Cable myths, or truths?

[Mark Amundson]

The Dark force of dance wrote:
> Forgive me for intruding in this little farce but isn't a speaker's
> impedance nominal to start with. Have you ever stuck a meter across any
> given range of speakers only to find that they're all around 5 ohms but
> different. And that any given speaker's impedance will be different to the
> next. And that any amplifier worth wasting a power bill on has to be able to
> deal with all this stuff otherwise it's just a heap of junk. And that when
> it all boils down to it, 0.002%THD isn't exactly distinguishable from
> 0.003%THD anyway. And that unless you forked out 20 grand for a pair of
> Duntechs, none of the above matters a great deal. And even then it only
> matters because there's 20 grand involved already.

I am in violent agreement with you on the THD part of your comment. Yes,
.002% THD does not both me especially since the
electro-magnetic-acoustic transducer (the speaker) will introduce more
audible distortion than the amplifier. What it get down to is how bad
some of components of the total system have to be before they are
noticable. All else being perfect, it will take a fairly lengthy piece
of 16AWG zip before it becomes a audible factor. Branding a discussion
of system effects "audiophile crap" is not being fair. It is matter of
how poor of quality can you get by with.

Mark "not golden-eared" Amundson,