[Joe Bloggs]

[my facts were fake to make the man understand silver has better conduct-ability.]
You agree with him - copper has better (flawless with less diameter of the wire) possibility to achieve 0 resistance (the lower is the temperature, the lower is the resistance, best achieved at 0 Kelvin)?
Prove it by facts, if so.

1. You can just make the copper cable of thicker gauge to offset the conductivity disadvantage.
2. At worst a badly conducting cable made of copper (or coat hanger wire, for that matter) will add a few ohms of output impedance before the headphone transducers. This is a non-issue with dynamic transducers with flat impedance response and any half-decent amplifier. At worst it would skew the frequency response of low-impedance, high-impedance-variation balanced-armature transducers by a few dB. But you of all people should know that that can be corrected for with EQ?

 

[MygpuK]

1. You can just make the copper cable of thicker gauge to offset the conductivity disadvantage.
2. At worst a badly conducting cable made of copper (or coat hanger wire, for that matter) will add a few ohms of output impedance before the headphone transducers. This is a non-issue with dynamic transducers with flat impedance response and any half-decent amplifier. At worst it would skew the frequency response of low-impedance, high-impedance-variation balanced-armature transducers by a few dB. But you of all people should know that that can be corrected for with EQ?

If we speak about a flawless headphone, there must be cables, I suppose.
If there must be cables, they should be "flawless". Silver is just "more flawless" than copper.
Hope you understand my point, sir!

Yes, its a non-issue.

TO DO:
dynamic transducers: flat impedance response. Low/high impedance frequencies are harder to EQ-fix. Balanced armature transducers.

 

[00940]

Let's drag a bit on the "non-issue"
 
Quote:

You agree with him - copper has better (flawless with less diameter of the wire) possibility to achieve 0 resistance (the lower is the temperature, the lower is the resistance, best achieved at 0 Kelvin)?
Prove it by facts, if so.

 
No, I don't agree with that. I contest that resistance is a relevant/interesting parameter. Electrical resistance cannot be used to say that silver is "better" than copper.
 
In the absolute:
 
Using the figures given here, a 10ft cable made of 24ga copper has a resistance of 0.26R. The same cable made of silver has a resistance of 0.24R. Difference: 0.02R. Twice that if you account for the return cable. Such a difference can be discarded as meaningless. Even with low impedance drivers, 0.04R won't cause any kind of frequency deviation worth speaking about.
 
What you aim for in an audio system is linearity. If a low output impedance matters, if a cable of reasonably low resistance matters, it's because resistance in between the amplifier output and the driver will change the frequency response of the driver and thus linearity. But one has to draw a line somewhere, otherwise we'd be using 12ga speaker cables for our headphones. The difference in between silver and copper is well under what matters.
 
One could argue that resistance matters because less power is wasted in the cable but that would get ridiculous considering the power involved.
 
And of course, Joe Bloggs is perfectly right in pointing that using just a bit more copper will get you the same resistance.
 
From a manufacturing perspective:
 
Designing a "flawless" headphones is a matter, not of picking first the material, but first the design parameter. In this case, the goal (a given, low cable resistance) can be easily achieved either with copper or silver. Maybe you need a little more copper for the same goal. But since copper is much cheaper, it is clearly a winner from a manufacturer perspective (and the manufacturer would be right).
 
 
Btw, one chasing the mythical "perfect" headphones would want a connector with 4 contacts (no shared ground), even if not using balanced amps. The shared contact resistance at the 1/4 jack  increases crosstalk a bit.

 

[MygpuK]

No, I don't agree with that. I contest that resistance is a relevant/interesting parameter. Electrical resistance cannot be used to say that silver is "better" than copper.

In the absolute:

Using the figures given here, a 10ft cable made of 24ga copper has a resistance of 0.26R. The same cable made of silver has a resistance of 0.24R. Difference: 0.02R. Twice that if you account for the return cable. Such a difference can be discarded as meaningless. Even with low impedance drivers, 0.04R won't cause any kind of frequency deviation worth speaking about.

What you aim for in an audio system is linearity. If a low output impedance matters, if a cable of reasonably low resistance matters, it's because resistance in between the amplifier output and the driver will change the frequency response of the driver and thus linearity. But one has to draw a line somewhere, otherwise we'd be using 12ga speaker cables for our headphones. The difference in between silver and copper is well under what matters.

One could argue that resistance matters because less power is wasted in the cable but that would get ridiculous considering the power involved.

And of course, Joe Bloggs is perfectly right in pointing that using just a bit more copper will get you the same resistance.

From a manufacturing perspective:

Designing a "flawless" headphones is a matter, not of picking first the material, but first the design parameter. In this case, the goal (a given, low cable resistance) can be easily achieved either with copper or silver. Maybe you need a little more copper for the same goal. But since copper is much cheaper, it is clearly a winner from a manufacturer perspective (and the manufacturer would be right).


Btw, one chasing the mythical "perfect" headphones would want a connector with 4 contacts (no shared ground), even if not using balanced amps. The shared contact resistance at the 1/4 jack  increases crosstalk a bit.

Now you are counter-arguementing. That's what I've needed.
Your point is right. Updating.

 

[MygpuK]

You might want a gold plated jack since it doesn't tarnish, something else to consider apart from resistance.

Tarnish=damage? I mean scratches.

 

[MygpuK]

MygpuK,

I grabbed the quote below from your other thread (Cyber Snipa Sonar 5.1 USB Headset -- wow that's an earful!)...as I think it presents, to me, the key premise of your discussion.
"~~I'm a scientist, you know I suppose there is nothing in this world being subjective, only tastes and biological "specials" of given ears which result in tastes also We should just clear it out, when NOT using an amp, we must get a good_to_go (fully portable) product, which must fit our tastes."

Having owned several high-end audio/stereo systems at the same time (Electrostatics, Planars, & Dynamics w/Ribbon Transducers - all driven by high current/quality amps), I found that I enjoyed them equally for different reasons. Based on that experience, I would say that there is no such thing as 'one headphone for the masses'...why?
In the end, what I like in a headphone sound signature may not interest another as much as it does my 'tastes'. This has been going on for decades and will continue for many more! In fact, many of us listen to different equipment/sound-signatures based on the music genre, mood we're in, etc...did this in my stereo days as well -- The Who on Quad ESLs - yechh! Vivaldi...priceless!
One only needs to read the variety of reviews in this and other 'hi-fi' forums to understand people do 'hear' things differently -- most likely based on biological 'specials', as you put it, and also what I'll call sociological 'biases' (music genre tastes, pride of ownership, product design & branding, perceived value, etc.).
Some audiophiles may want the best measuring headphone, while others trust their ears to guide them...neither is 'wrong'. Hopefully, they are choosing to spend their hard-earned dollars in a way that brings them the most joy when they listen to music, watch movies, or are gaming.

Science has its place but it is just a means to an end...that said, I firmly believe that Headphone design / Transducer quality can impact the listening experience and is something I’m willing to pay for...if I can hear the difference.

As I'm walking down this road again with Headphones (instead of room-sized speakers), it's costing far less and I'm enjoying it way more! Further down the road, I expect I'll have a broad mix of technologies as I did before. For right now, I'm just trying to decide between rounding out my mid-range dynamic collection (880, 701, or 600) or splurging for the Holidays and getting an HE-500...whichever fork I take, it'll be fun.

Lately though, I've been spending more time listening to my $40 M80's on a Rockboxed Clip Zip than anything else. Just can't believe the sound I get for $75 out the door!

PS - which ice cream is better -- Chocolate or Vanilla?...Butter Pecan? Ben & Jerry's, Haagen-Dazs, maybe Jeni's?

 

[00940]

Tarnish=damage? I mean scratches.

 
no, tarnish=corrosion.

 

[MygpuK]

Tarnish=damage? I mean scratches.

no, tarnish=corrosion.

Can't remember, is silver a noble metal?

 

[ab initio]

Can't remember, is silver a noble metal?

 
http://bit.ly/17Hrigl

 

[MygpuK]

Can't remember, is silver a noble metal?

http://bit.ly/17Hrigl

Have some respect. People may have no time for hobbies.
My point got no change from "tarnish", so no change was needed.
I checked that with a retorical question.

 

[ssrock64]

It seems you've improved your language skills; hopefully this thread can be more productive than the last one.
 
Why do you discount driver types such as electrostatic and planar magnetic? Why limit yourself only to the choice of a dynamic driver?

 

[castleofargh]

oxidized silver is still conductive I believe, but who would want black scraps of silver coming out every time you unplug you jack?
for connectors gold is a no brainer IMO. keeping this weak point in the circuitry clean is a good enough reason to use gold.
 
about the cable itself, is silver as durable as copper(when bended)? I'm a wanted serial cable killer, and my own experience is that my silver cables died in 6 to 8 months, when my copper cables(usually of lower overall quality) did at least as long and most did pass 1year.
 
 
also copper turns green, and green is good for the planet.

 

 

[MygpuK]

oxidized silver is still conductive I believe, but who would want black scraps of silver coming out every time you unplug you jack?
for connectors gold is a no brainer IMO. keeping this weak point in the circuitry clean is a good enough reason to use gold.

about the cable itself, is silver as durable as copper(when bended)? I'm a wanted serial cable killer, and my own experience is that my silver cables died in 6 to 8 months, when my copper cables(usually of lower overall quality) did at least as long and most did pass 1year.


also copper turns green, and green is good for the planet.  

Green=cheap, agree
Gold is better, I suppose you've persued me.
Gold = better conductibility. We must have a multi-cable? Many-cable which is built up by having that each cable should have a separate grounding? Lowers crosstalk, AFAIK.
We should forget that money are relevant. It's a personal point of view of mine money are not. Sorry.
We have tech progress to improve the "serial killer part". We may harden the cable with the same gold inside.

It seems you've improved your language skills; hopefully this thread can be more productive than the last one.
Why do you discount driver types such as electrostatic and planar magnetic? Why limit yourself only to the choice of a dynamic driver?

Starting researches ASAP.
You are free to persuase me.