AndreYew
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2001
- Posts
- 660
- Likes
- 657
"but if I were a betting man, I would bet the decision was primarily related to moving mass considerations alone, as the REST of Al characteristics are inferior to Cu overall."
That may be so, but I wasn't saying anything about why Sennheiser chose Al over Cu. Physically, no matter who uses it, Al has higher resistivity than Cu. For whatever other reasons Sennheiser chose to use Al, they must account for Al's higher resistivity in the design of the headphones. If someone chooses to tweak their Sennheisers by replacing their Al coils with Cu coils, and wish to retain identical system response, they must account for Cu's lower resistance. This means either using smaller diameter Cu wire, or longer Cu windings, both of which lead to changes to the overall system response since the former lowers moving mass, while the latter increases inductance.
"Additionally, we've already much anecdotal evidence to support that aftermarket cable replacements generally bring improvements to the "system.""
As you say, it's anecdotal.
--Andre
That may be so, but I wasn't saying anything about why Sennheiser chose Al over Cu. Physically, no matter who uses it, Al has higher resistivity than Cu. For whatever other reasons Sennheiser chose to use Al, they must account for Al's higher resistivity in the design of the headphones. If someone chooses to tweak their Sennheisers by replacing their Al coils with Cu coils, and wish to retain identical system response, they must account for Cu's lower resistance. This means either using smaller diameter Cu wire, or longer Cu windings, both of which lead to changes to the overall system response since the former lowers moving mass, while the latter increases inductance.
"Additionally, we've already much anecdotal evidence to support that aftermarket cable replacements generally bring improvements to the "system.""
As you say, it's anecdotal.
--Andre