, and a better outlet is certainly a good idea.

Otherwise -- snob and placebo factor aside -- the money one would invest in expensive cables would make much more of a difference, as Rsbeck has said, in components, especially your amp and speakers.

Rsbeck's last post was spot-on: cables cannot add detail or, for that matter, character to what flows through them. Yes, you need to be aware of impedence, etc., but that's it. By all means, use nice and appropriate cables. However, more careful attention to other components -- primarily the amp and speakers -- will have a far greater impact.

And, yes, having said that, please re-read "bryanhod"'s comments -- aside from the juvenlie invective, it is based on absolutely nothing factual. He claims to have listened to hundreds and hundreds of cables. That's fine. This is a hobby for some people, and some people really get into it, there's a pride of ownership factor, and, of course, a significant placebo effect.

I know quite a EE's, have a graduate degree in physics, and know several amp designers, sound systems designers, producers, etc., quite well. I don't know of one who buys into 99% of this stuff or, for that matter, who spends good money on "high-end" cables. Unfortunately, the "trust your ears" dictum is very misleading, precisely due to issues of suggestion, pride, enthusiasm, etc. Psych 101.

I highly applaud manufacturers who stand up for what's right in this matter -- and this means some of the biggest guns in the business, such as ARC, Mac, etc.

I would add this -- which is really just summarizing some of the above thoughts.

First of all, Nelson Pass's article is well worth reading.

Second, if you can't measure qualities within *significant* audible parameters between two cables (see Rsbeck's comments above -- he is read right about audibility), then you will not be able to hear any difference. It's really that simple. There are a lot of products out there, some of which are outrageously priced and some of which are reasonably priced, many of which are constructed quite differently but that all do pretty much the same thing.

There's a bit of a "Timex" factor in all this. Now, I happen to have a "thing" for watches and have a few very nice pieces in my collection -- a Patek, a couple Rolexes, IWCs, etc. I love the theory and construction of automatic and wind-up movements. However, my Timex Ironman, bless its heart, is absolutely the most accurate of the bunch and, as extensive travel and sports activities have proven, it can take the proverbial beating and keep on ticking.

What's dressier and more fun to wear? An IWC Fliegerchronograph -- my favorite. What does the same thing -- tell time -- except better, and does so for almost 1/100th (!) the price? The Timex.

I have no illusions about that. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy the fancy stuff -- I do. It's much the same in audio cables -- with the exception that there are high profit-margin operations out there that would claim that a Flieger IS more accurate than a Timex.

It's a funny thing, because in the world of mechanical time pieces, it's all about the accuracy within the genre...and not absolute accuracy.

I bet his hearing is even better than that...at over 20khz!

Boa2 -- good call on the Aquatimer, that movement is a beast. You're right, there is something to the lux goods thing. Still, I'm pretty damn happy with my cheapo cord...!