Speaker Leads
 

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)

I can't figure why they use #22 wire for the front speakers except #22 is
cheaper than #16 (go figure)!

The three front speakers are each less than 6 feet from the reciever.

Before I replace them with #16 or #18 wire cut to length, an unlikely remote
thought comes to my mind that the #22 wire at about 25 feet provides some
needed resistance in the speaker circuit, maybe damping value. Does this
thought make any sense?

Doesn't it make the most sense to use a larger size wire for speaker hookup?
Speaker inpedence is 4 ohms.

Thanks, Dave C.

Speaker Leads
 

Dave C. wrote:
I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)

I can't figure why they use #22 wire for the front speakers except #22 is
cheaper than #16 (go figure)!

The three front speakers are each less than 6 feet from the reciever.

Before I replace them with #16 or #18 wire cut to length, an unlikely remote
thought comes to my mind that the #22 wire at about 25 feet provides some
needed resistance in the speaker circuit, maybe damping value. Does this
thought make any sense?

Doesn't it make the most sense to use a larger size wire for speaker hookup?
Speaker inpedence is 4 ohms.

Thanks, Dave C.






Over that distance those leads are absolutely fine for most power
outputs. The only real reason to go bigger is for safely getting the
signal to the speakers. Unless you like the look of fat wires.
If you start to get really long leads you can go bigger if you like. In
actual tests no one can hear differences in wires no matter what they say.

Clay

Speaker Leads
 

"Crabman" wrote in message
...
Dave C. wrote:
I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads
to the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like
they are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)

Doesn't it make the most sense to use a larger size wire for speaker
hookup? Speaker inpedence is 4 ohms.

Thanks, Dave C.


Over that distance those leads are absolutely fine for most power outputs.
The only real reason to go bigger is for safely getting the signal to the
speakers. Unless you like the look of fat wires.
If you start to get really long leads you can go bigger if you like. In
actual tests no one can hear differences in wires no matter what they say.

Clay

Thanks, Clay. The levels at which we listen are not high, and this system
is in a modest room not as a "Major Home Theater" environment. I am very
satisfied with the system and the sound. I'll keep it the way it is.

I checked the manual, and it does not say anything about the leads at all.

Regards, Dave C.

Speaker Leads
 

On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:58:16 -0400, "Dave C."
wrote:

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)

I can't figure why they use #22 wire for the front speakers except #22 is
cheaper than #16 (go figure)!

The three front speakers are each less than 6 feet from the reciever.

Before I replace them with #16 or #18 wire cut to length, an unlikely remote
thought comes to my mind that the #22 wire at about 25 feet provides some
needed resistance in the speaker circuit, maybe damping value. Does this
thought make any sense?

Doesn't it make the most sense to use a larger size wire for speaker hookup?
Speaker inpedence is 4 ohms.

Thanks, Dave C.



Probably doesn't make much difference. I use #14 which is overkill,
but I got a large spool for cheap.

Speaker Leads
 

"Phisherman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:58:16 -0400, "Dave C."
wrote:

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like
they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)


Thanks, Dave C.


Probably doesn't make much difference. I use #14 which is overkill,
but I got a large spool for cheap.

In the past I would normally use #18 lamp cord (zip cord).

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

Speaker Leads
 

"Dave C." wrote:
"Phisherman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:58:16 -0400, "Dave C."
wrote:

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads
to the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks
like they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)


Thanks, Dave C.


Probably doesn't make much difference. I use #14 which is overkill,
but I got a large spool for cheap.

In the past I would normally use #18 lamp cord (zip cord).

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear
about? I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

The point of using Monster cables is for the
retailer to make LOTS of money on you.

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Speaker Leads
 

"Dave C." wrote in message
. ..

"Phisherman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:58:16 -0400, "Dave C."
wrote:

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads
to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like
they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)


Thanks, Dave C.


Probably doesn't make much difference. I use #14 which is overkill,
but I got a large spool for cheap.

In the past I would normally use #18 lamp cord (zip cord).

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear
about? I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Monster Cable helps a lot...if emptying your wallet is the main concern. But
if not, lamp cord is just as good.

Speaker Leads
 

clay is right. small wire will work just fine over short distance.
nobody could tell the difference. the only time you need larger gauge
wire is when you are using very high power (1400 watts=14 gauge)
or very long distance(over 100 feet use larger gauge).
another way to lower the resistance is to use silver plated wire and
this would be practical when the distance exceeds 250 feet, but still
you could use a larger gauge plain copper with the same result.
many companies have been pushing huge wire (monster cable)
for a high price and its a waste of money, you gain nothing by using
it.
1000 watts is carried by 16 gauge wire with no problem up to 75 feet
and then over 75 feet with only tiny amount of loss.
no its not for damping, 22 gauge will be fine for a 100 watt power
level.
you should invest your money in better speakers, not huge wire.
no, the speaker circuit does not need added resistance from the wire.
but please note that when installing wires inside walls and attics the
wire should have the appropriate jacket and should be UL approved
to meet building codes. this type of jacket is for fire safety and
prevents
the spread of flame during a fire.
if anyone tells you to buy huge wires to improve sound quality, they
are
full of crap, unless your amp is over 1400 watts per channel.

Speaker Leads
 

On May 20, 5:15 pm, "Vitamin R" wrote:
"Dave C." wrote in message

. ..





"Phisherman" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:58:16 -0400, "Dave C."
wrote:

I have a Sony DAV-FX500 and it is working very well. The speaker leads
to
the three front speakers each are at least 25 feet long but looks like
they
are a #22 wire size. (The one to the sub-woofer is size 16.)

Thanks, Dave C.

Probably doesn't make much difference. I use #14 which is overkill,
but I got a large spool for cheap.

In the past I would normally use #18 lamp cord (zip cord).

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear
about? I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Monster Cable helps a lot...if emptying your wallet is the main concern. But
if not, lamp cord is just as good.

monster cable is a waste of money, you are 100% correct.

Speaker Leads
 

"mykey" wrote in message
ups.com...


clay is right. small wire will work just fine over short distance.
nobody could tell the difference. the only time you need larger gauge
wire is when you are using very high power (1400 watts=14 gauge)
or very long distance(over 100 feet use larger gauge).
another way to lower the resistance is to use silver plated wire and
this would be practical when the distance exceeds 250 feet, but still
you could use a larger gauge plain copper with the same result.
many companies have been pushing huge wire (monster cable)
for a high price and its a waste of money, you gain nothing by using
it.
1000 watts is carried by 16 gauge wire with no problem up to 75 feet
and then over 75 feet with only tiny amount of loss.
no its not for damping, 22 gauge will be fine for a 100 watt power
level.
you should invest your money in better speakers, not huge wire.
no, the speaker circuit does not need added resistance from the wire.
but please note that when installing wires inside walls and attics the
wire should have the appropriate jacket and should be UL approved
to meet building codes. this type of jacket is for fire safety and
prevents
the spread of flame during a fire.
if anyone tells you to buy huge wires to improve sound quality, they
are
full of crap, unless your amp is over 1400 watts per channel.

My wiring is through the wall for the three front speakers, and the woofer
and two rear speakers go down through the floor, along the cellar ceiling,
and up to the speaker locations through he floor.

Great information, dispells the rumors about big wire. With my system, 100
watts+ per speaker, woofer about 250 watts, it sounds excellent with the
existing wire. Very revealing about speaker wire myths.

Dave C.

Speaker Leads
 

Dave C. wrote:


Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

It doesn't matter for ANY system if the size is adequate which means
14ga is plenty for 99.9999% of all systems.

Clay

Speaker Leads
 

On May 21, 6:19 pm, Crabman wrote:
Dave C. wrote:

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

It doesn't matter for ANY system if the size is adequate which means
14ga is plenty for 99.9999% of all systems.

Clay

So you all are saying that this would be a waste of money? ;-)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireworld-Gold-E...QQcmdZViewItem

Speaker Leads
 

On May 21, 6:19 pm, Crabman wrote:
Dave C. wrote:

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

It doesn't matter for ANY system if the size is adequate which means
14ga is plenty for 99.9999% of all systems.

Clay

So you all are saying that this would be a waste of money? ;-)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireworld-Gold-E...QQcmdZViewItem

Speaker Leads
 

wrote:
On May 21, 6:19 pm, Crabman wrote:
Dave C. wrote:

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.
Thanks, Cave C.
It doesn't matter for ANY system if the size is adequate which means
14ga is plenty for 99.9999% of all systems.

Clay

So you all are saying that this would be a waste of money? ;-)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireworld-Gold-E...QQcmdZViewItem


No. What's a waste of money is what was spent on food, shelter, clothing
and education on someone stupid enough to purchase snake-oil like that.

--
-Gandalf

Never meddle in the affairs of a dragon for you are crunchy and taste
good with ketchup!

Speaker Leads
 

On May 22, 5:14 pm, Gandalf wrote:
wrote:
On May 21, 6:19 pm, Crabman wrote:
Dave C. wrote:

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.
Thanks, Cave C.
It doesn't matter for ANY system if the size is adequate which means
14ga is plenty for 99.9999% of all systems.

Clay

So you all are saying that this would be a waste of money? ;-)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Wireworld-Gold-E...ble-1M-bi-wire...

No. What's a waste of money is what was spent on food, shelter, clothing
and education on someone stupid enough to purchase snake-oil like that.

--
-Gandalf

Never meddle in the affairs of a dragon for you are crunchy and taste
good with ketchup!

LOL

Speaker Leads
 

Just curious, what is the point of using "monster" cable thet I hear about?
I guess for simple home applications, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, Cave C.

monster cable has superior sonic clarity. (bull****)

one system i hooked, 22,500 watts RMS i used 12 gauge wire,
but not monster cable. here is an example of a system that
needed slightly thicker wiring from 6 amps into 24 speakers.
your system don't need that.

Speaker Leads
 

On May 21, 1:38 pm, "Dave C." wrote:
Great information, dispells the rumors about big wire. With my system, 100
watts+ per speaker, woofer about 250 watts, it sounds excellent with the
existing wire. Very revealing about speaker wire myths.

Dave C

FWIW, with a total power CONSUMPTION (according to Sony's spec sheet)
of 160 watts, the power OUTPUT figures are grossly
overinflated. : ) Your current wiring is more than adequate, I'm
sure.

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

FWIW, with a total power CONSUMPTION (according to Sony's spec sheet)
of 160 watts, the power OUTPUT figures are grossly
overinflated. : ) Your current wiring is more than adequate, I'm
sure.

Jeff

i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere else.

Speaker Leads
 

mykey wrote:
FWIW, with a total power CONSUMPTION (according to Sony's spec sheet)
of 160 watts, the power OUTPUT figures are grossly
overinflated. : ) Your current wiring is more than adequate, I'm
sure.

Jeff

i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere else.

It ain't in the wires, and that's a fact.
Clay

Speaker Leads
 

On May 27, 2:32 pm, mykey wrote:
i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere else.

Right. This from the guy that doesn't know the difference between
Dolby Digital, and THX.

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

" wrote:
On May 27, 2:32 pm, mykey wrote:
i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere else.

Right. This from the guy that doesn't know the difference between
Dolby Digital, and THX.

Jeff

Dolby Digital is a particular type of encoding.
THX is simply a "quality assurance" label.
They are not similiar in any way.

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Speaker Leads
 

On May 30, 5:19 am, wrote:
" wrote:
On May 27, 2:32 pm, mykey wrote:
i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere else.

Right. This from the guy that doesn't know the difference between
Dolby Digital, and THX.

Jeff

Dolby Digital is a particular type of encoding.
THX is simply a "quality assurance" label.
They are not similiar in any way.

Chip

Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

" wrote:
On May 30, 5:19 am, wrote:
" wrote:
On May 27, 2:32 pm, mykey wrote:
i have never seen a sony amp product with overstated output
specification.
and i have measured true RMS with the proper test equipment.
but i might not like the way sony sounds compared to others.
however sound (truly) is in the ear of the beholder and nowhere
else.

Right. This from the guy that doesn't know the difference between
Dolby Digital, and THX.

Jeff

Dolby Digital is a particular type of encoding.
THX is simply a "quality assurance" label.
They are not similiar in any way.

Chip

Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

So I did better than Mykey? Gee, what an honor! ;-)

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Speaker Leads
 

Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

all the information i post is true,
however a beginner like you may not realize it.

Speaker Leads
 

"mykey" wrote in message
oups.com...


Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

all the information i post is true,
however a beginner like you may not realize it.


Yeah, like the little rant you put out about Panasonic having a "secret"
book that told about all the parts that are required that they deliberately
leave out! ROFL! And your continue rants about "fuzzy" 1080p LCD projectors!

You're a complete idiot.

Speaker Leads
 

On May 31, 6:34 pm, mykey wrote:
Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

all the information i post is true,
however a beginner like you may not realize it.

I agree with much of what you say, but disagree with some, too. For
example (and I quote):

"I still recommend far as possible to get a wider field. Dolby really
has poor sound quality and recommend you look at THX instead."

"you owe it to yourself to look at THX instead of dolby
THX sounds way better."

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

On May 31, 7:57 pm, "severian" wrote:
"mykey" wrote in message

oups.com...



Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

all the information i post is true,
however a beginner like you may not realize it.

Yeah, like the little rant you put out about Panasonic having a "secret"
book that told about all the parts that are required that they deliberately
leave out! ROFL! And your continue rants about "fuzzy" 1080p LCD projectors!

You're a complete idiot.

Great. Now it looks like you're accusing me, instead of Mykey, lol...

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

On May 30, 10:15 pm, wrote:

Dolby Digital is a particular type of encoding.
THX is simply a "quality assurance" label.
They are not similiar in any way.

Chip

Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

So I did better than Mykey? Gee, what an honor! ;-)

Chip


You could probably best Mykey with 90% of your brain cells tied behind
your back. : )

Jeff

Speaker Leads
 

yeah, like the little rant you put out about panasonic having a "secret"
book that told about all the parts that are required that they deliberately
leave out! rofl! and your continue rants about "fuzzy" 1080p lcd projectors!

you're a complete idiot.

i think you may have misquoted me, i said: "accidentally" left out.
it's actually a secret book used by service centers to find
out why units fresh out of the box don't work right. and this
happens quite frequently with panasonic products. the customer
is then charged to install the missing parts.
by the way, i think there's something wrong with your caps key,
or maybe you're using one of those fuzzy projectors as a monitor
and can't see the difference.

Speaker Leads
 

"I still recommend far as possible to get a wider field. Dolby really
has poor sound quality and recommend you look at THX instead."

"you owe it to yourself to look at THX instead of dolby
THX sounds way better."

Jeff

i see very little wrong here, THX does sound better. you were trying
to infer that i suggested THX was encoding, but i really did not say
that at all. you were rearranging my words to make it sound as if
i had made an error, you must be a republican.

Speaker Leads
 

Great. Now it looks like you're accusing me, instead of Mykey, lol...

Jeff

i think he WAS accusing you!

Speaker Leads
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 31, 7:57 pm, "severian" wrote:
"mykey" wrote in message

oups.com...



Very good. : ) My point was that Mykey has had a knack in the past
of posting erroneous information making it painfully obvious that he
doesn't know the difference.

Jeff

all the information i post is true,
however a beginner like you may not realize it.

Yeah, like the little rant you put out about Panasonic having a "secret"
book that told about all the parts that are required that they
deliberately
leave out! ROFL! And your continue rants about "fuzzy" 1080p LCD
projectors!

You're a complete idiot.

Great. Now it looks like you're accusing me, instead of Mykey, lol...

Jeff


Sorry bout that! No, mykey is the idiot, not you!

Speaker Leads
 

"mykey" wrote in message
oups.com...


Great. Now it looks like you're accusing me, instead of Mykey, lol...

Jeff

i think he WAS accusing you!



Ah, now you show us that reading comprehension is another one of your life's
failures. Twit.

Speaker Leads
 

"mykey" wrote in message
oups.com...


yeah, like the little rant you put out about panasonic having a "secret"
book that told about all the parts that are required that they
deliberately
leave out! rofl! and your continue rants about "fuzzy" 1080p lcd
projectors!

you're a complete idiot.

i think you may have misquoted me, i said: "accidentally" left out.
it's actually a secret book used by service centers to find
out why units fresh out of the box don't work right. and this
happens quite frequently with panasonic products. the customer
is then charged to install the missing parts.
by the way, i think there's something wrong with your caps key,
or maybe you're using one of those fuzzy projectors as a monitor
and can't see the difference.



Sooo, how's those other conspiracy theories you have doing? Chemtrails, the
Illuminati, etc. Hey, I bet it's those dastardly Knights Templar who are
keeping those parts out of the Panasonic stuff. Dolt.

Speaker Leads
 

i think you may have misquoted me, i said: "accidentally" left out.
it's actually a secret book used by service centers to find
out why units fresh out of the box don't work right. and this
happens quite frequently with panasonic products. the customer
is then charged to install the missing part.

in the panasonic digital VCR, it was the pinch
roller adjustment that prevented 120 minute
tapes from playing, the longer tape is thinner
and would slip, causing the VCR to default
into error modes. in other panasonic VCR's
it was missing shims under the reel tables
that prevented the tape from rewinding,
both problems disclosed in the panasonic
secret notifications to service centers. in
both cases panasonic charged customers to
repair factory installed problems.these are some
of the many reasons why panasonic is on the
"do not buy" list, besides terrible parts
support. it's rather more of a manufacturing
failure than a conspiracy.

Speaker Leads
 

On May 31, 11:57 pm, mykey wrote:
"I still recommend far as possible to get a wider field. Dolby really
has poor sound quality and recommend you look at THX instead."

"you owe it to yourself to look at THX instead of dolby
THX sounds way better."

Jeff

i see very little wrong here, THX does sound better. you were trying
to infer that i suggested THX was encoding, but i really did not say
that at all. you were rearranging my words to make it sound as if
i had made an error, you must be a republican.

Actually, I didn't rearrange your words at all. Those are direct
quotes. And I was not the only one that interpreted those statements
(apparently) incorrectly. If you had said that dolby digital encoded
tracks played back through components meeting the THX specs sound
better than dolby digital tracks played back through components not
meeting THX specs, it would have admittedly been much longer winded,
but also more clear. Has obfuscation always been a specialty of
democrats, or is it something relatively new? (just kidding!)

Jeff