Speaker wire recommendations?

[Ari]

I need to set up my 5.1 surround sound in my new house, but all the speaker wire stayed in the old house as was mostly embedded.

Sorry for such a mundane subject but, is it worth spending more for decent speaker wire? (It's a reasonably good system, Diamond 9 speakers and a Denon amp).

And if so (or even if not), any recommendations?

[rxe]

If the embedded stuff is bell wire then yes, it is worth upgrading. If it any sort of meaty cable, don’t worry.

As to replacement, QED79 strand is an old favourite. It conducts electricity, can tolerate high currently and is about a quid a metre.

[Ari]

That's really helpful, thanks.

So just get a reel of this?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasics-16-Gauge-Spe...

[darreni]

I’ve used this for years:

https://www.audiovisualonline.co.uk/product/6685/q...

If you don’t need that much, it’s 88p a meter if I remember correctly.

[FunkyGibbon]

Ari said:

That's really helpful, thanks.

So just get a reel of this?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasics-16-Gauge-Spe...

Yep that will do.

Anything more is largely profit for someone else.

[Ari]

darreni said:

I’ve used this for years:

https://www.audiovisualonline.co.uk/product/6685/q...

If you don’t need that much, it’s 88p a meter if I remember correctly.

That looks good, thank you.

[Timothy Bucktu]

16 gauge seems a bit thin? I run 8 gauge to my rear speakers which I think is 3.6mm.

[justin220]

Ari said:

That's really helpful, thanks.

So just get a reel of this?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasics-16-Gauge-Spe...

That's what I use on my 5.1.4 set up. No issues

[Lucid_AV]

The Amazon basics stuff is copper plated aluminium. It wouldn't be my first choice.

The QED QX16/2 stuff is all copper, not cheaper aluminium masquerading as something it isn't. 16AWG (American Wire Gauge) is the equivalent of 1.5mm^2 per conductor. That'll be sufficient for runs up to 10~15m per length without significant power loss. More importantly, the next size up (2.5mm^2 or 14AWG) won't make much a of difference in the power loss stakes to justify the extra it costs.

The comment "Anything more is largely profit for someone else" is I think rather misleading. We're talking about just getting the basics right here rather than paying through the nose for some kind of magical angel hair. This QED QX16/2 or something similar (all copper, not CCA) will hit the nail on the head without spending too much.

If you're searching for other brands then your shopping list of features should look like this:

• all copper - if it claims to be high purity / oxygen free for a similar price to something that isn't then great, go with it, but don't sweat it if it isn't
• at 16 AWG / 1.5mm^2 then you're looking for a multi-strand cable with something between 16 and 40 filaments per conductor. This won't be stiff like solid core mains cable, and you want to avoid anything with hundreds of tiny filaments

That's pretty much it.

This 100% copper Kabeldirekt 50m x 1.5mm^2 works out at roughly 50p per metre. That's cheap.

[Boom78]

Just go for the cheapest wire, I’ve tried simple bell wire and expensive stuff and can’t tell the difference. In fact, if you look inside some top end speaker bell wire is used to connect components.

[NorthDave]

Boom78 said:

Just go for the cheapest wire, I’ve tried simple bell wire and expensive stuff and can’t tell the difference. In fact, if you look inside some top end speaker bell wire is used to connect components.

With any system above the absolute bottom of the range most people can tell the difference. The only reason someone couldnt would be hearing issues.

The benefits of spending more diminish quite quickly but the jump from bell wire to something like QED 79 strand is stark.

[Boom78]

NorthDave said:

Boom78 said:

Just go for the cheapest wire, I’ve tried simple bell wire and expensive stuff and can’t tell the difference. In fact, if you look inside some top end speaker bell wire is used to connect components.

With any system above the absolute bottom of the range most people can tell the difference. The only reason someone couldnt would be hearing issues.

The benefits of spending more diminish quite quickly but the jump from bell wire to something like QED 79 strand is stark.

Sorry, don’t agree. This is like the many other threads about hdmi cables, stereo racks etc. Expensive Speaker wire is snake oil. If you look in some top end speakers bell cable is used. I’ve got a massive roll of entry level screwfix wire and I can’t tell the difference whatsoever between that and my previous ‘expensive’ stuff.

[rxe]

It depends entirely on the system and distance between amp and speakers. An amplifier can easily push 50A, which will push the electrical capabilities of 10m of bell wire. You would hear less difference if the speakers were right next to the amp and linked by 0.5m of bell wire.

Basically - small system, close distances, bell wire will work. Big system, bigger distances, more bass, you’ll hear the difference.

Decent QED cable is more expensive than bell wire, but you’re still talking less than tenner for most systems.

[dundarach]

Ari said:

That's really helpful, thanks.

So just get a reel of this?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasics-16-Gauge-Spe...

I did, used to have some stupid expensive stuff, can't hear the difference.

This was excellent, cut and lays well, sounds great.

[mgv8]

If you have a high resolving system (good) you will hear the difference between cables. There are question to if the cable is acting as a filter and that is where is showing in the sound. On a low resolving system then it the difference is sound close to 0.

Copper cable well terminated will be good for most people. Once you are getting higher up the scale then borrow some cables and test for your self.

[Crackie]

mgv8 said:

If you have a high resolving system (good) you will hear the difference between cables. There are question to if the cable is acting as a filter and that is where is showing in the sound. On a low resolving system then it the difference is sound close to 0.

Copper cable well terminated will be good for most people. Once you are getting higher up the scale then borrow some cables and test for your self.

Regarding the bold..........the evidence says otherwise.

John Dunlavy was a pioneering physicist who worked for NASA prior to setting up his two speaker building businesses. He designed arguably the most accurate and best sounding speakers ever produced the DAL SC-Vl ; the letter below contains some of his thoughts regarding speaker cables.

Having read some of the recent comments on several of the Internet audio groups, concerning audible differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables, I could not resist adding some thoughts about the subject as a concerned engineer possessing credible credentials.

To begin, several companies design and manufacture loudspeaker and interconnect cables which they proudly claim possess optimized electrical properties for the audiophileapplications intended. However, accurate measurements of several popularly selling cables reveal significant differences that call into question the technical goals of their designer. These differences also question the capability of the companies to perform accurate measurements of important cable performance properties. For example, any company not possessing a precision C-L-R bridge, a Vector Impedance Meter, a Network Analyzer, a precision waveform and impulse generator, wideband precision oscilloscopes, etc., probably needs to purchase them if they are truly serious about designing audio cables that provide premium performance.

The measurable properties of loudspeaker cables that are important to their performance include characteristic impedance (series inductance and parallel capacitance per unit length), loss resistance (including additional resistance due to skin-effect losses versus frequency), dielectric losses versus frequency (loss tangent, etc.), velocity-of-propagation factor, overall loss versus frequency into different impedance loads, etc.

Measurable properties of interconnect cables include all of the above, with the addition of those properties of the dielectric material that contribute to microphonic noise in the presence of ambient vibration, noise, etc. (in combination with a D.C. off-set created by a pre-amp output circuit, etc.).

While competent cable manufacturers should be aware of these measurements and the need to make them during the design of their cables, the raw truth is that most do not! Proof of this can be found in the absurd buzzard-salve, snake-oil and meaningless advertising claims found in almost all magazine ads and product literature for audiophile cables. Perhaps worse, very few of the expensive, high-tech appearing cables we have measured appear to have been designed in accordance with the well-known laws and principles taught by proper physics and engineering disciplines. (Where are the costly Government Consumer Protection people who are supposed to protect innocent members of the public by identifying and policing questionable performance claims, misleading specifications, etc.?) — Caveat Emptor!

For example, claiming that copper wire is directional, that slow-moving electrons create distortion as they haphazardly carry the signal along a wire, that cables store and release energy as signals propagate along them, that a final energy component (improperly labeled as Joules) is the measure of the tonality of cables, ad nauseum, are but a few of the non-entities used in advertisements to describe cable performance.

Another pet peeve of mine is the concept of a special configuration included with a loudspeaker cable which is advertised as being able to terminate the cable in a matter intended to deliver more accurate tonality, better imaging, lower noise, etc. The real truth is that this special configuration contains nothing more than a simple, inexpensive network intended to prevent poorly-designed amplifiers, with a too-high slew-rate (obtained at the expense of instability caused by too much inverse-feedback) from oscillating when connected to a loudspeaker through a low-loss, low-impedance cable. When this box appears at the loudspeaker-end of a cable, it seldom contains nothing more than a Zobel network, which is usually a series resistor-capacitor network, connector in parallel with the wires of the cable. If it is at the amplifier-end of the cable, it is probably either a parallel resistor-inductor network, connected in series with the cable conductors (or a simple cylindrical ferrite sleeve covering both conductors). But the proper place for such a network, if it is needed to insure amplifier stability and prevent high-frequency oscillations, is within the amplifier – not along the loudspeaker cable. Hmmm!

Having said all this, are there really any significant audible differences between most cables that can be consistently identified by experienced listeners? The answer is simple: very seldom! Those who claim otherwise do not fully grasp the power of the old Placebo-Effect – which is very alive and well among even the most well-intentioned listeners. The placebo-effect renders audible signatures easy to detect and describe – if the listener knows which cable is being heard. But, take away this knowledge during blind or double-blind listening comparisons and the differences either disappear completely or hover close to the level of random guessing. Speaking as a competent professional engineer, designer and manufacturer, nothing would please me and my company’s staff more than being able to design a cable which consistently yielded a positive score during blind listening comparisons against other cables. But it only rarely happens – if we wish to be honest!

Oh yes, we have heard of golden-eared audiophiles who claim to be able to consistently identify huge, audible differences between cables. But when these experts have visited our facility and were put to the test under carefully-controlled conditions, they invariably failed to yield a score any better than chance. For example, when led to believe that three popular cables were being compared, varying in size from a high-quality 12 AWG ZIP-CORD to a high-tech looking cable with a diameter exceeding an inch, the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best – even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time.

Sorry, but I do not buy the claims of those who say they can always audibly identify differences between cables, even when the comparisons are properly controlled to ensure that the identity of the cable being heard is not known by the listener. We have accomplished too many true blind comparisons with listeners possessing the right credentials, including impeccable hearing attributes, to know that real, audible differences seldom exist – if the comparisons are properly implemented to eliminate other causes such as system interactions with cables, etc.

Indeed, during these comparisons (without changing cables), some listeners were able to describe in great detail the big differences they thought they heard in bass, high-end detail, etc. (Of course, the participants were never told the NAUGHTY TRUTH, lest they become an enemy for life!)

So why does a reputable company like DAL engage in the design and manufacture of audiophile cables? The answer is simple: since significant measurable differences do exist and because well-known and understood transmission line theory defines optimum relationships between such parameters as cable impedance and the impedance of the load (loudspeaker), the capacitance of an interconnect and the input impedance of the following stage, why not design cables that at least satisfy what theory has to teach? And, since transmission line theory is universally applied, quite successfully, in the design of cables intended for TV, microwave, telephone, and other critical applications requiring peak performance, etc., why not use it in designing cables intended for critical audiophile applications? Hmmm! To say, as some do, that there are factors involved that competent engineers and scientists have yet to identify is utter nonsense and a cover-up for what should be called pure snake oil and buzzard salve – in short, pure fraud. If any cable manufacturer, writer, technician, etc. can identify such an audible design parameter that cannot be measured using available lab equipment or be described by known theory, I can guarantee a nomination for a Nobel Prize.

Anyway, I just had to share some of my favorite Hmmm’s, regarding cable myths and seemingly fraudulent claims, with audiophiles on the net who may lack the technical expertise to separate fact from fiction with regard to cable performance. I also welcome comments from those who may have other opinions or who may know of something I might have missed or misunderstood regarding cable design, theory or secret criteria used by competitors to achieve performance that cannot be measured or identified by conventional means. Lets all try to get to the bottom of this mess by open, informed and objective inquiry.

I sincerely believe the time has come for concerned audiophiles, true engineers, competent physicists, academics, mag editors, etc. to take a firm stand regarding much of this disturbing new trend in the blatantly false claims frequently found in cable advertising. If we fail to do so, reputable designers, engineers, manufacturers, magazine editors and product reviewers may find their reputation tarnished beyond repair among those of the audiophile community we are supposed to serve.

Best regards,
John Dunlavy

https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/162/...

[V8covin]

2 core mains cable

[Crackie]

V8covin said:

2 core mains cable

This /\

Not the orange stuff from B&Q though............it's too coloured.

[sean ie3]

So, is a solid core copper cable better than a 79 strand cable?
I could find out myself for less than a tenner, but any opinion is welcome.

[mikef]

If you’re happy with bell wire or mains cable, go for it

I’ve been happy with Audioquest x2 frrom Futureshop (not too expensive and they will terminate if needed) for surround and with KabelDirekt Pure Copper from Amazon for long runs. You can spend an awful lot more if you wish

I like both these as the pairs are colour-coded