“Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans”
Facebook Youtube Twitter instagram pinterest

Speaker Cable Faceoff 3 - The DIY Shootout

by Thomas Goldsworthy April 30, 2005
Contributors:
WBT locking banana connector

WBT locking banana connector

This effort is an offshoot of my search for a decent performing large OD cable, which will be used for my DIY speaker cables. When I bought my first really good pair of speakers, the salesman sort of talked me into a set of Monster MCX-1S cables. I had been/ am a zip cord type of guy and did not know any better. Well, after purchasing those particular cables, and speakers, I had a bit of buyers remorse. Not over the $1400 pair of speakers, but the $75 pair of cables. At the time, my wife and I were dismantling the recording studio we had in the basement and selling it off in pieces, and saving some for a home theater. And after a lot in internet searches, I found Audioholics among others, and my education really started.

I have always had a bigger is better philosophy, as well as a devote DIYer. So after reading all I could about speaker cables, I started on my path to building a bigger (and better) mouse trap. I wanted diameter as well as performance. I also had the tools to determine which was better. I have my own LCR meter, a BK Precision Model 885. Granted this is no Wayne Kerr model 6420 with unobtanium leads and a $15000 price tag like Audioholics uses in their Test Equipment Arsenal, but it is suitable for most home grown/military applications and cost less than $1000. Not much less, but less (even with the Kelvin clips). Nor does it generate gigahertz frequencies, it maxes out at 10000 Hz. Which is fine with me, after all I cannot hear anything over 16000 Hz so why test speaker cables at 1 GHz? Video cables are another matter, but not in this paper.

So, let's get to the meat of the order.

Cable Descriptions and Comments

The cables tested include some standard speaker cables, and some readily available power or control cable from various sources. I acquired all cable at my own cost. Costs range from $0.21/foot to $16.00/foot (of course to get this particular cable at this price you have to buy 1000 feet). Anyway, some of the cables were tested in a couple of different ways, and some were tested straight. The table below is a list of the tested cables and their construction.

Manufacturer

Model

AWG

Strand Count

Conductors Per Cable

Conductors Used

Construction

Alpha

85104CY

10

658 x 38

4

2

Twisted Lay

Carol

10/3

10

104 x 30

3

2

Twisted Lay

Carol

12/4

12

65 x 30

4

2

Twisted Lay

CAT 5

V1

12

16 x 24

4

4

Twisted Lay

CAT 5

V2

12

16 x 24

4

4

Flat Braid

CAT 5

V3

10

24 x 24

6

6

Twisted Lay

CAT 5

V4

10

24 x 24

6

6

Flat Braid

CAT 5

V5

10

24 x 24

6

6

Twisted Braid

Generic

10/4

10

104 x 30

4

2

Twisted Lay

Generic

12/4

12

65 x 30

4

2

Twisted Lay

Monster

MCX-1S

NA

NA

2

2

Twisted Lay

Parts Express

Part Number 100-768

14

41 x 30

4

2

Twisted Lay

Sound King

V1

10

413 x 36

2

2

Flat Lay

Sound King

V2

10

413 x 36

2

2

Twisted Lay

Sound King

V3

10

413 x 36

2

2

3 Wire Braid

Sound King

V4

10

413 x 36

2

2

4 Wire Braid

Woods

HD Contractors Cord

12

NA

3

2

Twisted Lay

TABLE 1

TESTED CABLES and CONSTRUCTION

Unless otherwise stated, all cables were finished with WBT Clone, crimp style, locking banana plugs (see Figure 1).

locking-banana.jpg

FIGURE 1
WBT Clone (GLS) Locking Banana Plugs use for all cable ends

Alpha 85104CY (10/4 shielded)

I acquired 48 feet at a garage sale for $25. I thought this might be great performing cable because of it's high strand count, shielding, and gauge. Internet research indicates a retail price of $16/foot through Allied Electronics with a 1000 foot minimum. It is a marine grade control cable, very flexible, with a very supple feel to it. If I wanted one cable to really perform in my test it would be this one, mainly because of it's ¾ inch diameter, and 3X bend radius. Only two opposing conductors were measured, leaving the adjacent conductors unused.

Carol Cable

I bought 50 feet each through Parts Express of 10/3 (Part Number 100-58 for $33.15), and 12/4 (Part Number 100-590 for $33.10). Price does not include shipping charges. I made three tests with the Carol 12/4 cable: The first test was made the way all other four conductor cables would be tested, in this method, only two opposing conductors would be measured. For the second and third tests, I made a rig so that I could use the two unused conductors to power a 500 watt photo lamp (second test) and drive a speaker playing pink noise (third test). The reason for the second and third test was based on my post in the A/V Connections Forum and my question to John Escallier (aka jnuetron) about how a signal may be affected by signals in near by wires.

  • T1 - Two conductors out of four used.
  • T2 - Two conductors used for evaluation purposes, and two conductors used to power a 500 watt photo lamp.
  • T3 - Two conductors used for evaluation purposes, and two conductors used to power a speaker playing pink noise at 75 dB C weighted.

Cat 5

I have read about using cat 5 wire as a speaker cable, but I was not that interested in braiding all those tiny wires hundreds of times. Then I though that since the wire pairs run rather loosely inside the outer covering, how would they test out if I made speaker cables using the entire package? Since cat 5 is just a twisted bunch of 24 gauge wires, I figured that 16 wires was roughly equal to 12 gauge litz wire and 24 wires was roughly equal to 10 gauge litz wire, viola, 4 and 6 individual lengths of cat 5 would be all I need. I took about 100 feet of cat 5 wire where I work and cut it into 10 foot lengths, attaching all wires (left inside the sheath) to banana plugs (see Figure 7). The prices shown in table 5 are based on prices from Parts Express and the number of 10 foot lengths used and does not include the connectors. I used these cables in five different variations using 4 or 6 cables. See Figures 2 through 6 for descriptions.

As I started with many 10 foot lengths, the overall length of the speaker cable was somewhat shorter after twisting and braiding. This shorter length of each version is used below when determining Rs, Cp, and Ls on a per foot basis.

figure-2.jpg

FIGURE 2
CAT 5 - V1 Four Twisted Cables

figure-3.jpg

FIGURE 3
CAT 5 - V2, Four Cables Braided

figure-4.jpg
FIGURE 4
CAT 5 - V3, Six Twisted Cables

figure-5.jpg

FIGURE 5

CAT 5 - V4, Six Cables Braided

figure-6.jpg

FIGURE 6
CAT 5 - V5, Six Cables in Three Twisted Pairs Braided

figure-7.jpg
FIGURE 7

Typical Cable Ends Finished for Testing

Generic

I do not know the brand name of these cables, but they are available at Lowes. The 10/4 cost $1.74/ft and the 12/4 costs $1.46 per foot. I purchased these after being very impressed by the supple feel, flexibility, and large diameter. Both cables have some sort of polyester fill between cables, and the 12 gauge cable has a white polyurethane sheathing inside the rubber external sheath. Both cables have the same OD. 20 feet of each was purchased and the entire length was used in testing.

DIY Cable Faceoff - Testing and Methodology

figure-8-lowes.jpg
Figure 8

Cables from Lowes. 12/4 is on left & 10/4 is on right. Both have a 0.75" OD

Monster MCX-1S

I bought this cable from Tweeter when I bought my Mirage Speakers. The 10 foot pair of cables is $50, but, unless you want to use the pins, you need to purchase the Monster banana plugs or spades which cost another $12.50 for four (and you need a total of 8 for the pair of cables).

Parts Express

As the name implies, do not know the manufacturer, but thought is may be a nice to include. This is a 14 gauge, 4 conductor cable.

Sound King

I bought a 100 foot spool of 10 AWG speaker wire from Parts Express. I liked the large strand count. Anyway, I cut several 10 foot lengths of this zip wire and tested four variations of this cable. See Figures 9 through 12 for descriptions.

The same comment here as with the CAT 5 cables. As I started with many 10 foot lengths, the overall length of the speaker cable was somewhat shorter after twisting and braiding. This shorter length of each version is used below when determining Rs, Cp, and Ls on a per foot basis.

figure-9.jpg

FIGURE 9

Sound King 10 AWG Zip Wire (V1 in following Tables)

figure-10.jpg 

FIGURE 10 

Sound King 10 AWG Twisted (V2 in following Tables)

 

figure-11.jpg 

FIGURE 11 

Sound King 10 AWG Three Wire Braid (V3 in following Tables)

figure-12.jpg

FIGURE 12

Sound King 10 AWG Four Wire Braid (V4 in following Tables)

Woods

This is a generic 25 foot heavy duty 12/3 extension cord purchased from Home Depot for $16.

Testing

All measurements were made on a BK Precision Model 885 LCR meter using the optional Kelvin Clips. This meter has several functions which are very suitable for my purposes. This meter can measure capacitance, inductance, and AC resistance at 100, 120, 1000, and 10000 Hz. However, since I’m using excel to plot everything in a log format I did not bother with the 120 Hz measurements. Prior to making each measurement, the meter was run through a self calibration test.

figure-13.jpg

 

Figure 13 - Test Gear

Methodology

As stated above, the LCR measurements were made at 100 Hz, 1kHz, and 10kHz. The measured parameters were then averaged. The averages were used to evaluate the cables against each other and to cables from the two cable face-offs performed by Audioholics.

The evaluation process involved generating a dimensionless number based on linear interpolation.

By setting the worst case average, in each case this is the highest average, to 1, and the best average (the lowest) to 10, and interpolating for those averages between the best and worst to develop the dimensionless factors for all cables.

After all factors were calculated, weight factors were applied. These weight factors were arrived at after numerous email discussions between Gene DellaSala, John Escallier, and myself. For the most part, I just sat back and said uh-uh. Anyway, we arrive at the following weight factors.

Resistance 0.41
Inductance 0.32
Capacitance 0.27
Technical Factor 0.6
Cost 0.4

The way this system works is to apply the weight factor to the dimensionless factors for resistance, inductance, and capacitance and arrive at a Technical Weighted Ranking Number (TWRN). The TWRN then has the technical weight factor applied and is summed with the cost dimensionless factor and the cost weight factor to finally arrive at a Final Weighted Ranking Factor (FWRF). The highest FWRF wins.

This method was also used to compare the results of both cable face-offs, and the total combined results of my analysis and both cable face-offs. Check the tables, the results are surprising.

References: Speaker Cable Face Off 1 and Speaker Cable Face Off 2

DIY Cable Faceoff - Measurements and Value

Resistance (Rs)

The results of the resistance measurements are shown in Table 3, as previously stated, the higher the rank, the better. I’ve only shown Rs for each frequency. Rs is the AC resistance at the measured frequency plus the DC resistance.

Manufacturer

Model

Rs (Ohms/Ft)

RANK

100 Hz

1kHz

10kHz

AVG

Alpha

85104CY

0.00208

0.00213

0.00228

0.00216

9.858

Carol

10/3

0.00204

0.00205

0.00206

0.00205

10.000

Carol

12/4 T1

0.00329

0.00329

0.00341

0.00333

8.322

CAT 5

V1

0.00269

0.00269

0.00269

0.00269

9.161

CAT 5

V2

0.00326

0.00326

0.00344

0.00332

8.336

CAT 5

V3

0.00213

0.00218

0.00224

0.00218

9.824

CAT 5

V4

0.00216

0.00215

0.00231

0.00221

9.797

CAT 5

V5

0.00222

0.00227

0.00227

0.00225

9.736

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

0.00202

0.00210

0.00232

0.00215

9.870

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

0.00325

0.00325

0.00345

0.00332

8.345

Monster

MCX-1S

0.00861

0.00882

0.00937

0.00893

1.000

Parts Express

100-768

0.00521

0.00536

0.00536

0.00531

5.742

Sound King

V1

0.00207

0.00222

0.00222

0.00217

9.850

Sound King

V2

0.00210

0.00224

0.00224

0.00220

9.808

Sound King

V3

0.00210

0.00224

0.00224

0.00220

9.808

Sound King

V4

0.00210

0.00215

0.00217

0.00214

9.884

Woods

HD

0.00333

0.00343

0.00345

0.00340

8.232

 

Carol

12/4 T2

0.00329

0.00329

0.00341

0.00333

NA

Carol

12/4 T3

0.00329

0.00329

0.00341

0.00333

NA

TABLE 2

CABLE RESISTANCE (Ohms/Ft)

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the cable resistance for each cable. The higher the #, the lower the resistance or the better performance the cable will yield in this respect.

Note, that as expected, the photo lamp test (T2) and the pink noise test (T3), did not affect the resistance of the conductors in a 4 conductor cable. Notice also, the high resistance of the Monster cable, this is characteristic of a 16 AWG or smaller wire.

Capacitance (Cp)

Manufacturer

Model

Cp (picofarads/Ft)

RANK

100 Hz

1kHz

10kHz

AVG

Alpha

85104CY

45.241

41.959

38.097

41.7657

1.364

Carol

10/3

37.625

35.063

32.250

34.9792

3.439

Carol

12/4 T1

27.808

25.769

24.654

26.0769

6.161

CAT 5

V1

26.915

26.863

26.056

26.6115

5.997

CAT 5

V2

24.825

23.776

23.310

23.9705

6.805

CAT 5

V3

38.105

42.663

41.105

40.6246

1.713

CAT 5

V4

32.000

32.222

31.333

31.8519

4.395

CAT 5

V5

40.432

44.865

43.568

42.9550

1.000

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

16.000

18.600

17.500

17.3667

8.824

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

15.600

18.450

17.350

17.1333

8.896

Monster

MCX-1S

29.720

35.710

34.890

33.4400

3.909

Parts Express

100-768

22.400

21.020

20.000

21.1400

7.670

Sound King

V1

22.900

20.800

18.730

20.8100

7.771

Sound King

V2

21.128

19.897

18.154

19.7265

8.103

Sound King

V3

12.410

14.626

13.528

13.5214

10.000

Sound King

V4

20.886

19.697

18.314

19.6324

8.131

Woods

HD

33.320

35.000

32.160

33.4933

3.893

 

Carol

12/4 T2

26.000

26.192

24.962

25.718

NA

Carol

12/4 T3

28.231

25.962

24.769

26.321

NA

 

TABLE 3

CABLE CAPACITANCE (pF/foot)

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the cable capacitance for each cable. The higher the #, the lower the capacitance or the better performance the cable will yield in this respect.

Several thing to notice from these results are the very good performance of the standard off the shelf power cables. While the Woods extension cord does not appear to be exemplary in this respect, it is comparable to the more popularly known Monster cable. The two cables I purchased at Lowes really impress though, as does the Sound King. Bare in mind the Sound King V3 is a three wire braid and the V4 is a 4 wire chain braid. It seems that inexpensive wire rules here. A final note, the photo lamp test (T2) and pink noise test (T3) do not appear to have a minor impact on capacitance, but this is also within the realm of standard meter error.

Inductance (Ls)

Manufacturer

Model

Ls (microHenries/Ft)

RANK

100 Hz

1kHz

10kHz

AVG

Alpha

85104CY

0.217

0.210

0.215

0.214

4.332

Carol

10/3

0.262

0.260

0.253

0.258

2.393

Carol

12/4 T1

0.256

0.254

0.251

0.254

2.592

CAT 5

V1

0.112

0.095

0.104

0.104

9.162

CAT 5

V2

0.115

0.132

0.126

0.124

8.264

CAT 5

V3

0.097

0.096

0.089

0.094

9.587

CAT 5

V4

0.123

0.122

0.116

0.120

8.432

CAT 5

V5

0.088

0.086

0.080

0.085

10.000

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

0.256

0.255

0.251

0.254

2.582

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

0.290

0.282

0.284

0.285

1.208

Monster

MCX-1S

0.195

0.192

0.186

0.191

5.340

Parts Express

100-768

0.218

0.203

0.210

0.210

4.489

Sound King

V1

0.210

0.196

0.203

0.203

4.810

Sound King

V2

0.217

0.215

0.209

0.214

4.327

Sound King

V3

0.258

0.246

0.253

0.252

2.641

Sound King

V4

0.299

0.281

0.289

0.290

1.000

Woods

HD

0.190

0.190

0.183

0.187

5.493

 

Carol

12/4 T2

0.254

0.253

0.249

0.252

NA

Carol

12/4 T3

0.256

0.247

0.249

0.251

NA

 

TABLE 4

CABLE INDUCTANCE (μH/Ft)

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the cable inductance for each cable. The higher the #, the lower the inductance or the better performance the cable will yield in this respect.

Cable Metric Definitions

Rdc

Commonly referred to DCR which is the series resistance of a cable at zero frequency.

Rac

The resistive portion of the cables series resistance as a function of frequency due to skin effect.

Rs

Total Series Resistance (mohms) measured tip to tip at one end of the cable while the other end is shorted. Note: Rs = Rac + Rdc (minus instrumentation inaccuracies identified below)

Ls

Series Inductance (uH) measured tip to tip at one end of the cable while the other end is shorted.

Cp

Parallel Capacitance (pF) measured tip to tip at one end of the cable while the other end is open circuited.

CAT 5 rules, as expected. Extension cords almost rule as not expected. I wonder why the braided Cat 5 wire performed so much better than the braided Sound King. Let’s not start the argument that Cat 5 is designed for low inductance, especially since the way I made the cables - each of the eight wires inside the sheath acted as one thick wire, the same way as the Sound King cable. It would be nice to hear some knowledgeable opinions or even swags. Finally though, the Monster cable is at least looking mediocre.

Editorial Note
By braiding multiple conductors in close proximity you have taken advantage of mutual inductance by cancellation of self inductance to minimize the overall inductance of the cable. For more detailed information on cable inductance check out our article: Calculating Cable Inductance

Value and Price

Manufacturer

Model

Price/Ft

Rank

Alpha

85104CY

$16.00

1.000

Carol

10/3

$0.66

9.756

Carol

12/4 T1

$0.66

9.756

CAT 5

V1

$0.26

9.985

CAT 5

V2

$0.23

10.000

CAT 5

V3

$0.37

9.923

CAT 5

V4

$0.33

9.943

CAT 5

V5

$0.32

9.948

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

$1.74

9.140

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

$1.46

9.300

Monster

MCX-1S

$3.75

7.992

Parts Express

100-768

$0.34

9.939

Sound King

V1

$0.72

9.722

Sound King

V2

$0.74

9.712

Sound King

V3

$1.11

9.501

Sound King

V4

$1.56

9.244

Woods

HD

$0.64

9.768

 

TABLE 5

CABLE COST ($/Ft)

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the cable cost for each cable. The higher the #, the lower the cost or the better value to the consumer.

The cost per foot shown in Table 5 is based on one cable for one channel. So you will need to double the cost for a pair of speaker cables. The thing to observe here is that the least expensive cables require the most work. Do you have any idea how tiring it is to neatly braid Cat 5? Also notice that all cables except the Monster and Alpha have rankings above 9. That is because the cost of the Alpha wire is so much more than all others. In my field (mechanical engineering) we would almost call this a wash. Yes the cable from Lowes is almost 8 times as expensive as the cheapest Cat 5 variant, but you just have to put connectors of you choice on the Lowes cable - no assembly required. When these cables are compared to other esoteric cables (see Table 7) that $16/foot may not seem so expensive anymore.

DIY Cable Faceoff - Results and Conclusion

Speaker Cable Face Off II previously conducted by Audioholics provided a lot of meaningful information, but no clear idea of which was best. While we are waiting on Gene to finish his cable analysis in Face Off II, I thought I would assign ranking based on his measurements using my linear interpolation method. So, here before you, I give you my opinion on which of these cable is the best. Granted, my opinion is worth is weight in copper (I would have said gold, but the resistance is too high, definitely not silver as it tarnished too easily). All of those ranking numbers contained in tables 2-5 are put to use right now. But first let us discuss weight factors. I have measured three electrical parameters of each of these cables (Resistance, Inductance, Capacitance), and know from first hand experience how much each cable cost me to make. So now we (in the royal sense) decided which factors are the most important based on an educated estimation their impacts may have on system stability and frequency response variation. Under different circumstances, each parameter measured may rise in importance. For very long cable runs all three may be of equal importance, but I think we should just consider normal runs of less then thirty feet (since the longest cable I measured was 26 feet). Based on this, we assigned rankings for each metric with a certain weight function based on perceived importance. Therefore, Resistance is weighted at 41%, Inductance is weighted at 32%, Capacitance is weighted at 27%. These technical factors are weighted at 60% and Cost is weighted at 40%.

RESULTS BASED ON RANK FACTORS


Manufacturer

Model

Weight Factors

Final Weighted Ranking Number

Technical Rank

Final Rank

0.41

0.32

0.27

0.6

0.4

R

L

C

Technical Weighted Ranking Number

Cost

CAT 5

V1

9.161

9.162

5.997

8.30704

9.985

8.97822

1

1

CAT 5

V2

8.336

8.264

6.805

7.89959

10.000

8.73975

3

2

CAT 5

V4

9.797

8.432

4.395

7.90166

9.943

8.71820

2

3

CAT 5

V3

9.824

9.587

1.713

7.55819

9.923

8.50411

7

4

Sound King

V1

9.850

4.810

7.771

7.67587

9.722

8.49432

4

5

CAT 5

V5

9.736

10.000

1.000

7.46176

9.948

8.45626

8

6

Sound King

V2

9.808

4.327

8.103

7.59373

9.712

8.44104

5

7

Sound King

V3

9.808

2.641

10.000

7.56640

9.501

8.34024

6

8

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

9.870

2.582

8.824

7.25542

9.140

8.00925

9

9

Sound King

V4

9.884

1.000

8.131

6.56781

9.244

7.63829

10

10

Woods

HD

8.232

5.493

3.893

6.18399

9.768

7.61759

12

11

Parts Express

100-768

5.742

4.489

7.670

5.86160

9.939

7.49256

14

12

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

8.345

1.208

8.896

6.20993

9.300

7.44596

11

13

Carol

12/4 T1

8.322

2.592

6.161

5.90493

9.756

7.44536

13

14

Carol

10/3

10.000

2.393

3.439

5.79429

9.756

7.37897

16

15

Monster

MCX-1S

1.000

5.340

3.909

3.17423

7.992

5.10134

17

16

Alpha

85104CY

9.858

4.332

1.364

5.79630

1.000

3.87778

15

17

TABLE 6

MUDCATS CABLE FACE OFF FINAL RESULTS

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the overall score of the cable regarding technical and final rankings. The lower the #, the better the cable scored with respect to the test criteria, where the technical ranking is based solely on performance and the Final ranking also factors in value.

Surprisingly the Monster Cables performance was outclassed by extension cord. For ease of construction, I preferred the 10/4 cable from Lowes with techflex and banana plugs resulting in a nice looking, large diameter garden hose – err speaker cable. of the technical tidbits (Resistance, Inductance, and Capacitance) and does not include any cost factors.

For your continued enjoyment, I've included a table comparing all the cables I tested and all the cables from Audioholics two previous cable face-offs. If you do not like the results, change the weight factors.

Brand

Model

Source

Weight Factor

Overall Final Weighted Factor

Technical Rank

Final Rank

0.41

0.32

0.27

0.6

0.4

Resistance

Inductance

Capacitance

Technical Weighted Ranking Factor

Cost

CAT 5

V5

Mudcat

9.191

8.220

8.893

8.800

9.995

9.278

1

1

CAT 5

V3

Mudcat

9.246

7.963

8.958

8.758

9.993

9.252

2

2

CAT 5

V1

Mudcat

8.845

7.696

9.347

8.613

9.998

9.167

3

3

CAT 5

V4

Mudcat

9.228

7.237

9.202

8.584

9.995

9.148

4

4

CAT 5

V2

Mudcat

8.347

7.126

9.421

8.246

10.000

8.948

9

5

Cobalt Cable

10 AWG

CFO

9.518

5.705

9.621

8.326

9.654

8.857

7

6

Axiom Audio

Speaker Cable

CFO II

8.174

7.856

9.018

8.300

9.677

8.851

8

7

Sound King

V1

Mudcat

9.257

4.957

9.508

7.949

9.975

8.759

14

8

Sound King

V2

Mudcat

9.238

4.663

9.539

7.855

9.974

8.703

16

9

Tributaries

11 AWG

CFO II

8.940

7.084

8.140

8.130

9.501

8.679

11

10

AVCable

10 AWG

CFO II

9.075

5.209

9.586

7.976

9.707

8.668

13

11

River Cable

Starflex

CFO II

8.759

7.522

9.002

8.429

9.000

8.657

6

12

Sound King

12 AWG

CFO

8.467

4.974

9.694

7.681

9.988

8.604

20

13

Monster Cable

Original

CFO

8.533

5.047

9.550

7.692

9.948

8.594

19

14

Monster Cable

Navajo

CFO

8.068

5.429

9.625

7.644

9.930

8.558

21

15

Woods

HD

Mudcat

8.281

5.380

9.156

7.589

9.979

8.545

23

16

Sound King

V3

Mudcat

9.238

3.597

9.711

7.561

9.955

8.518

24

17

Avic

SC1100

CFO II

7.687

7.839

8.949

8.076

9.130

8.498

12

18

Generic (Lowes)

10/4

Mudcat

9.275

3.551

9.604

7.532

9.923

8.489

25

19

Carol

10/3

Mudcat

9.352

3.431

9.115

7.393

9.978

8.427

26

20

Cardas

Crosslink 1S

CFO II

7.495

7.298

9.225

7.899

9.119

8.387

15

21

Alpha

85104CY

Mudcat

9.262

4.654

8.926

7.697

9.195

8.296

18

22

Sound King

V4

Mudcat

9.281

2.567

9.541

7.203

9.932

8.294

27

23

Carol

12/4 T1

Mudcat

8.339

3.560

9.362

7.086

9.978

8.243

30

24

Parts Express

100-768

Mudcat

6.771

4.755

9.499

6.863

9.994

8.115

33

25

River Cable

Flexygy

CFO II

8.324

5.991

9.082

7.782

8.585

8.103

17

26

Generic (Lowes)

12/4

Mudcat

8.349

2.687

9.611

6.878

9.937

8.102

32

27

Stealth

Premier II

CFO

10.000

5.678

9.842

8.574

7.204

8.026

5

28

Acoustic Research

Speaker Cable

CFO II

8.986

2.447

9.898

7.140

8.991

7.880

29

29

Audience

Maestro

CFO II

7.536

9.042

6.020

7.609

7.896

7.724

22

30

Goertz

MI-2 Veracity

CFO II

8.524

10.000

1.000

6.965

8.710

7.663

31

31

Monster

MCX-1S

Mudcat

3.903

5.288

9.158

5.765

9.820

7.387

34

32

Cardas

SE 9

CFO II

8.738

9.262

2.201

7.141

6.548

6.904

28

33

Empirical Audio

Clarity 7

CFO II

8.284

8.925

7.379

8.245

1.000

5.347

10

34

Stealth

Fine Ribbon

CFO

1.000

1.000

10.000

3.430

7.969

5.246

35

35

TABLE 7 - Comparison of all Cables from the 3 Speaker Cable Face Offs

Editorial Note
The 1-10 scale ranks the overall score of the cable regarding technical and final rankings. The lower the #, the better the cable scored with respect to the test criteria, where the technical ranking is based solely on performance and the Final ranking also factors in value.

Conclusions

So, now that I went and did all this, who does it benefit? You I hope. For those with the most remote DIY capability, the path to a really thick, large diameter cable to impress the ego and neighbors, and performs as well as super high tech, expensive, snake oil laden (or even snake oil free), speaker cables is contained herein.

Hopefully, this will generate a lot of discussion, and I hope Mr. Escallier backs me up instead of insulting my mechanical engineering background. For my part, I think I'll try a blend of Cat 5 and the Sound King next.

P.S. Anybody want to buy some Monster MCX-1S speaker cables? I've got a couple of pairs to get rid of.

figure-14.jpg

 
FIGURE 14 - Finished Lowes 10/4 Cable, TechFlex Braid, and GLS Locking Banana Plugs

 

Audioholics would like to thank Thomas Goldsworthy for his Herculean efforts in writing this article, constructing the cables, and testing them. In future cable articles we will be implementing the Linear Interpolation method that Thomas established for ranking cables.