Need speaker wire advice

[d1abolic]

Alright, so i just picked up the Monitor 7s. No wires included, so i'm stuck using crappy PC speaker wires. I have a 24/7 Home Depot right near me, so if someone could tell me what i need, i could just walk over there and pick everything up right now. What gauge wire? What connectors? I assume banana plugs are best, right? Thanks!

update: the humming stopped. still want new wire

 

[Viperoni]

*sigh*

Speaker wires can't make your speakers hum. You've got a wiring problem between your source and receiver/amp.

Any 12-16g wire will do, something flexible is usually nicer to use, yes, banana's are nice, but I doubt home depot would have them.
Dual banana's are usually $20 a pair for lower end ones.

 

[d1abolic]

Yeah actually i don't hear the humming anymore, weird. So you're saying HD doesn't carry banana plugs? Speaking of which, are bananas best? Or spades?

 

[glen]

All wires sound alike, and almost all wire is made by the same factory.
how many places do you really think are refining copper and extruding wire anyway?
You have a faulty piece of equiptment with an impedance problem mostlikely.

 

[N8Magic]

Those Monitor 7's have binding posts, so banana plugs really aren't necessary.

I agree with 12-16g wire, and the flexibility factor is nice too. Stiff wire is tough to work with.

 

[Ornery]

"...the speakers HUM when nothing is playing..."

It ain't the speaker wire Sparky

Home Depot sells 12GA stranded with clear insulation for about .45 per foot. Buy a ton of that and sell it to your "audiophile" friends for $1.00 per foot!

Don't the Monitor 7s have screw terminals as well as banana plug? Just tin the ends and use 'em that way on the speaker end. Radio Shack sells the Gold plated banana plugs for $3.00 each (GAWD! :Q ) Here's the real low down I stumbled across about cable:

• Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 13:08:50 -0500
  From: 102365.2026@compuserve.com (Dunlavy Audio Labs)
  To: bass@mcfeeley.cc.utexas.edu (bass group)
  Subject: Cable Nonsense (Long)
  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 audiophile applications 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

 

[Ornery]

Oops, I meant to copy and paste this info:

Might as well throw this in here, since everybody is sharing wire and cable info. I stumbled onto this Wonderful Wire Hype Post:

• "Before you buy any expensive wires..."
  
  Before you buy any expensive wires, you might want to look at the following:
  
  Some double blind tests.
  
  What's the Placebo Effect?
  (Why Double Blind Testing is needed. Someone may easily believe they hear a difference when they do not actually hear a difference; the more impressive LOOKING thing usually is believed to "sound" better. Consequently, listening when you can see what you are hearing is unreliable for testing any controversial matter. Double blind tests can indicate whether it is the appearance of the thing {rather than the actual sound it makes} that influences people to believe that it sounds better. Many people hate double blind tests, because they do not always give the person the result they wanted; i.e., they often believe they hear things that they cannot. It is an unfortunate characteristic of humans that they tend to blame the test rather than to consider that they may have been mistaken about what they can actually hear. There have even been some fun tests where nothing is changed, but people swear they hear a difference!)
  
  Speaker Wire - A History
  
  ************
  (This one has a chart recommending wire gauges. Don't use wire that is too small. Because 'generic' 12 gauge wire is so inexpensive, I recommend not using anything smaller, unless you absolutely have to {as, for example, you are running it through a conduit that is not large enough}. Also, the entire article is interesting and informative.)
  ************
  
  Cable Nonsense
  
  http://www.audioreview.com/reviews/Cable/product_3854.shtml
  
  Reviews of Radio Shack RS Gold Interconnects.
  (For this one, you should scroll down to the review by Christopher Fucik. Read a review? Read it, and you should understand why. His review is long, but well worth reading. His measurements are enlightening.)
  
  http://www.vxm.com/21R.64.html
  (A wire manufacturer unwilling to have his claims actually tested. Why is it that, after so many years, there has been NO wire manufacturer who has actually bothered to prove their claims about their wires being audibly superior to ordinary ones? No, it is NOT a lack of money; see the next link.)
  
  http://www.forbes.com/forbes/98/1228/6214066a.htm
  "A $100 stereo cable is something like undercoating on a car. To move the product, you have to motivate the salesman."
  (There is plenty of profit for wire salespeople. Why don't they spend some of that money to prove their claims? Wouldn't that really help sell the wires? And no, it is not that expensive or difficult; many manufacturers already use double blind procedures for testing various equipment, including speakers. The only explanation that I have found plausible is that their claims are false, but you should think carefully about the matter for yourself.)
  
  http://www.magnani.net/~al/DigitalWireLabTest.html
  "A delicate digital AC-3 signal originating from my $4500.00 Theta DaViD transport THROUGH A WIRE HANGER...the Dolby Decoder reported ZERO errors..."
  
  Science and Subjectivism in Audio.
  (A very good read.)
  
  Audio Distortions
  
  (Another very good read. This one illustrates 'technobabble'. If you don't understand something, it could be something important, or merely marketing hype with a few facts thrown in to sound impressive.)
  
  
  What's All This Hoax Stuff, Anyhow?
  
  What's All This Splicing Stuff, Anyhow?
  
  I Am As Mad As Hell - Find Out Why
  
  Seven Shiny Pennies
  (I am not the only one annoyed by BS marketing of audio products. Do you want to buy some magic beans with your hard earned money, or do you want to face facts?)
  
  
  For the following two, you must subscribe (it's free) to The New York Times on the Web.
  http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/12/circuits/articles/23down.html
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/12/circuits/articles/23wire.html
  
  
  Wires are one of the big controversies at this site. I think expensive wires are a waste of money, but you should THINK about the issue carefully for yourself. If expensive wires are better, why is there no proof that they are?
  
  "Proof," of course, is more than just some people making some claims; many have claimed to be abducted by aliens, but that does not prove that they have been. "Proof" requires scientific evidence. In this case, double blind listening tests would probably be the most satisfactory type of test, which should be repeated by others, as one person could cheat (or make a mistake) in one test, and that would not be proof of anything. (Remember the claims of "cold fusion?" When the tests were repeated, it was shown that the original testers had made a mistake.)
  
  Do NOT confuse something being measurable with something being audible. Many things can be measured but not heard. 100 kHz can be measured, but is not audible to humans. (No, I am NOT saying that no measurements are relevant to what can be heard; I am saying that not all measurements are relevant.)
  
  When someone says, "Trust your ears" or "Hearing is believing", consider this: Do you thoughtlessly trust your eyes when you see a stick inserted halfway in water? If you don't trust your eyes without thinking, why would you trust your ears without thinking? I recommend not mindlessly trusting your sensory organs, but engaging your brain before you make a decision.
  
  Curiously, sometimes people will say "trust your ears", and then they themselves will make judgments without listening for themselves, like saying that an interesting article (about a cheap RCA CD player being audibly indistinguishable from players costing over $1000 in a blind test) must be wrong, without ever listening to the cheap CD player. (See: The $ensible $ound, # 74, Apr/May 1999, pg. 28-30.) People often buy expensive things not for their function, but for their status, but they may convince themselves that it is function. No one, for example, buys a watch that costs thousands of dollars just because they want to know what time it is, though some may claim that that is their motive. Do you think the same idea could apply to the world of audio equipment and accessories? The status of a thing is very important to many people, and often clouds their judgment. For more on the human psychology of this, you can start by reading Hans Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New Clothes". There is a reason why certain children's stories have such an enduring appeal; it is because they illustrate real traits of humans. See: http://deoxy.org/emperors.htm Or: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/7008/index31.html Or: http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type1620.html
  
  This brings to mind another lie, that everyone knows is a lie, yet, strangely, some people believe it is true: "You get what you pay for." Everyone knows this is false; if it were true:
  • 
    1) you would not need to think (or listen) at all in order to know what to buy; always, the more expensive the item, the better;
    2) buying things on sale would not help, as the same product would be worse than it is at full price;
    3) looking for a bargain would always be foolish, because the lower priced item would always be worse;
    4) product brands would be totally irrelevant; always, the more expensive the item, the better;
    5) looking for advice on what to buy would be foolish once one knew, the more expensive the item, the better;
    6) those "white van" speakers would be worth every penny one paid for them (there could not possibly be any kind of con, because "You get what you pay for.");
    7) building something yourself to save money would be a waste of time, because it would necessarily be inferior to anything more expensive.
  Need I go on? The simple fact is that price does not correspond to quality; in audio equipment or in anything else. Of course, price is tied in with the prestige of an item, because anything that is very expensive cannot be owned by most people, so it will virtually always, with some people, seem like something wonderful if only it is very expensive. This is true regardless of whether it is audio equipment or anything else.
  
  Beware of 'technobabble'. There is nothing like including a few impressive facts and half-truths while omitting important and relevant facts when someone is trying to convince you of something that is false. This may occur in an advertisement, or in someone's post here; there should be one posted in reply to this any minute now, but I cannot promise that someone will comply and give us a good example (there might, instead -- or in addition to -- be insults like those contained in "The Emperor's New Clothes" against those who cannot see the new clothes). See:http://www.sundial.net/~rogerr/truth.htm
  
  I do NOT suggest that anyone blindly follow anything I or anyone else has said, either on this forum or on any link; I strongly recommend that people think carefully about the issues for themselves AFTER considering different points of view. I leave it to the true believers to post links for the other side, as any such links from me would be regarded by many as a misrepresentation of the other side (as if there were only two sides to this issue).
  
  Indeed, I disagree with some of what is said in the links I have provided. To give you one example, I believe that Christopher Fucik is mistaken in his belief that "...the cables included with your components are crap, and an investment in interconnects that are sturdy, corrosion-resistant, and well-sheilded is wise." I have never had any problems with the included wires breaking or the ends becoming damaged; they are sturdy enough if you do not yank them from the middle -- if you abuse things, then you should expect that you may damage things from time to time. And I do not put my audio system in a very corrosive environment (which would generally be a very bad idea), so corrosion is not a major issue in my case. I have also not had shielding problems that were not fixed by simply moving wires away from other wires. Now, if your conditions differ from mine in relevant ways (e.g., you have your equipment in a corrosive environment), or if you treat your wires differently from the way I treat mine (e.g., if you abuse them), then following his advice on this point is what I would recommend (well, actually, I would recommend getting your equipment out of the corrosive environment and stop abusing your wires, but if you are going to do so anyway, then buying sturdy wires will be a good idea). In any case, his other comments, where he gives reasons for his views, are extremely useful. Be selective in what you believe, and decide these things for yourself.
  
  Regarding the connecting wires that are often included with components: Obviously, the manufacturer regards those wires as good enough for connecting their components, and if you cannot trust them with selecting wires, then you should not buy their components in the first place. Wires are far simpler than audio components, and if they are not capable of selecting satisfactory wire, then they are far too incompetent to design and manufacture components. Besides, take a look at the wires used inside electronic components and speakers; they are usually not much different from supplied connecting wires. If special wires were really needed, then they would need to be inside the components and would also generally be supplied by manufacturers. Given the cost of many components, they would include exotic wire if it really improved the sound, instead of the interconnects that they do include. If the included interconnects made their components sound bad, then many of the components would be returned, wouldn't they?
  
  
  If you decide to listen to wires for yourself, listen "blind" (i.e., have someone else hook up the wires and not tell you what you are hearing; decide if it is good or not, then look and make sure they did not hook up the "inferior" wires too loosely). People who object to listening blind do not want to get the "wrong" answer; they are like the people in The Emperor's New Clothes. Many judge sound quality by price and prestige rather than by sound. This is one reason why many hate double blind tests, because such tests force one to listen with one's ears rather than with one's prejudices. Judge by the sound, not by seeing what it is first.
  
  
  Depending on the type of connectors on your amplifier (receiver) and speakers, you might choose to have different connectors at each end of your speaker wire. What will work best in your case will depend on the types of connectors on your equipment, and how often you plan on disconnecting and reconnecting things. By the way, I suggest that, if you have a soldering iron and are capable of using it, you can 'tin' (i.e., melt solder into) the ends of braided wires instead of buying "pin" type connectors. Retighten your connections after a few days (if you have the type of connections that can be retightened). If you prefer a different type of connector, by all means, buy it.
  
  
  One last thing: If someone claims something that most electrical engineers regard as impossible, and makes the claims here rather than in a scientific forum -- is the person a misunderstood genius or just another quack? (History tells us which of these is more likely....) By all means, read what they say and decide for yourself. YOU decide whether their remarks are 'technobabble' or the truth. But whatever you do, THINK FOR YOURSELF.
  
  
  *****************************
  
  "Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that I've taken the approach of shopping with my brain and not so much with my ears. I have yet to be disappointed." -- Christopher Fucik, from: http://www.audioreview.com/reviews/Cable/product_3854.shtml
  
  *****************************
  
  "Believe only half of what you see and nothing you hear." -- an English proverb
  
  *****************************
  
  My apologies for the length of my explanations, but, unfortunately, I have found that some people who profess to be experts on the subject matter have had difficulty understanding the relevance of the various links. Frankly, I expect that in the future, I will need to make the explanations even longer for these people. On the other hand, there will probably be some who will not like what I post no matter how clear or reasonable the explanations may be.
  
  It's your money; spend it how you like.

Awesome stuff, eh?

 

[Nocturnal]

I thought all speaker wire was the same? I always just use the regular wire from radio shack.

 

[Ornery]

Yeah, but Metaphor, you won't have a '1337' system if you do that!

You can save a lot of money on the speaker wire by buying it at Home Depot. 16ga is plenty good, 14ga is overkill, 12ga is just a wee bit more than 14ga, so ya might as well grab that if ya gotta have fat, 1337 cable!

 

[mikebb]

You don't need to use banana plugs. Just a convenience if you're planning on disconnecting/reconnecting your speakers often. Any added implement between amp and speaker (such as bananas) has the potential of degrading the signal. Just use the bare wire ends on the binding posts, and save yourself a couple bucks.

 

[d1abolic]

Ok so i'll just grab some 12GA wire i guess So you guys don't think i even need connectors? Sounds good to me. Oh BTW.. underneath the binding posts, there is a golden clip. When i slide the end of the wire in, does it have to be between the speaker and the clip or between the clip and the screw-on thingie? Also, i should connect to the top 2 posts right? I think the bottom two are for bi-wiring.

 

[Heisenberg]

I'm not familiar with your speakers but most have a hole through the post with the "screw-on thingie". Just stick the end of the wire through the hole and tighten it down.

 

[mikebb]

As long as you get it in the hole you're ok

 

[Ornery]

The posts should have a hole right through the side of them. Might be a tight fit for 12ga, but it should go. If you can tin them, it might be better. I suppose you'll hear squawking about the lead degrading the signal, though...

 

[Harvey]

Assuming you have good wire (no contaminants in the copper), there are only two properties that make any real difference in speaker wire. It should be a sufficiently large guage, and it should be stranded. More power and longer wire runs require heavier wire. It's simple arithmetic. Like back pressure in a pipe, the resistance of the wire is a function of width and length. The guage determines the resistance per length. The length determines how much total resistance is in the wire run. The higher the power of your amp, or the longer the wire run, the heavier guage wire you need.

Wire weenies are weird.

 

[mithrandir2001]

I hook up my $1800 loudspeakers with cable I bought at Home Depot. It comes in massive spools and costs about 35 cents a foot.

 

[Ornery]

OMG, Harvey is still with us! We ought to just start another forum for audio related stuff and Harvey could write an FAQ for it. We'd cut the number of topics in ATOT down by 10 percent at least!

 

[d1abolic]

Could someone please answer this?

<< underneath the binding posts, there is a golden clip. When i slide the end of the wire in, does it have to be between the speaker and the clip or between the clip and the screw-on thingie? >>

 

[mikebb]

Alright, I'm looking at my Monitor 5's now, and if by gold clip you mean the washer on the bottom of the binding post, then the wire should be between the washer and the plastic screw-down piece.

 

[d1abolic]

Don't the 5's have 2 binding posts? Because the 7's have 4 and that's why they look a bit different.

 

[Ornery]

Do any of these posts look like yours? The only "clips" I see hanging off would be used for soldering purposes.

 

[kgraeme]

d1abolic, all that really matters is that you have wire metal firmly touching speaker metal. How ever you get that to work is what you need to do.

As others have said you don't need banana plugs. They don't do anything to improve the sound. But they are really nice for plugging/unplugging your wire. They're a cool toy. And isn't it all about having cool toys.

 

[glen]

ABX testing of zip cord vs. super expensive wire:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:E9RM7oQrEpYC:www.oakland.edu/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm+abx+zip&hl=en

 

[yellowperil]

This looks pretty good. Also 100' roll

 

[Mookow]

Why not just use some CAT5? Or if you are really concerned about sound quality, try some CAT6!!!