[siles1991]

Electricity is so completely not like water that beyond explaining the basic concept of what a current is to a schoolchild it really is totally unsuitable. It provides a nice visualisation for people without any training in electrodynamics but you can't look at anything water does and say that works for electricity.

In your analogy you mention that a "smaller pipe" has more "resistance" which isn't actually true for water. I assume what you're thinking about is back pressure. While it is true that this back pressure is exerted in such a situation the velocity of the water actually increases to compensate. And this is all actually for a pipe changing in size from large to small in an open circuit, not a small pipe in a closed circuit. The increase in back pressure is caused by the horizontal component of the pair of the force applied to the water in forcing it into a narrower gap (by Newton's 1st law). It is not something inherent to the smaller pipe which causes this, it is the act of moving the water outside of the small pipe diameter into the small pipe. The only reason in this situation the flow volume drops is because the water coming into the pump is at a certain pressure and you're increasing the pressure of that which is coming out of it, giving a pressure differential which tries to make the water flow the wrong way. If you have a small pipe in a closed circuit you can easily get the same flow volume by increasing the pressure of the water you put into it. The pressure is equal either side of the pump and apart from the risk of explosion everything acts pretty much the same. Assuming you don't pressurise it enough to cause it to phase change or considerably alter its viscosity. So in the water analogy the size of the pipe doesn't matter apart from explosion risk unless you increase the pressure to a degree at which it creates ice or something approaching ice.

Most importantly, not a single thing I just said occurs with electricity. So the entire analogy is faulty and you cannot derive the behaviour of electricity from that of water, even if you had understood the behaviour of water correctly. Water also doesn't have capacitance or inductance to worry about. And electricity doesn't have viscosity, pressure etc.

Yes it is true that thicker wires have a lower resistance, but the resistance changes are only a small part of what happens. When you increase the wire size you also reduce the inductance and increase the capacitance. This has a whole host of potential effects.

The effect on the resistance as has already been discussed is really very tiny. I myself made the mistake earlier in this thread of thinking it may be significant when I messed up some mental arithmetic, but sadly it is far too small to explain any possible differences. The relationship between the inductance and capacitance is where things might be explained if indeed they do actually exist at all.

Your final statement bemuses me greatly. To seek to give a physical explanation and then end with denying the premise of physical measurement is something I struggle to comprehend. Everything you think you know about your explanation is based on scientific measurements and/or fundamental mathematics. The human ear is a horrifically inaccurate measuring device. If you want to know the accuracy of human measuring place one hand in ice and the other in hot water. Now place them both in tepid water. You're brain will tell you it is both cold and hot at the same time. A digital thermometer may have an error of +-0.1% giving equal degrees of "fluctuation" but your brain can't even tell you if it's warm or not. Compare the thermometer graph to your perception graph and you'll see clear data next to a dartboard. We can measure the signals in wires down to less than +-0.01%, the human ear can't. Yes there may be something happening we haven't decided to measure yet (that's a huge maybe at best), but you can't possibly say that the human ear can compare to a modern graph. You can argue we might have the wrong graph, but that's about it.

Firstly "I agree electricity is not like water but I had no idea how else to explain my theory haha" secondly its a theory that I claimed that should not be taken seriously. Third im not an electric engineer. Fourth yes I damn well know electric is not the same I used it due to the lack of the right words I already stated it in my post if you bothered to read that part. Fifth frequency graphs are fine but this is audio you listen with your ears. You dont listen using graphs on a computer audio is subjective. So yes ears are the best measuring tools you can have. In the end what you hear is important not graphs. They can be guidelines but not a definitive answer. Sixth dont need to be a keyboard warrior about something I already said was a random theory, and should not be taken so seriously. Need me to repeat myself further?

 

[Menasor]

Going from run of the mill Monoprice RCA to custom made silver IC's was a huge difference. So much that I was shocked without moments after the swap

 

[Winegums]

A silver cable would make the biggest difference if you had a 50 ft long distance you had to cover. Since the resistance of silver is
Lower. If silver sounds brighter then what would that mean for a superconductor cable?

 

[ab initio]

If silver sounds brighter then what would that mean for a superconductor cable?

True fact: Everything sounds warm compared to superconducting cables.

Cheers

 

[yblad]

Firstly "I agree electricity is not like water but I had no idea how else to explain my theory haha" secondly its a theory that I claimed that should not be taken seriously. Third im not an electric engineer. Fourth yes I damn well know electric is not the same I used it due to the lack of the right words I already stated it in my post if you bothered to read that part. Fifth frequency graphs are fine but this is audio you listen with your ears. You dont listen using graphs on a computer audio is subjective. So yes ears are the best measuring tools you can have. In the end what you hear is important not graphs. They can be guidelines but not a definitive answer. Sixth dont need to be a keyboard warrior about something I already said was a random theory, and should not be taken so seriously. Need me to repeat myself further?

You may have said you know it's not like water but then going on to deduce everything from water invalidates that statement. Especially when you then get how water works completely wrong anyway. It doesn't matter that you're not an electrical engineer, when your attempting to explain something via electrical theory it will challenged and corrected by those standards. I'm not a professional EE either If it's not supposed to be taken seriously, examined, and challenged why post it in a serious debate? Such things belong in your head.

Actually you listen to audio with your brain. That soft squishy mass we all have is completely unreliable. Just knowing the cable is a different material is enough for it to sound different. The only way we can actually know is by physical measurement and/or extensive abx type testing. The question being debated isn't "can I hear a difference" it's "is there a difference". A great many people hear no difference between them so there is equal perceptive evidence on both sides.

 

[yblad]

A silver cable would make the biggest difference if you had a 50 ft long distance you had to cover. Since the resistance of silver is
Lower. If silver sounds brighter then what would that mean for a superconductor cable?

I think the main difference there is whether or not your headphones explode.

 

[Winegums]

I think the main difference there is whether or not your headphones explode.

Why would your headphones explode? The only difference would be is you would have a perfectly unbiased signal path. There would be no loss in the cable so you would have a perfect load and source relationship, nothing in the middle.Yes it would be easier to blow up your headphones but only because you'd have less resistance on the amp. So end result would be you'd turn up your volume less that you regularly would.

 

[siles1991]

Quote:

You may have said you know it's not like water but then going on to deduce everything from water invalidates that statement. Especially when you then get how water works completely wrong anyway. It doesn't matter that you're not an electrical engineer, when your attempting to explain something via electrical theory it will challenged and corrected by those standards. I'm not a professional EE either

If it's not supposed to be taken seriously, examined, and challenged why post it in a serious debate? Such things belong in your head.

Actually you listen to audio with your brain. That soft squishy mass we all have is completely unreliable. Just knowing the cable is a different material is enough for it to sound different. The only way we can actually know is by physical measurement and/or extensive abx type testing. The question being debated isn't "can I hear a difference" it's "is there a difference". A great many people hear no difference between them so there is equal perceptive evidence on both sides.

serious debate? I don't see any serious debate going on here lol??? It's called random blab doesnt have to be challenged because it's not even claiming that its true...and I repeat it doesnt matter how perfect or accurate your frequency graphs are if you don't hear the same thing. Therefore your ears will be the main decisive factor, if you can't hear it than so let it be unless you have an inferiority complex and wish to disprove how silver cables dont make a difference to feel less inferior.
 
Let's recap your trying to disprove a theory which I just randomly made up in my bored time, I didn't say it was remotely true, I also already claimed I used water because of a lack of other words to use. Serious debate...practically most of the comments here are self-experience  not "debating". I think you might be in the wrong thread. All in all good job for being a know it all give yourself a pat in the back for challenging and dissecting a completely random theory which should not have been taken seriously from the beginning. also its okay dont bother replying from your previous replies I can see your not one to back down, and i'm not interested in any further arguing, have a good day.

 

[Speedskater]

On Copper and Silver Cables:
 
The ratio of Resistivity between Copper and Silver is about 1.17.  So this means that you could replace a 10 foot Copper cable with a same cross-section Silver cable that is 11.7 feet long.
 
Interestingly the AWG step size ratio of 1.26 is very close to that 1.17 ratio.  So you could replace a Silver 14  AWG speaker cable with a 13 AWG Copper cable of about the same length.
 
Not much difference is there?

 

[yblad]

serious debate? I don't see any serious debate going on here lol??? It's called random blab doesnt have to be challenged because it's not even claiming that its true...and I repeat it doesnt matter how perfect or accurate your frequency graphs are if you don't hear the same thing. Therefore your ears will be the main decisive factor, if you can't hear it than so let it be unless you have an inferiority complex and wish to disprove how silver cables dont make a difference to feel less inferior.

Let's recap your trying to disprove a theory which I just randomly made up in my bored time, I didn't say it was remotely true, I also already claimed I used water because of a lack of other words to use. Serious debate...practically most of the comments here are self-experience  not "debating". I think you might be in the wrong thread. All in all good job for being a know it all give yourself a pat in the back for challenging and dissecting a completely random theory which should not have been taken seriously from the beginning. also its okay dont bother replying from your previous replies I can see your not one to back down, and i'm not interested in any further arguing, have a good day.

Actually I think you'll find I have myself proposed several possible reasons as to why silver cables might make a difference. I seek to find the truth, with no bias. Inferiority complexes aren't really my style :rolleyes: lets not get into personal insults though, I haven’t insulted you and I’d ask that you extend the same courtesy to me. This is a debate about science, not a playground.

If you were a historian and someone said the second world war was in 1066, would you not correct that? It's my job to understand these things. It's not my fault that you don't. A theory (and actually it was more of a hypothesis, probably even conjecture) is there to be challenged. If you don't want it examined don't post it in the first place. You can't say you think something works a certain way because of x and then say that it was never intended to listened to or critiqued. Do that in your head, not on a thread attempting to genuinely answer the question. If you say "I think it works like this" you are automatically asking for it to be taken seriously.

I apologise if you feel I offended you by correcting what you said, it was not my intent. You cannot blame me however for your lack of knowledge, and throwing around personal insults because someone knows more than you isn't really on.

 

[siles1991]

Quote:

Actually I think you'll find I have myself proposed several possible reasons as to why silver cables might make a difference. I seek to find the truth, with no bias. Inferiority complexes aren't really my style

lets not get into personal insults though, I haven’t insulted you and I’d ask that you extend the same courtesy to me. This is a debate about science, not a playground.

If you were a historian and someone said the second world war was in 1066, would you not correct that? It's my job to understand these things. It's not my fault that you don't. A theory (and actually it was more of a hypothesis, probably even conjecture) is there to be challenged. If you don't want it examined don't post it in the first place. You can't say you think something works a certain way because of x and then say that it was never intended to listened to or critiqued. Do that in your head, not on a thread attempting to genuinely answer the question. If you say "I think it works like this" you are automatically asking for it to be taken seriously.

I apologise if you feel I offended you by correcting what you said, it was not my intent. You cannot blame me however for your lack of knowledge, and throwing around personal insults because someone knows more than you isn't really on.

whatever floats your boat

 

[Winegums]

Quote:

On Copper and Silver Cables:
 
The ratio of Resistivity between Copper and Silver is about 1.17.  So this means that you could replace a 10 foot Copper cable with a same cross-section Silver cable that is 11.7 feet long.
 
Interestingly the AWG step size ratio of 1.26 is very close to that 1.17 ratio.  So you could replace a Silver 14  AWG speaker cable with a 13 AWG Copper cable of about the same length.
 
Not much difference is there?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_effect
Silver has the lowest skin depth, this lets the wire carry a higher frequency signal before it encounters an exponentially increasing resistance. It's less about standard resistance and more about frequency resistance.
 
There's about a 6% percent difference between pure silver and pure copper. Whether the human ear can detect that 6% is questionable. I have noticed that with a top of the line planetwaves oxide free copper cable my guitar is noticeably brighter as well as have greater clarity, (it sounds like a 8-10% increase in sound quality).
 
I'm a skeptic and a believer in higher quality cabling. On one hand I think that they increase sound quality and frequency response. On the other hand I'm doubtful that the price jump (1000% in some cases) from a high quality pure copper cable to a pure silver cable is justified.

 

[Steve Eddy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_effect
Silver has the lowest skin depth, this lets the wire carry a higher frequency signal before it encounters an exponentially increasing resistance.

Just the opposite. Higher conductivity and a shallower skin depth means that the ratio between DC resistance and AC resistance is greater, which means a greater effect on high frequency roll off compared to a metal with a lower conductivity. In other words, in terms of skin effect, brass would be better than copper, and copper better than silver.

se

 

[Winegums]

Quote:

Just the opposite. Higher conductivity and a shallower skin depth means that the ratio between DC resistance and AC resistance is greater, which means a greater effect on high frequency roll off compared to a metal with a lower conductivity. In other words, in terms of skin effect, brass would be better than copper, and copper better than silver.

se

But if silver is theoretically worse, then why does it sound brighter?

 

[ab initio]

Quote:

But if silver is theoretically worse, then why does it sound brighter?

Who has conclusively demonstrated that typical lengths of sliver and copper cables of reasonable quality are audibly different?